Lancashire United Transport – AEC Swift – NTC 109G – 292


Copyright John Stringer

Lancashire United Transport
1969
AEC Swift MP2R
Alexander B43D

LUT’s single deckers were often a little different from the norm. This AEC Swift was one of three (291-293) delivered in either late 1968 or early 1969 (sources differ) along with some similarly bodied Bristol RESL’s. Their Alexander bodies were based on the W-type, but featuring short window bays, flat glass, V-shaped windscreens, and a plain front roof dome, rather than the more common version with long bays, curved screen and peaked dome. Interestingly they appear to have retained the curved rear screen though.
The Swifts did not find favour and were ‘swiftly’ withdrawn in 1973 and sold to neighbouring St. Helens Corporation, with whom they retained the same fleet numbers.

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer


19/05/13 – 11:31

The Bristols, delivered at the same time, had a three part rear window arrangement including a full depth emergency exit door in the centre. Short window bays also appeared on the Plaxton bodied Seddon RUs and Bristol REs, delivered up to and including 1974.
I always thought the Alexander bodies, with their deeper window line, were better looking than the Plaxton bodied Seddon RUs and Bristol REs. and decidedly superior to the, at best, unattractive Northern Counties LH6Ls delivered in 1969.
The Swift’s short service duration with the company has always been a matter of conjecture. Was it the reputation the type was rapidly gaining in London or, much more likely, the fact that the power plant wasn’t a Gardner or, at a push, a Leyland.

Phil Blinkhorn


19/05/13 – 12:08

As we saw with the DM(S) Fleetlines, failure in London was not necessarily a reflection on the vehicle – more on the rigid London “system”. As an AEC man, I would accept that the Swift (& Merlin) wasn’t their finest hour – but wasn’t as bad as the Panther and certainly not the disaster that was the Roadliner. It just wasn’t the RE! St Helens, Morecambe and Leeds – not to mention in a smaller way, Sheffield – gave them full service lives. [OK. I haven’t forgotten East Kent.]
I think Phil’s final paragraph has it in a nut-shell. Non-standard – and not Gardner.

David Oldfield


20/05/13 – 07:33

Did Alexander classify these bodies as W-type? I think the more anonymous front front panels, and dome – OK the whole front! – has stood the test of time better than the “classic” W-front (and would probably be cheaper to repair in the case of any lower front panel damage). I think the three-window/smooth dome of the REs probably sat better with this frontal design than the “classic” curved-screen/peaked dome. For me though, the biggest single improvement over the usual W-type body has to be the straight window-line fore and aft. RE/RU/Swift/LH/Plaxton (bus bodywork)/Northern Counties/Alexander/LUT/LT/St Helens – I’d forgive them all shallow window-lines, inflexible practices, less-than reliable offerings etc, just to have them still around . . . I can’t see myself offering opinions on some First/Arriva etc Wright etc thingy 40+ years down the line. Its 44 years – this photograph is closer to 1926 than today!

Philip Rushworth


20/05/13 – 07:34

Four of the Sheffield two-door Swifts were sold to Hardwicks at Scarborough when they were just over three years old, and supposedly even one of those they acquired by default. Story has it that one of the buses they’d agreed to buy couldn’t be persuaded to start when they came to collect it, so they ended up taking a different one instead!
Two of the quartet, TWE 21F/22F got themselves sold on to Stokes of Carstairs a few years later, and when asked about the pair during a depot visit on one occasion, Mr Stokes himself suggested that the only good thing about the two of them was that they kept a fitter in full time employment!

Dave Careless


20/05/13 – 09:08

That quip made my morning, Dave C – don’t you just love black humour!

Chris Hebbron


20/05/13 – 09:09

And a Ribble Lowlander in view: from the (almost) sublime to the ridiculous – please refer to the Ugly Bus Page . . .

Pete Davies


20/05/13 – 11:36

As far as I know, Dave’s story is correct. You need a bit of black humour on a grey and gloomy Monday morning…..

David Oldfield


20/05/13 – 16:56

Glad you enjoyed that one, Chris and David! Again, it’s not only the vehicles, it’s the people involved with them that make this hobby of ours so fascinating and, at times, wonderfully entertaining.
And you’re not alone with respect to the Monday morning weather, it’s equally as dark as the humour here in Nova Scotia also!

Dave Careless


20/05/13 – 16:58

This style of body was also bought by Cardiff also on Swift chassis. Although LUT had bought Marshall bodies with a wrap round windscreen. They reverted to an almost fifties appearance for their Plaxton bodywork on Seddons and Bristols one wonders if this was a cost saving measure as a small two piece windscreen would be much cheaper to replace. The NCME ones were the standard product which was a strange mixture of styles that didn’t gell The next LUT saloons with wrap round windscreens would be a batch of Leopards with Plaxton bodywork which were LUTs swan song as an independent operator.
Despite their outer appearance I always had a soft spot for Ribbles Lowlanders they were certainly an improvement on a “lowbridge” Atlantean

Chris Hough


21/05/13 – 07:37

You’re right about the Lowlander Vs Lowbridge Atlantean, Chris! I have experienced the preserved Silver Star example of the latter style on a number of occasions. It doesn’t look right, somehow!

Pete Davies


21/05/13 – 07:38

Like St Helens, Blackpool also had a fairly large fleet of AEC Swifts which seemed to have full service lives.

Philip Halstead


21/05/13 – 12:40

Portsmouth Corporation had 12 AEC Swifts in 1971, lasting 10 years. They went with some slightly older Panther Cubs and some slightly newer PDR2/1’s, seemingly part as a cleanout of single-deckers than for unreliability reasons. I seem to recall some of them finishing up with Basil Williams (Southern Motorways), actually owned by White Heather and which, during a rail strike, were used to ferry folk, working in the City, to London every day! Basil acquired quite a collection of Swifts/Merlins in the end. He’d earlier owned ex- London Transport GS’s, of course!

Chris Hebbron


21/05/13 – 15:50

Yes, Chris H, Portsmouth had 12 AEC Swifts (new 1969) with Marshall bodies, and these had wrap-round windscreens, which I always assumed were “BET style” (or similar). The 26 Panther Cubs (14 Marshall + 12 Met-Camm) were similar in appearance. The 12 PDR2/1s that followed in 1971/72 were unusual in two respects – saloon bodies on a d/d chassis, and Seddon as the manufacturer. Pompey began to withdraw the Panther Cubs in 1977, but some of them along with all the rest were still in service in 1981/82 when the MAP project was carried out. The drastic recasting of services saw all the remaining Panther Cubs, all the Swifts and some of the PDR2/1s leave the fleet, along with 14 5-year old Leyland Nationals! As you say, at least two of the Swifts ended up with Basil Williams of Southern Motorways fame. By the time deregulation came in, Williams had some ex-London Swifts/Merlins, too, and repainted them in his original Hants and Sussex red and cream livery, using that fleet name, too. A non-enthusiast friend of mine travelled on one of the ex-London ones said it was a “fantastic vehicle”. Make what you will of that, good people – an ex-London bus, around 18 years old, run by Mr Basil Williams, in the opening days of deregulation…

Michael Hampton


21/05/13 – 16:50

Amazing, Michael H, that a generally derided vehicle of such age and with standard London Country bus seats should get such glowing praise. Basil Williams must have had great faith in these vehicles to let them loose on the 150-odd mile return journey to London every day, although he would not have owned them for long at that stage!

