London Transport 1936 AEC 664T Metro-Cammell H40/30R
This representative of London’s once extensive trolleybus system is a London Transport class C2 AEC 664T (chassis number 168) with a Metro-Cammell H40/30R body. The 664T chassis design was a close relative of the six wheeled LT class Renown that the LPTB also operated in large numbers. CUL 260, fleet no. 260, arrived new on 2 July 1936, reputedly costing the sum of £2,286.3s.8d., and operated for its entire life out of Stonebridge Park depot (previously a tram “shed”) until its withdrawal on 27 August 1959. It was originally selected for preservation by London Transport, but then rejected in favour of “All Leyland” K2 type 1253, EXV 253, H40/30R, of 1938. Consequently, on 18 July 1962 CUL 260 was sold for scrap to the George Cohen 600 Group, but two enthusiasts, Tony Belton and Fred Ivey, stepped in literally at the last minute as the trolley was being hitched to the Cohen’s tow wagon at Clapham. They bought it, and arranged for its safe transport to secure premises elsewhere. This picture shows it being towed away from Clapham on 1 August 1962 over the John Rennie London Bridge of 1831, now “recreated” in Arizona on a concrete substructure. www.flickr.com/photos/ Alfred Smith of Smith’s Coaches, Reading, kindly allowed the storage of 260 at his Basingstoke Road depot for several years, and Tony Belton acquired Smith’s Duple bodied Dennis Lancet III KJH 900 for use as a tow vehicle to take the trolleybus about. Sadly, it seems that this Lancet no longer survives. In the heading photograph trolleybus 260 is seen at Madeira Drive, Brighton on 1 May 1966, when it won the award for the best restoration of the past year. Today 260 is resident at The East Anglia Transport Museum, Carlton Colville, Lowestoft.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
19/12/19 – 05:43
If any of the so called Experts of the period are still alive, I wonder if they now regret telling Trolleybus operators to get rid of them?
Ronnie Hoye
20/12/19 – 06:33
I recall you and I (and others) covering this subject, Ronnie, in another post, in 2012 no less! Link is: //www.old-bus-photos.co.uk/?p=14275
Chris Hebbron
28/12/19 – 06:14
I remember the London trolleybus being towed to Brighton in respect of the 1966 HCVC (now HCVS) London to Brighton Run.I recall the following year, two preserved trolleybuses were towed to Brighton for the run namely a Brighton one & a then newly restored Derby Corporation utility (both four wheelers). Sadly I do not think since 1967 a trolleybus has taken part in the annual Brighton run, I would love to be proved wrong with my statement!
Andrew Spriggs
11/02/20 – 07:01
My friend’s Dad was in the City of London Police, and he was told that the reason trolleybuses had to go from London was if there was a nuclear attack, diesel buses could disperse people much further because they weren’t restricted to the overhead wires. I bid the last trolleybus a tearful goodbye at Isleworth depot when London’s final trolley routes were closed.
Steve Bacon
11/02/20 – 13:34
I have never been a Londoner, and therefore don’t have a good grasp of the route system (present and ever-changing, or historical) but even to me, Hammersmith via Acton & Cricklewood (in that order) sounds geographically strange. Shouldn’t it be Hammersmith via Cricklewood (first) and Acton (second)? I could understand it with separate destination and routing blinds, but this is all on one display. Or is this another bit of esoteric London Transport lore to confuse us provincial types?!
Stephen Ford
15/02/20 – 06:28
Trolleybus route 660 ran from North Finchley via Finchley, Golders Green, Childs Hill, Cricklewood, Willesden Green, Craven Park Junction, Harlesden, Acton Vale and Ravenscourt Park to Hammersmith (and back again!) My high mileage memory, though not yet an MOT failure, has been rewardingly refreshed by the following site:- www.angelfire.com/
Portsmouth Corporation 1934 AEC 663T Metro Cammell H32/28R
This impressive beast is Portsmouth Corporation 215 an AEC663T/Metro-Cammell H32/28R trolleybus from 1934. Originally delivered as 15, it was last of a group of trolleybuses of different makes of 2 and 3-axled chassis (AEC, Sunbeam, Leyland and Karrier), with different electrics and bodies (Metro Cammell and English Electric) to evaluate the most suitable for the future fleet. It was re-numbered 215 in 1938 and lent to Pontypridd UDC, along with some of its other non-standard stable mates, from 1942-46. Shown here in its maroon/white with grey roof livery, straight from the paint shop at Eastney Depot in 1949, it was scrapped in 1952. As for the evaluation, although the main fleet centred on 2-axled AEC/BUT chassis, most (100) were bodied with non-evaluated Craven bodies, with a sprinkling (9) of English Electric and, postwar, (15) Burlingham bodies! One non-standard (No.1) and one Burlingham example (No.313) survive, but, sadly, not one Craven example, the mainstay of the trolleybus fleet. The whole network was swept away, in 1963, by Leyland/MCW Atlanteans. The unexpected one-year delay in delivery of these, caused by a disastrous fire at Addlestone, resulted in a very sad-looking trolleybus fleet and a great maintenance effort to keep the vehicles in one piece and capable of moving!
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron
10/02/11 – 17:12
Portsmouth Corporation had a wonderful livery displayed to perfection by their paint shop work on 215 in 1949. I visited Portsmouth for a day in 1963 to ride on the remaining routes and still recall the wonderful livery of the AEC 661T/Craven and BUT9611T/Burlingham trolleybuses even at this time. I wonder what decision criteria were used by the Portsmouth managers in 1934 to choose a 2 axle fleet rather than 3 axle fleet of trolleybuses. The 3 axle trolleybus was able to accept the higher starting forces from the traction motor but perhaps this was not recognised at the time. The single worm drive differential on a 2 axle trolleybus was always subjected to much greater forces than that on a motor bus. I do believe that 3 axle trolleybus fleets had less trouble with drive failures than those with 2 axle fleets and these were compounded with the longer length 2 axle types which appeared in 1954. I do believe Sunbeam addressed this single axle drive problem by introducing a double reduction epicyclic differential axle. I do believe these appeared in Walsall, Glasgow, Belfast and Bradford. Can this be confirmed? I do know these axles made a growling noise but nothing as loud as a Bradford AEC661T “Regen”.
Richard Fieldhouse
10/02/11 – 17:13
Thanks Chris for this wonderful shot of the 663T. The early PCT experimental fleet was quite fascinating, as, although not unique by any means, early trolleybus operators tended to purchase “experimental” fleets, and PCT`s such fleet was quite extensive! The MCCW bodies were obviously metal framed, whereas I believe, that the English Electric ones were composite. This gave them another feature to work out and study, as well as the chassis and equipment suppliers, giving them more reliable data before placing further orders. The subsequent 9 English Electric 661Ts were metal (I believe), as were the Cravens, but I am wondering why the change to Cravens was made. Was it simply cost based, or did PCT have similar problems to other operators of EEC metal bodies. Perhaps they had picked up rumours, and were “scared off”. Who knows? A fascinating post, for which many thanks.
John Whitaker
04/03/11 – 07:22
Lovely shot of this Portsmouth trolleybus, as repainted post-war after it’s war-time loan to Pontypridd UDC with the other three six-wheelers. Three of the four returned to service after loan, but one did not (212, an AEC 663T/EEC). Incidentally all the 15 mixed test vehicles and the following 9 AEC 661Ts did not have manoeuvring batteries and were all stored from 1940 through the war on wasteland at Hilsea (apart from the six-wheelers sent to Pontypridd). They were all returned to service from 1945 onwards. I have always been fascinated by the very mixed bag of trolleybuses taken as the experimental batch of 15 by Portsmouth. It was not an even spread of orders. Four AEC 2-axles, all with the same body make. Three Leyland 2-axles, also with the same body make. Then variety is brought in – Two Karrier 2-axle, each with a different body; Four Sunbeams, but two are 2-axle and two are 3-axle, and each pair has different bodywork, and two AEC 3-axle, also with different bodies. It doesn’t seem to give a fair spread to assessing the necessary qualities. And the choice of chassis make fell to the supplier of the highest quantity! (AEC). It seems to have been common for municipals to try out an experimental batch of trolleybuses in the 1930s. But the rest had more “equal” fleets of trial vehicles. Take Belfast, which in 1938 took pairs of 3-axle Crossleys, Guys, Karriers, Leylands, AECs, Daimlers and Sunbeams. The bodywork contracts weren’t so evenly spread, but then Harkness might be expected to corner the market there. Reading made do with just six in 1936, of which two were Sunbeam (but one I think was an ex-demonstrator, so that may have been an influence), and then one each of AEC, Guy, Leyland and Ransomes. All were two-axle and Park Royal bodied the lot. In spite of two Sunbeams the next bulk order went to AEC. Bournemouth had just four trial trolleybuses in 1933, one Sunbeam 3-axle, one AEC three-axle, one AEC two-axle, and one Thonycroft single-decker – a very odd choice. But the point is that, compared to Portsmouth, there is a “one of each” approach going on. Both of the AECs were converted to a motorbus (petrol)in 1936, and the next bulk orders went to Sunbeam. Walsall had two AEC and two Guy three-axle vehicles for their tests in 1931, again a fair share to trial – they then chose Sunbeam for their main orders! It’s difficult to imagine what kind of committee sat down with manufacturer’s catalogues and selected the chosen makes for these trials in each city. But we can make sense of those that decided “one of each” or “two of each” – but the Portsmouth mix seems to defy any of that kind of logic! But it’s what keeps us interested as observers of these events of the past. Incidentally I have never read any other account than that the Corporation chose Cravens for the batch of 76 plus the 30 Leyland TD4s because of obtaining appropriate delivery dates. No mention has been made of EEC build quality.
Michael Hampton
04/03/11 – 17:19
Interesting comments, observations and comparisons, Michael, much appreciated. As it happens, logical or not, their choice of bodywork for the main fleet, Cravens, was as sound as the bodies turned out to be, lasting around 25 years, although some re-building was necessary. I never realised that the non-standard vehicles were parked on wasteland for the duration. I also never realised that the other vehicles, especially the second batch, the 9 AEC 661T’s, lacked off-line manoeuvring ability. I always felt rather sad about them, living a rather shady life and always giving off an air of neglect – I’m not sure whether all of them were ever repainted. Considering the far less use they got, this was surprising. I always thought them the nicest looking of all the trolleys, even in comparison with the later Burlingham-bodied examples. The Pontypridd escapade fascinates me. Can you imagine the towing of these large six-wheel vehicles over to Bristol, over the Aust Ferry, then up the valley to Pontypridd, an estimated 150 miles without motorway or Severn bridges. Or, if the Aust Ferry wasn’t man for the job, a journey via Gloucester would have entailed a 190 mile slog! I daresay these journeys were not without incident!
Chris Hebbron
04/03/11 – 18:13
Don’t forget that every one of the Cravens trolleybuses would have been towed down the even greater distance from Sheffield! Towing trolleybuses would have been an everyday occurrence in those days – think about Glasgow’s with Weymann bodies!
David Beilby
06/03/11 – 08:13
And, of course, the chassis would have had to be towed to the bodybuilders first!
Chris Hebbron
06/03/11 – 09:16
Wartime loans fascinate me too Chris! Bournemouth trolleys running in Newcastle, Southend in Bradford, Hull in Pontypridd. Quite a few examples and some interesting pre-motorway routes to plan!
John Whitaker
06/03/11 – 11:52
You raise in my mind an interesting point, John. If Pompey sent its four six–wheelers to Pontypridd and Hull also sent some, what was the reason? AS a UDC (Urban District Council), it’s hard to believe it had a large fleet of vehicles, especially trolleybuses, and enemy action seems unlikely to be a significant cause, was it an upsurge in coal production and colliers, mainly impressed (and probably unimpressed!) Bevin Boys?
Chris Hebbron
07/03/11 – 08:33
Re. wartime loans of trolleybuses. Good point Chris. I can only assume that the resort towns had surplus vehicles in wartime, whereas the industrial areas needed extra capacity. Where that leaves Portsmouth, itself a prime target for the Luftwaffe, I do not know. Southsea is, I suppose, a resort, but Portsmouth as a whole would have had quite a lot of industrial activity apart from the Naval dockyard (?)
John Whitaker
07/03/11 – 08:37
The bus fleet in Pontypridd exploded (if I can use that term) during the war. The fleet strength in 1966 was 53 yet during the war they received 21 utility double-deckers and 2 unfrozen double-deckers. There were also eight utility trolleybuses which became the postwar fleet but they were really used to replace the pre-war fleet which it must be remembered was mainly single-deck EE vehicles which later moved to Cardiff, as well as releasing the loaned vehicles. There had been 8 LT ST-types on loan as well. This reflects the boom in demand during the war years, with local collieries and factories working flat out and therefore a greater need for transport. It’s probable that not only were more people travelling but also they were travelling further – there was certainly a lot of long distance travelling to the various Royal Ordnance Factories. The trolleybus route served very little directly and the way the traffic on that route expanded was probably more complex. The southern end of the route at Treforest was a long way from Treforest Trading Estate which was a major source of employment at the time and therefore would not have been used to take people there. Maritime Colliery in the centre of Pontypridd would have generated some traffic but its location in the centre of town means workers could have come from anywhere. Albion Colliery was the only large colliery directly served by the route and was at the northern terminus at Cilfynydd.
David Beilby
07/03/11 – 09:27
John – Your post triggered something else in the back of my mind about Bournemouth trolleybuses on war loan. No fewer than 18 of them were lent to London Transport between December 1940 and September 1942, partly being relieved by some new ones destined for South Africa being diverted to London. Braking-wise, they were not up to the job of London’s demands. They had to go to Ilford Depot because of their exceptional height – 15′ 11″! Ilford had no routes which went under low bridges.
Chris Hebbron
08/03/11 – 06:05
John W – CPPTD lent some 3-4 TSM buses to London around the Blitz for six months and a couple more locally towards the end of the war. They lost several buses when Eastney Bus Depot was bombed (including the sole AEC Regent they ever owned!). They then took in 10 Bedford OWBs and 9 Daimler CWA6’s in the middle of the war, but I would say that they were well positioned with trolleybuses. They also had some Leyland Lynxes surplus from sea front duties, but I don’t know if they were ever used in anger! So the fleet just about remained the same or slightly larger. This doesn’t really answer the question about pressure in maintaining services, though.
Thx, David B, for a wonderfully detailed picture about Ponypridd’s situation in the war. It goes to show how a war can distort situations and produce hotspots which, in normal times, would never arise. I’ve seen photos of LT ST’s all over the place in wartime, but never any in Pontypridd, not even by that ubiquitous bus photographer, DWK Jones!
Bradford Corporation Transport 1935 AEC 661T English Electric H32/26R
We all have our personal favourites as far as buses are concerned, and I have to confess that mine are, (or were), trolleybuses. Amongst my earliest memories were the late war years in Bradford, where I so clearly recall the sight, and sound, of Bradford’s “Regen” trolleybuses. These were AEC 661T types based at my home depot of Duckworth Lane, and were unlike any trolleybuses anywhere else, as they made a NOISE. Their mournful wail could be heard for miles about, especially when braking, and this was due to the double reduction rear axle and full regenerative control. How Bradfordians distinguished them from the Air Raid “all clear” signal I shall never know! They were new in 2 batches, in 1934 (597-617 KY 8200-8220) and 1935 (618-632 AAK 420-434), and carried early examples of English Electric metal framed bodies, which recent research has discovered, were extremely troublesome right from the off. English Electric metal bodies at that time did not benefit from the expertise demonstrated in the products of Metro Cammel. Having said that, the situation was not helped by tight and hilly schedules, the aforesaid unusual double reduction rear axles, and the fully regenerative control, such that these bodies were virtually shaken to bits after a troublesome 10 year life on Bradford’s granite setts. Failures were occurring at an alarming rate by the war years, and BCT received permission to rebody 9 of them with Brush utility bodies in 1944, during which process, the regenerative control was reduced. The remainder were rebodied by Northern Coachbuilders in 2 styles, between 1946 and 1949, the last of the English Electric all metal bodies being consigned to scrap in 1947, and these trolleybuses, with their composite bodies, then settled down to a “second life” which was to last into the 1960s. They still made plenty of noise in their new guise and being a regular rider to school, each one developed its own character for me, and they became firm friends. Sad, I know!
