Category: Photos

Northern General – Leyland Titan – VUP 761 – 1761

Northern General - Leyland Titan - VUP 761 - 761

Northern General Transport
1957
Leyland Titan PD2/12
Park Royal H35/28RD

Pictured outside Consett Depot, VUP 761 is a Park Royal bodied H35/28RD Leyland PD2/12, it was the first in a batch of ten delivered in 1957 – VUP 761/70; We have seen Northern General Transport vehicles with the open platform version of this type of Park Royal body before on this site, the previous ones being the Guy Arab IV’s of Tynemouth and District. The order for these handsome vehicles was initially placed by Sunderland District Omnibus, but prior to delivery they were diverted to Northern and entered service as 1761/70, so I don’t know if any of them got as far as being painted in SDO livery. They were generally to be found earning their keep on the long routes to Darlington and Stockton/Middlesbrough that NGT shared with United, where they were eventually superseded by the Routemasters. 1761 is still looking very smart, but going by the lettering and livery style it was probably nearing the end of its service life at the time this photo was taken, but I don’t think any of these vehicles suffered the indignity of being painted in NBC poppy red.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye

20/12/13 – 15:51

I didn’t ever encounter these particular buses, but the combination of the dependable and stolid PD2 chassis with the stylish and well finished Park Royal bodywork of the time always formed a sound and efficient piece of capital equipment. The reputation that Leyland double deckers acquired from the TD1 through to the PD3 was entirely merited, and Park Royal bodywork, until it descended from the sublime to the ridiculous, was always a sound choice. Buses like these attained a level of reliability that present day bus engineers can only dream about.

Roger Cox

20/12/13 – 16:43

Couldn’t agree more, Roger.

David Oldfield

20/12/13 – 17:58

It’s called rugged simplicity lads. There’s a lot to be said for power steering and fully automatic gearboxes -especially when the driver has to collect fares, ensure the passengers are safe and watch out for top deck vandalism – self diagnostics can be a boon to the engineers and heaters, fluorescent lights and high visibility grab rails with low floor accessibility might be great for passengers but the modern bus for all its sophistication is a potential nightmare when it goes wrong.

Phil Blinkhorn

21/12/13 – 07:13

…..and so say all of us, Phil…..

David Oldfield

21/12/13 – 07:13

Power steering can also be a bad thing, Phil. Our half cabs a Percy Main were well maintained, and although heavier, they were perfectly acceptable, and at least they had ‘feel’ whereas the MK1 National was a nightmare on a wet or slippery road. Half the time you didn’t have a clue where the wheels were pointing, and it was more by luck than judgement if you went in the direction you intended to go.

Ronnie Hoye

21/12/13 – 08:32

Only drove a Mk1 National once in good conditions. Light and vague sums up the handling!

David Oldfield

21/12/13 – 13:58

A bendy is even worse, gents! Imagine putting the foot down for a standing start on a frosty morning, and seeing – via your mirrors – the back end advancing sideways towards the wall of a nearby property, while the front end just sits there. I know of one instance in Southampton and I’m sure it isn’t unique . . .