Chris Hebbron


22/05/13 – 07:27

Chris, from my own knowledge of the Basil Williams empire, and my personal experience of driving GS 43 (Southern Motorways – Guy GS – MXX 343 – Ex LTE GS 43 on this site), I believe that faith formed a major ingredient of his maintenance procedures.

Roger Cox


22/05/13 – 17:46

Just to clarify the earlier note, my non-enthusiast friend travelled on the ex-London Swift on a local route, not a London marathon. Memory says Williams used route no 451 for a service from Portsmouth to the Emsworth area. Always with grandiose ideas of route numbers, it didn’t clash with the competition!

Michael Hampton


23/05/13 – 07:49

As most of you will know from the cover of a recent issue of Bus & Coach Preservation magazine, the Cardiff Transport Preservation Group has ex-Cardiff Swift/Alexander 512 and it’s still living up to the breed’s reputation as rather troublesome beasts.
Its arrival at last year’s Merthyr Rally all the way from Barry depot brought forth some expressions of surprise and relief from members at its safe arrival but we weren’t allowed to go anywhere on it, just in case!
There may come a day when we use it to go on one of our summer evening runs, but it’s not likely to happen soon.

Berwyn Prys Jones


04/07/13 – 17:33

Leeds had the largest provincial fleet of Swifts eventually having 150 in service. They were by no means perfect but had a normal lifespan. The last 1971 batch were by far the best with more powerful engines. When the PTE took over in 1974 they went for Leyland Leopards and Volvo B55 chassis. The first Nationals (other than a one off delivered to Leeds) were Mark 2 examples which were followed by Leyland Tigers in 1983.

Chris Hough


14/07/13 – 14:25

Just wished I could have driven one of these Swifts in my LUT days and I could have told you all about them. They were allocated to Atherton and try though I may to get one whenever a changeover in ‘foreign depot’ territory was required, I never could. I did not previously know about their rear end having a single windscreen as against the similar looking but Bristol RE’s, that we had at Swinton, which as is stated had three piece rear windows that included the emergency door. They did not, as far as I saw spend much time on the hard working 84 (ex trolley bus service) and of course as soon as the Seddons arrived, even their look alike Bristols were taken off the 84 in their favour. Wide doors, good acceleration, great brakes, comfy thought out cab, no wonder the Seddons became everyones favourite, myself included.

Mike Norris


Vehicle reminder shot for this posting


11/04/16 – 16:22

LUT First Flat fronted bus was the Wulfrunian.
The first Daimler Fleetline to arrive was fleet number 98 it should have been 97 but wasn’t finished in time for the driver to drive it back to Atherton.

Mr Anon


12/04/16 – 06:05

Mr Anon may be right about LUT buses but the coaches in the 1950s starting from the Duple (Midland) Britannias and the following Burlingham and Northern Counties batches had a very plain frontal appearance.

Stephen Allcroft


13/04/16 – 13:38

“Leeds had the largest provincial fleet of Swifts eventually having 150 in service. They were by no means perfect but had a normal lifespan.” (04/07/13) 
With respect Chris H (Chris Hough) but wasn’t the total of Leeds Swifts 120, plus 30 Fleetlines making the total of 150 OPO single deckers of that pattern ??
Sorry its taken me three years to spot this – par for the course, old age you know !!

Chris Youhill

Leeds City Transport – AEC Swift – JNW 952E – 52

Leeds City Transport - AEC Swift - JNW 952E - 52

Leeds City Transport
1967
AEC Swift MP2R
Roe B48D

Leeds bought several batches of AEC Swifts between 1967 and 1971. Prior to these appearing the fleet was 90% double deck with around 15 saloons most of which were AEC Reliances some with centre entrance bodies with the later ones being dual door for one man operation.
Seen here are a quartet of the first two batches of Swifts parked outside the old Bramley depot which was a former tram depot.
Three of the Swifts have Roe bodywork of an attractive style while the fourth carries an MCW body which had forward sloping window pillars and a slightly stepped waistrail. Further saloons in the shape of both Swifts and single deck Fleetlines would appear before the last Roe bodied Swifts entered service in 1971. All of the buses seen here carry their original dark green with light green windows livery that was basically reversed when it was decided to paint one man operated buses in a different style to the rear entrance fleet. All of the Swifts passed to the PTE and had a largely normal life span. From the left they are 52 JNW 952E, 74 MNW 174F the solitary MCW example seen here and 54 and 56 from the same batch as 52.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hough


05/09/13 – 14:30

Leeds City Transport plus Roe bodywork is pretty much as one might expect, since the factory was within the boundary. MCW? However did that idea get past Committee???

Pete Davies


05/09/13 – 14:30

A matter of personal preference I know Chris, but I thought that the traditional Leeds City Transport livery as shown here was the very best – corporate and completely dignified, inside and out. The various batches of Swifts each had fascinating characteristics, often considerably different and interesting (challenging even) in their own ways. The first fifty as shown in the picture had semi automatic transmission while the final batches of fifty and twenty had the option of fully automatic or, if drivers like me preferred, manual override so as to allow “normal” gearchanging of a sort. In fairness though the fully automatic mode on these was normally very predictable and well behaved. All things considered, the final twenty (1051 – 1070) with luxury seats were the best of the lot and were a delight to drive and to ride in. Passenger flow in the last seventy was really excellent and they were ideal for one person operation. Rumour had it, we shall never know on what foundation, when the last twenty were on order that they would be of 12 metres length – its a good job that they weren’t, as some of the corners on the inner city routes would have been literally impossible – the turn from the nearside lane of East Parade into Park Lane (Headrow) being one certainty. Thanks again for a really nostalgic picture Chris.

Chris Youhill


06/09/13 – 08:21

Peter Leeds had a long history of dual sourcing bodywork between Roe and MCW although the Swifts were the first saloons.
Chris I too preferred the original liveries seen here although the doors were a little eccentric since the exit door was half the width of the entrance. The Park Royal examples were much better in having both doors of normal width. The Roe 1971 batch had fronts derived from the Leeds two door decker design and as you say were a joy to ride on. I recall that they were replaced on the Ring Road service with Duple bodied Tigers which were also a pleasant ride. One thing that has always struck me about the MCW bodied Swifts was their apparent narrowness at the front compared to the Roe examples.

Chris Hough


06/09/13 – 08:22

By 1967/8 MCW had been Leeds’ ‘backup’ supplier of bodywork for the best part of two decades. It was widely believed that it was possible to get more advantageous quotes from suppliers by multi-sourcing.

David Call


10/09/13 – 06:33

You are right Chris, and the MCW do appear narrower and even allowing for slightly different camera angle its very strange indeed – but must somehow be just an illusion ??
The Tigers were truly superb vehicles, mechanically and bodily, and the luxurious brown patterned moquette seats were the finest. They did indeed replace the Swifts on the Ring Road service entirely, and I think on most other single deck routes from Headingley Depot – memory not clear, although it should be, on the last point but its getting now to be a long time ago – I eagerly took redundancy from the forthcoming “circus” on October 25th 1986. On joining South Yorkshire Road Transport after that I encountered daily more Tigers but with OPO adapted Plaxton luxury coachwork – these really were the bees knees for stage carriage work, and one of them still enjoyed a working radio – the others having been silenced because of arguments arising on private hires and excursions – and whenever I had number 22 on bus services (often) the passengers were able to enjoy Radio Two.

