Category: Photos

London Transport – Leyland Tiger – JXC 288 – TD 95

London Transport - Leyland Tiger - JXC 288 - TD 95

London Transport
1949
Leyland Tiger PS1
Mann Egerton B30F

Following the cessation of hostilities in 1945, the London Passenger Transport Board found itself seriously short of serviceable vehicles, partly through enemy action but equally because of the time expired nature of much of the fleet. To compound the problem, 55 T type AEC Regals and 20 Leyland Cubs were sent to assist in war ravaged Belgium and Germany. To meet the needs of the capital city, the Ministry of Supply (that still oversaw the allocation of resources in the immediate post war period) sanctioned the delivery of a number of standard provincial types of buses to London, which was still taking the tail end deliveries of utility double deckers, mainly Daimler CWA6 plus a few Guy Arabs. Thus between 1946 and 1948 the AEC Regent O661 (STL) and Regal O662/O962 (T), Leyland PD1 (STD) and PS1(TD) appeared on the London scene. From 1st January 1948 the LPTB became the nationalised London Transport Executive, and help began arriving in the form of vehicles on loan from provincial operators, notably Bristols from Tilling group companies, though Tilling itself did not sell out to the government until September 1948. In 1946 LT was allocated fifty AEC Regal O662 buses (7.7 litre engine/crash gearbox – basically the pre-war design) but also thirty one examples of Leyland’s very new Tiger PS1. These eighty one vehicles were fitted with Weymann B33F bodies of unprepossessing appearance, characterised particularly by a front destination indicator box that “frowned” over the top of the driver’s windscreen. In 1948 a further thirty Regals were acquired, but these were of the O962 variety with 9.6 litre engines and epicyclic gearboxes, consistent in specification with the new RT double deck fleet. At the same time another one hundred PS1s came into LT ownership, though these still had the standard 7.4 litre engine and crash gearbox. The 1948/9 Regal and Tiger deliveries were fitted with Mann Egerton B31F bodywork (later reduced to B30F) displaying much cleaner lines than the earlier Weymann bodies. One would have expected the preselector gearbox Regals to have been allocated to the Central (red) fleet, but they all went to Country area garages, while all the crash gearbox Regals and PS1s operated in red livery. Given London Transport’s unenthusiastic attitude to “non standardisation”, these provincial type single deckers clearly earned some measure of respect, for they lasted between ten and fourteen years in LT ownership. Seen above on the A23 Brighton Road during the 1971 HCVC Run is Mann Egerton bodied TD 95, JXC 288, which entered service in May 1949 and was sold in August 1963. In 1965, now in private hands, it undertook a series of extraordinary Continental journeys to Rumania, Hungary, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Hamburg, Helsinki, Lenningrad, Moscow, Warsaw and Berlin, followed, in 1965, by a trip to France and Spain. Then again in 1966 TD95 went off to France, Belgium, Prague, Offenbach, Budapest and Belgrade. Throughout the performance of this amazing machine was exemplary. It then passed into preservation in May 1967 to be restored into its previous LT guise. In that form, as with all Central Area single deckers of its time, the front entrance has no door at the insistence of the Metropolitan Police, who clearly took the Spartan view that the possibilities of a passenger falling out or incurring influenza from draught were rendered insignificant against boarding and alighting delays.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

08/08/17 – 06:07

The seating capacity of 30 seems rather low for a full sized post war halfcab saloon, most provincial versions averaged around 35 seats. Did these TDs have a standing area at the front with inward facing seats or was it a luggage pen which took up some of the space?

Chris Barker

08/08/17 – 08:36

Chris,
I rather think that, in view of Roger’s views on the attitude of the Metropolitan Police, the reason for the low seating capacity lies in that direction, rather than standing area or luggage pen!

Pete Davies

09/08/17 – 06:42

The full service life of these buses shows that LT could successfully operate standard provincial designs when they put their minds to it. This opens up the oft-debated cherry – was the Routemaster really necessary? Would PD2’s, Regent V’s or CVG’s have done the job of replacing trolleybuses and later on the RT family just as well? All were available in semi-auto form which would probably have been a minimum requirement for LT. Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield and Glasgow for example seemed to manage and Birmingham even got large numbers of Crossleys to work. Food for thought!

Philip Halstead

09/08/17 – 06:43

I know the Green Line and Country area RF’s had doors, whereas the central area red versions didn’t, was it the same story with these?

Ronnie Hoye

09/08/17 – 06:44

Pete’s comment is true, but it is also relevant to remember that the T&GWU of the time had considerable influence upon the vehicle configuration and seating layout of the LT fleet. These Tigers were used on intensive urban routes where low bridges and other obstructions prevented the operation of double deckers. Free movement of the conductor and easy access/egress for passengers would have been important issues.

Roger Cox

11/08/17 – 06:27

Philip raises an interesting point. Could London Transport have managed without the Routemaster? I think that, yes, it probably could, but some curious features of the London Transport engineering situation have to be taken into account. The RT/RTL/RTW/RM families were designed to be taken to pieces like Meccano for processing through the Aldenham overhaul system. Firstly, however, did LT need a fleet of some 2760 Routemasters in the first place? When the initial deliveries went into service in 1959, LT already possessed a surplus of RT and RTL buses. The last RT deliveries came in November 1954, and 81 went immediately into store until 1958/59 when the RM production scheme was already in progress. Similarly, 63 of the last RTL deliveries were stored until 1958. On the grounds of “non standardisation”, the 120 entirely sound Cravens bodied RTs had already been sold off in 1956 when they were only between eight and six years old, and, by 1961, over 200 of the earliest RTs (discounting the so called “pre war’ machines that were withdrawn in 1955 when they were 13 to 15 years old) had gone when they were only some 10 years or so of age. Nonetheless, ever besotted with its inward thinking, LT brought out the costly Routemaster, claiming that the capacity increase of 8 seats over the RT family was essential for trolleybus replacement. (It seems astonishing now that London Transport seemed utterly exempt from any kind of cost constraint, but the profligate attitude was to continue in later years with the catastrophic Merlin/Swift/MetroScania charade and then the Daimler Fleetline debacle.) Undoubtedly, standard offerings from the manufacturers catalogues could have provided entirely satisfactory fleets for the Capital’s public transport needs, but for the rigid LT engineering system. London Transport did not employ, at its garages, engineers as they were understood by municipal or company bus operators. London Transport had “fitters’. If anything went wrong, that part was simply removed and sent to Chiswick in return for a replacement item. Mechanical analysis was not part of the scheme of things. That was Chiswick’s job. Likewise, body/chassis overhauls were totally centralised at Aldenham, where the chassis and body were separated and sent down different overhaul tracks, the chassis being dealt with more quickly than the bodies. At the output end, the next completely rebuilt emerging body and chassis were put together and given the fleet number of a bus that had just gone into the works. Thus, identifying a London bus by its fleet number was essentially meaningless. Nevertheless, the Aldenham system could have worked equally well with jig built bodywork mounted on a standard provincial chassis type. Indeed, the early Routemasters were exceedingly troublesome, and it took some years of development to make them truly reliable.