Pete Davies

21/12/13 – 13:58

Notwithstanding all the supposed development work and the well publicised testing in near arctic and sub tropical climes, the National MkI was appallingly unbalanced design with very poor front/back weight distribution. Its one saving grace was the almost indestructible bodywork. Some of the early 11.3 metre production examples went to London Country who, despite the dual door configuration, put the things on the Stevenage Superbus, thereby applying to that ‘premium’ service its first kiss of death. Hatfield and Dunton Green garages were next to receive these bundles of joy for local bus routes. By now Leyland had relaxed its rigid stance and agreed to produce a single door option, and, despite the ultra basic bus seating, a batch of these gems went on Green Line routes 721. 706 and 711. I never drove a National; at this time I worked in the LCBS HQ next to Reigate Garage, where the vicissitudes of the LN were well known. The introduction of these things coincided with a spell of extremely hot weather which caused some kind of meltdown in the gear selection/control mechanism. Also, the misconceived microswitches in the engine cover required someone to push the back panel hard to enable engine starting – it was said that the National was the only bus that needed a boot up the backside to make it go. I did often ride on these early Nationals, and found them to be utterly nasty. Drivers had never experienced such rapid engine acceleration before, and progress consisted of a succession of savage starts and violent stops. The body roll on corners was extreme, requiring passengers to clutch at the handrails to avoid being deposited in the gangway. The very light steering coupled with the long rear overhang behind the back wheels led to a spate of rear end collisions due to the backswing. The much hyped heating system, the rearward pod roof location of which added to the weight imbalance of the design, must have been created by someone with no knowledge of simple physics, since hot air rises everywhere except, apparently, in Leyland, Lancashire. The roof interior soon became Henry Ford’s preferred colour. Certainly the National did improve with time, but the 500 series engine was always a lemon. The MkII addressed several of the problems, but it could never match up to the Bristol RE that Stokes deliberately killed off to boost National sales.

Roger Cox

21/12/13 – 15:22

Brilliant resume of the National, Roger. I am a little more generously inclined to the MkII – but there was no excuse nor was it a substitute for the Series III RE that never was.

David Oldfield

21/12/13 – 18:04

And how did the Lynx measure up to the Nationals I & II?

Chris Hebbron

22/12/13 – 07:17

Lynx? Swearing and bad language should never be allowed on this site.

David Oldfield

22/12/13 – 07:18

It would be fascinating to know just what the warranty arrangements were for the Mk1 Nationals. They were either a nightmare or a milch cow for Leyland judging by the throughput of spares at the Chorley operation in the first few years. There was many an old Leyland hand seen shaking their head and muttering about the legitimacy of the type.
On a different tack, just what is it that the Brits don’t like about articulated PSVs? They operate successfully all around the world, including in many countries where snow and ice reign for far longer than in the UK. Certainly those with the power pack driving the rearmost wheels are harder to control in certain conditions but I can’t recall hearing such criticism of the breed anywhere else.

Phil Blinkhorn

22/12/13 – 08:46

Is it the “London Transport Syndrome”, Phil? We didn’t invent it, we didn’t design it so we won’t make any effort to make it work. Oh, and whilst we’re at it, we’ll draw attention to the slightest fault – conveniently glossing over any faults in our own designs.
I’m a firm believer in the RM – having both ridden and driven numerous examples. It is fairly well documented, however, that there were numerous teething problems – which were eventually sorted out. [Pride wouldn’t let us design a dog.] The MB and DM(S) weren’t designed by LT, so could be jettisoned as rubbish and failures – but like the Cravens RTs they had long and honourable lives post LT. The Bendis fall into this category. They are not British – and therefore not worth consideration. Oh, goody. Some have gone up in flames. QED. [As a world-wide statistical point, this argument doesn’t hold water.] The Bendis are not bad, I simply don’t like them.
Now that is honest!

David Oldfield

22/12/13 – 09:04

According to Bus and Coach Magazine the Maltese Government in August ordered off the road the former LT Mercedes-Benz Citaros following nine fires in one year.

Peter

23/12/13 – 06:55

Roger’s summary of the Leyland National (perhaps a little off-topic here, but I didn’t start it!) is very accurate. For the passengers it was a lively ride accentuated, on those early models, by the shiny seats in an attractive shade of fawn.
LT passengers had long enjoyed the tactile pleasures of moquette and slithery seats requiring a steadying hold on the handrail were most unwelcome.

Petras409

23/12/13 – 11:19

This British anti-bendi-bus attitude could simply be the fact that we increase our bus capacity with double-deckers which are familiar here, but nowadays virtually unknown on the continent, so they do it with bendi-buses. Having said that, it seems to me that, as ever, it’s the few influential ones who make the fuss, like Boris, peddling untruths like the rear part squeezing cyclists off the road etc.