Chris Youhill


10/09/13 – 16:30

Like Chris, I have a great deal of affection for the TRCTL11 Tigers. [A shame there were no TRCTL12s – AEC men will know what I mean.]

David Oldfield


10/09/13 – 16:30

Going off at a bit of a tangent here, but at Halifax we had some of the Tigers to which Chris refers. They became regular performers on the ex-Hebble Rochdale service, along with its later alternative variant via the incredibly narrow and tortuous lanes around Mill Bank and Soyland. They certainly romped along compared with ex-West Yorkshire Leopard coaches which we also had at the time, though they always gave me the impression of not being quite so durable. They were also without any doubt the worst buses I have ever had to drive in snow and ice.
However, I would question Chris’s views on their bodywork. They had Duple Dominant Bus bodies, and were apparently built in stages, the works giving priority to coach production and fitting ours in as and when they had a bit of spare time. Our chap whose job it was to monitor the construction of the PTE’s buses paid a visit to the works and found their basic steel frameworks had been assembled and then dumped outside in the yard with inadequate (or possibly no) rustproofing to suffer the worst of the salty Blackpool sea air. They were already rusting away and a strong request was made (in no uncertain broad Yorkshire terms I can well imagine !) to get them treated straight away. This was apparently carried out, but apparently not very well, and they began to suffer corrosion problems from quite an early stage in their lives. There were two batches, and I think it was the first batch of seven Y-reg ones (which went to Leeds) which suffered the worst, but one of our A-prefix ones was subject to quite a major rebuild later and became the only one to carry the white, blue and yellow First Calderline livery, and the last to survive.

John Stringer


11/09/13 – 08:30

But John, they were Duples. The reason that the firm folded was because of the appalling quality and finish. Your story helps explain why the metal frames were so prone to rust and corrosion. The fit and finish left a lot to be desired on the 320/340 bodies at the end (1989). I know of at least one Western National 340/Tiger where the panels were coming adrift after a few months and I drove a 320/Scania where I thought that the engine cover had counterbalancing until I was told it was rusted metal “sloshing” about in the cavity. How are the mighty fallen. Duple were at the top of their game when they moved to Blackpool and had an honourable history with the Continental and Commander but seemed to lose the plot after that. The Dominant was an Elite rip off – but with a metal frame. Somehow it never worked – despite the Continental being a successful metal-framed model. MCW had exactly the same corrosion problems despite the MCCW metal frames being the best of their time.

David Oldfield


11/09/13 – 16:30

Following on from Davids comments. It is interesting that the PTE/Yorkshire Rider never went for the National (one batch only) and Calderdales last pre low floor saloon were Plaxton bodied Volvos.

Chris Hough


12/09/13 – 08:30

John and David – I can only say that I amazed to hear of such structural inferiority in the Duple Dominant bodies, but naturally don’t doubt it for a minute on hearing such reliable reports. All I can say is that, in their “youth”, the Headingley PTE Tiger ones were superbly comfortable and free of any rattling or body noise and movement – as the saying goes “You can’t judge a book by its cover.” !!

Chris Youhill

Birmingham City – A E C Swift – KOX 663F – 3663

Birmingham City - A E C Swift - KOX 663F - 3663

Birmingham City Transport
1967
A E C Swift 505 MP2R
Metro-Cammell B37D+30

KOX 663F, is an A E C Swift 505 MP2R built in 1967 with Metro-Cammell B37D+30 standing bodywork. New to Birmingham and then West Midlands as 3663 it was acquired by Mid Warwickshire Motors before being preserved and has just been fully restored in West Midland livery.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ken Jones


13/04/14 – 18:30

Another candidate for the Ugly Bus page! Top-heavy treatment of the front end…. Was this for extra headroom? ….and the side route box and blank panel/window by the exit. Does it really have no doors?

Joe


14/04/14 – 07:43

Both sets of doors are open.

Roger Burdett


14/04/14 – 07:43

Slightly less ugly than the same bodybuilder’s effort on the Liverpool Panthers.

Phil Blinkhorn


14/04/14 – 08:44

Doors… I can see a handrail to each right and a well-light at the bottom- but above that I look straight through the bus. Is there room on the left, obstructing the driver’s view?… Now it can be told?

Joe


14/04/14 – 08:44

Two pictures for your consideration

KOX 663F_2

one showing that the vehicle does have doors

KOX 663F_3

and one internal shot showing the standing area.

Ken Jones


14/04/14 – 18:19

Thanks Ken- looks like one flap on each side then? Ceiling marvellous shade of Nicotine, reminiscent of top decks. Is that your silver handled cane?

Joe


14/04/14 – 18:19

Pity it’s ugly – certainly an unbalanced design – because it’s a superb restoration from the photographic evidence. The Liverpool Panthers might beat them in the ugly stakes but the Southport Panthers, with deeper screens, were quite handsome for their time.

David Oldfield


15/04/14 – 06:57

Not my cane and not my bus before anyone asks – they haven’t made a Swift in N gauge yet!

Ken Jones


15/04/14 – 06:57

It looks to me as if Met Cam have used the lower front end of a double deck Fleetline as supplied to Birmingham – probably at the customers request in the interests of standardisation

Ian Wild


15/04/14 – 06:57

I must be fair and agree with David: uglybus maybe, but it looks a lovely job. I have however been staring at Panthers & Swifts on this site and wonder why this bus has so much infilling between screen and peak- look at the Leeds Roes- just enough. Never mind.

Joe


15/04/14 – 06:58

Looking at a photo of a Southport MCW-bodied Panther here //tinyurl.com/m4xqajb, it looks like the same windscreen to me (although in the curved Manchester version rather than the Birmingham vee-form). But I can see three subtle differences which make it fit better. The blank space above the screen is split up by the way it is mounted, the front half of the bus has deeper windows and the remaining height difference is accommodated by the livery application. It just shows what a little thought can do.

Peter Williamson


15/04/14 – 10:49

…..and longer (panoramic?) side windows, Peter. Always make a better impression than multiple short windows. [Only the Y type “got away” with it, but the panoramic side window – normally coaches – version was much better.]

David Oldfield


15/04/14 – 10:51

These buses were built to the operator’s specification using many standard parts in the interest of economy and ease of maintenance. The flat screens for example, like much of the front end treatment, are shared with the BCT double-deck fleet and were used because they were much cheaper to replace than curved ones. The shell is that used to body mainly Panthers, but also some Panther Cubs and some Swifts and is a close copy of the ubiquitous BET design.
It is a great credit to the owners that they have restored this bus, which is now, and arguably always was, an interesting rarity. If we were to judge all historic artefacts on their aesthetic appearance alone, and only retain what looks nice, bearing in mind of course that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, an immediate end would be put to those interminable antiques programmes on the TV!
Let’s hope that the owners don’t read the comments left here – If I were one of them, I would feel insulted.

KOX 663_4

The bus does look much better in more favourable surroundings, as I’m sure that you gentlemen will agree.

Philip Lamb


15/04/14 – 18:11

I’m not sure why anyone should feel insulted. It is a most attractive restoration of a rather unpretty bus, but a lack of prettiness is no reason not to restore- or I would be rejected by the NHS! As it is, it tells a fascinating tale of fleet management, which has unfolded here- and how this and other operators resolved such questions. Consider the rather odd looking PS1 deckers-utility over looks? Or single deck Fleetlines? Bridgemasters, Wulfrunians were all unpretty but of their time. Was there a balance between appearance and economy through standardisation? Good material for discussion- so we can all be wannabee General Managers!