Roger Cox

12/08/17 – 07:37

I only travelled on one of these once, on the 240A. I have wondered whether that was part of the original 240 route left for single deck operation after the rest of the route was converted to double deck buses during WWII. I do not recall seeing a standing area or a luggage pen.
I doubt if the standard double deck buses of the mid-1950s would have done the job as London Transport specified automatic gearboxes for the red Routemasters and semi-automatic for the green country area and Greenline Routemasters, probably to provide a mechanically common set of buses for the country area depots. In any case, Greenline drivers sometimes worked a country route when necessary (they were paid the same as the central area crews, which was slightly more than that paid to the country area crews).
That said, I never warmed to the Routemaster. My favourites in the late 1950s and 1960s were the Southdown Guy Arab 4s wit Park Royal Bodywork and Weymann-bodied Dennis Loline IIIs.

David Wragg

14/08/17 – 07:31

The offside seat behind the driver was a single seat on the central area TDs as illustrated here – www.flickr.com/photos/ (taken at a route 227 running day) – think the idea was to give the conductor somewhere to stand without being in the way as passengers got on/off.

Jon

15/08/17 – 07:56

Referring to Philip Halstead’s comment about standard types, the Guy Arab (which, like the others, was available in semi-automatic form) should not be forgotten, particularly in view of the large number operated in Hong Kong. It’s been suggested that if something will work in Hong Kong, it will work anywhere!
As for Birmingham’s Crossleys, they were of the later type with engine design modified by AEC. Apparently they were more successful than the CVD6s that BCT were obliged to take because of a shortage of Gardner engines.

Peter Williamson

16/08/17 – 06:50

Peter, only the second half of the Birmingham Crossley DD42/6 1949/50 order for 260 buses, numbers 2396-2525, had the HOE7/5B downdraught engine. The first 130, numbers 2266-2395, plus the earlier 10 buses delivered in 1946, numbers 1646-1655, were delivered with standard HOE7 engines that were retained to the end. Even so, as you point out, Birmingham regarded the Crossley engine more highly than the contemporary Daimler CD6, individual examples of which proved to be extremely variable in quality.

Roger Cox

16/08/17 – 06:52

I apologise Peter for omitting the Guy Arab. I well remember the Hong Kong Arabs while living out there in the mid-1980’s. They would storm up Stubbs Road on the route on the Island over the mountain to Aberdeen. At the summit they would be boiling profusely but by the time they had thundered down the other side and had chance to cool down a bit they were ready to return. The same can be said about the DMS’s. London offloaded them over there in large numbers saying the were unreliable or some such excuse. They operated quite happily for CMB in far more taxing conditions than London. 30deg of heat, mountainous terrain, severe traffic congestion and some ‘enthusiastic’ handling by the Chinese drivers.

Philip Halstead

17/08/17 – 07:19

I think I might have got on well with the bus drivers in Hong Kong, as my colleagues used to say my style of driving was ‘enthusiastic’! I suppose they were right. Southampton to North Lancashire or the Southern end of the Lake District as a day trip . . . Yes, some of them used a different word!

Pete Davies

17/08/17 – 07:20

Interesting to see mention of Guy Arabs in a thread on Leyland Tigers. Have no personal memories of either as too young but I have pictures of my grandfather stood in front of both a Guy Arab and a Leyland Tiger TS8 while he worked for Thames Valley. Pictures of Thames Valley liveried Guy Arab’s I can find but a Tiger TS8 with ECW B35R coachwork in Thames Valley livery seems to be more of a challenge.

Andrew Stevens

18/08/17 – 06:32

Andrew: that was Thames Valley’s golden age—at least for enthusiasts! There are also some pictures of TV TS8s in the later pages of Thames Valley 1931-1945 and near the beginning of Thames Valley 1946-1960, both written and published by Paul Lacey. The last of the TS8s were withdrawn in October 1954. As a young passenger I loved the “woody” sound of the engine, the groaning in second gear, the gentle whine in third and the big Clayton heater on the front bulkhead.

Ian Thompson

17/05/19 – 07:13

When the TD 32-131 Mann Egerton bodies were built they had 31 seats, but one was removed to give the conductor more room, I think in the mid 1950s. London roads were narrow, and the 26ft x 7ft 6 in size was standard at the time. Luggage pens are a recent idea!
The comment about route 240A – originally Edgware to Hale Lane Mill Hill later extended to Mill Hill East Station, the low bridge at Mill Hill station preventing double decks from Mill Hill to Edgware. TDs originally alloc to EW as 240/240A. If LT had completed the 1935-40 works programme that they should have done the link from East Finchley via Mill Hill East, Mill Hill Hale Lane to Edgware of the Northern line would have replaced the LMS steam line for the Northern line to link up with the route to Golders Green. When the Mill Hill bridge was rebuilt when M1 opened at the southern end, a new bus station was built under the main line at Mill Hill, and route 240A which had had TDs from 1949 to 1962, then RF’s was withdrawn and covered by an extension of route 221 from North Finchley to Edgware with Routemasters.

Mark Jameson

18/05/19 – 06:13

26ft x 7ft 6in was standard for double deckers, but the standard size of a PS1 was 27ft 6in x 7ft 6in. If London Transport’s were really only 26ft long, that would go some way to explaining why they only had 31 seats, but it seems most unlikely.

Peter Williamson

19/05/19 – 07:25

Peter is right. The LT TD class were entirely standard PS1 buses having an overall length of 27ft 6ins on a wheelbase of 17ft 6ins. The usual wheelbase for a contemporary 26ft double decker was 16ft 4ins. The erroneous 27ft length figure for the LT TD class comes from the usually accurate Ian’s Bus Stop site. A few examples of 17ft 6ins wheelbase PS1/4 chassis for the then new permitted length of 27ft for double deck bodywork were taken by Birch Bros in 1951.

Roger Cox

Hebble – Leyland PSU1/16 – ECP 500 – 74

Hebble - Leyland PSU1/16 - ECP 500 - 74

Hebble Motor Services
1954
Leyland PSU1/15
Bellhouse-Hartwell C37C

This amazing creation was photographed at the Rotherham rally in August 1976. I wonder what has happened to it since. There are photos on flickr showing it undergoing heavy restoration but no further details. It would be great to see it out and about again. Makes you wonder how it survived until 1976.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

27/04/20 – 07:31

Ian,
There is plenty about these if you go onto MDS book sales website and download (its free to do so) the book – 12 Royal Tigers – Its basically the history of Bellhouse Hartwell and Beccols vis-a-vis the battle with Blue Cars, that brought about the demise of the latter.
Its a great read and heartily recommended!