Chris Hebbron

23/12/13 – 14:00

David and Chris make excellent points re articulated buses plus there is the “not invented in Britain” syndrome. Berlin operates both double deckers and articulated singles very successfully across a massive area of both intensely urban and semi rural road networks London could easily do the same. London tourism, in particular, has traded on the red double decker for decades as if they were the only double deckers in the world, touting riding on the top deck as a unique experience. As David points out, too many otherwise successful designs have been condemned by LT in its various forms and it was only the break up of LT that catapulted so many industry standard designs onto the streets of London. TfL under Boris has now come up with a very expensive animal compared to the articulated Citaro (£330K new as opposed to £200K) which it has lauded as being the best of all things to urban London, whilst ensuring no-one else can buy one even if they wanted one for the foreseeable future and even then any order would include a licence payment to TfL. Presumably if it turns out to be a dog, work will be done to rectify problems that the rest of the industry will not find out about until years later, (apart from some unusually good journalism from the Mail) see this link www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ whereas the Citaros were stigmatised in short order and very vociferously.

Phil Blinkhorn

23/12/13 – 17:27

Chris Y- did you see (Daily Mail story link above) conductors on a Borisbus for 12 hours a day cost £60K per annum for each bus?

Joe

23/12/13 – 17:28

It always surprised me that, despite North’s selling lots of London Transport (and possibly non-LT ones, too) double-deck buses to European countries such as Belgium/Jugoslavia/Canary Isles/Spain/Portugal, the double-deck principle never really gained momentum. Berlin had DD buses before the war, of course.

Chris Hebbron

24/12/13 – 06:44

Ref. to Joe’s remark on costs of Borisbus conductors, I have never understood why the UK does not adopt the continental method of revenue collection, at least for urban routes – self-cancellation of pre-purchased tickets. It reduces to a minimum driver’s duties as a ticket seller/revenue protector and so cuts down on dwell time at stops. On-the-spot penalty for ticketless travel (spot checks by teams of roving plain-clothes inspectors) is fixed at about 25 times the standard fare. So, provided tickets are checked once in every 25 journeys the operator loses nothing, and the freeloaders gain nothing.

Stephen Ford

24/12/13 – 06:45

These “Borisbus” absurdities are nothing more than a vanity project for a publicity hungry London Mayor. I am not a great fan of the articulated bus, but Johnson’s hysterical condemnation of the Citaros in his self awarded parallel role of “Cyclists’ Champion” was just another headline grabbing stunt. Perfectly sound, expensive public service vehicles (I prefer the old expression) have been flogged off well before their properly depreciated lifespan, at a heavy cost to all national taxpayers (most of whom receive no benefit whatsoever from the huge and disproportionate subsidy handed out to TfL). In their place have come these ridiculous committee designed camels, each having a unit cost far above entirely acceptable, proven, modern designs. Within a few years, these things, neither fish nor fowl (nor barely recognisable as buses) will be deemed too old to continue in passenger transport service within the exclusive, rarefied bubble that seemingly now encompasses London. What then? I do not see realistic operators outside the Metropolis wanting Borisbuses for normal services. No doubt they will be sold off to dealers at hugely discounted prices for school transport operators once the rear doorways have been permanently nailed up.

Roger Cox

24/12/13 – 06:46

Leyland Nationals in the snow would go anywhere the problem was stopping them but the traction was amazing on snow covered roads going up hill.

Michael Crofts

24/12/13 – 06:47

David (Oldfield); living in the Morley area and working in Bradford, between about 1988 and 1990 I probably travelled on a West Riding Lynx up to ten times per week. As you will know West Riding built up a large fleet of these (as they did, of course, with the Guy Wulfrunian!), but the Lynx had a full service life. I found it an attractive vehicle to look at, not especially noisy, fairly comfortable and with very impressive acceleration. I admit I am not a professional busman, either a driver or an engineer, so why do they seem to be so unpopular? You are not the only person to condemn them on this and other forums!