Joe


16/04/14 – 06:49

Can’t understand why anyone would feel insulted over the ugly bus comments. Preservation of anything is normally for reasons of historic value. Availability, familiarity, rarity are other factors. Looks rarely come into it and shouldn’t have any bearing with a true preservationist

Phil Blinkhorn


16/04/14 – 06:50

Thank you Joe for your balanced comment. There’s no reason for anyone to be insulted by any of the comments on this link – mine or anyone else’s.
There is, of course, a reason for the body being on both Swift and Panther. It’s the same bus. They shared a frame and only the engines and gearboxes were different. It was the first entirely new bus (in 1964) from the Leyland Motor Corporation, after the merger of Leyland and ACV in 1962.

David Oldfield


16/04/14 – 11:09

I consider this bus to be of an interesting – “different” – but perfectly acceptable appearance, especially compared to some of today’s double deckers from certain factories, vehicles which are simply a mass of incongruous bits and pieces disguised to a degree by ghastly “liveries.” The Birmingham Swift’s livery is dignified and unsullied in the extreme, and the ceiling material in my view is delightfully restful and attractive and a welcome change from the almost universal garish matt white of today – I’m sure this material was chosen by BCT rather than having anything to do with nicotine Joe.

Chris Youhill


16/04/14 – 18:24

Perhaps David O you should have started your thread with ‘I think it is ugly’ rather than ‘pity its ugly’ that way it is defined as your personal opinion rather than Carte Blanche opinion on the bus as clearly opinion on this bus is divided and just maybe less people may feel a little offended – just my thoughts!
Clearly a lot of time, money and hard work has gone into an excellent restoration of a relatively rare vehicle. I rather like this bus and I would also agree with Ian Wild with regards to the front end treatment.

Richard McAllister


16/04/14 – 18:25

I think some of the difference between this Swift and the Southport Panther are due to the fact that the Panther has a front mounted radiator and therefore needs the attractive grill fitted by Metro Cammell and also has deeper destination apertures which decreases the size of the blank panel above the screen, the deeper windows in the front part of the body also lessen the large side panels aided by the band of colour below the window line which may not look as good on the O/S. To me the use of curved screens on the Panther make little difference to the overall appearance, but the Swift’s restoration is a credit to a huge amount of time and effort by many people WELL DONE.

Diesel Dave


16/04/14 – 19:02

The ceiling colour is similar to that employed by LT on its Routemasters and is there to combat nicotine. This only worked in part. I used to sell a PVC/aluminium product called Tedlar which was supposed to defeat nicotine by being wipe clean but the cost of the product and the cost of cleaning was too much for the 1960s bodybuilders and operators.

Phil Blinkhorn


17/04/14 – 06:29

David’s comment about the windows being shorter than on the Southport Panther has caused me to look at this a little more closely, and I have come to the conclusion that the Swift’s body was designed very much from the inside out. The door apertures are much narrower than on the Panther, and the exit door is mounted further forward. Presumably this was to give the internal layout that the operator desired, but the result is that it would have been impossible to fit longer windows in the front half, and therefore at all (since this was well before the advent of the Borismaster ethos where every bay can be a different size!).

Peter Williamson


26/04/14 – 18:15

Thanks for the interest and comments. My brother David and I funded and Trailways of Bloxwich, West Midlands, transformed the Swift. To me it’s a beauty !
No offence taken ! The walking stick belongs to Trailways owner Ron Faherty !

Robert Carson


27/04/14 – 08:13

Well, Robert, you can both be proud of the finished product and of Trailways for doing such a fine job. I did wonder if the walking stick was something West Midlands Travel provided on all their buses to help all disabled passengers!

Chris Hebbron


28/04/14 – 09:49

KOX 663_4

Here is KOX 663F when owned by the troubled Mid Warwickshire Motors. It is seen in Mereden on an enthusiasts’ tour.

Tony Martin


24/12/15 – 12:11

The usual stamping ground for single-decker BCT buses like this was the 27 route because it required so many low railway bridges to be negotiated – notably in Northfield and outside the Cadbury factory. The 27 was my daily transport to and from school and during the 1960s and early 70s BCT would use the route to trial all kinds of manufacturers test offerings, asking passengers for their opinion. There were Ford R192s (BCT later bought a couple) and even on one occasion a Volvo.

Ray Trendy


Vehicle reminder shot for this posting


01/01/16 – 16:51

I think the “issues” with the frontal styling arose because the Swift chassis was (at the rear) relatively high, but this one has a low driving position. Hence the correspondingly low positioning of the windscreen, relative to the overall height of the vehicle, which needs to allow for the height of the floor in the rear section.
As David O says above, the Swift and Panther used the same chassis frame, but Swifts had radiators in the side adjacent to the engine, and I believe this caused them to have higher floors at the rear. Other bodybuilders had this problem with Swifts, for example, Southampton’s East Lancs bodied batch numbered 7-10 also had an “extra” section between the windscreen and destination box.

Nigel Frampton

Southampton Corporation – AEC Swift – MTR 420F – 2

Southampton Corporation - AEC Swift - MTR420F - 2

Southampton Corporation
1968
AEC Swift MP2R
Strachans B47D

I thought a southern flavour was in order with another Southampton photo this one in service in early 1968 when the bus was quite new I am not sure of the exact location in the city.
No 2 MTR 420F was an AEC Swift MP2R with a Strachans B47D body delivered in February 1968 one of a batch of five which were some 9-10 months after No 1 JOW 499E with an identical body, the ways to tell them apart was that No 1 had a red roof and a cream skirt rather than that shown on No 2 it also had a route number box above the first near/side window. These were followed by four more Swifts in 1970 this time with East Lancs who by this time were confirmed as Southampton’s body builder of choice.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Diesel Dave


05/06/14 – 07:38

It’s on the junction of Portsmouth Road and Victoria Road in Woolston, Dave. She’s come from Weston Estate and is going to City Centre via Bitterne and Northam.
The 8 and the 16 ran in opposite directions and the bus is turning right here because ahead of her is the bridge carrying the Southampton to Portsmouth railway line. Occasionally, drivers tried taking double deckers under the bridge, and failed to do anything other than cause the vehicle’s immediate withdrawal, hence the introduction of the compulsory right turn here. The road was lowered when the Itchen Bridge was built to replace the Floating Bridge in 1977.
Several “Corporation” services ended at either side of the Itchen, and Hants & Dorset had a couple which terminated in Woolston, along with a small depot.

Pete Davies


05/06/14 – 07:39

By the time I saw this bus it was in a rather sorry state – parked at the back of the Blackpool Corporation depot in April 1980 being used as a source of spares for their own fleet of Swifts.

Mike Morton


05/06/14 – 17:41

It’s nice to see this style of bodywork in a decent colour scheme. London Transport and Wolverhampton’s versions were both dreadful!

Neville Mercer


05/06/14 – 17:41

I recall seeing these vehicles on my occasional forays from Portsmouth to So’ton. They had attractive bodies, in my opinion, aided by the livery. I moved from the area in 1976, the same year that saw the demise of Strachans. Your comment, Mike, confirms my thoughts that they did not have long lives, like many Swifts. No idea of bodywork quality: do you DD?