Mike Norris

27/04/20 – 11:23

….. and the last two Bellhouse Hartwell Landmasters ever were a pair of MU3RV Reliances for SUT. They came between about 22 Duple Elizabethan Reliances and the first of SUT’s 30 Burlingham Seagull Reliances.

David Oldfield

27/04/20 – 12:55

Sadly Ian, you won’t be seeing it out again.
ECP 500 had passed to Frank Cowley (dealer), Salford in 12/66 and then to Talbot House Special School, Glossop who had a wheelchair lift fitted into the rear, but fortunately set into the existing rear dome. It lost its chrome bumpers, Royal Tiger badge and ornate Standard Vanguard Phase II front grille but otherwise remained fairly original.
It passed to John Hinchcliffe of Huddersfield in the mid-1970’s for intended preservation, at which time I was told by him that the bodywork was extremely sound. However with a lot of work to do on it and other projects in hand he decided to sell it to a preservation group based at Liversedge, who I’m told loaned it to another group with YWD connections, and whose apprentices were supposed to be restoring it and it did appear at a number of rallies in the condition depicted in Ian’s photo. This project appears to have failed and it then passed through a variety of would-be preservationists in Lancashire, until it eventually ended up in a serious state of deterioration exposed to the elements. It was advertised for sale in about 2001 and it is said that despite its extremely parlous condition Ensign acquired it as a major restoration project, but that even they had to admit defeat as it was just too far gone. Sadly it was scrapped. One of the more regrettable losses to the preservation movement.

John Stringer

27/04/20 – 12:57

The company began in the 1800s as the dye works Bellhouse Higson which became incorporated as a limited liability company on 10 July 1914 and changed its name when A.W. Hartwell joined in around 1932. For much of its later existence the company specialised in subcontracting to the aircraft industry, but entered the PSV bodying business in the post WW2 boom period. Initially bodying conventional front engined chassis, the firm is best remembered for its flamboyant styling of bodywork for underfloor engined chassis from 1951, of which the Hebble coach is an example, which possibly suggested inspiration derived from the spaceships in the Dan Dare comic strip. As David states above, the last PSV bodies were delivered in July 1955, after which the firm reverted to concentrating on aerospace industry work. In 1964 the business was sold to the Hampson Jig Tool company, and it finally closed its doors on 13 November 2002. The first link below gives a potted history of the firm in the Bolton News, which differs in minor detail from James Taylor’s account in his A-Z Of British Bus Bodies. The second link illustrates a splendid array of various Bellhouse Hartwell bodies.
www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/ – www.busphoto.co.uk/gallery.php

Here is a later, rather sad picture of this coach. www.flickr.com/photos/

Roger Cox

28/04/20 – 06:25

John – sad to hear that it has been scrapped. Such an unusual coach.

Ian Wild

30/04/20 – 06:06

I had the privilege of travelling on this or a sister beast from Burnley to Blackpool at a date I would estimate as being around 1964. Certainly, it was after the new Burnley Bus Station came into use. This was a journey that I made with my parents at intervals during the year, having relatives living in Blackpool. As a 12-ish year-old, I had an interest in buses, and from experience expected that we would end up a on a Ribble operated J1 or J2 duplicate, probably an already elderly Royal Tiger with Leyland or Burlingham bodywork, or maybe even one of their less-appreciated Tiger Cubs with later Seagull bodies. In the past I had seen Ribble half-cab coaches duplicating these services and had always hoped one would show up for me, but it never happened!
I think that I had seen these Hebble vehicles once or twice previously in Burnley Bus Station and been fascinated by their already dated but exotic appearance, so different from anything that Ribble or other familiar operators ran. So, imagine the excitement when this beauty pulled into the stand, and we were allowed to board! I remember being able to bag the seat right behind the driver, so close that there was basically nothing between my seat and the panel of lights and switches to his right. To my mind that ride was a major “cop” that I still remember 55 or more years on!
I have wondered since which service this would have been on. The most frequent Yorkshire – Blackpool routes (of the ones that passed through Burnley) were the J1 and J2 via Keighley and Colne, but these seemed exclusively Ribble or West Yorkshire operated, though I suppose that Hebble could have provided a duplicate from Leeds or Bradford. I was aware from timetable leaflets of other J services that took the route through Halifax and Todmorden, and that might have been a more logical route for a Hebble vehicle to appear on. However, I very rarely spotted workings of these services on local roads and believe that they were seasonal and/or weekend operations (which may well have applied to the journey I described).

Ricky

15/01/21 – 11:38

I have only just found this page & it’s with great sadness I read about ECP 500’s demise. As a child in the 70s this bus was kept in the National bus garage in Liversedge where my uncle worked. Both my uncles & my dad all became members of the preservation group. My dad drove it on a number of rallies around Yorkshire, in fact he was probably the driver when this picture was taken as we lived near Rotherham at the time. Many happy memories of that time. So sad to hear its gone

Andy Stirling

Ribble – Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/2 – LCK 712 – 998

Ribble Leyland Tiger Cub

Ribble Motor Services
1958
Leyland Tiger Cub
Burlingham “Seagull” Mk 3 C41F

We are travelling in style today on a rather nice coach or as when I was a young lad I would always say “are we going on a chara” more than likely originates from charabanc. The Yorkshire dialect as a tendency to shorten words and does not use a new word if the old one will suffice. Did you have a word other than coach for coach, and whilst we are at it, have you a different word for a bus, I had a friend from Oldham Lancashire who called a bus a “buzz”, let me know along with your area, leave a comment.
Anyway that’s enough of that back to the Ribble, the “Seagull” body was very popular for the period not surprising really they did look rather sleek at the time. Ribble also had the Mk 2 version of the “Seagull” built 1953/4 but they had centre entrances. I have a photo of a 1957 Yorkshire Traction “Seagull” I think it is a Mk 2.

An uncle of mine, a native of St Helens, always referred to a coach as a SALOON.

Pete Davies

Which was correct as the replacement for the charabanc was the Saloon – or all weather – Coach.

David Oldfield

The bodywork on this is actually of the Mk. 6 version of the Seagull, easily distinguished by the side glazing which is set in “window pans” after the fashion of Burlingham’s service bus body of the time. Very few of this design were built apart from the Ribble batch, but Harper Bros of Heath Hayes had some on Guy Arab LUF chassis. One of these at least is preserved. I have just written an article on the various breeds of Seagull which I will be sending to the website as soon as I can get round to typing it!