Dave Towers

24/12/13 – 08:31

Boris buses do not have conductors. They are platform attendants – allegedly to prevent customers falling off. It patently hasn’t worked if recent news is to be believed. They do not have anything to do with fare collection or revenue checks. In central London there is already ticket-less operation similar to what you have suggested, Stephen.
Personally, I find the Boris bus ugly in the extreme, its linking with the name Routemaster an abomination and its whole existence pointless. Most, if not all, of its useful features are also found in the standard offerings of ADL, Wright-bus and Optare and its usefulness and desirability outside London (new or second hand) is, as Roger said, nigh on none-existent.
Dave/Lynx. As said elsewhere, the National had an unassailable body to mitigate against its dreadful engine and handling. The Lynx was so badly designed. The body depended on its bonded glazing and other such features to ensure body rigidity. In practice this didn’t happen. Rattling and twisty body syndrome did. In the general scheme of things the engine was too big for the bus – and contributed to body disintegration – and with the transmission contributed to as clog and anchor style of driving and ride. It didn’t hit the market at an auspicious time, but even so the poor sales represented what operators thought of it. Caldaire was the only big scale operator of the type and probably, like LT mentioned above, had to make it work. Getting rid of so many vehicles would have bankrupt them.

David Oldfield

24/12/13 – 13:45

I seem to be a Rare busman on these pages as I Liked the National. We used to operate them (Crosville) on the C84 service which was a five hour round trip and these buses worked for a living day in and day out fully loaded on lots of trips, they were T reg they spoilt the National by putting Gardener engines in them making them noisy and smelly with no performance !
I had a K reg Lynx as a training bus I believe it was one of the last to be made and always enjoyed driving it.

Michael Crofts

24/12/13 – 15:35

The Lynx came with four engine options, though not concurrently. Early examples had the Leyland TL11 or Gardner 6HLXCT coupled with the Leyland semi auto gearbox. The Cummins L10 and ZF fully auto box were added later, and became the standard when the Leyland and Gardner power options were withdrawn. Then Leyland Bus fell into the clutches of Volvo, and the THD102KF 245 bhp 9.6 litre unit – developed from the AEC engine – was offered as an alternative to the Cummins. All the Lynxes that I drove were Cummins powered, and had the endearing Cummins PT injection system characteristic of a total lack of logical liaison with accelerator pressure. Depressing the pedal brought no response until the engine revved up to a level way beyond that which was desired. Easing off the pedal again yielded no effect in reducing revs until the thing suddenly shut down again to idling speed. Effectively, Cummins engines were either ‘on’ or ‘off’, making it impossible in buses so powered to drive smoothly with consideration for the passengers. The driver might just as well had an on/off throttle switch on the dashboard. The transmission howl from gearbox and rear axle in the Lynx gave one a severe headache in no time; the semi integral body structure must have amplified the noise somehow. Yes, the Lynx could certainly motor, but progress was decidedly savage and unpleasant. I absolutely hated driving the Lynx; it was beaten for nastiness only by the Seddon Pennine IV, and then by a small margin. My distaste was shared by all the drivers of my acquaintance that encountered the things. In one depot where I worked the Lynx was nicknamed “The Scud” – it went like a missile and was just about as uncontrollable. The L10 powered Olympian was a nasty creature too, unlike its Gardner stable mate, but the Lynx was far worse. It is noteworthy that the ‘in house’ Cummins engines, latterly the ‘C’ family and M11, are no longer offered for the automotive market. The ‘B’ series and its derivatives, as used in ADL buses, was originally designed by the Case Corporation, and it employs the trusted Bosch type conventional fuel injection system. This web page www.aronline.co.uk/  gives one opinion of the Lynx, much of which I do not share, especially the comment, “The Lynx was a good vehicle to drive; Cummins and Volvo-engined buses had acceleration best described as alarming and were very popular amongst drivers”. Popular with drivers? Not in my experience.