I attach a poor quality Brownie Box photo of 606, one of the Brush rebodies, and always my favourites, taken on a quiet 1953 Sunday morning. This photograph is full of nostalgia for me, especially as it was one of the last to carry the older Tattam livery with cream bands and rear dome. Happy Days! If only I could ride on one again at Sandtoft!
Photographs and Copy contributed by John Whitaker
Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.
Not sad at all – some vehicles, just like people, have characters and the more eccentric ones get recalled the most! How amazing that permission was given to re-body vehicles while the war was on, something I’ve not previously heard of. I always had a soft spot for the London United Tramways (later LT) A1 and A2 class ‘Diddler’ trolleybuses, unique and also frail bodywise!
Chris Hebbron
Fear not John, as Chris H rightly says there’s nothing sad in being fortunate enough to be able to recognise the characteristics of vehicles. It is a fact that, even in large batches of brand new ones, individual machines very quickly display their own particular “natures.” As a teenager on frequent visits to relations in South London I was also totally fascinated by the “Diddlers” on outings to Hampton Court and the area.
Chris Youhill
Thanks Chris H and Chris Y for the reassuring remarks about my deceased friends!! Good to know that other enthusiasts are just as moved as myself when referring to man-made inanimate objects !!
Thanks for comments about London “Diddlers” from Chris Y and Chris H. I too was fascinated by them, but never saw them “in the flesh”. I hold my very fleeting memories of Bradfords EEC 6 wheelers, and single deckers in the same light, as I can only just remember them. It would be great to hear about other trolleybus interests from fellow enthusiasts, as my enthusiasm is for anything old in the psv line, including trams!
But I wont go there!
John Whitaker
Chris Hebbron raises an interesting point re. re-bodying of vehicles during WW2. The MOWT (Ministry of War Transport) controlled all allocations of chassis and body manufacture, and supply to customers. I doubt whether operators had much say in most cases; Body builders were allocated orders in batches, and hence Pickering, for example, built small numbers of utility bodies in 1942/3 on unfrozen, and early Guy Arabs, (including a minority on Mk2 chassis), they disappeared again until late 1945, when they were allocated a contract for relaxed single deck utility bodies on Albion chassis, for Scottish operators. East Lancs were used for re-bodying only, several fleets receiving all metal bodies on reconditioned chassis (mainly AEC) to almost peacetime standard. Brush were unusual, but not unique, in being used for new and reconditioned chassis, viz the Bradford trolleybuses and early AEC Regents for Birmingham. Bradford had 10 AEC Regents with all metal English Electric bodies which dated from 1935/6, and these were just as worn out as their trolleybus cousins by 1944, such that 7 were given new East Lancs bodies that year. I intend to look at the English Electric situation as far as metal framed bodies are concerned, as there were other disasters, notably with a batch of TD3/TD3c buses for Burnley Colne and Nelson JTC. I will submit a post on the subject if there is sufficient interest.
John Whitaker
I was delighted to see the Bradford AEC 661T “Regens” 620 and 606 posted on this web site by my best friend John. These were my favourite group of trolleybuses as they made a loud noise and had regenerative braking. Over the last few years I have been doing research into the early years of these trolleybuses 597 to 632 built 1934/35. My findings have been published in the Journal of the Bradford Trolleybus Association “Trackless” 200 to 205 inc. and 211. I can confirm the double reduction differential rear axle drive and the fierce regenerative braking were the main contributory factors leading to the failure of their EEC metal-framed bodies. The noise and vibration made it impossible for passengers to have a conversation inside these trolleybuses when running at speed, such as from Springhead Road to Bell Dean Road on the Thornton route. This leads me to ponder why Bradford specified a double reduction differential drive when a single worm drive differential was working quietly and efficiently on a very similar AEC 661T/EEC in London, namely LTPB 63 delivered some months earlier.
Richard Fieldhouse
This site has certainly brought back some memories. I served an apprenticeship with the English Electric Co. at the Thornbury works in Bradford in the late 50’s. The Trolleybus motors kept the Traction Department busy for many years. I recall working on the motors in both production and refurbishment and for it’s output it was very compact, good for it’s purpose, but a pain to work on. A common fault with motors returned for Overhaul was the “Square Commutator” Not really square but appearing so due to abnormal wear on opposite sides. Caused it turned out by slightly eccentric brake drums on some vehicles resulting in the motors always stopping and starting at the same point in it’s rotation.
Phil Johnson
Amazing the sort of problems which crop up – I should think it required some thinking about to identify THAT problem!
Chris Hebbron
I found Phils’ comments and experience at the English Electric Co at Thornbury most interesting and wonder which type of trolleybus traction motors were being overhauled and who were the regular customers. Can I assume Bradford City Transport was a regular as it was a loyal supporter of English Electric traction equipment?
Richard Fieldhouse
19/04/11 – 19:20
In the comments on the page for Bradford Corporation AEC661T trolleybuses, some correspondents mention the LUT “Diddler” trolleybuses. In 1962 the last trolleybuses were withdrawn in London and living in a road near the last trolleybus route to close I took my 18 month old son to see the last trolleybus from Hammersmith to the depot at Fulwell. In the event the modern bus was preceded by a “Diddler” from the London Transport Museum decorated with bunting, etc. as for its opening day. Alas, my son does not recall the sight. For those of you who are interested, if you log on to the “You Tube” website and type in the Search Box “Twickenham Trolleybuses” (without the quotes) there is a film of the first day of operation of the diddlers taken in 1932. It is in black and white and, originally, was silent but a sound track of 1930’s band music has been added. If you look carefully you will notice that they do not have headlights but it was shortly afterwards at the insistence of the police that a single headlight was put in the centre of the panel replacing the radiator on a IC engined bus.
This photo of Bradford “Regen” 607 was taken in 1944 outside Duckworth Lane depot and shows this trolleybus in dark blue with war time white paint and headlamp masks. The overhead wiring has flash guards fitted on the points as a blackout precaution. Also present are two Bradford motor buses in khaki livery which did not apply to any of the trolleybuses in the fleet. The bus on the left is a 1939 Daimler COG6/English Electric Company and the bus on the right is a 1936 Daimler COG6/Weymann. Behind 607 there is a parked 1935 “Regen” in the “new blue” livery introduced by Bradford in 1942. “New blue” was the description used by the Bradford engineering staff during the early years of this light blue and cream livery which remained the standard in Bradford up to April 1972 when WYPTE took over all the Corporation fleets in West Yorkshire. From my research I have found that 607 had a serious front accident in late December 1935 and was rebuilt with a full width cab and seating reduced to 58. The control contactors and shunt resistors were relocated from the chassis side to the cab. All the “Regens” except 632 were originally built with a half cab and 60 seats but all were rebuilt to full cabs as 607 in 1937/38 and the seating reduced to 58. Perversely due to the cramped half cabs, the main circuit breakers were located on the roof trolley gantry and operated by levers in the drivers’ cab connected by Boden cables with steel wires. Overtime these steel wires extended and often broke rendering the trolleybus inert and an operational disaster. It is surprising that Bradford did not fit cab located circuit breakers at the time when the full bulkheads were fitted. This work however did start in 1942 for some “Regens” but was not done to 607 where the large boxes are the circuit breakers which can be seen on the roof. 607 was withdrawn for re-bodying in June 1945 and returned to service with a Northern Coachbuilders Mark 1 56 seat body in September 1946.
The photo of 620 now with a 1949 Northern Coachbuilders Mark 2 56 seat body shows it accelerating noisily up Godwin Street in Bradford City Centre in October 1952. In the background is a Brush bodied “Regen” on the Allerton service to the City Centre terminus. 620 still wears the glorious Tattam livery with cream bands, black beading and yellow lining. It soon lost its cream bands, was moved from Duckworth Lane depot to Thornbury in 1954 and then could be seen elsewhere in the City, Sadly 620 was withdrawn from service prematurely in April 1958 due to a serious accident when it skidded and overturned on the Clayton route. Other “Regens” with NCB bodies lasted until November 1962 having given 28 years service, albeit with a troubled number of early years until re-bodied in the forties. Happy days, these unique “Regens” with their wailing and humming sound will always remain etched in my mind.
Photographs and Copy contributed by Richard Fieldhouse
Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.
01/02/11 – 18:41
What a treat to see the 2 “Regen” Bradford trolleybuses, and thanks to Richard for the technical data concerning the circuit breakers and full cab rebuilding. It all goes to emphasise the points I made about the severe problems with these early EEC metal bodies, mentioned in my own “Regen” post. In their rebodied form, I spent hours travelling in them, and, like Richard, will never forget their distinctive wailing sound. Also of interest is the rear of the EEC bodied COG6. My recent article on English Electric Bus Bodies mentions the 1937 re-design, and the well rounded rear dome of this bus illustrates this very well. There were very few takers for this design. I can only think of TD5s at Barrow, and lowbridge “Regens” at Southend. Anyone know of any more? The previous design had a very upright dome as can be seen on the “new blue” AAK “Regen” to the left of 607. My home was about a mile and a Half from Duckworth Lane depot, shown here, and I was about five when the photo was taken!
John Whitaker
01/02/11 – 18:47
Fascinating submission. This is not the first one which mentions noisy trolleybuses, yet I cannot ever recall hearing more than the odd whine and swish from them, and I must have visited and travelled on them in some 10 towns which operated them. Any reason for the noise?. I must confess that noise would have given individuality to an otherwise usually rather bland form of travel. Even so, I was always impressed by their 0-60 acceleration and indeed used to ride on the last trolleybus from Croydon to Mitcham which went flat out across the common (about 60) silently, bar the singing of the poles/wires and the vibration from a far from new class of trolleys. On reflection, I wonder if I saw the girlfriend, who gave me this routine, for longer than I might, simply for the trolleybus experience!!
Chris Hebbron
02/02/11 – 06:14
Chris, I think the noise was generated by the double reduction gears in the rear axle differential that were straight cut teeth. Similar to tram motor gearing so a similar noise. I am pleased you found these Regens pictures interesting.
Richard Fieldhouse
05/02/11 – 16:07
Glasgow must have had very quiet trolleybuses. My dad can remember them being almost silent to pedestrians and they became known as ‘the silent death’. I hadn’t ever heard this mentioned anywhere else but reading Ken Houstin’s excellent ‘The Corporation Bus’ (Grosvenor House, £9.99 from Waterstones) lastnight I came across mention of one Dionne Warwick vs Glasgow Corporation. It seems the singer left the Glasgow Odeon after a concert using the back door on to West Nile Street. This being shrouded in thick fog, she didn’t hear or see a trolleybus and was struck by it and an out-of-court settlement smoothed things over!
Scott Anderson
29/04/11 – 06:49
One of the class lasted until 1965 having become trainer no. 060 in 1962. This was the former 597 with an NCB (mk2) body. I photographed it in this role outside Thornbury depot in July 1963. On withdrawal in 1965 it had achieved almost 31 years of service. No. 603 was repainted in the 1911 style livery to celebrate Bradford’s Golden Jubilee in 1961. According to Stanley King no. 603 attained 1 million miles in service on 24 April 1962.
Malcolm Wells
26/03/12 – 07:53
I have just put together a gallery to commemorate 40 years since the end of Bradford trolleybuses. This incorporates over 500 photos including a section on the ‘Regens’ which I hope will shed some new light on the issues they experienced. Richard Fieldhouse has given me some useful information which has helped to interpret the photos, a lot of which relate to the structure of the body. There is also route-by-route coverage. The gallery can be found at: //davidbeilby.zenfolio.com/ Hope you enjoy it!
David Beilby
26/03/12 – 13:21
David, the Bradford additions to your gallery are absolutely superb. Many thanks for your efforts, and particularly the EEC views, which to us Bradford enthusiasts are unbelievable. We would never have believed that such a wonderful archive even existed, let alone become available. The Regens have always been my main transport “love”, as I grew up with them, and have previously said on a 606 posting, they were “personal friends” in the way that true transport enthusiasts will readily understand.
John Whitaker
27/03/12 – 07:17
Thx, David B, for putting Bradford’s trolleybuses on your website. Interestingly, the range 597-632 is virtually identical to (2)16-(2)24 (and especially (2)24 in Portsmouth Corporation’s fleet. Bradford re-bodied them around the end of the war, but Pompey’s carried their original bodies until they were scrapped, mainly in the 1957-8 period. What was news to me were the five AEC ‘Q’ trolleybuses, presumably all with English Electric bodies, although whoever built the ‘Q’ (trolley)bus bodies, usually seemed to make them all look very similar. Bradford’s ‘Q’, 633, had a relatively short life (1934-1942). To withdraw a vehicle in mid-war would seem to indicate a really serious deficiency somewhere. The clue might lie with Southend’s ‘Q’ trolleybus No. 123, originally on hire from AEC Ltd., from 1934. It was rebuilt by Sunny Dawes in 1943 and again by Beale in 1945, finally being withdrawn in 1949. Intriguingly, Peter Gould’s website shows this vehicle as being a lowbridge example.
Chris Hebbron
27/03/12 – 15:47
Chris. Bradfords Regens were the first EEC metal framed trolleybus bodies. Like their BCN Leyland TD3 cousins, the bodies were literally shaken to pieces after 10 years, due to body weakness, cobbled streets, and the double reduction drive. EEC had learnt a few lessons by the time PCT received theirs, and there was a redesign in 1937, as exemplified by 635 etc in the BCPT fleet. the Q (“Queenie”, No 633) was sold to South Shields in 1942, where she ran until c.1950. She was non standard in Bradford, regarded as draughty, and there were problems with the front overhang. A MOWT directive instructed BCPT to sell earlier 6 wheelers, and 633, South Shields and Newcastle being the recipients in 1942, and 1945. Bradford had, of course, received 10 Sunbeam MF2s in 1942 under MOWT directive, which enabled these transactions to proceed. I refer to the “Joburghs”, 693-702. We could write paragraphs on the “Regens”, so I will leave it there!
John Whitaker
28/03/12 – 08:31
Thanks, John, for filling in the gaps. We tend to forget cobbled streets and the effect they had on vehicles of the time, and probably to a lesser extent now as well. I sometimes wonder if East End of London cobbles were a prime reason for London Transport’s chassisless bodies coming into service. Although one or two small orders had their weaknesses, most survived the punishment well, although a large maintenance workforce would have helped.
Chris Hebbron
28/03/12 – 18:23
It has always amazed me Chris, that the LPTB chassisless trolleys performed as well as they did, and that the concept was not followed up apart from, I suppose, the RM input. Interesting point! Re. Bradford’s Q trolley, I think an identical, or near identical body was fitted to the Halifax Motorbus Q. Have a look on David’s site. Most Q motorbuses had MCW bodies as did Bradford’s. As you say, Southend’s EEC Q was lowbridge, as were the earlier 661Ts! What a fascinating fleet that was! re. Portsmouth, I am assuming that their EE bodied 5 bay AEC 661T trolleys were metal framed, as I always assumed, perhaps wrongly, that they were. The earlier 6bay EEC bodies, and their 6 wheel equivalents were definitely composite, as the BCPT ones, delivered from November 1934, were definitely the first trolleys from EEC with metal framing.The Burnley C and N Titans were their first all metal motorbus bodies, and caused horrendous problems, as has been stated before. What a great hobby interest we share!!
John Whitaker
02/12/14 – 16:14
I always thought these Bradford Corporation AEC 661Ts 597 to 632 (built 1934/35) with double-reduction differential rear axle drives were unique. This belief was wrong as I have now found details in the recently published Portsmouth Trolleybus book by David R H Bowler that their AEC 661Ts 16 to 24 were also fitted with double-reduction drives and also made a loud noise when running. These Portsmouth trolleybuses with English Electric bodies were built in 1935 and followed the Bradford order and were similar in appearance. By 1936 I believe a worm drive with stronger bearings had emerged from AEC, no doubt due to London Transport influence, and future orders by Bradford and Portsmouth were for AEC 661Ts with worm drives which were much quieter in their operation.