Neville Mercer

When working for Ribble at Carlisle depot in 1964 I was detailed to take over a Tiger Cub/Seagull identical to this one at Carlisle when it arrived from Manchester en route to Glasgow. With 4 speed (I think) gearbox and 2 speed axle they were lovely machines to drive even up the A 74 trunk road which was little better than a glorified country lane in those days. Although I remember well the large fleet of Austin 5 ton tippers belonging to a Carlisle scrap merchant hauling rock on the construction site when the section from Telford Bridge to Beattock Summit was being converted to dual lane.

Gerald Walker

29/01/12 – 07:25

Southdown buses and coaches were always referred to as cars for many years even into NBC days. I totally agree with Gerald Walker about the Tiger Cub with 4 speed box and 2 speed axle they had a lively performance and light controls and excellent brakes, the secret was to master the 2 speed axle and use it properly. Ours were fitted with Weymann Fanfare bodies which were solidly built and comfortable. I have to say light controls and brakes were not at that time a common trait with Leylands.

Diesel Dave

29/01/12 – 16:27

Saloons/Cars, as hangovers from the past, bring to mind older conductors, even in the early 60’s, still saying, when the inside was full, “Plenty of room outside” from open-top days.

Chris Hebbron

29/06/13 – 15:20

I started my apprenticeship at Frenchwood body shop which we shared with the body builders in 1962 and worked on most bus numbers 1200s, 1300s, 1400s, 1500s, and 1600s with 1700s just about starting the overhaul on the bus bodies, one instance whist cleaning the boot of a Seagull coach some one closed the doors, and with using cellulose thinners after 15 mins I was drunk as a lord, light headed and later, with a bad head, but I left in 1964 and went to Atkinson vehicles to finish my time, in the service department and was there for 12 years.

James Lynch

23/11/13 – 07:51

One of these worked out of Whiteleas for George Wimpey Contractor in the 60s and 70s, it was a former Ribble coach and had reg LCK ???

Frank Lowe

Yorkshire Traction – Leyland Tiger Cub – LHE 506 – 1078


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

Yorkshire Traction
1957
Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/2
Burlingham Seagull C41F

If you go back to a previous posting at this link you will be able to compare the difference between this “Yorkshire Traction Seagull” bodywork and the “Ribble Seagull” . The main difference that strikes me is the Horizontal split windscreen and slightly different lighting arrangement. Is this a Mk 2 or Mk 3? Maybe they are both Mk 3s and in the one year age gap improvements to the screen were made. If you know, let me know, leave a comment.

06/03/13 – 16:46

This Seagull is a Mark V. This was available with either front or central entrance and replaced the central entrance Mark III and forward entrance Mark IV. The distinguishing feature of the Mark V from the models it replaced was the single piece rear windscreen with rear quarter lights. The Mark V was produced for the 1957 and 1958 seasons. The windscreen arrangement was optional on the Mark IV, V and VI, either single piece flat screens or horizontally split. For example, Ribble had Mark IV and Mark VI Seagulls with flat screens, whilst North Western, Trent, Wallace Arnold and Yelloway (at least) had Mark V Seagulls with flat screens.

David Williamson

North Western – Leyland Leopard PSU3/3RT – VDB 913 – 913

North Western Leyland Leopard & Leyland Tiger Cub

North Western Road Car 
1962
Leyland Leopard PSU3/3RT
Alexander DP49F

This bus was one of the first batch of 36 foot vehicles that North Western acquired. Seen here with LDB 787 fleet number 787 a 1960 Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/1 with a Willowbrook duel purpose 43 seat body at the Shay football ground Halifax (I don’t think Halifax were playing Manchester United at the time).

There are still two Leopards going in Llandudno working around the Great Orme they are WND 477 which is a Duple Britannia new to Smiths then went on to Shearing’s then with Alpines. There is also an Harrington Grenadier as well, history not known.

Anonymous

20/02/11 – 06:43

1. What’s a Leopard doing on the Tiger Cub page ??
2. The WND coach working in Llandudno is definitely a Tiger Cub, not a Leopard

Paul Statham

21/02/11 – 14:55

The last I heard this vehicle was preserved although it’s not seen in public very often. Does anybody know its current status?

Neville Mercer

Wallace Arnold Tours – Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/2 – U 8339

Wallace Arnold Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/2

Wallace Arnold Tours Leeds 
1958
Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/2
Burlingham Seagull C41F

I don’t claim to be more expert than anyone else but I am a huge fan of Burlingham and regard them as one the very best coachbuilders ever. Mark/Series numbers are a bit of a mystery since they were extremely small variations between certain types – and a new number for each.
This is putting 2 and 2 together and getting into the making 5 territory, but I think I can piece most of the Mark numbers together from what little evidence I have.

Mark I – The original centre entrance Seagull on heavyweight chassis such as an AEC Regal IV and Leyland Royal Tiger.

Mark II – Basically the same centre entrance body on a medium weight chassis such as an AEC Reliance and Leyland Tiger Cub. The earlier Ribble Motor Services 1953/4 Leyland Tiger Cub Seagulls Fleet numbers 926/945 FCK 426/440 & FRN 675/679 are certainly of this mark.

Mark ? – Forward entrance/lightweight chassis such as Bedford (SBG/SBO) and the Commer Avenger was this the Mark III

Mark IV – Front entrance body on medium weight chassis such as an AEC Reliance and Leyland Tiger Cub.

Mark ?

Mark VI – Front entrance interim style with radiused (bus?) window panes. The later Ribble Motor Services 1956/8 Leyland Tiger Cub Seagulls Fleet numbers 977/1018  LCK 889/732 I think are of this mark

Mark VII – Final full coach version (similar to Mark IV but with Duple rear end screens)

I believe new numbers were given for the slightest variation. That being said, what was the Mark III and could the missing Mark V have anything to do with the Ford 570E when it was finally introduced? If you know the differences between the Marks or if you can through a little light on any of the above please leave a comment.