Roger Cox

25/12/13 – 06:35

Just as matter of correction (and we are way past the 1970 cut off for this site) the Cummins C series engine had a conventional fuel injection system, same as the B series. I believe both types were built in Darlington for UK applications – as was the V6-VIM – now THERE is a pre 1970 comment!- Daimler Roadliner!

Ian Wild

25/12/13 – 09:39

Thanks for that correction Ian. my only driving knowledge of the ‘C’ engine came from a couple of Dennis Javelins at one garage, and, yes, they were less ‘snatchy’ than the L10s. Mercifully, I never had to handle a Roadliner.

Roger Cox

26/12/13 – 08:36

The interesting thing about the Lynx and Caldaire (West Riding/Yorkshire was that the single deck Lynx seemed to become a major part of the fleet, replacing double deckers such as Bristol VR’s. This (with real minibuses) seemed then to be the way forward: surely passenger numbers were declining & something simpler was needed, together with buses that could pick up around suburban estates. Then the megagroups formed and we have the lumbering megabuses which can scarcely squeeze into bus lanes: what is the real logic (not the public transport command economy logic) of this?

Joe

26/12/13 – 13:07

Re Michael’s comments on the National. The only ones I have ever driven were the early MK1, of K & L vintage, this covered the period from Aug 1971 to July 1973, and I don’t retract a single word I said about them, they were in my opinion an absolute abortion. By the time you got to the ‘T’ registered vehicles ‘Aug 78 to July 79’ that Michael speaks of, a further five years had passed during which time many of the problems had been dealt with. However, I can’t help thinking, that had the opposition not been killed off, and had the companies been given a free choice rather than having the National thrust upon them, the chances are that working for Crossville, Michael would have been driving a Bristol RELL rather than a National.

Ronnie Hoye

02/01/14 – 08:23

Returning to the photo of 1761, this batch of ten buses were very easy on the eye – Ronnie describes them as handsome and I can’t think of a better adjective with which to describe them. They were also very fast (for their day), particularly when given their head South of Durham on the 46 (Darlington) and the 55 (Middlesbrough). Their downside was the seating, which was cramped and provided inadequate legroom, especially for long journeys.
They were intended to displace the MCCW (Orion)-bodied Guy Arab IVs, themselves less than two years old, from the above services although I can well remember both types operating in tandem on the 47 and 55 during the early ’60s. The arrival of Routemasters at Chester-le-Street and Bensham depots in 1964/5 ousted these fine machines from the North Road but they continued to provide excellent service elsewhere on less prestigious routes. The 136, as seen above, was, at 11 minutes from Consett to Chester Road (Moorside), a bit of a comedown compared with Newcastle-Darlington (1 hour 55 minutes) and Newcastle-Middlesbrough (2 hours 9 minutes).

Alan Hall

18/05/14 – 06:24

VUP 769

1769 seemed to outlast its siblings of this batch as this was the only example I saw/travelled on. It often found itself on the scholars (of which I was one) run from Lanchester back to Consett.

John4521

18/05/14 – 11:56

I see from the colour of the wheels and logo that we have now entered the NBC era, and look how standards have dropped. Okay, the photo was taken on a damp and dreary day which is never a help, but both vehicles are showing signs of neglect. The Atlantean appears to have a broken fog light, and neither vehicle has any front wheel trims. Neither would have been acceptable under the old NGT regime, whatever the reason the wheel trims had been removed, they would have been replaced, and the broken light would have been attended to at the earliest opportunity, apart from anything else its an offence, fog lights are not obligatory, but if fitted must work.

Ronnie Hoye

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

04/08/16 – 08:54

I lived next door to the depot at this time, and I’m sure that the buses parked at that end of the depot were awaiting disposal, which would excuse the missing foglight.