Richard Fieldhouse
03/12/14 – 05:39
Nice to hear from you again, Richard. If you go to ‘More Pages’ on this website, then Old Bus Sounds, the first item is a Portsmouth trolleybus of the later type, but still with a noisy rear axle, albeit because it was worn, perhaps, near the end of its days! It’s certainly not a silent one! I confess that I never heard one of the 16-24 type, to my knowledge. They didn’t possess battery power movement and were usually relegated to peak time workings and were scrapped earlier than would otherwise have been the case. They also had a neglected air about them, with faded paintwork. Sad, because I always thought they had the most attractive bodies of all of Pompey’s trolleybus fleet.
Chris Hebbron
03/12/14 – 10:26
Many thanks Chris for your kind words and advice on the Bus Sound section for the sound of a Portsmouth AEC 661T/Craven trolleybus. I believe the General Manager Mr Ben Hall of Portsmouth was very wise to specify at a late stage Battery Traction availability for the large AEC 661T/Craven order. With the damage due to bombing during World War II, the trolleybuses in Portsmouth were still able to operate by using temporary turning points on battery power. Regarding trolleybus noise, this was also common in Bradford with some of their AEC 661Ts with worn worm drives adding to the “music”. It made every trolleybus seem to be a character. Interestingly the Karrier E4s (677 to 692; built 1938) used to make a more growling noise even when newly overhauled. Perhaps these were the bass section.
Portsmouth Corporation 1937 AEC 661T/English Electric Craven H26/26R
Portsmouth Corporation had 115 trolleybuses in its fleet. The first 15 (1934) were a motley collection of chassis/electrical equipment and bodies, four and six wheelers, bought for evaluation. The next nine (1935/36) were, to me, the most handsome of them all, were AEC/EE ones with English Electric bodies. Unable to move under their own power, they lived a shadowy life, latterly neglected and shabby. See here for a “smart” photo of one. The last 15 (301-315), BUT9611T, with Burlingham bodies, were the last delivered, in 1951, for a route extension. 294, from the third order, in the range (225-300), was the largest group delivered, in 1936/37. Amazingly, with not a Craven body appearing previously, these wore those bodies! They bore the brunt of the services and proved to be sound vehicles all round, although the ash bodies needed rebuilding during their 26/27 year lives. In this rare colour photograph, 294 (like the Leyland PD1A/Weymann bus I recently posted), is also crossing Guildhall Square on tennis racquet-shaped route 17/18 from Eastney to the Dockyard, 17 anti-clockwise and 18 clockwise. The destination would be changed at Dockyard and Eastney. This photo was taken on an early Summer”s evening in 1963, on the cusp of the system”s demise on 27th July 1963. 294 lasted to the end. Two trolleybuses have survived, but neither of them represents this range; a loss really, for I”m not aware of Craven using this body design for any other vehicles.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron
Thank you Chris for another lovely Portsmouth photo of a very deserving type of trolleybus. The AEC 661T/Craven trolleybuses were the workhorses of the fleet and I have very fond memories of a visit to ride on them in 1963. I have always remembered the internal finish of the Portsmouth Cravens to be an excellent show of Civic pride. I do believe similar Craven bodies were built for Kingston -upon-Hull on Crossley TDD4 trolleybus chassis nos. 27 to 46 in 1938.
Richard Fieldhouse
08/01/12 – 16:22
The Cravens (full title Cravens Railway Carriage and Wagon Company Ltd) bore similarities to the twenty Cravens bodied Crossleys delivered to Hull in 1938. the majority entered service on 2 September 1938, eight lasting until 3 February 1962. There was an option for a further 54 bodies which was not taken up.
When clicking on the link to one of the batch of nine English Electric bodied AECs of 1935, a picture of No 24 is displayed. A previous picture on that site shows No 21 of the same batch. The contributor there notes that the electrical support structure on the roof is enclosed on No 24, but is open framed on pictures of the others in the batch. I suspect that the reason for this is that No 24 was exhibited at the 1935 Commercial Motor Show, and was built thus for that purpose. Although presumably delivered to Portsmouth after the Show, it did not enter service until April 1936. It became the last of the batch to survive, being withdrawn in 1958. As far as the Cravens-bodied stalwarts are concerned, they were what a Portsmouth trolleybus was expected to look like – just as an RM or RT represents London! No 237 reportedly survived in a Portsmouth scrapyard near the erstwhile airport for several years – possibly even into this century? But I have not heard whether it still survives, and if so whether it is accessible. No 313, a Burlingham bodied BUT of 1951 (Portsmouth’s last to run in service on 27 July 1963) is in fine fettle at Carlton Colville, I believe. No 201 (Portsmouth’s first numerically) has had a more chequered preservation career, first at Beaulieu Motor Museum, then back to Portsmouth, and ended up at the Milestones Museum in Basingstoke. About two years ago, it looked rather sorry for itself, and at my last visit early last year, it was not on display. I would hope that it is out of display for some smartening up work at the very least.
Michael Hampton
11/01/12 – 10:33
Thx, Michael, for the interesting titbit about 24 being in the 1935 Comm. Motor Show. You mention one Cravens survivor hanging on in Pompey somewhere and I believe another one did for a few years as a public convenience in Bristol – I think I saw a photo of it once, painted white. I saw 313 only in October, but it was in the ‘garage’ and I was unable to see anything other than an impeccable rear: it wasn’t running that day. Were these distinctive Burlingham bodies replicated on other contemporary (trolley)buses? I can’t recall any others, off-hand. And you’re so right about the Craven’s ones. The comprehensive and intensive system Pompey had, meant that a trolleybus was barely ever out of sight and the 75 Cravens ones seemed to total more like 200, always popping up. Wherever you went, there they were! Fratton Bridge was a complex junction for the overhead and I used to happily spend 20 mins watching the poles picking their way across the wires and frogs. The last (evening) journeys were still by trolleybus, even when the system officially closed down, and that was my last ride on a Cravens. Happy days!
Chris Hebbron
11/01/12 – 13:19
I always thought that Cravens bodies were full of character, regardless of operator or application. Having waxed lyrical in many discussions about how I loved the Cravens RTs in London I’ve usually found that I couldn’t convince the opposition – sad really, because I think that they are missing something very attractive in the five bay construction within the RT classic outline – a magical combination in my view.
Chris Youhill
11/01/12 – 17:08
I have a prejudice in favour of Cravens because they were from my home town (Sheffield) and provided many STD buses from the mid thirties until 1950. [At this point they left bus building until they bought East Lancs in 1964 – and also formed Neepsend Coachworks.] The last Cravens (1950 Regent IIIs)were among my favourites – and I thought amongst the most attractive of the immediate post war designs. They were almost identical to the RTs – but minus the “Londonisms”.
David Oldfield
12/01/12 – 06:01
I always liked the Cravens’ RT’s, too. They were nicer to look at, in all respects, save for the hunched back and, if I recall correctly, the emergency windows and lower rear window did not match up, either. Nevertheless, they made a good stab at making a pseudo-RT body from a standard design shell. Surprisingly, there are only two postings of Cravens’ bodied vehicles on this website, which should be rectified! Perhaps David could post a photo of the 1950 AEC Regent III’s he mentions. It would make an interesting exercise to compare them with the Londonised RT’s.
Chris Hebbron
12/01/12 – 06:07
Copyright P R Doughty
The latest comment by David Oldfield on the Portsmouth Cravens trolleybus has reminded me of this slide, taken by a friend of mine when we visited Sheffield in December 1966. I guess this is the batch he is mentioning
Bob Gell
12/01/12 – 06:05
Re above posting from Chris H, Here is a picture of the rather unfortunate Portsmouth ‘bus that ended it’s days in a rather unusual service role. It was used as such for many years, maybe around fifteen or even more! It was in use during 1961 and as far as I am aware it disappeared about 1980 //farm8.staticflickr.com/ No 313 has survived in fine condition and can be seen in running order here. //www.youtube.com/
Richard Leaman
12/01/12 – 10:38
Bob’s slide is most pleasing, and shows well the very attractive upper saloon front bay and roof dome which I’ve always found to be a particularly classic outline. Richard’s comparison of the two latter careers of the Portsmouth trolleybus are heart warming, and the visitors to Carlton Colville are obviously flushed with enthusiasm at the relaunch.
Chris Youhill
12/01/12 – 10:39
Thx, Bob, for the Sheffield bus photo, from which I can see something of the “RT”. Did these bodies have the hunched back that the “RT”s” possessed? And thx, Richard, for reassuring me that my memory of the “Ladies” trolleybus wasn”t faulty! I think we can say that preservation of it was not an option by this stage! And it was nice to see 313 in action, too. I was surprised to read that this vehicle, after being saved, went for scrap and was rescued a second time.
Chris Hebbron
12/01/12 – 10:41
Thanks, Bob. This is indeed the batch. [Strange how vehicles which spent most of their lives with grey roofs looked bald when repainted without it. Apparently this grey was called “smudge” – an STD concoction from mixing paint.] Put a London cab and London opening windows in and they are more or less identical styles. This vehicle was departing the small Bridge Street Bus Station for the borders of Ecclesfield which, at the time, was actually in the West Riding. [It became part of Sheffield after the 1974 Government reorganisation.] Bearing in mind the common 13 year life of STD buses, 1966 was very late for a bus of 1949/50 vintage, but occasionally vehicles reached 16 – and exceptionally 20 – years service. Please note, in the distance, one of the Neepsend bodies I mentioned earlier. STD had about 40 on the atrocious PDR1/2 Atlantean between 1964 and 1966.
David Oldfield
13/01/12 – 07:21
Chris Y, Chris H, David – Thanks for your kind comments; pleased to help. David, thank you also for identifying the location, which I wasn’t sure of. A nice co incidence getting two Sheffield bodied vehicles on the same shot.
Bob Gell
24/01/12 – 05:59
Michael Hampton recalls that No. 237 languished in a Pompey scrapyard for many years. I”ve found a photo of it on David Bradley”s excellent website, having just arrived at Jordans Scrapyard and it can be found at the link below. Apparently, it survived until about 2000 and a Sheffield group of Craven”s enthusiasts looked into saving it, but it was too far gone. The majority finished up in a quarry on Portsdown Hill where a cutting was made some years ago to bring the A3(M) through to join the A/M27. David Bradley”s website //www.trolleybus.net/
Chris Hebbron
25/01/12 – 05:13
Here”s a three minute “collage” of Portsmouth trolleybuses, both Craven and Burlingham-bodied types, along with glimpses of Southdown and Corporation buses, especially some Bedford OWB”s. The first scene shows the brilliant acceleration, (driver showing off?) despite the sounds of old age, creating a tram-like whine. You can also hear the “twang” of the overhead wires at one point, something I”d forgotten about. See HERE: //www.youtube.com
Chris Hebbron
07/02/12 – 16:37
Thanks to Chris H for more info and the links to other sites re the one that ended up in a “convenient place” in Bristol, and the evocative clip of several swishing their way through Portsmouth streets. Many places still recognisable, but with subtle (and not some not so subtle) changes. In an earlier contribution (11th Jan), I mentioned that pioneer trolley 201 (AEC/EE) had been in a rather down-at-heel condition at the Milestones Museum in Basingstoke, and had disappeared from there at my last visit. A friend handed me a cutting from a recent local paper (The News, Jan 31, 2012) which has a few paragraphs reminiscing about the trolleybuses. Most importantly, it states that from June 2009, 201 has been in the care of the City of Portsmouth Preserved Transport Depot, at Portchester (nr Fareham, Hants). So it’s good to know that it’s disappearance from Basingstoke is not sinister, and that it’s still being looked after.
Michael Hampton
08/02/12 – 06:21
That’s good news, Michael. I would think that it’s in much the same state as the London ‘Diddler’ by now – delicate!
Chris Hebbron
28/04/12 – 07:57
As a Sheffielder I well remember the Cravens batch of AECs. I thought they had nice simple clean lines. Cravens later effort on the only Bedford ever in the Sheffield fleets, number 11 KWA 811D was an ugly beast by comparison. What a shame that no Sheffield Cravens Regents were ever preserved.
Les Dickinson
28/04/12 – 08:54
Oh how I agree with everything you say, Les.
David Oldfield
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
15/10/12 – 07:41
Recent pics of Trolleybus 201 can be found here www.cpptd.co.uk
London Passenger Transport Board 1937 AEC Regent O661 London Transport Chiswick H30/26
The STL – the letters stand, rather confusingly, for “Short T Long” – was introduced into London area service firstly by Thomas Tilling in October 1932 and then by the London General Omnibus Company in January 1933. The STL Regent then became the standard double decker for the new London Passenger Transport Board which came into being on 1 July 1933. The chassis was the latest version of the AEC Regent which took advantage of new regulations that allowed for the extension of the overall length from 25ft to 26ft on a wheelbase of 16ft 3ins, and an increase in the rear axle loading from 9½ to 10 tons. The LPTB STL class then reached a total of 2647 by the commencement of war in 1939, and a further 34 unfrozen chassis were added from the end of 1941. Twenty more buses complemented the STL class in 1946, but these were very different beasts from the LPTB specification, being standard post war AEC Regent II machines with provincial style Weymann bodywork. An example of which can be seen here The STL class underwent several specification changes over its production run and subsequently in service – engine changes (petrol/indirect injection diesel/direct injection diesel) and many bodywork swaps, some arising from the attrition of wartime. STL 2093, DLU 92, seen above during the HCVC Brighton rally of May 1971, was a 1937 chassis powered by the AEC A171 indirect injection 7.58 litre diesel driving through the AEC D132 four speed spring operated preselector gearbox. It was initially bodied by Park Royal, but, being damaged in an air raid, it was sent to Birmingham City Transport for repair in 1944. By 1949 the body was deemed past further use and it was scrapped in February of that year. STL 2093 then received the Chiswick built body from 1939 vintage STL 2570, the chassis of which was then selected to join the expensive and ultimately fruitless SRT conversion programme, under which newer STL chassis were “upgraded” to carry the heavier RT bodywork. Sadly, not only were the SRTs under powered but, more seriously, they couldn’t stop, and the whole wasteful exercise was abandoned ignominiously. This OBP entry contains comments on the SRT debacle. www.old-bus-photos.co.uk/ Meanwhile, now carrying its Chiswick body, STL 2093 soldiered on, even seeing a short spell during 1949 as a Green Line coach on route 703 at Swanley, until its withdrawal from passenger service in 1954 along with the rest of the pre-war/wartime STL class. It was then sold in 1955 to Reliance Services of Newbury who in turn passed it on to a private owner for preservation in May 1958. This was Dennis John Cowing, a chemistry master (and transport enthusiast) at Selhurst Grammar School in Croydon, a master contemporary with my own attendance in a less elevated capacity at that establishment. Mr Cowing rallied the bus for many years and he is driving it in the 1971 picture, but, by 1976, the structure of the vehicle had degenerated alarmingly and it passed into the ownership of Prince Marshall for full restoration. That has since proved to be a mammoth undertaking, currently in the hands of the former Cobham, now Brooklands Museum, where it has more recently been displayed as a bus victim of the blitz. www.londonbusmuseum.com/
I have gleaned information from various sources for this note, but, as ever, Ian’s Bus Stop has been invaluable.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
26/03/20 – 06:43
One of my favourite buses, in roof-box form, along with the Bluebird LT’s. A shot which brings out the best of its design and in a condition which suggests it’s only been on the road for a few weeks after delivery to LT. Only the parked Ford 105E gives the game away! Yours, Roger? My last glimpse of a working STL was in June 1955. When waiting at traffic lights, one passed across me. It must have been a garage hack on one of its last journeys.
Chris Hebbron
29/04/20 – 06:19
This bit of Pathe newsreel, taken in 1946, includes shots of many LT types including STLs. I was surprised that so many horse drawn vehicles were still extant and also by the number of private vehicles on the road in addition to London taxis in a time of petrol rationing. Some of the pedestrian behaviour is decidedly death dicing. www.youtube.com/watch?