Copy by David Oldfield photograph by Paul Haywood

The Mark numbers you refer to are the ones which were used for Seagull bodies on underfloor engined chassis. The Mk2 differed from the Mk1 in having a doubled chrome “tank shape” moulding beneath the window line. The Mk3 (introduced in 1953) reverted to a single chrome moulding and had a slightly restyled rear end. The Mk4 offered the alternative of a front entrance (all previous Seagulls had been centre entrance) and also had the option of a front dome destination blind box. The Mk5 replaced the Mk3 in 1955 and differed from it in offering a choice of front or centre entrance. It also featured flat one-piece glass panels in the front windscreen as opposed to the two-piece, slightly curved units previously fitted. The Mk6, as you correctly state, differed from the Mk5 in having its side windows fitted into radiused (and slightly recessed) window pans for ease of maintenance. The variant was built at the request of Ribble Motor Services and there were few other customers. The final “heavyweight” Seagull in this sequence was the Mk7, introduced in 1958 and featuring much longer side windows than previous models. This was in response to Plaxton’s introduction of the trendsetting Panorama design, but the Burlingham model proved less popular than they might have hoped. As a result it was replaced in 1960 by the Seagull 70 with its pseudo-American styling, and this was used by Scottish Omnibuses, East Midland, Trent, and other operators although only in penny numbers.
Lightweight chassis such as Bedford SBs were given a design of bodywork which mimicked the then current Seagull design, but as far as I know the body never had an official name although many (including some Burlingham employees) referred to it as “the Baby Seagull”. The final, rather ugly version of this body made its appearance in 1959 and was the butt of so many unfavourable comments that it lasted just a single year. In 1960 it was replaced by the Seagull 60, similar in styling to the previously mentioned Seagull 70 for heavyweight chassis. It sold well, but operators soon discovered that the slightly raised “clerestory roof”, made of see-through plexiglass, was prone to leakage. The design was relaunched the following year, with the leakage problem solved, as the Seagull 61 which featured far too much front-end chromework for most tastes. The last two new Burlingham-badged designs emerged in 1962. The Seagull 62 was barely distinguishable from its immediate predecessor, but coach operators were offered an alternative, the curiously named Burlingham Gannet which featured a restyled front end and more glasswork. Both models sold poorly and from 1963 onwards were replaced by the Duple (Northern) Firefly.

Neville Mercer

19/09/12 – 07:11

Ribble Motor Services FRN 679 mentioned in Mark II above was definitely a Royal Tiger rather than a Cub.
I used to travel to school in it and always liked to sit at the front as the view was superb. Comfy seats too.
Any idea where it went?

David

29/09/12 – 12:35

The small batch of coaches featured in Paul’s photo, 8338 – 8343 U, were indeed splendid vehicles but with “minor” limitations of which the Company seemed blissfully unaware. I can speak from bitter experience, having operated the Yorkshire – Torquay/Paignton night service with them. The passengers all seemed to equip themselves with enough enormous luggage to suffice for emigration to the Southern Hemisphere – and it was the very devil to stow it all in the shallowish boot of the “Seagulls.”
The return journey (non stop for we drivers) was scheduled at around thirty hours and, due to the lack of motorways/by-passes, we were always very late back into Leeds on Saturday nights – the Tiger Cubs and the top speed limit for coaches meant that there was no chance of achieving the timetable – it was not a pleasant assignment at all in those days. That’s in no way a criticism of the Tiger Cubs or of the Seagulls – simply wildly over optimistic and unrealistic scheduling by the Company.

Chris Youhill

East Midland – Leyland Tiger Cub – XRR 540 – R40


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

East Midland Motor Services 
1958
Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/2
Willowbrook DP41F

Not an operator I know very much about but on researching this particular vehicle it would appear that it started its life with a fleet number of C40. I have come across a photo of XRR 535 C35 which was in a livery of all Cream with a single coloured band below the window did this vehicle start life as cream coach? I am not sure what their prefix fleet letters stood for “C” For coach “D” for double decker I can guess at but “R” “O” “L” which were for single deckers do not mean much to me. If you know please leave a comment. It would appear that East Midland at one time had a livery of Chrome Yellow for the body, Cream for the lower saloon windows and Chocolate for the upper saloon windows and roof I bet that looked good, has anyone seen a colour shot. The livery at the time that the shot above was taken was Dark Red and Cream but that changed to Dark Green in the early seventies.

I recall the original livery which was very distinctive! It was almost art deco- very thirties- and then went into a sort of drab utility maroon. The green was presumably NBC….?

Joe

I vaguely remember these vehicles from my Sheffield childhood (on the Derbyshire border, towards Chesterfield).
I quite liked the maroon and cream – because I was not then aware of the original livery, which had disappeared by the time I was old enough to be aware of these things. It is possible that this livery was derived from that of Underwoods – the firm which became East Midland under BET control. The original livery adorned a RM in the short time that they plied the roads of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire.
Over a period of time – in BET times – East Midland became joint owner, along with Yorkshire Traction and North Western, of one of the greatest coach tour operators – nearby Sheffield United Tours.
East Midland became one of my favourite operators – which I used regularly – and I was sad when NBC leaf green replaced the drab maroon. This was especially so when my favourite (J – M) registered RE coaches lost their cream and maroon for NBC corporate livery.

David Oldfield

In 1977, long before the RM already mentioned, East Midland repainted an Alexander bodied Fleetline in the old brown/cream/yellow livery to commemorate their 50th anniversary. One of the 1965 batch, but can’t recall which one. It should also be mentioned that the famous bus photographer Roy Marshall (who once worked in Nottingham and was thus familiar with EMMS’s original livery) later became the General Manager of Burnley & Pendle and adopted the same colour scheme for several of that Lancashire undertaking’s vehicles including some Y-type bodied Leopards and at least one VRT3/ECW double-decker.
Going off at a slight tangent, Roy Marshall also did a stint as the boss of Gelligaer UDC’s fleet and when he moved to East Staffordshire (Burton-on-Trent Corporation as it used to be) he repainted this Midland fleet in Gelligaer’s old livery of green, red, and white – a vast improvement over the gloomy maroon and cream previously used by Burton.
Does anybody know of any further examples where migrating General Managers have ‘taken the livery with them’?

Neville Mercer

Can’t remember which way round it was but Halifax and Glasgow shared a livery due to a demonstrator in one fleet being borrowed by the operator who liked the livery and adopted it themselves.
There is also the apocryphal story of legal action when someone saw the old Bostock’s livery, liked it, adopted it and upset Bostock’s.

I also vaguely remember the Fleetline, now that Neville mentions it.

Trivia: Can anyone explain why, with a head office in Chesterfield, all East Midland buses had Nottinghamshire registrations?

David Oldfield

The 1965 edition of BBF5 says that the R prefix was for 30-foot long dual purpose vehicles, but that can’t be right because it shows all the bus-seated 30-footers with R prefixes as well. L meant long – i.e. 36 feet.
Joining Neville on his tangent for a moment, did Geoffrey Hilditch once set up a coach fleet at Aberdare using Halifax livery? Or did I dream that? The memory does feel very much like a dream . . .

Peter Williamson

According to the Prestige Series book on East Midland (excellent B&W photographs by G H F Atkins; text by John Banks) the old livery was derived from United, who abandoned it in 1930 in favour of red and cream. The company was originally W T Underwood of Clowne, but with strong backing from United (virtually a subsidiary).

As for the alpha-numeric number series, the type-series letter seems to have been allocated in a rather haphazard fashion. Note that only the single-deckers were distinguished in this way. All of the double-deckers were just series D, irrespective of chassis or body manufacturer.