Chris Hebbron


06/06/14 – 07:39

The six Strachans bodied Swifts lasted a maximum of eleven years in Southampton, but a couple of them went after a mere six years. The subsequent four Swifts with East Lancs bodies also stayed in the fleet for just eleven years, so I suspect that the modest lives of these buses was due more to the shortcomings of the Swift chassis than to inadequacies with the bodywork. In fact, the Strachans body on rear engined two door single deck chassis gained quite a reasonable reputation owing to the employment of underframing that reduced the flexing movement. The Strachans examples were rather less prone to roof structure failure in the region of the centre doorway than the efforts of some other manufacturers, as London Transport, for example, discovered to its cost.

Roger Cox


06/06/14 – 08:46

One peculiarity of the Swifts in Southampton – it may have applied to the Arab UF and Nimbus fleet as well but I never got to travel on any of them, and I suspect not – was a red stripe across the roof, to match the location of the step behind the centre door. Smoking downstairs had been prohibited for several years, but was still allowed upstairs. On the Swifts, the step and stripe designated where the ‘upstairs’ was!

Pete Davies


07/06/14 – 08:17

Roof? No, sorry! I meant ceiling!

Pete Davies


07/06/14 – 08:17

I had always wondered how cigarette smoke determined where to stop blowing. It was commonplace for Smokers to be requested to occupy the rear of the vehicle on single deck buses. But how to keep the smoke from wafting into the forward section?
Southampton clearly had the answer – paint a read line across the ceiling, the smoke won’t dare go beyond there. Obvious, or what !!

Petras409


07/06/14 – 08:18

Thx, Roger, your thoughts about the chassis rather than the body being the problem matches mine.

Chris Hebbron


07/06/14 – 10:00

Slightly off topic but there used to be an airline that had smokers on one side of the aircraft, non smokers on the other and this was on narrow bodied aircraft. The joke was that this must be Aer Lingus. The truth was it was Lufthansa. Just how German efficiency prevented the smoke crossing the aisle on a B737 for instance has never been revealed.

Phil Blinkhorn

Lowestoft Corporation – AEC Swift – YRT 898H – 4

Lowestoft Corporation - AEC Swift - YRT 898H - 4

Lowestoft Corporation
1969
AEC Swift 2MP2R
ECW B45D

At Local Government Reorganisation in 1974, Lowestoft became part of the Borough of Waveney. The operations of the Transport Department were sold to Eastern Counties some years later, and Eastern Counties is now part of First. YRT 898H is a rare combination – a 1969 AEC Swift chassis of the 2MP2R variety, with an ECW B45D body, ECW were more usually associated with Tilling fleets. The reasoning is clear, of course – support the local firm, to help the economy of the town. It is seen at Wisley on 4 April 2004.

YRT 898H_2

The Municipal Crest and fleetname form this second view.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies


29/12/16 – 07:05

I have always thought that the front end of these vehicles let them down. Without the more usual Bristol RE grille, the plain front needed some alternative feature.
The vertical trio of small air intake, authority crest and the winged AEC blue triangle badge just didn’t work. It would have been slightly better with the AEC badge at the top, together with a little bit of styling. The very low headlamps didn’t help, either.

Petras409


29/12/16 – 09:58

I bet, also, that those near vertical front screens gave rise to some serious interior light reflections during darkness hours.

Roger Cox


30/12/16 – 07:03

YRT 896H_1
YRT 896H_2

One of the Swifts spent some time in Somerset with Brutonian. It seemed a strange purchase for rural services and had difficulty in negotiating some of the lanes. I understand it was not that reliable. Acquired in 1978 is was used for a couple of years and it did look attractive in the Company’s colours.

Keith Newton


30/12/16 – 11:42

TGH 769F

Who was SD and what is the coach in the background?
It looks a lot smaller than the Swift even allowing for perspective.

John Lomas


30/12/16 – 14:44

Well the close up seems to have given me part of the answer. Bedford VAM? Plaxton Panorama? But S. D. I don’t think the S&D railway (the old slow and dirty) ran coaches and they had disappeared by then anyway.

John Lomas


30/12/16 – 14:45

John,
TGH 769F is a Reliance 2U3RA, new to Janes, Wembley in March 1968. It’s only a guess, but SD might be Shaftesbury & District.

Pete Davies


30/12/16 – 14:47

Shaftesbury & District
1968 AEC C51F new to Janes of Wembley BLOTW under More are 5 photo’s.

Alan Coulson


30/12/16 – 14:48

Shaftesbury and District who have provided bus services in the area for some years. The firm started in 1976 and is still going. The photo was taken in August 1979 in Shaftesbury.

Keith Newton


25/11/17 – 14:51

YRT 896H

A recent trawl found this photo of YRT 896H in depressing weather when it was a few months old. It shows a detail not mentioned above, that the rear end design was unlike the standard RELL bus with centre rear emergency exit, but like the RELH express bus body with an off-side emergency door and single piece rear window.

Geoff Pullin


24/01/19 – 07:03

Firstly the district council that took on the former Lowestoft borough area was Waveney (no r). Secondly the route licences were bought and three Bristol VRTs on order were diverted but the operation fleet wasn’t purchased. Thirdly, the advent of these Swifts in 1969 led to ECW designing the single pane rear window, previously bus-shelled dual purpose REs had three windows at the back.

Stephen Allcroft


25/01/19 – 06:49

With regard to Stephen’s third comment, I am not aware of any dual purpose REs that had a central rear emergency exit. Perhaps there were some that I missed that were bus-shelled vehicles with sloping floors (on RELL chassis) but DP style seats. So far as I am aware all high floor (on RELH chassis) flat floor DPs had a side emergency exit. If Stephen has inside knowledge from the time, it would be interesting to know which came first the Lowestoft Swifts or the bus framed RELH DPs (eg United Counties TBD278G of May 1969). Or was it a happy coincidence?

Geoff Pullin


25/01/19 – 06:50

I don’t think that is quite right about the bus shell bodied RELH DPs, as the G-suffix vehicles built for Bristol OC and United Counties also had a single piece rear window. //bcv.robsly.com/tbd278g.html
I think the vehicles that Stephen is thinking of are the two RESH DPs built for Midland General (SRB66/7F).

Nigel Frampton

Leeds City Transport – AEC Swift – MUB 193F – 93

MUB 193F

Leeds City Transport
1968
AEC Swift MP2R
MCW B48D

Pictured in Leeds in April 1970 is Leeds City Transport No.93, MUB 193F, an AEC Swift MP2R bought in May 1968 with MCW B48D bodywork that emulated the forward sloping side pillars of contemporary Alexander designs. A curious feature was the narrow width of the centre exit door. I believe that here was a total of thirty such buses, which were intermixed with deliveries of Swifts with Roe bodywork, also of B48D pattern, some of which arrived in 1967. Swifts continued to feature in the Leeds purchasing programme until 1971. The Swift MP2R was powered by the AH505 8.2 litre engine, and the first Leeds batches, of which No.93 is an example, had the semi automatic Monocontrol transmission. Later examples were fitted with fully auto gearboxes. I am sure that other correspondents with much a greater knowledge than mine of the Leeds system can give details of these buses in service.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox


26/06/19 – 09:48

The narrow exit door was also a feature of the Roe bodied Swifts delivered in 1967/68.
The biggest batch of Swifts were the 50 delivered in 1969 were bodied by Park Royal and had full size centre doors The last Swifts came in 1971 and had Roe bodywork. In addition to the Swifts Leeds also bought thirty single deck Fleetlines with Park Royal bodywork these were identical to the fifty Park Royal bodied Swifts

Chris Hough


28/10/20 – 05:36

I think there were 5 variants of these.
51 – ? were AEC Swifts with MCW bodywork, vertical window pillars, lights in the roof line and narrow doors, bus seats MUG 4xxF reg.
? – 100 were AEC Swifts with Roe bodywork, they were the slanting window ones as the pic above, coach seats, narrow rear door MUG 1xxF reg.
Not sure of the split I think 51 – 85 were MCW, 86 – 100 were Roe 1966-8.
1001 – 1050 AEC Swift, Park Royal bodies, wide rear doors, dest display at side. bus seats SUB 4xxG 1969.
1201 – 1230 Daimler Fleetline Roe bodies, wide rear doors, bus seats, dest and route no at side, reg UNW 2xxH introduced 1970.
1051 – 1070 AEC Swift Roe body wide rear doors, only route number at side. coach seats AUB 1xxJ introduces 1971.
Please let me know if I have any of this wrong.