Roger Cox
30/04/20 – 06:03
A wonderful piece of film there Roger with a fascinating array of buses but strangely, given the date of 1946, I spotted only one utility, GYE 51. Were utilities kept off central London routes to any extent?
Chris Barker
02/05/20 – 06:36
A real cornucopia of LTs (one open staircase, with half its windows still boarded up), STs, pre-war STDs, STLs all still with their white discs on the back, and, surprise, surprise, the lone surviving TF9, on a ‘SEEING LONDON TOUR’ and still in its pre-war livery.T wo ex-army lorries, one a 3 ton Bedford OY model, which I recall as being ubiquitous post-war. Very pleasurable to watch – thanks Roger.
Chris Hebbron
03/05/20 – 06:21
Well spotted, Chris B. As Chris H can confirm, GYE 51 was Brush highbridge H30/26R bodied Daimler CWA6 D62, allocated to Merton garage. Pretty certainly it is seen here on route 88, Acton Green – Clapham Common – Mitcham which did run through central London via Marble Arch and Parliament Square. That route is reputed to have given rise in Victorian times to the term, “The Man on the Clapham Omnibus”. The Daimlers were based at Merton and Sutton garages, apart from a brief period when a few were painted green and allocated to Romford for the reintroduced Green Line routes from Aldgate. The wartime London Bristol K types, the K5Gs were later converted with AEC engines to conform with the later K6A batch, were all allocated to Hanwell. The Guy Arabs operated mainly in eastern and northern sides of London, but Victoria garage had an allocation along with its Leyland TD7 unfrozen utilty bodied buses. The heavy 5LW powered Guys, with their ‘back to front’ crash gearboxes and rather ponderous clutches were not popular with London drivers, but the TD7s were truly detested at Victoria owing to their high gearing and the heavy engine flywheel designed to damp out rock from the flexible engine mountings. This resulted in a requirement to wait excessively for the revs to die for upward gear changes, and keeping time with the type was nigh impossible. In practice, those TD7 mountings were unreliably weak, and many other operators bolted them up solid. The whole exercise was a bit pointless anyway since the rigid mountings of the TD5 were entirely adequate for the smooth running 8.6 litre Leyland engine. Those TD7s were the first wartime buses to be sold off by London Transport, when they all went for scrap. The appearance of private hire TF9 in the film is remarkable as, by 1946, it was unique, its fellows having been destroyed in October 1940 by enemy action. The prototype TF1 did survive the war but was sold off early in 1946. The Green Line TF fleet was withdrawn and sold by 1953.
Roger Cox
03/05/20 – 06:22
Chris Barker – During my working time in London from 1951 to 1956, I worked in Shaftesbury Avenue and would often walk around the whole West End, especially Regent Street, Piccadilly Circus, Haymarket, Trafalgar Square and although I never saw any Utility G’s (Guys), there were their cousins, the utility D’s (Daimlers) who went up these roads. They worked the 88 route, which went from Clapham Common (Old Town) to Shepherds Bush. These D’s worked out of Merton Garage. Other routes they operated on were the 77/77A, all going through Westminster, terminating at Kings Cross, plus the 137 going through Knightsbridge and Oxford Circus. I seem to recall that most of the G’s were garaged in East London, but I never recall seeing any around Holborn or the City. Others will probably help on that score. The following link maybe of interest London Transport – Daimler CWA6 “GXV 785“ D 54
Chris Hebbron
04/05/20 – 05:49
One wonders why the unfrozen STD TD7s were ever allocated to Central London. They’d have been more suited to Country Area, or at least to less challenging Central Area routes.
Chris Hebbron
31/07/20 – 09:36
GYE 51 would pass to Belfast Corporation in December 1953 becoming No.467. It would be rebodied with a new Harkness metal framed body in 1955 and would serve until 1970.
Bill Headley
01/08/20 – 06:27
The earliest of the Highbridge Daimlers were delivered to LPTB in August 1944, the era of V1 and V2 bombings, but not one of them suffered from this German onslaught. Ironically, a few of these went to Belfast, and a couple of them were destroyed in the early days of the ‘Troubles’. Fortunately, this was from the mid-1960s, near the end of their service lives.
As a graduate engineer I found myself training at the Brislington works of Bristol (Commercial Vehicles Ltd) when the RE was about to be constructed – in fact I was on the production line when the first production model was assembled – I took in my Bus and Coach magazine with an exploded sketch of the layout to help us put it together! As an aside, the same vehicle eventually became an experimental vehicle and I had the pleasure of driving the only RELH6B – a turbocharged horizontal version of the Bristol BVW engine! It is interesting that Bristol did not extend the MW, like AEC and Leyland extended their Reliance and Leopard models to meet the new 36 ft maximum permitted length. Cyril Eyles was the down to earth engineer who dreamed up the layout of the RE I believe. The glories were that the engine came closer to the back axle than the Panther and Swift et al and drove forward with a smaller diameter higher speed prop shaft over the dropped centre rear axle into the gearbox – originally the synchromesh box designed specifically from scratch with input and output flanges at the same (back) side. The drive from the gearbox went straight into the standard Lodekka rear axle – a well proven unit at the time (and only came to grief on the VRLH6L coach version with the Leyland 680 Power Plus engine). This provided a better, even optimal, weight distribution between axles to provide better ride, steering and braking performance.
Clutch life became an early problem related to drivers not able to hear the engine and the higher torque of the 6HLX engine. Later calculations proved it to be of too small a diameter. We discovered that Leyland and AEC were having similar problems with 36ft long vehicles. While various modifications were tried, the change to semi-automatic using the SCG epicyclic box with BCV transfer gear to bring the output to the rear was put in hand. The earliest vehicles had a rear suspension with rigid beams pivoted at the front each with two air bags, one in front and one behind the rear axle. This beam failed in service and the experimental department confirmed the mode of failure on a 24hr running test rig. The decision was taken fairly swiftly to replace this arrangement with something that had worked well – the Flat Floor Lodekka (FS – FLF) arrangement of ‘flexible beams’ with single airbags behind the rear axle. It was my job to produce the Service Modification drawing to campaign change the rear suspension!
With regard to the engines – I was with Eastern Counties as a junior engineer when the incoming General Manager wanted to be seen to have fast coaches, so he had one vehicle (ECOC RE890?) converted to horizontal Leyland 680. BCV also introduced it as an option and certainly Crosville went for it because there REs were being overtaken by Ribble Leylands on the M1. However they soon found that if two REs one with Gardner and one with Leyland engines left London at the same time, the Gardner was home first.
When I was at Ribble, I eventually got Leyland to admit that the reason that the longer Leopards faded on Motorway hills, whereas the double deck VRL also with a 680 engine could go ’70MPH uphill’, was the unwillingness of Leyland to produce a ‘Power Plus’ version of the horizontal engine because the exhaust manifolds would get in the way of the chassis frame. Signs of Leyland’s fall from excellence!
Geoff Pullin 12/2014
21/12/14 – 10:59
I seem to remember during the sixties Buses Illustrated ran a “joke” article called “Ready, steady, bus”, which tried to bring our hobby up to date with a bus news bulletin presented in the style of contemporary pop music programmes. It referred to “Bristol’s new smash hit, ‘MWL'” At the time I wondered if that was just a figment of the writer’s imagination, or had Bristol offered the MW in 36ft length, but not sold any. This article answers the question! I think the Lodekka was actually offered as a chassis to be bodied by non-standard builders in it’s final years after the partial takeover by Leyland, but again none were sold.
Don McKeown
22/12/14 – 07:36
I have looked through the linked article related to the exchange of VRT for FLF between SBG and NBC. It suggests that it was the Tilling operators who wanted the transverse engine layout. I think you will find that the change of engine position was brought about by legislation that provided grants to bus operators for introducing vehicles suitable for one man [sic] operation and I understood that the small print stated transverse rear engine for double decks. I would appreciate any ‘inside’ information on the reason for the rapid design change from the reasonably well developed longitudinal engined VRL to the VRT.
Geoff Pullin
22/12/14 – 12:08
From the point if view of drivers and passengers alike I always found the RE to be the very best of the first generation rear engined single deckers. For the driver it was well behaved, smooth and free of any nasty vices. The virtually universal, but not exclusively so, smart looking ECW body was simple and uncluttered within and the model was the outright winner in its class for me. As a luxury coach the RE was equally delightful and well behaved. Having driven and ridden in many other brutes of the period, of famous makes, I feel free of any guilt in this enthusiasm.
Chris Youhill
23/12/14 – 05:20
A couple of observations. Firstly, the arrangement of the RE engine and gearbox was apparently selected because BCV wanted to offer a short version, and the Gardner engines were relatively long, so that the rear overhang would have been too long if the gearbox was between the engine and the rear axle. Regarding the change from the VRL design to the VRT, I suspect that there is some truth in both of the reasons given. The early bus grant specs did only refer to transverse engined double deckers (allegedly, the specs were drawn up by people from Leyland). However, there was another issue – or, in effect, the same issue as that which prompted the arrangement of the mechanical components of the RE. With the engine mounted longitudinally, and the gearbox, the rear overhang was so long that the total vehicle length could not have been less than about 32’7″. At that time the Construction and Use regulations specified the proportion of the length that could be outside the wheelbase. Positioning the gearbox ahead of the rear axle in the manner of the RE would not have been possible with a double decker. Thus the vehicles would have been large enough to have about 80 seats, but at that time they would principally have been used to replace early LDs, none of which seated more than 60. Everything else aside, the extra fuel used would have done nothing for the Tilling Group’s operating costs per mile, and, it is known that General Managers were “incentivised” to try to reduce operating pcm each year, even if only by a fraction of a penny. So it is perhaps understandable that Tilling managers wanted a shorter model. In practice, very few 33′ double deckers were delivered to THC/BET/SBG/NBC companies. There is another aspect to the story that is also rather curious. BCV wanted to return to a single type of “universal” chassis, harking back to the days of the K and L types, and the VRL would theoretically have achieved this. Production economies would have been the benefit. So it seems rather strange that, when BCV offered the VRL as a single decker, the prices quoted were higher than for an equivalent RE.
Nigel Frampton
07/01/15 – 06:36
What a fascinating article Geoff. I’m quite envious of you training with Bristol Commercial Vehicles, and on the early REs too, at what must have been an exciting time in the industry. The RELH with the turbocharged horizontal Bristol BVW (BHW) engine you mention was actually the third of three prototypes built -this one being chassis number REX.003. After several years serving as a BCV testbed vehicle, it was eventually kitted out by ECW to full coach specification (C47F), and entered service with West Yorkshire as its CRG1 (OWT241E) with Gardner 6HLX engine in 1967. It has always been my favourite RELH coach, and was the only one of WY’s CRGs to have a manual gearbox. Conversely, WY’s earlier ‘express’ RELH6Gs (ERG1-11) all had manual ‘boxes apart from ERG7, which was converted to semi-automatic transmission. From new in 1966, this coach was dogged by an annoying vibration at speed. Various remedies were tried – new flywheel, gearbox, rear axle – but to no avail. In the end someone suggested fitting a fluid transmission, and the vibration magically vanished. Presumably something must have been misaligned somewhere in the original configuration, but the new fluid flywheel and epicyclic gearbox did the trick. West Yorkshire did have some problems with the manual gearbox RELLs, relating to the synchromesh balk rings failing from time to time. Despite encouragement from Bristol for drivers to use the synchromesh as intended and depress the clutch once for each gearchange, most drivers appeared happier using the tried and tested method of double declutching to effect better changes. This could be confirmed by the “FRRRP! FRRRP!” hiss of air emanating from the air assisted clutch – one “FRRRP!” for each depression of the clutch pedal. Nigel’s comments relating to the Bristol VRL also ring true. The New Bus Grant double-decker specifications at the time did indeed only refer to transverse rear-engined models, and Leyland was involved in advising on this. A shorter VRL would have fallen foul of the Construction & Use Regulations as Nigel states, due to the rear overhang of a vehicle being determined as a proportion of the wheelbase. Therefore, the shorter the wheelbase, the shorter the rear overhang had to be to reduce disproportionate outswing at the rear. Some years later, this caused similar problems for Leyland, when designing the short National. The long wheelbase National had a long rear overhang due to the engine and gearbox being mounted behind the rear axle. The short wheelbase model had shorter window pans due to the body pillars being closer together. This spacing, together with alterations to the fan drive, allowed the rear overhang to be reduced and conform to C&U regulations. The engine compartment was more cramped on the SWB Nationals as a result, which made some engine maintenance tasks more difficult. Now, going back to CRG1, just before Christmas I finally took delivery of a model of my beloved coach (by EFE) after waiting around 47 years for the privilege! It is a fine and beautiful model however, and has been well worth the wait.
Brendan Smith
13/01/15 – 11:41
The first 250 or so RE buses (not coaches) for Bristol Omnibus all had Leyland engines. Gardners began to come in during the 1972 delivery but there were only 14 Gardner-engined REs in all out of nearly 400 (including RESL). For coaches and DPs, the split was more even but Leylands still predominated. I worked in the Traffic Department 1970-3 but the talk was that Gardner’s could not meet Bristol’s demand for large numbers of REs so a decision was made to standardise on Leyland engines. I also heard that the few Gardners were diverted from another NBC order. Someone may know more!
Geoff Kerr
21/10/15 – 07:09
With regard to Nigel’s final paragraph, when I was training at BCV (1962-5), the VR was only known as the ‘N’ type and the SU was the ‘P’ type – the latter only a glimmer in Cyril Eyles’ (CE) eye – and always referred to as likely to have a Perkins engine. With regard to Geoff Kerr’s comments about BOC RE buses – I think you will find that the decision to go to single deck city buses was taken by a General Manager, hot from Ribble (where similar decision had been taken – also using REs!) The fairly new CE at BOC at the time (Philip Robinson) I think you will find started life as a Leyland senior apprentice and may well have had biassed views on engine provider. Even within NBC, personalities could be decisive! At Ribble, of course, Harry Tennant decided (in BET days!) the RELL6L drank too much fuel and specified Gardner for the second batch although shortage in NBC early days meant he had to accept RESL6L thereafter.
Geoff Pullin
22/10/15 – 07:21
The Gardner-engined REs that BOC received in 1972 were indeed diverted from another operator – Western National. There were also 3 Plaxton-bodied RELH coaches, diverted from the same source. I understand that WN had financial difficulties at the time. I am slightly intrigued by Geoff Pullin’s reference to the SU as being known as the ‘P’ type. Duncan Roberts, in his book on the RE, mentions a proposed ‘P’ type, that would have been a lightweight rear-engined single decker (which, of course, never materialised). We can only speculate on what it would have been like. I had never heard of the SU being referred to by any other designation, and by 1962 it would have been in production for a year or two, so the use of an alternative designation seems a little odd.
Nigel Frampton
22/10/15 – 10:55
Perhaps time is playing tricks as indeed the SU was in production by 1962. Perhaps the P type was a successor for it – the Albion engine was not over popular then. I can’t remember it having a rear engine when I drew out a draft specification leaflet for the proposed new models that Chief Engineer Cyril Eyles intended. A quick flash of wisdom now tells me that the P type of course became the LH which did indeed have a Perkins engine and I think the Leyland engine was an option that nearly everyone took!