However, unravelling the tangle it seems this is how it went for the single deckers (Are you sitting comfortably? Then I shall begin!) :

G -50 x ADC 416A (Short Bros.) 1927 -series allocated to EM by United
M -10 x AEC Reliance (Lowestoft – later ECW) 1929 -series allocated to EM by United
N -10 x AEC Regal (Short Bros) 1930 (some rebodied 1939 with Leyland bodies taken from 1935 TS7s, i.e. type B)
L -20 x AEC Regal (Brush) 1931 (of which 3 were coaches, designated LC)
L -? x AEC Regal 4 (Brush) 1933-34
C -5 x Leyland KP2 Cub 1934
B -20 x Leyland TS7 (10 Brush; 10 Leyland) 1935 (4 Brush rebodied 1949 by Willowbrook re-designated type N)
B -14 x Leyland TS7 (5 Brush; 1 Burlingham coach; 8 Leyland) 1936
E -30 x Leyland TS7 (ECW dual purpose) 1937 (6 rebodied 1948 by Willowbrook re-designated type N)
F -11 x Leyland TS7 (ECW bus) 1938
A -10 x AEC Regal (Weymann) 1946
A -14 x AEC Regal III (Third-hand ! Leyland bodies)  1947-48 (rebodied 1952 by Willowbrook and re-designated type K)
AC -2 x AEC Regal III (Windover coach) 1948
H -? x AEC Regal III (Weymann) 1949
J -? x AEC Regal III (Willowbrook) 1950
R -All underfloor engine buses from 1952-62 (all Leyland chassis)
C (Second time round) -All underfloor engine coaches and dual-purpose from 1954 onwards.
L -? x Leyland Leopard buses from 1963 (Willowbrook)
O -? x Bristol buses from 1969 (ECW)

N (Second time round!) -various re-bodies (see above) also 10 second hand Leyland TS7s purchased from YWD 1949 and subsequently re-bodied by Willowbrook.

Please note that this is not comprehensive, and takes no account of vehicles absorbed through takeover. There were certainly 5 x Bristol L5G (ECW) in 1938 and 2 x Bedford WTB (Duple) in 1939, for which no type letter is quoted.

Stephen Ford

Someone mentioned East Midland having a Fleetline in the old brown livery. This was in fact an Atlantean PD1/2 fleet no D177 registration BNN 177C.
Chesterfield Corporation also had Nottingham registrations as well.

Alan Ridge

Chesterfield Corporation had NU and RA registrations – Derbyshire CC.

David Oldfield

R -All underfloor engine buses from 1952-62 (all Leyland chassis)
Some of these were in fact AEC chassis and the last 3 R496 R497 & R498 were AEC chassis and the same bodies as the L400 (400 RRR) series Leylands.
The O series were one batch of AEC Swifts O501 to O510. (NAL 501F to 505F then OAL 506F to 510F) Marshall Bodies,
Bristol RE’s with single doors. O511 to O522. ECW.
Bristol RE’s with single doors. O523 to O532. I think these had Marshall Bodies, I know that they had a strange 3 X 2 arrangement for the rear two rows of seats.
Bristol RE’s with single doors. O533 to O541. Leyland engines and Marshall bodies. I have not heard any news of it, but CRR 537J O537 was preserved, somewhere around Derby.
Bristol RE’s with Dual doors. O542 to O556. ECW bodies. I think O545 was the last red and cream East Midland bus, around 1975/6

Ian Couzens

10/07/12 – 06:44

The question raised about registration numbers being issued in Nottinghamshire. It was from the days of the head office being in Worksop. Why on moving to Chesterfield it was not changed I don’t know. Hope this helps/ Don’t forget Clowne was also head office prior to Worksop.

Ian Bennett

10/07/12 – 09:17

In response to Nevilles question above re migrating General Managers. When Vane-Morland moved from Walsall to Leeds he brought their blue livery with him prior to this the trams and buses were yellow and white or a deep Prussian blue rather than the flatter slate blue that became standard in the thirties.

Chris Hough

26/07/12 – 07:44

The vehicle in the above photograph was taken over the pit at Worksop bus garage on Allen Street Worksop.

Mr Anon

26/10/12 – 07:06

For those youngsters, who were deprived of the EMMS chocolate etc livery, I have appended some links to modern day efforts to replicate the livery.
www.flickr.com/photos/manofyorkshire/
www.flickr.com/photos/
www.flickr.com/photos/guy_arab_uf/
www.flickr.com/photos/deltrems/

John Darwent

12/07/16 – 07:29

Can anyone remember how many routes East Midland had that ran into Pond Street Sheffield in the 70s, there was number 3 from Mansfield, number 46 from Clowne via Killamarsh, number 18 from Eckington, and there was also an EM bus from Gainsbrough.

Big Jim

04/04/17 – 07:15

You’re right about the 3 and 46. There was also the long-established 99 to Chesterfield via Ford and Staveley. Also in the 60s and until 1971 there was the 62/64 to Chesterfield via Eckington. These were joint with Chesterfield and Sheffield JOC.
By 1971 there was also the X53, which was an extended express version of the 3. This ran to Nottingham via Mansfield and was joint with Trent.
The Gainsborough route was the 85 – originally a Sheffield ‘C’ fleet (railways-owned) route but which became a joint Sheffield/East Midland/Lincolnshire route when the British Railways interest in the Sheffield B and C fleets ended.

John May

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

19/07/17 – 11:00

Just been told that the old EMMS bus garage at Retford was demolished in 1992,in the 70s it held a fleet of 25 buses and coaches, Worksop is now the last remaining original depot.

Big Jim

Isle of Man Road Services – Leyland Tiger Cub – 3680 MN – 54


Copyright Michael Bishop

Isle of Man Road Services Ltd
1961
Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/1
Willowbrook DP41F

Here is a shot I took of a bus at the Isle of Man Airport in 1966, I took it at the same time 1966 as the Isle of Man Road Services Leyland Titan posted two weeks ago. As stated on that post I know very little about buses more a railways man so I will leave it to anyone who wants to comment to do so.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Michael Bishop

29/05/12 – 17:45

When the Stratford Blue operations were absorbed into the main Midland Red Company in 1971, PMT was able acquire five almost identical Willowbrook bodied Tiger Cubs to the one pictured here. Four were DP, one was bus seated. Originally Stratford Blue 41-45 (2741-2745 AC) they were new in 1959. They were a bit slow compared with the PMTs own AEC Reliance 470s but performed useful work on some of the flatter routes from Stoke and Newcastle Depots and they didn’t suffer from frequent cylinder head gasket failures! The Albion designed five speed constant mesh gearbox was quite a nice unit to handle – but then I didn’t have to work them on One Man Operation for a shift!