Ken


01/11/20 – 06:07

According to buslistsontheweb.co.uk the 51-100 split was rather more complicated than that:
51 (GUM 451D): Roe body, 1966 (exhibited at Earl’s Court).
52-60 (JNW 9xxE): Roe body, 1967.
61-75 (MNW 1xxF): MCW body, 1968.
76-85 (MUG 4xxF): Roe body, 1968.
86-99 (MUB 1xxF): MCW body, 1968.
100 (MUG 100F): same as 86-99.

Peter Williamson

Sheffield Corporation – AEC Swift – TWE 123F – 1023

Sheffield Corporation - AEC Swift - TWE 123F - 1023

Sheffield Corporation
1968
AEC Swift 2P2R
Park Royal B53F

Sheffield took delivery of two batches of AEC Swifts in 1968. The 2P2R type was fitted with the AH691 engine, ideal for the Sheffield hills. The first 11 buses were single doorway for the Joint Committee B fleet as shown here. These buses were initially put to work on the Inner Circle services 8 and 9 despite these being category A services. 1023 is seen here so employed when just a few weeks old at Hunters Bar. The Inner Circle routes took one hour for a round trip serving the older and inner parts of the City. The small window beneath the nearside windscreen had a roller blind behind which could be set to either blank (as here) or Please Pay as you Enter as appropriate.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild


29/06/20 – 06:21

Who knows? I could have been lurking within 1023. I was a pupil of King Edward VII School on Newbold Lane from 1964-1971 and these were my regular mode of transport to and from school from 1968. Fast and smooth but, in retrospect, not the equal of the RE. Ironic that, shortly afterwards, an order for the superb RE was changed for the flawed VRT.

David Oldfield


15/07/20 – 06:45

I think you and I spent many a happy hour waiting for these Swifts and before that – whatever could be mustered from East Bank Road depot at that time in the morning, be it a 30ft long AEC Regent V with Weymann, Alexander or Roe bodywork, a PD3, Atlantean, Fleetline or even something older. What a splendid mix was the Sheffield fleet right up to the 1970s.
The Swifts had a hard life climbing up and down the ferocious hills of the Steel City to Lodge Moor, Gleadless, Upperthorpe, Walkley and, as here, on the Inner Circle. Of course they never looked as good as this once taken over by the South Yorkshire PTE.

Philip Hanwell


17/07/20 – 07:33

Yes, it was a bit of a hotch potch just prior to the Swifts. Not sure about the B fleet Regents Vs or Fleetlines, but we certainly had the rest – and older. [Not to mention the fleet of almost retired Regent IIIs and PD2s used to ferry us to games at Trapp Lane and Castle Dyke.]

David Oldfield

London General – AEC S-Type – XM 7345


Photograph by “unknown” – if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

London General
c1920
AEC S-Type
LGOC O30/26RO

Here is a wonderfully evocative photo of Morden UndergrounD Station (near to where I grew up) with the Derby Week “racing fraternity” in full flood, having arrived by Tube and queuing up for transporting to Epsom Downs/Tattenham Corner. I count about twelve of these bone-shakers. At the end of the day, the scene would be played out in reverse! Note the inspector on his boxes directing what appears to be a very smooth operation. One wonders if he was a tic-tac man in his off-duty hours!
The S-Type bus was first introduced around 1920. It was larger than the similar-designed K-Type, and could carry 56 passengers as opposed to the slightly earlier and smaller K-Type”s 46, making it popular on the busier routes. They were withdrawn between about 1930 and 1932, as new and infinitely better LT and ST types came off the production lines. Since Morden Station was built in 1927, the scene can fairly accurately be dated, therefore, at between 1927 and 1932.
One S-Type (S742) survives as part of the Transport of London Collection and appears at rallies from time to time.
When I collected bus numbers, using my Ian Allan ABC book for reference, I would bunk off school for these few days each year. London Transport would bring in buses from every corner of its territory (and every dark corner of its garages) to support this challenging feat. In an area which usually had austerity Daimlers, pre-war RT”s and STL”s, Morden would come alive with austerity Guys and Bristols, Godstone and Watford”s green STL”s and ancient LT”s and ST”s from afar, many with chalk crosses on their wings, signifying their imminent doom, once this final task had been fulfilled!
Maybe these S-types were also on the way to the bone (shakers) yard after the last horse had run and passengers deposited at Morden!

Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron


14/06/21 – 06:28

I was just giving some thought to the exhortation to the photographer beneath the picture, “if you took this picture please get in touch”. By my reckoning, assuming the picture was taken in 1931 to make the maths easy and that the photographer who took this is going to be at least 20 at the time, he would now be at least 110 years old. I think if the person who took this picture tries to get in touch I for one, would be out!

Peter Cook


15/06/21 – 06:34

You were right, Peter, to come up with 1931, as the last 700 ‘S’ double deckers were taken out of service by November of that year, with some single deckers lasting, amazingly, to 1936. These did eventually get pneumatic tyres, which the double deckers don’t ever seem to have had, so the photo could well be 1931.