Stuart Gunn

09/08/16 – 06:18

I have an update to the discussion about the New Routemaster which took place in this thread two-and-a-half years ago, although actually it is also closely linked to the main subject matter of this forum, because the story really begins with the original Routemaster.
Readers may recall that, when the Routemaster was finally withdrawn from normal London service, an urban myth started circulating, to the effect that its open platform had been specially designed for London to allow passengers to board and alight between stops during periods of heavy traffic congestion. (This has resulted in anything with an open platform now being called a Routemaster.) Of course we all know that, in reality, getting on and off between stops is something that was always discouraged for safety reasons, until Boris promised to being it back in order to get elected as mayor.
Well the update is that next month – a mere four months after the end of Boris’s second term – the ‘platform attendants’ on the New Routemasters are to be dispensed with to save money, and the rear doors are to be kept closed between stops. What a surprise!

Peter Williamson

09/08/16 – 09:23

And what a criminal waste of public money on a preposterous vanity project.

Roger Cox

10/08/16 – 05:54

It’s probably partly political, with a Labour Mayor in post, to dismantle one bit of the ‘Boris Legacy’, with a wish to get rid of his unattractive-looking buses, too, but that is a step too far! Politicians love these projects, Concorde being one of the most expensive for huge technical advances, but no direct benefit to more than a few rich and business folk.

Chris Hebbron

11/08/16 – 06:25

As one who has always thought of Concorde as being a simply beautiful design, I cannot bring myself to say the same about the New Routemaster.

Brendan Smith

Sheffield Corporation – Leyland Titan PD2 – OWB 866 – G56

Sheffield Corporation - Leyland Titan PD2 - OWB 866 - G56

Sheffield Corporation
1952
Leyland Titan PD2/10
Leyland (previously H33/26R)

This is my only photo of G56 in action doing what it did so often in the 1960s, recovering an errant PDR1/2 Atlantean in this case on a very wet day in Leopold Street, Sheffield.
G56 was converted from fleet number 666 as a gritter/tow wagon in 1966. Three of the batch were put on one side for conversion, 662 as a tower wagon to replace AEC Regent CWJ 410 and 667 as a driver trainer but in the event only the gritter conversion went ahead. It was a standard Sheffield conversion, lop off the top deck, take away the drop rear frame extension and install a doorway into what was the lower deck gangway. Random buses were modified in this way over the years when the Transport Department had to stand on its own feet when snow fell as Local Authority road gritting was not commonplace.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

03/02/14 – 13:55

This type of conversion continued into PTE days with at least one ex Doncaster bus getting the treatment in addition to a number of ex Sheffield PD3s and an ex Severn of Duncroft example.

Chris Hough

03/02/14 – 17:09

Small point. It was originally a 58 seater. The first 59 seaters were the 1957 PD2s (ECW, Roe and Weymann).
Nice atmospheric shot of Leopold Street in its one way phase with the Town Hall and Beethoven House (and Wilson Peck’s music shop) in the far distance and the Education Offices in the near distance. The latter have been redeveloped into upmarket boutiques and restaurants – the bit out of sight on the West Street corner was what originally was a college which eventually became Sheffield University. Leopold Street was named after the Prussian Prince Leopold.
The broken down Atlantean had its body built in Sheffield. Why did so many Atlanteans fail in the ’60s? Sheffield bought around 100 PDR1/2s between 1964 and 1966 – by far the worst and least reliable of all Atlantean variants!

David Oldfield

04/02/14 – 07:46

What a wonderful old workhorse this machine was; in the heady days when Atlanteans were hove to all over the city, with engine covers raised and pools of oil gathering underneath, I doubt G56 ever really cooled down. I still consider it a great shame that this splendid old PD2 ended up getting scrapped and not preserved, even though half of it was already missing!

Dave Careless

04/02/14 – 07:47

The problem with the PDR1/2 seemed to be in the combination of Leyland engine and Daimler gearbox which didn’t appear to work very well, was it something to do with the power produced by the Leyland engine being too much for a gearbox designed to be coupled with a Gardner slogger? Certainly the Manchester examples never sounded quite right compared to either a PDR1/1 or a Gardner engined Fleetline. I used to enjoy travelling on the back seat downstairs on a BND-C or END-D PDR1/2 for an exciting combination of excessive heat and interesting mechanical smells!