I was appointed Deputy Assistant Engineer to Eastern Counties Omnibus Company on May 17, 1965 at an annual salary of £1,000 after an interview at Fleet Street, London with the Tilling Senior Training Scheme directors followed by one at Norwich with General Manager Len Balls and Chief Engineer Leo Page. Unfortunately I became ill with an unknown virus immediately upon arrival and spent two weeks in hospital overlooking a cemetery and four weeks at home in Clevedon, Somerset recovering! I had a small office in the chief engineer’s office block on the first floor within the central repair works at Cremorne Lane, Norwich immediately behind the head office at 79 Thorpe Road, Norwich. The office looked out over Laurence Scott and Electromotors works and I was serenaded and showered by one of their large extraction plants. I was worried that I would be expected to work out stresses and design things. I don’t think there was a job description! The only task I can recall as recurring was to take the minutes of the weekly works committee meeting chaired by Jack Robson, the Assistant Engineer – a true Yorkshire man, who I had come across by phone when at Bristol Commercial Vehicles Ltd (BCV) as a trainee. When I was having a spell in the service department at BCV, the phone rang one day and this Yorkshire voice said “You know that modified suspension beam that you have just fitted to our RE (coach), well it’s b***** broken again!” There were two main problems with the first batch of REs, one that the clutch plate life was very low and that the rear suspension hinged fabricated beams, which each supported two air bags, cracked in half spectacularly. The first was only cured by introducing fluid clutch and epi-cyclic gearboxes in time and the second was a campaign change to fit the FLF style flexible beam rear suspension to all REs. I was in BCV experimental department when the test rig confirmed the failure mode and in the drawing office to produce the campaign change drawing and instructions! Jack also introduced me to the phrase ‘as noisy as a weaving shed’ which meant nothing to me as a quiet west country man! I had a few trips out with Jack, who tended to see the central repair works as his main domain. When I was training at Bristol Omnibus Company, I was shown the Setright ticket machine shop and made aware in hushed tones of a ‘problem’ that had been discovered whereby the machine could be made to print a ticket at the correct value and then the dials could be forced back to a lower fare and the register counters would only count the lower fare. Thus a conductor could provide the correct ticket to the customer and pay-in a lot less than was rightly due. One morning, travelling across Norwich to work on a full 1948 vintage K5G, (this body type had been replaced on my Bristol school journey eight years earlier!), I was at the back upstairs, showed my leather bound red pass and then watched the conductor ‘turn-back’ his Setright on every fare! I’m not sure whether Jack knew about this scam, but he soon had the senior Setright mechanic to discuss the matter! Another of his phrases comes to mind: ‘there’s none so miserable as those that are short or crippled’. We sallied forth to the Setright works in London and came back with a modification that should cure the old single digit fare machines still in use in Norwich city. We also took a two digit, modern machine, which I could turn back successfully and they promised to overhaul it and make it fraud proof. I was taken along to collect it, as the expert! I thought the machine felt ‘dodgy’ and succeeded in turning it back in front of the Setright managers! More Yorkshire expressions were forthcoming! Eventually they came up with a shear pin that broke if you tried too hard and then the conductor had to explain why his dial went round and round. I doubt if he got away at the first enquiry, but he certainly wouldn’t the second time. I don’t think the road staff could have known that it was me who upset their well paying scam – they never showed it! Far less difficult was the conversion of the Setright machines from £.s.d to £.p, which I planned. I set up an experimental items system for trying things out in service and providing regular reports for the company and manufacturers (especially BCV and ECW) and this was always admired when I attended the Tilling Group regional engineering meetings three times a year, hence getting to know the chief engineers of the then Eastern Region. I had a rubber stamp made with the then-current oval Eastern Counties logo and the address so that all drawings and documents looked really professional. The vehicle maintenance system comprised of ‘docks’ at fixed mileage which were scheduled from the Chief Engineers’ office weekly and were carried out at central repair works for the Norwich (Surrey Street), Cromer, Great Yarmouth, Lowestoft; Ipswich for Ipswich, Bury St Edmunds, Felixstowe and Saxmundham; Peterborough for Peterborough, March and Kings Lynn and Cambridge (Newmarket Road) for Cambridge (Hills Road), Ely and Newmarket. Specific mechanical units (engines, gearbox, rear axle / differential, air brake units, air suspension control valves, compressors) were scheduled for preventative change and were sent out by truck from central repair works in time for fitment. When I arrived, the schedules showed vehicles due for attention every 30,000 miles and with the sixth dock being a change of all units, then the cycle started again. The previous chief engineer John Woods had set up this system and it had worked like clockwork. A few years before my arrival he had sent news to all depots that through the completion of the programme to replace all 6 cylinder engines in double decks with 5 cylinder engines, the company’s overall average fuel consumption had been reduced such that it was now better than Lincolnshire Road Car Co! Happy days! The regular site of a 5 cylinder double deck chugging along the main roads followed by a stream of cars was already familiar! I collected LFS125 from ECW at Lowestoft – the first time I had driven an FS with 5 cylinder engine and 5.5:1 back axle ratio, making it a very sluggish machine compared to the 6LWs with 6:1 back axle ratios that I was used to at Bristol Omnibus. I was assured when at BCV that an enquiry had been received from Norwich whether 5-cylinder engines could be fitted to the 30ft double deckers – presumably when the six rare FL vehicles were ordered and delivered with Bristol BVW engines (After my time these were changed to Gardner 6LW for better reliability and standardisation, I believe). However this was a time when PSV fitters were being attracted away by the HGV industry which was having to get to grips with annual HGV testing at the newly set-up testing stations. Central repair works was beginning to slip behind in producing overhauled units and it was unthinkable in those days, and probably impossible, to find a contractor to help even if the engineer’s budget ran to it. So units began to fail in service and the running depots were having to spend more time carrying out major unscheduled changes that should have been done in the dock shops. The immediate solution was to write 40,000 miles for 30,000 miles and alter frequency of one or two unit changes! Things got more dire. In Peterborough ECOC pay scales were such that skilled fitters were attracted away to semi-skilled jobs in new industries, so Kings Lynn garage was given some major docks to do. Traffic conditions were getting tougher as well, new vehicles had compressed-air assisted brakes and were being specified with 6LW then 6LX engines to replace 5LW vehicles with resultant increases in wear and tear from greater braking and acceleration. The routine inspection and adjustment (in those days brake adjusters, clutch adjustment, battery topping-up were frequent manual tasks) slipped behind and the mechanical staff were depending on drivers to report defects. I’ll come back to this later. I always had a bit of a penchant for design. I was able to put this to use in two items that were seen by many people and in the second case used by ECW on other customer’s vehicles. The first was the ‘PAY AS YOU ENTER Please tender exact fare if possible’ transfer that was applied to the exterior of all ECOC one-man vehicles for several years. I think the ‘if possible’ was my own customer relations addition, as even then I didn’t like ‘thou shalt not..’ notices on buses. The second was another small transfer which was required when time limits were placed by law on the use of horns during the night. All ECOC one-man vehicles were retrospectively fitted with reversing horns and reversing signs after one or two fatalities, one in Lowestoft bus station before my time, and one within Surrey Street garage. Now a switch had to be incorporated to turn the safety device off! Realising that few types of vehicles had similar dash panels and thus space, the transfer was designed to be used on all vehicles. I achieved this by incorporating an arrow that was in a square and could thus be cut off and placed at either end of the notice section and turned up, down or straight when applied. It was adopted by ECW as a standard! Another abortive bit of design was to produce bus stop plate designs for the Ipswich area incorporating both companies names and or colours. The standard British bus stop plate appeared not long after this effort, but it never achieved the main purpose, by which it was ‘sold’ to the industry, of being recognised as a statutory sign prohibiting parking of non-PSVs. I was allotted the task of installing the first drive-through washes in the company. I spent a night or two and a day or two watching the run-in at Surrey Street so as to position the first drive through bus washing machine in Surrey Street, Norwich. It had to fit between the roof trusses and had a recirculation tank. It replaced a couple of Essex washers which dropped down around a vehicle and mechanically brushed the sides and rear leaving the front to be done by hand – one of these had to be extended to cope with the first 36 ft long vehicles. It had to cope with an allocation of about 240 vehicles (of which some 45 were in outstations overnight and an overflow on open ground across the road at the top of the bus station). Although I got the position about spot-on, (after all I had been driving for a fair bit of overtime on service driving at Bristol, as a graduate trainee), there were some operating problems. The wash was fitted with a felt blanket to deal with roof cleaning and it also swept a good volume of water off the roof of vehicles, but drivers were very keen to get washed and parked up. This meant that there were rather more gallons of water on the garage floor than was acceptable and some of this made its way towards the maintenance pits which in those days were at the city end and not enclosed. I discovered that a ‘dripping time’ of 20-30 secs within the exit ramp was all that was needed to improve matters drastically and this was implemented! This type of wash did not deal with fronts and backs. So the Depot Mechanical Superintendent (DMS) Alec Mortimer recruited four older ‘dependable’ part-time cleaners who succeeded in hand cleaning all the backs for the evening run-in as each bus stood before driving-through. The fronts never get so dirty and water coped between routine cleans! Then a night or two were spent in Hills Road, Cambridge to site their wash. One problem I like to think that I resolved with the FLFs was that conductors couldn’t see forward to announce where they were. I designed a cut out in the nearside blind and a blanking plate in the cab which stopped reflection from the bright fluorescent lighting distracting the driver. I wonder what the Scottish group made of these when they were exchanged with VRT, thankfully after I had left for Maidstone! With the arrival of a new General Manager, W. Tom Skinner, formerly chief engineer at Eastern National – the richer sister company down the road, policies changed! He wanted to keep himself ahead in engineering. Leo Page, the chief engineer at the time preferred being left alone to do what he was used to! The first change was from 6LW to 6LX in the second large batch of FLF double decks and the replacement by BCV of the Gardner 6HLX engine by a Leyland O.680 engine in one of the second batch of RELH coaches (I think it was RE890) as an experiment to improve the performance of the coaches which were perceived to be slow! [As an aside, this strategy didn’t work! Later I discovered that Crosville specified Leyland O.680 engines in their RELH coaches for the Liverpool London service due to complaints of slow running but found that the slower Gardner engine vehicles still got in first because their greater low speed torque got them up the hills faster than the Leyland versions. Later, when at Ribble, I complained to Leyland service engineers that 12m Leyland Leopards were being outperformed by the splendid heavier and bigger Bristol VRL double deck motorway coaches which also had Leyland O.680 engines. I was informed that the VRLs had the ‘Power-Plus’ truck engine which was not available in the horizontal format and in any case wouldn’t fit into the Leopard chassis frame if they tried! This was an indication of British Leyland at its worst and a pointer to its future demise! The next ‘impressive’ idea was to install Dawson cyclone cleaners to make interior cleaning more efficient. I saw the system in use at Trent, Derby where a long straight service lane allowed the vehicles to line up with raised side platforms in place for the operator to enter the vehicle from the rear side emergency door to agitate litter with a compressed air lance to be sucked through the front door which was covered by the giant fan extractor unit. I was given the task of installing a unit in Surrey Street but had little conviction that it would be operable! There was no way any vehicle could line up in a straight line at Surrey Street – it had three or four side by side fuelling points and there was just room to drive from these through the bus wash at the back side of the garage. All I can say is that it was installed, mobile steps were provided and it got used during the day as outstation vehicles came into fuel. I can’t remember whether Hills Road, Cambridge received a unit. New FLFs around this time were delivered with flaps that would open under the rear upper deck seats to let in an air current to take all the upper deck litter out through the front door. Earlier deliveries were converted later. Director George McKay on entering Cremorne Lane works and seeing the pile of flaps waiting to be fitted exclaimed “what’s all this f***ing stuff for?”! Another fascinating episode involved the last MW (LM) buses. Two (or was it one?) were specified to have front entrance and centre exit with room for more than usual standing passengers and glazed quarter lights. Perhaps a good idea in principle for the Thorpe Station – Cringeleford route. But then you looked at the exit and the huge deep steps and shuddered! One was allocated to King’s Cliffe outstation to provide greater capacity (fewer seated, more standing) on the commuter inbound service to Peterborough! How long did that last? Why on earth didn’t they (was it Tom Skinner or Tilling group?) wait to use the lower-floored RESL (RS) vehicles which followed immediately in place of the outstanding order of MWs? The devil is in the detail. Due to the poor earning potential of ECOC, it had always run vehicles to a great age and received second hand vehicles from other ‘richer’ Tilling group fleets to save capital costs. Tom Skinner was well aware that Eastern National was disposing of sound Bristol LS buses which would help the ECOC vehicle age profile and several arrived, the first stage carriage versions ever in the fleet and confusingly designate ‘LM’! Another innovation was the purchase of some Bedfords. There were 4 Bedford VAM with Leyland engines with Duple coach bodies, designated CB. I collected one of these from Hendon. They had very heavy steering! Also 4 Bedford VAM, 2 with Leyland engines, 2 with Bedford engines (to see what the cheap engine would do compared to the ‘heavy duty’ ones) with bus bodies by ECW, designated SB 661-4, I think. The driver had to get to his cab by walking behind his seat and squeezing forward, because the ticket machine and cash tray structure were mounted over the shallow engine cover. I had these rebuilt with a substantial engine cover to form the normal way into the cab. (These Bedfords are not mentioned in your website fleet list! Although I say here 4 + 4, I have just looked back through some lists of slides and notice that fleet number CB836 and 845 occur, so perhaps there were more or two batches? I also was reminded that ECOC had an earlier unique batch of Bedford SB chassis with Duple coach bodywork which had Gardner 4LK engines (- this must have been another of John Wood’s conversion projects!) When Jack Robson retired as Assistant Engineer in June 1967, he was replaced by Eastern Area Engineer, Charles Mannell. Tom Skinner told me I was to replace him as Area Engineer. I told him that I felt totally unsuited to the job as I had had no practical training other than as a graduate engineer and holiday jobs, but could do the Assistant Engineer’s job! He said the area could run itself and that’s why he was putting me as Area Engineer for the experience – they will teach you the job! The greatest advantage was a company car – no less than the retired Assistant Engineer’s car because Charles had long legs and had had his identical Austin Cambridge seat amended. Finding and looking after the outstations in Norwich and Ipswich districts was a joy – no carphones or mobile phones! I carried an oil can for garage door hinges and locks, lamp bulbs and a cloth and cleaner to keep the signs looking tidy. In 2½ years there was one outstation that I never found! Whenever in Diss, I changed the time clock to suit the time of year for the bus station lighting. It was the norm for the Ipswich and Central Works vehicle painters to spend the Summer repainting company property, including outstation garages and booking offices. I enjoyed deciding the colours to be used and remember having the ceiling in Bury St Edmunds booking office painted bright red and in Ipswich where the public wandered through an old office building between bus stations, I had the ceiling painted black so they could not see how irregular and tatty it was! New vehicles were usually allocated to outstations so there would be no starting problems in the mornings. An MW (LM) allocated to Stradbroke (Ipswich district) did a run on one day a week into Norwich. The driver parked his bus at the back of Surrey Street garage and moved another one to block it in, so that nobody used his vehicle during his lay-over. I have a feeling that it had a plastic flower posy on the front dash! In the Summer, Great Yarmouth was allocated extra coaches and the DMS was distracted by his wife’s lodgings business. I got to know from the experience of drawing my finger on the interior windows of a bus how long it had been since it had been cleaned – in Great Yarmouth it was often nicotine encrusted from over 8 weeks! Incredibly, come to think back, I cannot remember ever having to deal with any disciplinary action or formally meeting with any trade union representatives during my time as area engineer, except indirectly when we had a campaign check and rectification of heaters on all SC (LSC?) buses in Ipswich depot one cold winter. We had an apprentice at Great Yarmouth and at Lowestoft. I was concerned that the one at Great Yarmouth was not getting adequate training so arranged for him to spend time at Surrey Street where he could get a lot more experience – I suspect he had to travel back and forth by bus, so probably didn’t do much work! Getting buses out of ditches was another regular item where I was shown how to do the job. My predecessor had designed, and had made in the works, ground anchors which could be secured to the soil with large angle iron stakes, to provide a winching point. I arrived one snowy morning at Bulmer Tye to find the Ipswich gang already well forward with recovery of a double decker. I was then approached by a GPO Telephone engineer’s van. He said he was looking for a cut in all the telephone cables along the road – then he saw the ground anchor! I was never advised what the cost was to our insurance. We did issue instructions to check for little concrete GPO posts before inserting stakes in future. As mentioned before, the regularity of vehicle routine maintenance was slipping badly. This was a national problem and the Traffic Commissioners were beginning to get tougher by insisting on very high standards at the Certificate of Fitness inspections, such that depots could no longer just take a vehicle off the road, steam clean it and present it. [In those days a new PSV was given a Certificate of Fitness (COF) at the factory for seven years. It became the practice that at the first re-certification the longest period that was granted was 6 years if the vehicle was in good condition, 5 if not!, and at the second re-certification 5 years and so on. At ECOC the average age of vehicles was always high, so COFs became more frequent]. If the certificate ran out, the vehicle was off the road, full-stop! So, we tried putting all Norwich district COFs through central repair works where they took precedence over mileage docks. The regular inspection of PSVs by the Ministry of Transport was always carried out in the depot and each inspector was supposed to see each vehicle every year. It was not so regimented as it is now or was for HGVs at that time. This was the time when no pay increases were permitted by government unless there was an increase in productivity. A work study scheme was begun for engine overhauling at Cremorne Lane works. Charles Mannell had experience of engine overhauling on a grand scale in South Africa and set about the job in a proper manner. This soon improved output and we began to find that engines were available when wanted. Later, these engines were declared to be poor quality at Surrey Street as they failed within a short period. Having already learned at this early age that most people tell you what they honestly believe to be the truth, there is usually an explanation if you dig in carefully. One day whilst ‘walking the job’ I asked a cleaner why he was topping up the engine oil of an MW (sorry, LM) when it came in from an outstation, as it was fitted from new with a Frankman Lubrimatic automatic top-up system which enabled the sump to be replenished from a reservoir. He said it didn’t work, so I had a look and discovered that it had been disconnected and the wide stub pipe onto which the normal filler tube should fit was left open without a cap. Depot Mechanical Superintendent Alec Mortimer was horrified and a quick check over the next few days as similar vehicles appeared for refuelling from outstations revealed several in this condition, thus sucking road dirt straight into the oil sump and causing rapid bore wear! Filler tubes and caps were ordered up and the Frankman’s officially and properly disconnected. The work study scheme was absolved! Surprisingly the arrival of the first RELL (RL) and VRT (VR) doesn’t seem to have made a dent on my memory. It must have been without incident, after all they had automatic break adjusters and a fluid clutch! I can recall that a VR was converted to one-man operation fairly swiftly, our first double deck so equipped and allocated to Attleborough outstation to prevent overloading on the first morning journey- rather more successful than the King’s Cliffe experiment! This presaged the huge FLF for VRT exchange between the Scottish Bus Group and National Bus Company that followed soon after which greatly effected ECOC but not me! By this time the 240 vehicles at Surrey Street were being inspected about every 8 weeks, if that, and the maintenance was running mainly on drivers’ defect reports. The fine performance of the three running shift chargehands kept the fleet on the road! As a small improvement, I had already increased the number of specific Norwich vehicles that were allocated to Cromer depot for routine maintenance. I then received a simple instruction from the General Manager (I think the Chief Engineer was off sick by now and was replaced by John Phelps just as I was leaving in late 1969) ‘I want all Surrey Street vehicles routinely inspected every four weeks – organise it!’ I think I might have said that this would mean buses not being available for service when broken springs, brake relines etc were found initially at a rapid rate, but no doubt got short shrift. I sat down and worked out how many vehicles of each variety would be required every week day so that traffic would have an even flow of vehicles. I could see that there would be some efficiency gains when we got it going because we currently (I had inherited and who was I to query it?) had wandering battery toppers-up, a Dunlop tyre man unable to find vehicles he needed, interior vehicle cleaners scrubbing clean the older vehicles frequently and the newest and outstation vehicles rarely, the advert fixer never being able to find the right vehicles. I went to see Alec Mortimer the DMS and asked him what he would say if I told him that we have to inspect every vehicle every four weeks. He replied that he would take his white-coat off and go straight home! Never one to have a ‘meeting’, I sat on the radiator in his tiny office, we chatted around what would need to be done, and sure enough, it was my assurance that specific vehicles will be released by traffic on the allocated day, that caused him to say ‘give me another shunter and I’ll make it happen!’ And he did. Then immediately I was successful in getting the job of Assistant Engineer at Maidstone & District, an ex- BET company that was now, with the Tilling Group incorporated into the National Bus Company. My 2 ½ years there, with Vin Owen as my Chief Engineer, was a different world and another story! I was followed as Deputy Assistant Engineer by Chris Jepson, who also came via Bristol Commercial Vehicles. When I left, the post of Area Engineer Eastern disappeared and Chris became Norwich District Engineer which newly incorporated Kings Lynn.