Chris Hebbron


13/09/22 – 06:50

XM 7345

In London and its surrounding areas the proliferation of motor buses from 1905 led the Metropolitan Police to view the early examples of mechanical propulsion with a deep suspicion bordering on hostility. Early in 1906 the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police issued a set of regulations governing the design and construction of buses operating in the area under his jurisdiction. From this date the Met Police Public Carriage Office stipulated the maximum dimensions of 23 feet in overall length, 7 feet 2ins in width and a maximum unladen weight of 3 tons 10 cwts, with axle loading limits of 2 tons at the front and 4 tons at the rear. Minimum turning circles were specified, and severe constraints were placed upon mechanical and bodywork engineering features right down to the smallest details. In 1919 the government set up a new department, the Ministry of Transport, to oversee the burgeoning mechanised transport scene. Doubtlessly influenced by some lobbying from the LGOC, the new ministry accepted the need for a larger capacity omnibus to meet the pressures of public demand in London. The Metropolitan Police already had the discretion to permit the operation of vehicles that exceeded the 1906 regulations, and the introduction of the forward control AEC “K” type from 1919 was covered by an increase in the laden axle weight limits from 2 tons to 2 tons 15 cwts at the front and from 4 tons to 4 tons 5 cwts at the rear. The maximum laden weight became 7 tons. In recognition that even this was unduly restrictive, the rear axle weight was increased further in 1920 to 5 tons, the vehicle laden weight to 8½ tons and the maximum overall length to 25 ft. These relaxed criteria led to the introduction in 1921 of the heavier AEC “S” type with O28/26RO bodywork. A total of 928 S type buses, some being single deck, entered the fleet of the London General Omnibus Company and its associates mainly between 1920 and 1923, though a few were constructed later up to 1926. AEC offered provincial versions of the S as their Types 4 and 5. Bus design progressed rapidly during the late 1920s, and the arrival of the NS followed by the advanced Regent sounded the end for the early K and S types. Most of the S class were withdrawn in 1931, but those that had been converted to enclosed windscreens and pneumatic tyres stayed on until a little longer. Remarkably, because of a weight restriction on Chertsey Bridge, fifteen K type buses remained in stock until June 1932. When the LPTB was formed in 1933 fifteen S double deckers and fifty eight single decks transferred to the new ownership, though not all were licensed. The double decks all went by 1934, but some of the single decks lingered on until 1936. The bus in the picture above is S774 XM7345, which was allocated to Tottenham garage by April 1923 and was withdrawn in 1931. Even the low framed NS of 1924 did not survive much longer, many being withdrawn from passenger service by 1934 and the last by 1937. Above is a picture of preserved S454 on an HCVC Rally in the early 1970s.

Roger Cox

London Transport – AEC Routemaster – 254 CLT – RMF 1254


Photographer unknown – if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

London Transport
1962
AEC-Park Royal Routemaster
Park Royal H38/31F

Whilst on loan to Halifax Corporation this was London Transports first front entrance Routemaster, it also had a tow bar fitted so it could tow a luggage trailer when doing airport duty. I think there was a connection with “British European Airways” somehow but not over sure of exact detail If you know, let me know, please leave a comment.
There wasn’t many front entrance Routemasters compared to rear entrance even the Green Line coaches were rear entrance although they did have platform doors, nice seats and fluorescent lighting. The Routemaster really was built for town work having 9.6 or 11.3 litre AEC engines or a 9.8 litre Leyland Engine with a gearbox that gave the driver the choice of semi-automatic or fully automatic. Put all that power and the automatic gearbox together in a light chassis less body And you have a very nippy bus.
In one of my reference books on buses which I use for information I came across the following sentence.
London introduced front entrance Routemasters (FRM) in 1967 with a rear mounted A.E.C 11.3 litre engines and Park Royal bodies seating 41 on the upper deck and 31 on the lower deck, and a laden weight of 13.55 tonnes.
A Rear engined Routemaster! now that’s a new one on me can not find any photos on line or any information anywhere. The book was published by the Blandford Press so I would of thought the content would of been carefully checked. So all you Routemaster followers out there let me know if you know something about this mystery rear engined AEC, please leave a comment.

An interesting article regarding the front entrance Routemasters is here.


FRM1 (there was only 1 built) it is still around, it is part of the London Transport museum collection and I think it is kept at Acton. This link should reveal all! //www.countrybus.org/FRM/FRM.html

If that does not work search for IAN’S BUS STOP and click on the FRM in the list of London bus classes. Hope that helps.

Michael


The rear engined Routemaster FRM 1 was unique, as was the above pictured RMF 1254. It was used by British European Airways prior to the purchase of their front entrance Routemasters.
In addition to Halifax, RMF 1254 was also loaned to Liverpool Corporation and East Kent, whilst in London Transport ownership.
It was fitted with a Leyland engine before being sold to Northern General in November 1966, where it lasted until October 1980 and is also now in preservation.

Pete Cook


RMF1254 was exhibited at the 1962 Earl’s Court Commercial Motor Show, and was later involved in service trials with BEA. It did indeed tow a luggage trailer whilst with them, and the experiment proved successful enough for BEA to place an order for 65 short forward entrance models. These too towed luggage trailers. They were powered by AEC AV690 engines developing 175bhp for use on the M4 motorway. RMF 1254 (Routemaster Forward entrance) was later sold to Northern General, where it joined their fleet of 50 similar vehicles. The rear engined Routemaster FRM1 (Front entrance Routemaster) used approximately 60% of standard Routemaster body parts. It had independent coil suspension at the front with air suspension at the rear. It was powered by an AEC AV691 11.3 litre engine developing 150bhp @ 1800rpm. A shame it was never allowed to enter production, as no doubt Northern General would have taken delivery of some. They were certainly impressed with the high standards set by the originals, which did not suffer the effects of corrosion encountered with their Atlanteans of a similar age.

Brendan Smith


With reference to London Transport’s tie-up with BEA, as an airline BEA didn’t want the overhead of operating passenger road vehicles and space to house them. So, while the vehicles were owned by BEA, they were operated by London Transport using LT drivers and were accommodated at the former Chiswick Tram Depot (later to become Stamford Brook bus garage). The service started initially with half-decker Commer Commandos; and continued into the early 1950s with a dedicated fleet of RFs (AEC Regal IVs with special Park Royal deck-and-a-half bodies).
Replacements were needed in the 1960s – larger aircraft now required larger vehicles. LT had conducted trials with double-deckers, one an AEC Regent V with a large rear luggage compartment and the other, RMF 1254, with a trailer.
The RMF trials having been successful, BEA ordered a fleet of 65, together with 88 luggage trailers (by Marshall). These RMAs differed from RMF1254 in various ways:
1. They were of the standard Routemaster length, 27ft 8in.
2. They had the standard engine but were geared for 70mph motorway operation.
3. They were equipped with paraffin heaters to keep the interior warm during the sometimes lengthy waits at terminals.
4. The destination displays were eliminated (as passengers knew where they were going)
5. An illuminated panel above the front entrance advertised the airline, as did a matching panel on the offside.
6. The drivers front window was of the single pane non-opening variety.
They went into service between the West London Air Terminal at Cromwell Road and Heathrow Airport from October 1966 after a brief trial period.

(Information adapted from Ian’s Bus Stop website.)

Trevor Haynes


25/09/11 – 18:02

When London Transport and Green line started to run down the Routemaster fleet they became scattered far and wide, but if I’m not mistaken Northern General were the only other operator who had Routemasters of any type from new. They were bought for the routes between Newcastle and Darlington, Hartlepool, Stockton and Middlesbrough. The Sunderland/Bishop Auckland route run by Sunderland & District (Northern General) used Burlingham bodied PD3’s fitted with rear doors.

Ronnie Hoye


08/10/14 – 06:58

I joined London Transport at 19 as a conductor on the trolleys at Stonebridge park garage, when we took over the Routemaster they were in a new world like a dream. I conducted then passed out as a driver, these buses were still in the experimental stages, some had Dunlopillow suspension that made the poor conductor feel sick. We had one that I reported for break problems RM1144 it frightened the life out of me one day, when I took it over the driver said watch the brakes, well as I was pulling up at a bus stop the brakes suddenly went off I put more pressure on the pedal and was thrown over the steering wheel, with a bit of practice I found if that if you left your foot where it was the brakes came back on. They were the most wonderful vehicle that was ever designed, we were told to drive our ones in auto all the time, Cricklewood were told to drive theirs in manual as it saved so many litres of fuel. As one of you comments about the sound of the engines, ours were AEC.