Ian Wild

30/05/12 – 07:23

This bus is now preserved on the Isle of Man

Chris Hough

31/05/12 – 08:18

Yes, Ian, interesting point you make. Despite a general superiority, the AECs had an Achilles heel – the wet-liner engine (AH470 and AH590). Leyland produced two mainstream engines, the 0.600 and the Leyland Comet engine which progressed from 0.350 to 0.375 to 0.400. The Comet engine was small, underpowered and noisy but did it’s job reliably. Regulars know my predilection for AECs but also my, not quite equal, admiration of Leyland (Motors). The wet-liners did a lot of harm to AEC’s erstwhile superb reputation and allowed the Leopard to subsequently overtake them in the market.

David Oldfield

North Western – Leyland Tiger Cub – LDB 709 – 709


Copyright John Smith

North Western Road Car
1957
Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/2T
Burlingham C41F

Awhile ago the above photo was sent to me with the following comment.

I wondered if this picture of a North Western coach taken on the A5085 Blackpool Road, Lea, Preston heading towards/away from Blackpool (see comments) would interest you? My dad (Jack Smith) was a Police Sergeant and is driving the Lancashire Constabulary MGA in the picture. I think it would be 1962.

Well you don’t have to ask twice when there is a Seagull in the shot, especially one in full flight. I don’t think the coach was the purpose of the shot maybe it was taken from another MGA police car. I am not certain of the Mark number of the Seagull but researching through Neville Mercers great article ‘Burlingham’s flock of Seagulls’ I’m going plum for a Mark 5 with the optional roof box display. The reasons are, the year, a one piece windscreen (no horizontal crossbar) and slim side window pillars, I think I will soon find out if I am wrong.

Photograph and Part Copy contributed by John Smith

01/04/12 – 09:22

Yes, it’s a Mark Five – numbers of this batch also served in blue and cream with NWRCC subsidiaries Melba Motors and Altrincham Coachways. North Western’s earlier flock of Seagulls (with FDB registrations) were Mark Fours and some of these also passed to Melba.

Neville Mercer

02/04/12 – 07:27

I don’t think it’s heading towards Blackpool though. Quite apart from the fact that it says Manchester on the blind, this appears to be the spot, looking towards Blackpool, which means the coach is heading towards Manchester. //g.co/maps/t3dq2

Peter Williamson

12/04/12 – 06:05

It looks like the location is Blackpool Road (A5085) approaching the Pedders Lane junction at Ashton, Preston. The two bungalows behind the vehicle are the giveaway.

Mike

29/06/15 – 06:53

This is before the last bus stop before the traffic lights at Lea, the police station is opposite, we used to live in the first bungalow. Happy times

R Cooper

02/04/22 – 05:43

Thanks for all the information in the comments! I had to laugh that in my message to the group (when I sent the photo), that I queried if the destination was Blackpool or Manchester! Maybe I was thinking the conductor hadn’t changed it from Blackpool for the return journey.

John Smith

Stratford Blue – Leyland Tiger Cub – 2745 AC – 44


Copyright Roger Cox

Stratford-upon-Avon Blue Motors Ltd
1959
Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/1
Willowbrook B45F

In his comment upon Michael Bishop’s posting of the Isle of Man Road Services Leyland Tiger Cub with a Willowbrook DP41F, Ian Wild refers to the very similar Stratford Blue Leyland PSUC1/1 Tiger Cubs. Pictured in August 1970, this is No.44, 2745 AC, the one with the Willowbrook B45F body – the other four had DP41 seating configuration – and, I think, it is our first picture on the site of a Stratford Blue bus. The early history of the company is rather complicated, but by 1931 it was operating as a Balfour Beatty group business with second hand vehicles, as Balfour Beatty refused to finance new purchases. In 1935 the BET group assumed control, with management passing to BMMO, a situation that continued until the BET sold out to NBC in 1969. NBC set about absorbing its newly acquired smaller operators into the bigger neighbouring companies. From 1st January 1971, Midland Red assumed full control of Stratford Blue, and buses were progressively repainted into the BMMO overall red livery.
Here is a link to read the full history of Stratford Blue.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

15/07/12 – 08:08

What a beautiful glossy finish. You don’t see that very often – and you rarely saw it in NBC days. It seems strange to me that some operators manage to keep this sort of finish and others can’t. It can’t simply be the difference between whether vehicles are hand or machine washed.

David Oldfield

15/07/12 – 12:44

On that point, David, when I was with Tynemouth and Wakefields, prior to NBC all Northern group buses were hand painted, this involved several coats of primer and paint followed by a final coat of varnish, the drawback was cost and the fact that the whole process took about 10 days, these days much of what you see is just stuck on graphics. cost effective, but no where near as good a finish.

Ronnie Hoye

15/07/12 – 12:44

A very nice photo of a small’ish concern who always took a pride in their vehicles and ploughed their own furrow, in spite of being a BMMO subsidiary for some 40-odd years. They were great advocates of Tilling-Stevens B10’s before the war and I recall visiting an aunt around 1949-50 and seeing these strange-sounding antiques. I didn’t fully appreciate them, truth be told.
Later, they were equally keen Leyland users, of which the above is a good example. Peter Gould’s website contains a potted history, taken from the book “Stratford-upon-Avon Blue Motor Services Remembered”, by David Harvey. 

Chris Hebbron

16/07/12 – 06:28

I can’t help thinking that the picture gives a good impression of how Samuel Ledgard’s fleet would have looked if they had taken similar vehicles.

Chris Barker

16/07/12 – 06:29

It certainly does look in remarkably good fettle for an 11 year old bus – one could easily believe that the photo was taken to mark its first day in service.
As Chris states, despite being under the wing of Midland Red, they went their own way – especially regarding vehicle policy. Their BET Federation style PS1’s and Tiger Cubs, and the Northern Counties rebodied PS2’s were more reminiscent of Yorkshire Traction – a company about as far removed from Stratford Blue as I can imagine.
I’ve heard it said that the BET Group retained some smaller outfits such as Stratford Blue, Hebble and Mexborough & Swinton in order to allow junior managers to gain experience and prove themselves on a small scale before being let loose with a larger company.