Geoff Pullin 01/2015
Thanks for this very interesting article, I don’t know how you can remember so many of the peoples names from those days, so long ago. I worked at LUT in the 70’s and I struggle to remember names, but I can easily remember all the vehicles though ! I remember one chap though with reference to the information of the pre-decimal set-right machines. We had none of those at Swinton depot, only TIM’s for 99% of duties with just the odd Bellgraphic (you wrote onto the ticket through a little window- the copy winding straight into the machines body after issuing the ticket) which were used on the X60/X70 runs. This chap however knew how to fiddle a TIM. (You just asked for a favourite machine, if you had it before). He did it while on part day duty, where you did not sign off back at depot, hence you kept hold of the ticket machine until you did your back half duty. What he did was sit the machine into a vice, unscrew the handle and he made a short drill shaft with an end that matched the handle and by attaching an electric drill he wound the penny counters on through 10000 and stopped short of the start numbers, hence paying in say £16.00, when perhaps £20 – £25 had been taken. He was found out (sacked on the spot & prosecuted of course) when the overnight TIM checking staff found slight differences on the halfpenny & shilling catch, which was not moved onwards by the drilling process. All that effort for a few quid, once every three of four weeks. So it was not just Setrights that could be beaten !
Mike Norris
13/01/15 – 06:18
Geoff, what an excellent article. I was slightly later than you into the Bus Industry, PMT from 1968 – 1972. So much of what you have written applied at PMT even though the Companies were from opposite sides of NBC. We too installed a Dawson Cyclone interior vacuum at Hanley Depot with exactly the same problems and solutions as at Eastern Counties. As a raw recruit into the Industry I still marvel at things we ‘got away with’ (scheduled docks not carried out because of major unit failures; a liberal attitude to annual Ministry vehicle checks. PMT had a large fleet of both early Atlanteans and early Fleetlines, neither of which were particularly reliable followed of course by the great Roadliner disaster; Incidentally, you are Geoff who was Head of Department at Coventry City College in the late 90s/early 2000s aren’t you? I hope you will continue with part 3 of your memories – at Maidstone and District – a good BET Company if ever there was one!
Ian Wild
13/01/15 – 08:55
Thanks for the article. I got quite excited because I think we are getting nearer to the answer to my occasional but unanswered query about those two hatches in the rear of ECW VR’s which I believe are for removing rubbish, but they sound more sophisticated than the Dawson systems described here. At least such things did exist! Did the VR systems blow or suck and were they for both decks? Did they work?
Joe
15/01/15 – 06:06
Thank you for a lovely article Geoff, and what wonderful memories. They are an important part of our transport history and need to be recorded. Your article took me straight back to my time with West Yorkshire Road Car, at their Harrogate Central Repair Works, where I started my apprenticeship in 1969. Your comment about the RE suspension beam being “b***** broken again!” reminded me that until I started work at 16, I didn’t really know any ‘asterisk’ words, but my knowledge was soon to be extended. Then – although in the main I did not tend to use such words often – at least I knew that should the occasion arise (such as striking my thumb with my hammer) I could feel confident in letting forth a decent expletive or two to compete with the best of them! The ticket machine ‘turning back’ saga is fascinating, and must have caused quite a few headaches for the Company. It was a much more elaborate way of fiddling the books than the method used by one or two conductors up here. One older Harrogate conductor loved double-deckers on peak journeys, where he would rarely venture upstairs to collect fares when the bus was well loaded. Instead he concentrated on collecting the fares of passengers on the lower deck, and then took up position at the foot of the stairs. As passengers came downstairs to alight, he would take their fares as they passed by, issuing tickets of less value than the money taken, and pocketing the difference. Very simple, but very sad, and he was eventually dismissed by the Company when it had gathered enough evidence to take action. Like Eastern Counties, West Yorkshire operated the ‘heavy dock’ maintenance system, carried out by the main depots at Harrogate, Leeds, Bradford, Keighley and York. However, the Company also carried out full vehicle overhauls when a certain age or mileage was reached. Overhauls were carried out at Central Works and the nearby Body Shop. All mechanical and electrical units, major and minor, were removed from each vehicle, and then the chassis was inspected, cleaned and painted, before being fitted with newly overhauled replacement units from stock, and rewired. On completion, the vehicle would be driven around the corner to the Body Shop on Westmoreland Street. There the coachwork was overhauled, with corroded/damaged parts replaced, seat frames checked and repainted, upholstery renewed in the Trim Shop, and the vehicle fully repainted by hand and (in pre-corporate poppy red days) finally varnished to a very high standard. Before the advent of the LS and Lodekka, bodies were removed for overhaul in the Body Shop, and the chassis driven around to Central works for overhaul, which must have made access to all the mechanical components fabulous. On completion, the chassis and body were married up again in the Body Shop. As with ECOC, WYRCC had a preventative maintenance programme in operation, to help maintain reliability, but like ECOC, it sometimes fell short of expectations due to similar shortages of depot engineering staff. It didn’t appear to affect Central Works and the Body Shop, but their staff did not work shifts or weekends, apart from occasional rounds of overtime. We too had a ‘productivity scheme’ inflicted upon us and it was something of a farce from start to finish. The two men observing fitters and electricians repairing or overhauling all manner of items large and small, had not the slightest inkling as regards anything mechanical or electrical. They were constantly asking “What’s that part there?”, “What does that do?”, or “Why are you doing that?” In exasperation one day when asked “What do you call that?” while overhauling a Gardner water pump, Chris, the placid fitter I was working with said “Charlie”. The Time and Commotion man was not amused, but I certainly was!! Thank you so much once again Geoff for evoking many happy memories. I can’t wait for the next instalment.
Brendan Smith
28/12/15 – 11:52
I returned to this page today and found the comments – thanks for your responses
To clarify the Dawson Cyclone interior cleaning system for Joe – There was a large metal box which rolled up to the entrance door and sealed around it with cushion edging. It had a large fan which sucked air through the doorway and out through the top of the box. It must have had a filter system, but I can’t remember that. Having got suction, there will be no air flow until an access for the air is provided. With single deckers, the emergency door was just right – usually on the offside and at the other end of the vehicle. An operator entered the vehicle through the emergency door with a compressed air lance with a long coiled piping and agitated litter from dead corners and caught around the floor which then shot up to the front door and out. It was less neat an arrangement when the emergency door was centre rear. On double decks, the operator had to walk to the back upstairs to push open the rear floor level flaps to let air in to sweep upstairs, complete with coiled air lance which caught around everything. It is one of those bright ideas that can work with a straight long service lane providing vehicles have offside rear emergency doors. The Trent installation at Derby seemed to work very well but where were the emergency doors on standard BET vehicles? – rear offside! Tilling companies, besides still having rear platform double decks, had lots of FLF / FSFs with centre rear emergency doors (but at least reachable without steps) and were putting centre rear exit single decks (RE) into service which needed steps!
Brendan speaks of West Yorks’ central workshop overhauls. When I was still a graduate trainee at BCV, one of three interviews I had for a first post was at Harrogate with Chief Engineer Marcus Smith. He showed me around – including a Lodekka stripped of units and the chassis painted with yellow phosphate paint, I think it was, to protect against the excess road salt. He also made the comment that they were looking for a self-starter technical assistant and not someone who needed to be cranked. I assume I needed cranking! I came across Marcus again when he turned up as MD at BCV.
Ian mentioned City College Coventry. After not being on the millionaire list on the break-up aftermath of NBC, I got a job as Head of School – PSV training at what was then Tile Hill College, not because I could teach but because I knew the industry! I reported to Bob Millington, an indefatigable enthusiastic FE engineer who was new in post just before me. In FE colleges thereafter the jobs change and increase year on year and the funding of courses changes half way through the year. It eventually got to me and despite having designed and got built a purpose built PSV training workshop, complete with pits and hoists, I was only too pleased to get out just after there was a reverse take-over when Tile Hill took on Coventry Technical College and became Coventry City College, only to abandon the new workshop within a short period.
My experiences of work study schemes really started at M&D, continued at Ribble and thankfully ended at UCOC – but that’s another story!
Geoff Pullin
28/12/15 – 16:55
Mention of various ticket machine ‘fiddles’ in this article remind me of an instance at Blackpool. At busy times, ‘jumper’ conductors were used to help with fare collection. These men would board a busy tram, help the conductor by collecting fares on one deck, then get off and await the next tram. There was no set duty for these men, so no proper record of what trams they had to work. One man was known as always refusing overtime and so was not normally asked but one day the depot inspector was particularly short the next day so asked our friend to work but he refused. The next day, the inspector himself was off duty and boarded a tram with his wife and was surprised to find “Joe Blogs” work it as a jumper. When the inspector returned to work he asked his colleague how he had managed to persuade him but he insisted he had not! Further investigation eventually found (with police help) that he had a caravan, boat … and a long missing ticket machine” In another case, a lady was walking her dog near a Manchester bus depot when a bus passed and turned a corner a bit sharply. As it did so, a roll of Setright tickets fell off the open platform. The helpful lady picked them up, made a note of which bus they fell from, and took them into the nearby depot. The roll turned out to be one of a batch that went missing sometime previously…
John Hodkinson
29/12/15 – 06:54
I think John Hodkinson means Ultimate Tickets, which being pre-printed had a value, and had serial numbers, so easy to trace. Setright ticket rolls being blank and of no value, and unable to trace.
Not seen the beginning of this article click here.
My arrivals at Huntingdon Street between 1964 and 1969 were always by means of the North Western/Trent X2 from Manchester. Ribble vehicles could also be found on this service, as some journeys continued through Manchester to Blackpool, relabelled as X60s. As Robin Hood Coaches (pre 1961) and then Barton provided a daily express service between Nottingham and Blackpool, the terms of the X2 licence allowed through bookings but laid down strict conditions about the number of duplicates and prohibited any advertising save as a connecting service rather than a direct link. Unfortunately North Western and Ribble drivers were in the habit of parking up for their layovers next to the Barton inspectors’ hut, blatantly displaying “Blackpool X2” as their outbound destination! I gather that stern letters often followed such faux-pas. What follows is a summary of the activity on Huntingdon Street’s platforms during my many visits (or should that be pilgrimages?) during the second half of the 1960s. Most of these visits were made on Saturdays, but I did make several mid-week visits during the summer holiday periods. My earliest possible arrival time was just before noon, so I have also added details of other movements which avoided my personal attentions. It should be remembered that Platforms 1-4 were the southern half of the bus station, with 1 being adjacent to Huntingdon Street and 4 across from the municipal power station (or “Tram Depot”, a misnomer which spread from young bus-spotters to the later commercial developers of the site).
Platform 1
As noted in Part Two, this was mainly the preserve of Nottingham City Transport routes 25/25A which operated as circulars to Thackeray’s Lane in the north-east of the city. The 25 took the direct route first while the 25A went the long way around via Carlton before returning via the shorter leg. In the evenings and on Sundays the short leg was eliminated, with all journeys operating Huntingdon Street-Carlton-Thackeray’s Lane and return via the same route, showing service number 25 in both directions. NCT favoured open radiator Regent Vs for the route during my years at Huntingdon Street, usually with Park Royal bodywork.
Barton’s express service 9 to Skegness also used Platform 1, and an occasional double-decker was still used as a duplicate. On one visit in August 1966 I saw Barton’s unique lowbridge Loline parked next to Lammas Lodge with the blinds set for a trip to Skegness later in the day. By the 1960s though, this was an increasingly rare sight as traffic decreased from the post-war heyday. The more regular performers were single-deck coaches, especially the second-hand Reliances bought from the Cream Line group and elsewhere. For a while in the 1950s it appears that Barton’s service 34 to Llandudno also used this platform after being evicted from Platform 2 in the general swap-around after the Broad Marsh migration. This left before my arrival, got back after my departure, and left no trace of its existence on the bus station destination boards, so I really cannot say where it departed from in the 1960s.