Brendan, you are right about the roar of that Leyland engine, wonderful a few more bits about the Routemaster, most of the Routemasters were governed at 44 mph, they were numbered in SLT, VLT, WLT, RM1000 was the odd one out with 100 BXL if I remember. I think it came from Brighton, then they went on to CLT and so on, some were fitted with moving advertising boards on the lower deck. I asked an instructor at Chiswick about taking one on the skidpan, and was told that at that time if it went into a skid it went into neutral gear but if it hit something it went back into gear, I was told on my test to pull up the dip in Chiswick put it in second gear and pull away, I found that was the only gear that it wont pull away in when the bus suddenly ran back down the slope. I have got great memories of my days on London Transport, my colleagues and the public, the old char ladies on the night bus from Edgware to London Bridge were great to chat to and we did not have much trouble at all.

Bix Curtis


17/11/14 – 08:36

254 CLT_2

Here is an updated picture of this vehicle. The preserved vehicle is seen at the LVVS running day.

Ken Jones


07/01/16 – 17:03

If you read this, Bix, I’d love to hear more recollections of RMs and also of trolleybuses. The trolleys must have been quite difficult to drive, especially when compared to a fully automatic RM.

Ernie Jupp


04/07/20 – 07:35

Short bodied RMs were designated 5RM5 and longer RMLs designated 7RM7. Does anyone know what the RMFs were designated. I believe the shorter BEA Routemasters were 9RM9, but what about RMF 1254 and the Northern vehicles?

Martyn H. Taylor

London Transport – AEC Routemaster – ALD 924B – RM 1924


Photographer unknown – if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

London Transport
1964
AEC-Park Royal Routemaster
Park Royal H28/36R

Here is a nice action shot of a standard Routemaster, and it’s probable out accelerating the mini next to it. This particular vehicle had the Leyland O600 9.8 litre diesel engine and it would of had a throatier sound than the AEC engine. This was due to the fact that London Transport did not use air filters for some reason and it was the air entering the Leyland engine rather than the exhaust that produced the throaty sound. If memory serves me correct I think the London Transport practice of not fitting air filters meant that the RT had that lower bonnet line than the Provincial Regent.
The main reason for posting this shot is I visited Southport recently and found an excellent second hand bookshop that had a good selection of bus books and was lucky enough to get a copy of “Blue Triangle” by Alan Townsin. One thing I noticed in the chapter for the Routemaster was that the prototypes had the radiator and fan positioned under the floor behind the engine bay. This explains how the first RM prototype achieved engine cooling when having no radiator just a solid panel with a London underground type logo on it, I have searched high and low for a shot on the internet to no avail I’m afraid. But fortunately by the time the first production model RM 8 appeared in 1958 the radiator and fan had been moved back to the normal position in front of the engine. This meant that the bonnet length had to be increased by 4 inch though to accommodate them and the good looking Routemaster that we all know came to be.

A full list of Routemaster codes can be seen here.

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.


Photograph taken by Colin Tait in 1955

Here is a photo of RM1 SLT 56 with the solid front plate and bullseye motif, it’s worth observing that this prototype had no opening windows in the upstairs front.
Photograph courtesy of the London Transport Museum.

Chris Hebbron

The final design was far more balanced, and arguably more attractive, than the original.
There was an interim design of grille which had the LT bulls-eye on the round protuberance (just visible above the grille in the first photograph) and no “AEC” triangle at the top of the grille divider.
The final version (shown) had the LT bulls-eye but not the letters “AEC” on a triangle in the usual place.
There were, over a period of time, variations in the depth of the ventilation grille beneath the destination/route number indicators. (RM 1 is shown with standard route indicators – which it did not carry originally).

David Oldfield

Your comment about the throaty sound of the Leyland-engined RMs brought back fond memories of riding on one or two of them while I was on a week-long course at CAV in Acton in the early 80’s. The induction roar was absolutely gorgeous, and all the more audible as you say, due to the lack of an air filter. West Yorkshire Road Car had some Bristol RELH coaches (ECW and Plaxton bodies) fitted with 0.680 Leyland engines, which always sounded grand on the road. However, they had a similar induction roar when being tested on WY’s dynamometers at Central Works, as they were tested without air filters. I used to love running such engines in, and then fully bench-testing them on the dynamometers after overhaul. It was lovely (and quite addictive) to hear that roar – even with ear protectors on! The Routemasters had a lovely ‘song’ whether AEC or Leyland powered, as the accompanying melody from the transmission was so gentle and tuneful. Sadly, the tune went off somewhat when they were re-engined and re-gearboxed later in life, but at least it kept them running. P.S. Does anyone else think that someone has lost the plot somewhere with the ‘Borismaster’?

Brendan Smith

Simple answer – “Yes”
I drove for Reading Mainline on a casual basis.
Everyone knows I’m an A(mbassador) for E(xcellent) C(oaches) – and buses – but our two “Leyland” Routemasters were great fun and didn’t half shift (especially up – and down – Norcot Hill).

David Oldfield

22/04/12 – 07:34

Brendan, I’m so glad someone else is clearly so addicted to the Routemaster “melody”. I fell in love with the Routemaster sound as a young lad and, some 40 years later, I am still totally absorbed by the unique harmonies of the engine (has to be AEC or Leyland) and the various parts of the transmission.

Mike Wakeford

22/04/12 – 16:10

What engines were used to re-engine the RM’s? I understood at one time that they were Italian, but would like to know if this was so.

Chris Hebbron

23/04/12 – 05:44

Chris, some of the power units used to re-engine the Routemasters were indeed Italian, these being of Iveco manufacture. Iveco is owned by FIAT, but I seem to recall it collaborated with Magirus and Ford to produce a range of commercial vehicles in the 1980s/90s. (The Ford/Iveco EuroCargo truck springs to mind). Other engines were also fitted to the Routemasters in later life, notably by Cummins and Scania. It was rumoured that Ken Livingston had planned to have the original Routemaster engines replaced with Gardner units at one point, as they had an excellent reliability record, were very economical, and were of British manufacture. The cost of the programme was said to have been too great however, given the perceived extended lifespan of the RMs/RMLs at the time, and so mass-produced engines were used instead. One also wonders if Gardner would have been able to fulfil an order for over 500 engines in time. Their engines were all hand-built from start to finish, and as well as building bespoke engines for the automotive industry, Gardner also built engines (plus gearboxes and pumps) for marine use. Therefore it would probably have been difficult to increase production simply by speeding up the various processes, or transferring production from marine to automotive. Such a shame though that we were cheated out of hearing the sounds of a ‘Gardner Routemaster’. I’m sure Mike and I would have found such a gentle beast just as delightful to the ear as the original AEC and Leyland-powered ones had been.

Brendan Smith

23/04/12 – 05:45

Chris. Three different engines were originally tried out and used to re-engine RMs. Cummins C (ie 8.3 Dennis Javelin), Scania DS 9 and IVECO 7.7. There was at least one DAF tried as well. The majority were Cummins, minority Scania, IVECO somewhere in the middle. IVECO is Italian (FIAT), but most of their PSV output is made in Spain. Later re-engines (like the “Heritage” RMs in Central London) have the Cummins B (5.9) as in the Dennis Dart and are know – less than affectionately – as Dartmasters.
The well preserved RML that I drive regularly has the IVECO engine – not a patch on the AEC or Leyland originals.

David Oldfield

23/04/12 – 05:46

I heard they (or some of them) were “Fix It Again Tomorrow’s.”

Stephen Ford