John Stringer

16/07/12 – 12:18

You’re right in what you say, John, whenever United ‘Tilling Group’ took over a company everything was changed to a standard procedure, where as Northern General ‘BET’ allowed companies to retain their name, different livery, and a certain amount of independence, in some cases this even went as far as vehicle spec, take the PD3’s for example ‘livery apart’ although outwardly the Orion bodied examples all looked the same, but the Percy Main vehicles were totally different from the rest inside, and the Sunderland District ones were Burlingham bodied. This all changed with NBC, the ‘Corporate Image Brigade’ stepped in, the names went one by one, and some splendid liveries were cast aside to be replaced by drab poppy red or vomit green dependant on where you live

Ronnie Hoye

16/07/12 – 18:20

Only one word to say about the photo – stunning, absolutely stunning! That’s three, but who’s counting. As others have said, a beautiful livery – strange how something as basic as blue and cream can look beautiful, but it did – immaculately presented on a classic design. In addition ‘Stratford-upon-Avon Blue Motors’ has such a wonderful ring from a more elegant age.
And Ronnie, I agree with every word you say about Northern Group liveries. I was sad when Gateshead adopted green and cream in 1964 thereby making them look the same as Tyneside; I may have been in a minority in loving the old maroon/brown and cream but I thought it was really smart and it was distinctive.
In mentioning the end of separate liveries with inception of NBC you might also have mentioned the revolting yellow which got slapped all over buses based in Tyne and Wear soon afterwards; strange how Newcastle Corporation’s yellow and cream looked really smart and yet Tyne and Wear’s didn’t seem to look good on anything!

Alan Hall

17/07/12 – 06:55

Another well-kept vehicle in a small fleet despite, as others have said, being a division of Midland Red for so many years. Looking closely at the picture reminds me that Stratford Blue were among a very small number of (usually small) operators who used the service number box to display the name.

Pete Davies

17/07/12 – 06:56

I may be mistaken, but I think Stratford Blue were wound up after pay/conditions were brought into line with BMMO – there was a strike about this issue. Why the company couldn’t have been allowed to continue with staff on an equal footing with the parent escapes me, but then around this time NBC was intent on wrapping-up its smaller operations – were there administrative costs, such as posting of accounts, involved in running subsidiary companies?
Whatever, it was a shame to have lost a “blue company” – although NBC’s (lack of!) policy on corporate blue liveries would have seen to that in due course anyway. Red “Statford Blue”?: reminds me of when Western National was split by NBC and Bob Montgomery had those members of his new North Devon operation – trading as Red Bus [sic] – which were still in Leaf Green lettered as “This is a RED BUS” (as opposed to the “RED BUS” fleetnames on the red members of the fleet). “This is still a STRATFORD BLUE bus” (on Poppy Red vehicles) doesn’t have the same ring though. Although with NBCs policy of shortening fleetnames – Cheltenham District/Cheltenham, Bath Services/Bath, Maidstone & District/Maidstone (on coaches), Mansfield District/Mansfield – red “Stratford” buses wouldn’t have been so silly.
Back to the bus though – the whole thing’s just right isn’t it? livery, vehicle design/proportions . . . and a nice linen destination blind – class.
But does anybody know why Stratford Blue was “allowed” to pursue a Leyland-based vehicle buying policy? One assumes that the Directors were all senior BMMO officers, so why didn’t they insist on purchase of BMMO products? Was it because the Leyland purchases by Stratford Blue provided a bench-mark against which BMMO products could be judged, as I’ve read? – but then they weren’t being operated over comparable routes and BMMO operated Leyland vehicles in its own fleet anyway; or was it because BMMO couldn’t meet its own requirements from internal production and Stratford Blue had, of necessity, to look elsewhere?

Philip Rushworth

17/07/12 – 06:57

Alan, I prefer not to think about the NBC version of T&W yellow, and the PTE went on a very expensive experiment with various layouts of Newcastle Corporation’s original livery only to end up with something not a million miles from where they started, in fact I would be surprised if most of the population of Newcastle knew the difference.

Ronnie Hoye

17/07/12 – 08:19

…..but just be thankful that you didn’t end up with something like South Yorkshire’s “Coffee and cream”! Even when the coffee was strengthened, it wasn’t a patch on Sheffield’s cream with blue livery and it only became vaguely bearable with the eventual addition a red.

David Oldfield

17/07/12 – 12:41

Yes, the right combination/shade of blue and white/cream do make a very attractive buss. My Western Travel post shows a dual-purpose Gloucester Bristol RELH6L in similar guise, although their bog-standard all-over blue with thin white stripe between decks looked uninspiring.

Chris Hebbron

17/07/12 – 12:41

Chris B – how right you are with the Ledgard comparison – in fact there was once an edition of an Ian Allan publication which featured a Stratford PD2 and I for one had to glance again quickly, thinking that it was a Ledgard view. I can’t just recall whether it was a “Buses Illustrated” or one of the annuals.

Chris Youhill

28/07/12 – 08:36

A lovely picture but it would be a mistake to think this is representative of how Stratford Blue buses looked in their later years – what it does show is No. 44 fresh from the paint shop in the blue and white livery that replaced the earlier blue and cream from 1969 onwards. In their later years the Tiger Cubs were unreliable, unloved and often unkempt, and consideration was given to replacing them with used buses from elsewhere, but it never happened. There were 14 Tiger Cubs in the fleet, with Willowbrook, Park Royal and Marshall bodies. They all passed to Midland Red on 1 January 1971 but were withdrawn by May, despite two of them having been repainted red – mostly replaced by the newly delivered Ford R192s. As to Stratford Blue’s quasi-autonomous existence the answer probably lay with BET headquarters rather than with Midland Red, but it has never been fully explained and probably never will be. Although Stratford Blue bought Leylands almost exclusively from 1948 to 197 (82 in total), Midland Red bought more in 1952/53 alone, with their 100 LD8-class Titan PD2s. Final comment on this photo is that Warwick was rarely seen as a destination on a Stratford Blue bus – the hourly 90A from Stratford to Leamington passed through the town, but very few journeys finished there. This was most likely a schools journey.

Bob Telfer

28/12/12 – 13:48

Stratford Blue

Just to say Kineton depot of Stratford Blue used white ticket rolls as did Stratford unless on local service then we had to change to pink.

Bill Floyd

29/12/12 – 18:13

I may be imagining this, but there looks to me to be a conductor on board who is in the process of winding the destination blind – this would explain the ‘unlikely’ destination and the fact that it appears badly set. The ‘PAYE’ sign doesn’t look to be illuminated.

David Call

20/07/14 – 07:15

Just to say Leyland Cub fleet number 44 reg no 2745 AC finished its days in the brook through bridge on Kineton to Radway Rd driver they say lost control DD number 31 turned over on Bourdon Hill towards Stratford this was a converted SD.

Bill Floyd

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

09/06/17 – 06:27

I am trying to find out when Stratford Blue re-livered/painted their Leyland PD double deckers and included the newer Stratford Blue logo.
I believe that originally the mudguards were black and at this time were re-painted blue, also the roof colour changed.
I think it was in the early 1960’s but can’t find anything definite about it in the various books published on SB.
Hope that you can help or point me in the right direction please.

Paul Meers