Platform 2
Before the opening of Broad Marsh in 1952 Platform 2 was the domain of Barton alone, housing the busy 7/7A/8 cluster of services to the Calverton area and the less frequent services 22/24 to the Vale of Belvoir. After the mass migration Barton lost the platform to Trent who used it for the half-hourly 65 to Bunny (continuing to Loughborough every two hours as the 66), the high frequency services to Gedling and beyond (67-70/70A/70B/71, with a combined frequency of five per hour), and the half-hourly 76 to Burton Joyce (continuing to Southwell every two hours as the 74). A more frequent service to Southwell was provided by Mansfield District Traction service 215 which was the only non-Trent presence on Platform 2. This was usually operated by MDT Lodekka rear-loaders but I did see a couple of Regent IIIs on the service before their eventual withdrawal. The hectic Trent activity on the platform was mostly double-decked with PD2s and PD3s gradually yielding to Atlanteans during the decade. The exceptions were the 65/66 to Bunny/Loughborough which were the preserve of single-deckers, particularly the 36ft Leopard/Willowbrook DPs.
Platform 3
The Trent invasion of Platform 2 displaced Barton’s 7/7A/8 to Platform 3 where they took the space vacated by migratory Barton services 2 to Melton Mowbray, 6 to Keyworth, and 23/26 to the Vale of Belvoir. Barton service 12 to Leicester had also used platform 3 before 1952 but moved to platform 6 during the reorganisation of stands. The 7/7A/8 cluster of services was a bastion of Barton’s Leyland PD2 fleet, with both second-hand and “bought new” examples in evidence. Having the platform to itself Barton also tended to use the offside lane as additional parking, particularly for excursion and tour coaches.
South Notts’ fleet number 80 (80 NVO) was a 1962 PD3 with Northern Counties L65F bodywork, one of two such vehicles acquired just before the Lowlander years. In this shot, taken on 4th May 1968, it is seen leaving platform 4 for Loughborough. Visible in the parking area are three Trent double-deckers, and beyond them the distinctive clock housing of Lammas Lodge (John Stringer)
Platform 4
To my younger eyes this was the best platform on the bus station as it was allocated to independents other than Barton. South Notts Bus Co were the largest user in terms of departures, with their half-hourly route to Loughborough (which saw the frequency as far as Gotham doubled to every 15 minutes on Saturday) operated by a fascinating mixture of lowbridge PD2s and PD3s (two of the latter with front entrances) and low-height Albion Lowlanders. And before anybody points it out, I know that the Lowlanders had “Leyland” lettering on the fibre-glass radiator cowlings – I just prefer to ignore such corporate re-branding. On Wednesdays, Saturdays, and summer Sundays South Notts also had a single-deck presence on their village service to Thrumpton, providing a rare chance to see a Duple Roadmaster which didn’t have Dinky Toys stamped on its base-plate.
The second most frequent user of the platform was Gash of Newark, rightly renowned for its immaculate fleet of Daimler double-deckers. By the time I became a regular at Huntingdon Street the Massey bodied examples reigned supreme, some of them older chassis whose original bodywork by Strachans had disintegrated. Gash’s direct main road service to Newark ran hourly from Sunday to Friday, but half-hourly on Saturdays. A variation which abandoned the main road for Orston and the villages beyond before finding its way to Newark ran infrequently on Wednesdays and Saturdays only, with departures from Huntingdon Street at 1305 and 1505, If you were very lucky this might produce a sighting of one of Gash’s Willowbrook bodied Albion Nimbuses.
Here we have W Gash & Sons Daimler CVD6 it is on platform 4 and has a Barton BTS1 behind it on platform 3 – presumably on one of the 7/7A/8 cluster although I can’t read its identity or destination.
The third independent to be found on platform 4 was Skills, better known for its long distance tours than its local stage carriage route. As often happens in such cases the route in question was acquired as a by-product of purchasing another operator for its coaching licences. Skills acquired Jacklin’s “Elect Service” of East Bridgford in 1944 along with a half-share of the route from East Bridgford to Nottingham. A year later Trent bought Lewis of East Bridgford which operated the other half of the joint service. Surprisingly, Skills kept their half, operating a succession of new and used double-deckers on the route at a frequency of every 90 minutes, In the 1960s the Skills workings were covered by a pair of forward entrance Met-Cam bodied PD3s bought new in 1959 and looking rather odd in Skills two-tone green colour scheme. Trent operated their share of the service at an intermittent frequency as route number 73, often with open platform rear-loaders which looked very cold and draughty compared to the Skills machines.
Platform 5
Moving on to the northern half of the bus station, platform 5 was the closest to Huntingdon Street and platforms 8 (and later 9) the nearest to the parking area. Before the opening of Mount Street Bus Station platform 5 was the territory of Midland General, providing departure points for services towards Alfreton, Ilkeston, and South Normanton. In post-war years it was allocated to Trent express services, including the X2 to Manchester, X3 to Skegness, X4 to Mablethorpe, X5 to Cleethorpes, X6 to Blackpool via Derby, and X7 to Great Yarmouth. As the destinations suggest, all but the X2 were infrequent seasonal routes, so in the off-peak periods the platform served as a dumping ground for Trent vehicles on layover and was also used as a departure point for tours and excursions.
Platform 6
Barton’s half-hourly service 12 to Leicester was the company’s only contribution to platform 6, but was always worth checking as it offered a variety of single-deckers including the Yeates bodied Reliances and VAL14s. Trent’s service 62 to Mansfield via the direct route was slightly more frequent (every 20 minutes), but offered a more boring offering of PD2s/PD3s/Atlanteans. The platform was Midland General’s last foothold at Huntingdon Street, providing space for the hourly B8 to Mansfield via Hucknall and Rainworth ( a most indirect route compared to the 62) and two much rarer services, the Saturdays only F3 to Mansfield (which omitted Hucknall) and the peak-hour only A1 to Ripley. In my era the B8 and F3 were usually operated by a selection of Lodekka derivatives.
Trent’s 1957 vintage PD2/Met-Cam Orion KCH 127 was given fleet number 1027 when new, but later became fleet number 784 as seen in this 1970 shot. The vehicle is parked next to the Trent inspectors’ hut at the north end of platform 4, preparing for a departure from platform 7 to Bingham on the 79A. (John Stringer)
Platform 7
This platform was used by Trent’s (ex Dutton’s Unity) service 84 to Sutton-in-Ashfield which ran half-hourly on Mondays-Fridays and every 15 minutes on Saturdays. It shared the platform with Trent’s service 79 to Grantham (jointly operated eight times each weekday with Lincolnshire Road Car who showed the service number 33C on their rear entrance Lodekkas), the wholly Trent operated 79A which filled in the gaps to provide a half-hourly service as far as Bingham, and the hourly 63 to Chesterfield (jointly operated by Trent and East Midland, with the latter using service number 12A). The Trent workings provided the usual double-deck fodder, while East Midland provided lowbridge Atlanteans and Lowlanders for variety.
Platform 8
Two further services operated jointly by Trent and East Midland departed from platform 8. These were the Trent 64 (EMMS 36) to Doncaster and the Trent 80 (EMMS 37) to Retford. The 64/36, which took a bottom-numbing 2 hours and 50 minutes to reach its destination, operated every two hours on Sundays-Fridays, but hourly on Saturdays, while the 80/37 was two-hourly throughout the week. On the weekday schedule the two services alternated, but on Saturdays the vehicles operating the two routes left Huntingdon Street in convoy at even hours plus 40 minutes. The two services’ relatively low frequency left plenty of room for other departures, and after the Broad Marsh migration in 1952 the platform became the departure point for “other” express services, meaning those not operated by Barton or Trent. These included Black & White (operating to Cheltenham on behalf of Associated Motorways), Hall Bros of South Shields (with well-known express routes from Coventry to Newcastle via Nottingham), Lincolnshire Road Car (which operated seasonal services to Mablethorpe as route A and to Cleethorpes as route B), Royal Blue (to Northampton and then Bournemouth for Associated Motorways), United Counties (to London), and the Yorkshire Services consortium of EMMS, EYMS, WYRCC, YTC and YWD which came through in force twice each day en route from a huge variety of Yorkshire towns to more southerly termini in Birmingham, London, and Luton.
Until 1961 the platform was also the departure point for Robin Hood’s services to Blackpool, Morecambe, and Southport, and their joint service (with Barton) from Corby in Leicestershire to Glasgow. Barton’s service number for the Glasgow route was 58, and after they acquired Robin Hood the daily (year-round) Blackpool service became the 61, and the seasonal Morecambe/Southport services the 62/63. The operations continued on platform 8 as before.
East Midland’s 36ft Reliance/Willowbrook DP fleet number C272 (272 UVO) was new in 1964, and is seen here six years later on platform 8 operating a Yorkshire Services departure to Bradford. (John Stringer)
Platform 9
Although (in theory!) the timings of the Yorkshire Services companies’ twice daily stampedes through Huntingdon Street should have avoided problems with other traffic, experience soon proved that this idea was merely a utopian conceit. United Counties would often have two of their vehicles parked up in the offside lane of platform 8 for extended periods and Hall Bros were equally fond of this as a layover spot for short working duplicates. Then the Yorkshire Services convoy would arrive, only to find the boarding lane blocked by an East Midland double-decker or two as the convoy’s late arrival (due to traffic en route) had placed them into conflict with stage carriage departures. By 1968 enough complaints had been filed with the bus station’s municipal overseers to belatedly stir them into action. The railings between platform 8’s offside lane and the small nose-in car parking area were removed, a shelter erected on the paved area beneath (somehow managing to precisely match the architecture of those erected 20 years earlier on platforms 1-8!) and a sign secured to the lamp-post asserting that this was now platform 9. Basically it was there to provide a “go to” option for express services which could not reach their preferred habitat. At the same time the parking of private vehicles on the bus station (other than a few cars owned by inspectors and other officials) was brought to an end. The practice of mixing car parking with bus manoeuvring areas had never been that wise of a proposition and there had been several accidents over the years, thankfully none of them too serious.
Passing Traffic
Until their all too swift departure in 1966 Nottingham City Transport trolleybuses could be seen at the south end of the bus station, passing the William Booth Memorial Halls on King Edward Street and then either turning right into Bath Street or continuing in a straight line into St Anne’s Well Road. There was also trolleybus overhead wiring on Huntingdon Street, but I never saw it in use and can only presume that it was used by vehicles coming into or out of Parliament Street depot. Apart from the terminating 25/25A the only other corporation motor bus service to use Huntingdon Street was the 51, an irregular service timed to suit the employees of John Player’s tobacco factories on Radford Boulevard. The other end of the route was on Carlton Road, only a few hundred yards beyond NCT’s Parliament Street garage.
After the opening of Broad Marsh in 1952 two new Midland General services found a home there, the F2 to Ilkeston via Kimberley and the F4 to Beauvale Estate. Both of these services bypassed the worst of the city centre traffic by using Huntingdon Street rather than Milton Street, and were usually operated by single-deckers which provided a change from the blue Lodekkas on the bus station itself.
Finally, no account of Huntingdon Street is complete without mention of Hughie’s Cafe, immediately to the north of platform 5. In order to serve as many people as possible in as short a space of time as possible the proprietor had invented his own (more efficient!) way of making tea. Large industrial sized tea-urns were loaded up with tea at such a density that the result was barely fluid. Cups were then placed under the spigot and received an oil-like splash of concentrated tea. The cups were then placed beneath a boiling water heater and the beverage diluted to a more acceptable strength. Yes, it was disgusting, but it was all part of the experience. And Hughie’s prices were very reasonable when compared to those of the far less “colourful” Journeys End cafe in Huntingdon House
Neville Mercer 09/2015
25/09/15 – 09:59
I’d just like to thank Neville Mercer for this 3-Part article. Great reading and appreciable research. I first became imprinted on (initially Barton) buses when a young child in Calverton, so Huntingdon Street bus station has a significant place in my memory.
Stephen Allcroft
25/09/15 – 09:59
Speaking as someone who has lived in Nottingham almost all his life, I’d like to congratulate Neville Mercer on his excellent history of Huntingdon Street bus station. The piece contains a spectacular amount of information and detail, and not confined just to the bus station itself; there’s a fair amount of general history of Nottingham in there as well. We lived on Clifton Estate, so most of my memories of buses were the services which went to Broad Marsh (the old and new versions). But we sometimes went to Nottingham on the South Notts services to Huntingdon Street, so I could be in the background of those 1960s photos.
KC
26/09/15 – 06:03
Thoroughly enjoyed the series on that wonderful place which came to my attention in the mid 60s, travelling from Yorkshire to visit my Grandad in Chilwell. The range of vehicles was amazing: two particular memories are awaiting the massive influx of Hall Bros vehicles on their service, and taking years to unravel the Gothic script fleetname and realise that the Newark-based firm was Gash, not Cash! Such are the misconceptions of youth. And thanks to Neville for at last appraising me of the origins of what I now know to be Lammas Lodge. A building which always fascinated me (but not as much as the Barton vehicles parked near it).
John Carr
27/09/15 – 05:51
Re the South Notts PD3, though the lower deck window layout is a little odd due to the position of the door, I just wonder how many 30 ft double deckers were built with four bay bodies?
Phil Blinkhorn
02/10/15 – 05:56
Neville Mercer, I applaud you for this article. Thank you. Like many other people, I find these have tidied up/triggered off long dormant memories, may I add a few of my own: The Grantham service, which was in my recollection, the only Lincolnshire service to reach Nottingham – how come the “33C” route number – what were routes 33, 33A and 33B? In this context, someone recently tried to explain that suffix A meant Any deviation from the main route B meant terminates Before normal destination C means Continues beyond normal destination D means any other Deviation from normal route Please let this start off another series of theories? Changing the subject, I never twigged that South Notts 76 & 80 (Northern Counties bodied PD3s) were four-bay 30-footers. I suppose they were really more like four-and-a-bit since the upstairs front and back bays were rather long, resulting in the extra bit in front of the entrance doors.
I have enclosed a slide from the late 60s – I suspect the background includes “Lammas Lodge” am I right?
Rob Hancock
03/10/15 – 04:00
This series is absolutely brilliant. I lived in Nottingham or not far from it throughout the 50s, and can remember Huntingdon Street occupied by buses of every hue. Trent predominated, and seemed to be mainly pre-war Regents rebodied by Willowbrook – also I think a few utilities(?) and COG5s. At that time, Trent Leylands only seemed to figure on the No.8 from Derby, which came into Mount Street. Barton was still using a mixture of the famous Duple PD1s and PS1s, second hand PD1s from Leicester (and elsewhere!), and ex-Leeds Roe-bodied Regents and TDs. Midland General hadn’t yet received Lodekkas, and the height restricted route B8 was usually operated by lowbridge Regents of the RLH type. I can recall a trip to Sherwood Forest (Edwinstowe) on the East Midland 36 with a Guy Arab in the old sand-coloured livery. NCT’s 25, 25A and 25B were actually not all that frequent – only about half-hourly at that time, and often still run with the 1938 Met-Cam Regents – later superceded by the very similar 1948/49 batch, followed by the OTV Park Royal series. Interesting question about the Lincolnshire 33C – which again, I remember using about 1952, at which time we had a Bristol K going, and something different (a Leyland?) coming back. I am not certain, but I have a feeling the 33 may have run from Grantham to Bottesford – which would agree with the theory about “extension beyond normal destination” – but I had never heard the idea before. Just a small observation, the NCT 51 was never timetabled to start at Huntingdon Street – though I may have “loitered with intent” before proceeding to its starting point at the junction of Alfred Street South and Carlton Road, about two minutes run away.
Stephen Ford
05/10/15 – 07:10
Many thanks to all who have posted for their kind words. Perhaps I could respond briefly to a couple of the posts. Yes, Rob, that’s Lammas Lodge and you can tell that the photo is taken after 1967 as that was the year in which Barton started using “X” prefixes for its express services. I should say officially, as crews on the 61 to Blackpool were given to displaying “X61” after acquiring the service from Robin Hood six years earlier – presumably as it mimicked the “X60” at the northern end of the route. Speaking of Lammas Lodge, I failed to discover any evidence whatsoever that it was once used as a police station as alleged in a couple of publications which show it in the background of photographs. As far as I can tell it was a park-keepers’ lodge at first, and then when no longer needed for that purpose (as the former park had disappeared beneath the bus station) it was rented out to private tenants. A retired military officer was the tenant in the late 1930s, and then by 1950 the tenant was the widow of a local professional boxer. One website refers to it as “St Michael’s Police Lodge”, but this is clearly wrong. The part of the future Huntingdon St where it was located was originally Millstone Lane. St Michaels Road started three blocks to the north of the site. Also, the only reference I can find on the Web apart from that local nostalgia site, is to a Masonic “St Michaels Police Lodge” in suburban London. Does anybody know any differently from authoritative sources (ie, not just repetitions on different sites of the original assertions?) Moving on to the NCT route 51, I never actually said that it started at the bus station, but that it passed along Huntingdon Street between the terminal points as named. Perhaps I could have put it more clearly but by that stage deadlines were looming! Once again, thanks to everybody, particularly to Stephen for the 1950s reminiscences.
Neville Mercer
06/10/15 – 07:01
Well, you live and learn! I had never realised that the NCT 51 ever went along Huntingdon Street (except the very north end, far beyond the bus station). Its traditional route was to head straight up Alfred Street (south, central and north) turning right onto Huntingdon Street just short of where it merges into Mansfield Road. The evidence was on my bookshelves in the 1971 timetable. Following the demolition and re-development of the St Anns area, Alfred Street ceased to be a through road. Thereafter the 51 started along Alfred Street south, then left onto St Anns Well Road, past the bus station, and left again (southwards) down Huntingdon Street, right into Lower Parliament Street, right into Glasshouse Street (back of where the Victoria station used to be) and left, back into Huntingdon Street (now heading north) just above the bus station – a long way round to go nowhere, no doubt caused by one way traffic restrictions.
Stephen Ford
30/10/15 – 06:33
Neville, An interesting series of articles, thank you. Nottingham City Transport service 19 started operation from Huntingdon Street to Lenton Abbey Estate from 24/11/29. From 28/11/37 it was extended to Gordon Road/Dowson Street (the area known as Bluebell Hill) still operating via Huntingdon Street bus station. From February 1939 it was further extended to Porchester Road/Haywood Road, before being curtailed to St. Ann’s Hospital from July 1939. Service 19 was altered to run between the Old Market Square and Lenton Abbey Estate from 06/05/45. Service 25 started operation from Huntingdon Street from 15/11/31. All journeys, whether via Carlton Road or Mansfield Road operated as service 25, the a suffix for Mansfield Road journeys was not used until 1944.During the 1960s journeys outwards via Carlton Road operated as service 25 and retained this number when returning inwards via Mansfield Road to Huntingdon Street. Journeys outwards via Mansfield Road operated as service 25a and retained this number when returning inwards via Carlton Road to Huntingdon Street. Short workings to Westdale Lane Top via Carlton Road used service number 25b were introduced from 12/04/53.During the 1960s the service frequency was better than the 30 minute headway suggested by Stephen . Although this headway applied on Sundays the off peak frequency (all via Carlton Road) was every 20 minutes, with a combined ten minute peak service via Carlton Road operated by service 25/25b and every 20 minutes via Mansfield Road. Services 25/25a/25b moved to Queen Street in the city centre from March 1972. Barton’s service 14 to Ruddington operated from Broad Marsh not Huntingdon Street. It was the 54 to Clifton via Ruddington that operated from Huntingdon Street. Barton’s service 12 to Leicester also called at Broad Marsh on the way to and from Leicester. The new Broad Marsh bus station opened on 31/10/71 and South Notts and Gash transferred their Loughborough and Newark services to Broad Marsh from Huntingdon Street from that date. I can’t think why NCT service 51 figures in the discussions as during the 1960s it operated via Alfred Street south, central and north and only used the short section of Huntingdon Street between Alfred Street north and Mansfield Road, which was some distance from Huntingdon Street bus station. There was a third catering facility at Huntingdon Street in addition to Hughie’s Cafe and Journey’s End. This was not available to the general public as it was Trent’s staff canteen located behind the Trent booking office and was available to all bus crews using the bus station.
Michael Elliott
30/01/16 – 18:42
To Neville, Thanks for the enthralling series. As one who does not know Nottingham at all, how much if anything is left of the area ? I am not of course expecting any of the wonderful vehicles to be seen but if an opportunity arose to visit Nottingham are there any of the buildings still extant or has modernisation totally wiped the area clean of all traces. Thanks for any information.
Not seen the beginning of this article click here.
At the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939, Nottingham’s Central Bus Station was in much the same condition as when it was built ten years earlier. There were still no shelters or seating on the eight platforms, and the only undercover accommodation for passengers was to be found at the south-eastern end, directly across from Platform 4. This area had a makeshift shelter (albeit on the only paved area in the bus station which had no departures!), a waiting room, some fairly disgusting toilets, and two phone boxes. This lack of any civilised facilities created good business for the two cafes adjacent to the bus station, and despite its exposure to the elements the ten year old site was already well over capacity. This was in part the City council’s fault as it continued to insist that all non-municipal services had to use the bus station, whether they actually wanted to or not. Street termini were to be the exclusive right of corporation vehicles.
Mount Street
The war might have been expected to ease the capacity problem, given that stage carriage services were slashed by 30% or more, but the missing timings on the traditional routes gave way to a host of vehicles provided for the military and for workers in local industries crucial to the war effort. Something had to be done and Nottingham City Council came up with a plan to establish a second bus station. This opened on a totally unsuitable hillside site at Mount Street in October 1944 and consisted of three platforms, curiously designated as 4, 5, and 6 – perhaps it was originally intended to be twice as large and nobody could be bothered to change the plans. On the positive side it had bus shelters on every platform. On the negative side the shelters’ canopies were made out of asbestos, seen as a perfectly acceptable material at that time.
As a result of this new competition the Central Bus Station became Huntingdon Street Bus Station. Services which left the city centre in a quadrant from the Hucknall road to the north to the River Trent in the west were transferred to Mount Street. The services which moved included Barton’s mainline routes to Castle Donington (3), Swadlincote (3C), Derby (5), Loughborough (10), and Coalville (11), Trent’s service 8 to Derby and their 60/61 to Hucknall and Mansfield, and Midland General’s B1 to Ripley, B2 to Cotmanhay, B3 to Alfreton, B4 to South Normanton, C5 to Alfreton, and C8 to Ilkeston. A further migrant was Midland Red’s X99 to Birmingham.
These services in total amounted to around 35% of Huntingdon Street’s traffic and their transfer made things far more manageable. But, as they say, nature abhors a vacuum and the return of peace in 1945 brought new problems. After six years of misery the general public wanted to travel and the space vacated by the Mount Street refugees was quickly commandeered by massive numbers of duplicates on the express services to the east and west coasts. In the early pre-war era Platform 1 was wholly occupied by Nottingham City Transport. Originally this area had played host to NCT services 19/22/25/25A, but the 19 to Lenton Abbey had been transferred to a street terminus on the Old Market Square (or “Slab Square” as it is universally known by locals) and the 22 to Hucknall had been eliminated at an early stage by an agreement with Trent. The remaining 25/25A circulars to Thackeray’s Lane were frequent but hardly justified their own platform.
Meanwhile Platform 2 was severely over-crowded at times of peak leisure travel. The problem was that Barton’s own high frequency 7/7A/8 to Epperstone/Calverton/Oxton had a continuous presence on the platform, which was also used by Barton’s twice daily service 9 to Skegness. A photograph taken in 1947 and used in several books shows a row of five brand-new Barton PD1A/Duple L55F double-deckers, all bound for Skegness on a single departure, completely blocking the platform with no local service vehicles in sight. Barton’s allocated platforms after the mass departure to Mount Street were numbers 2 and 3 (with the other independents using Platform 4), and Platform 3 could provide little relief as it was already full of Barton services heading across Trent Bridge to Melton Mowbray (2), Keyworth (6), Leicester (12), Ruddington (14), and the Vale of Belvoir villages (22/23/24/26). The northern half of the bus station could offer no alternative accommodation as it was already full of Midland General and Trent services along with a plethora of express routes.
As a partial solution Barton’s Skegness service was allowed on to Corporation turf at the rear end of Platform 1, with duplicates queuing alongside (but facing in the opposite direction) along Huntingdon Street itself. This proved to be a wise move as traffic soared to even greater heights in the late 1940s and early 1950s with Barton’s line-up of Skegness duplicates often reaching the northern end of the bus station with further vehicles waiting to emerge from the parking area next to Lammas Lodge. All of this traffic must have been good for the municipal coffers as shelters were finally erected on Huntingdon Street’s platforms in early 1949.
Two of South Notts’ Northern Counties bodied Lowlanders (82/82 SVO and 87 /FRR 87D) are seen here, driverless and completely blocking Platform 4. Parking discipline was never very good at Huntingdon Street! (John J Holmes)
Broad Marsh
An even bigger change was on the way. The Council had decided that two bus stations were no longer enough, especially in light of its decision to build a major new housing estate at Clifton to the south of the city. This would require many more new bus services and as these were to be operated jointly by NCT, West Bridgford UDC, and a privately owned operator (South Notts), the use of the Corporation’s carefully guarded street termini was unthinkable. On the other hand Huntingdon Street was now almost as full as it had been before the opening of Mount Street (which was also full and had overflowed into neighbouring side streets), so the Council bit the bullet and authorised the opening of a third bus station at Broad Marsh, to the south of the city centre.
It was ordained that this new development would accommodate all bus services leaving the city via Trent Bridge, but this soon caused rumblings of discontent from all concerned. The mass eviction to Mount Street had taken place during wartime, and it would have been unpatriotic to make too much of a fuss, but this was peacetime and there was talk of possible legal action by Barton and others if the Council attempted to send them to Broad Marsh against their will. A compromise was reached, with each operator being allowed to choose one service crossing Trent Bridge which could continue to be served from Huntingdon Street. Short workings and variations of those routes were also to be allowed to stay. Gash nominated both of their services to Newark, South Notts their workings towards Loughborough, Trent the 65/66 to Bunny and Loughborough, and Barton the 12 to Leicester. In the case of the latter three operators there was a reason for their choice of routes. Huntingdon Street was to the north of the city centre, and only 5 minutes walk away from Nottingham Victoria railway station. Regular train services connected this station to both Loughborough and Leicester, and if the competing bus services had been forced to move to Broad Marsh they would undoubtedly have lost some traffic to the trains.
The new Broad Marsh bus station opened in January 1952, and in addition to the entirely new services from the Clifton Estate became a haven for Barton’s services to Melton Mowbray, Keyworth, and the Vale of Belvoir, although for some unknown reason the Belvoir routes had a brief stay at Mount Street before transferring to Broad Marsh. A brand-new Barton service to Clifton via Ruddington (54) also used Broad Marsh, but their existing route to Ruddington (14) was allowed to stay at Huntingdon Street as it competed with Trent’s 65/66. After all of the departures Trent became the largest operator at Huntingdon Street, with Barton departures limited to the 7/7A/8 local services, the 12 to Leicester, the 14 to Ruddington, and the express routes to Skegness (9) and Llandudno (34). Despite this statistical fact, at any given time there were still far more Barton vehicles on the bus station than Trent ones. This anomaly was accounted for by the limitations of Huntingdon Street garage, across the road, which had no parking area of its own and used the bus station as a turn-out and layover facility. Most of the services transferred to Broad Marsh were still worked by Nottingham garage, either wholly or in part, and vehicles showing route numbers for the Vale of Belvoir cluster of routes could often be found alongside Lammas Lodge as late as the 1970s.
The Gash route to Newark via the main road was usually operated by double-deckers well into the 1970s, but here is their 36ft Leopard/Willowbrook saloon LO7 (YNN 650H) at Huntingdon Street to provide a little variety. (John J Holmes)
The Rise of the Shopping Centres
In the mid-1960s drastic changes came again. The City council decided that all of its bus stations should be situated next to shopping centres and sites were earmarked as an integral part of new city centre retail developments. The first of these schemes to be approved, Victoria Centre, was an ambitious plan to redevelop the site of Nottingham’s Victoria Railway Station. The station had been opened in 1900, jointly financed by the Great Central and Great Northern companies, and became the Nottingham halt for the GCR’s express services from Manchester and Sheffield to London (Marylebone). These lines competed directly with the Midland Railway’s services from their station at Carrington Street, to the south of the city centre, and by the 1960s the old GCR routes were seen as ripe for elimination by the infamous Dr Beeching. The London expresses came to an end in 1966, leaving only a six times daily service to Rugby operated by DMUs. It was a pitiful end for a station with 12 platforms, and the facility closed completely in September 1967. Demolition was swift, although the station clock tower on Milton Street survived, and work began almost immediately on the construction of the new shopping mall. The scale of the development was certainly impressive. As well as the retail units there were 26 storey flats above the centre, providing more than 400 homes, vast multi-level car parks, and a new (completely undercover) bus station.
Those of us who loved Huntingdon Street watched the new shopping centre rising from the ashes of the railway station with great trepidation, as its completion would surely spell the end of the neighbouring site. Fortunately I was spared the final rites as by 1970 I was the singer in a (semi-professional!) rock band, and musical commitments in Manchester at the weekends made visits to Nottingham, or anywhere else, few and far between. Huntingdon Street closed, without me to mourn it, in early 1972 (does anybody know the exact date?). My next journey to Nottingham, later in the same year, deposited me at the new Victoria Bus Station. It was horrible, in a Digbeth Coach Station sort of way but without the primitive charm, and was made even worse by the creeping advance of NBC poppy red and leaf green. I decided to take a look at the old site and was happy to discover that the parking ground by Lammas Lodge was still full of Barton vehicles. Barton rented this area from the City council until 1977 when their lease was terminated so that the site could be used as an enlarged surface car park. This was rather ironic as a much smaller surface parking area had previously existed at the northern end of the power station and alongside Platform 8. Despite having room for no more than 25 vehicles this had been supervised by a man in a hut. The development of a new Platform 9 in the late 1960s (and an increasing need for bus parking) had finally eliminated this facility. The Barton garage across the road survived until 1980 when most of its vehicles were moved back to Chilwell (from whence their predecessors had come way back in 1939).
The other two bus stations suffered similar fates. Redevelopment at Mount Street began in 1965 and the “traditional” bus station (I’m trying to be kind about it!) closed in 1968. For two years its services were scattered onto Maid Marian Way and other local thoroughfares before the completion of the new facility, another piece of nasty concrete modernism with no soul. More embarrassingly the shopping development adjacent to the new Mount Street Bus Station found it hard to find tenants (being separated from the rest of the city centre by a dual carriageway) and the entire place had that kind of virtually deserted futuristic look that made you expect an attack by Daleks. The bus companies didn’t like it much either. Barton gave it short shrift, moving their services to the new Broad Marsh within two years. Trent were next to go (in 1973), taking Midland Red’s X99 with them to Victoria. Mount Street became a Midland General mono-culture and closed in 1980, only ten years after its opening. It was not replaced and the remaining services went to Victoria. The new version of Broad Marsh (now attached to a shopping centre of the same name) opened in October 1971 and was an improvement for everyone except bus photographers, the previous pleasing skyline in the background of their Broad Marsh shots having been replaced by artificial lighting and a multi-storey car park where the sky should be. My fondness for the new Broad Marsh might have been influenced by events in my own life. In September 1973 I moved to Nottingham to be the singer in a new band, and a year later met my first wife in the city. We married in November (eight weeks after our first meeting) and – being impoverished – used a South Notts Lowlander on the Clifton Estate service to transport the wedding party from the registry office to our cheap and cheerful reception at a friend’s flat in Wilford. Well-wishers ensured that there was an abundance of confetti on Broad Marsh Bus Station.
As always seems to happen with my articles, this one has run well beyond its originally intended length. Part Three will draw this reminiscence to a close with a platform-by-platform survey of Huntingdon Street’s attractions between 1964 and 1972. If you have any good quality photographs taken at the bus station during those years I’d be delighted to see them and include them.
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