Michael Keeley

04/02/14 – 13:44

OWB 866_2

Apologies for submitting a photo with myself in it, but I thought in this instance it might be forgivable. On holiday from Canada in the spring of 1984, I caught up with G56 in a sorry looking state at the SYPTE Meadowhall Training Centre in Sheffield, out of use and presumably awaiting the scrapman. Unfortunately, there was nobody in authority to whom I could beg, plead or otherwise come to an agreement with about acquiring the much coveted registration plate! Note that somebody has already taken it upon themselves to ‘rescue’ the ‘Leyland’ radiator badge! OWB 866 was thirty two years old by this time, had worked hard all its life, and didn’t owe anybody anything.

Dave Careless

04/02/14 – 13:46

According to my information, the power outputs of the engines contemporary with the Atlantean PDR1/2 were as follows. The Gardner 6LX developed 150 bhp at 1700 rpm, with a maximum torque of 485 lb. ft. at 1050 rpm. The corresponding figures for the later 6LXB were 180bhp at 1850 rpm, and 536 lb. ft. at 1050 rpm. For the Leyland engines in bus applications, these became, for the O600, 125 bhp at 1800 rpm, and 410 lb.ft. at 1100 rpm. The O680 gave 150 bhp at 1800 rpm and 450 lb. ft. torque at 1100 rpm. The ‘Power Plus’ O.680 gave 200 bhp at 2200 rpm, and 548 lb. ft. at 1200 rpm., but this engine was not employed in the Atlantean. These figures did sometimes vary with differing applications, but not by much. The Gardner engines were lighter than their Leyland equivalents, though not so compact in design. It is unlikely, therefore, that the torque of the Leyland engines was responsible for transmission problems in the PDR1/2.

Roger Cox

05/02/14 – 09:29

JOJ 211

Here is an ex Birmingham PD2 in use as a towing wagon, but in this case by a scrapman. Photo taken at Walsall depot, 1970
I don’t remember what the vehicle was being towed, but appears to have had an argument with a low bridge.

Tony Martin

05/02/14 – 13:54

Note in the background, yet another quaint destination on Walsall Corporation No.315 : “Boney Hay”.

Stephen Ford

06/02/14 – 06:36

It’s actually 815, a Leyland PD2/12 with Roe body. The destination is a reminder that Walsall, like neighbouring Wolverhampton, ran well outside its own boundaries.

Tony Martin

07/02/14 – 18:04

I wasn’t aware until this discussion that there was a known transmission problem with the PDR1/2. Leyland were aware of a weakness in the Daimler gearbox at that time, which caused them to refuse to supply PDR1/2s with O.680 engines in standard Atlantean fettle, but the standard O.600 should not have been a problem.
Manchester specified derated O.680s for durability rather than extra power, and had them rated at 130bhp. This was the same as the derated 6LXs in the Fleetlines, but I don’t have torque figures for either. As a passenger I did notice a tendency to slip in top gear, but that was no worse than on the Fleetlines.
I know exactly what Michael means about Manchester’s PDR1/2s not sounding “right”, but this seems to have been confined to Manchester, and was probably due to them having strangulated O.680s instead of standard O6.00s.

Peter Williamson

07/02/14 – 18:46

The Daimler gearbox of that era was not a very robust unit with excessive band wear evident resulting from poor driving standards (2nd gear restarts/full throttle gear changes). The Mk3 version with wider brake bands made a significant improvement about 1971 followed by a ‘self wrapping’ 2nd speed band by 1975 (we called these the Mk4 although this was not an official Daimler/Leyland classification). The Fleetline used a trailing link coupling between flywheel output and gearbox input throughout its life. This was intolerant of misalignment usually down to failing rear engine mountings, again these were substantially improved by the early 70s. I have never seen under the bonnet of a PDR1/2, does anyone know whether it used the Daimler coupling or a short propshaft between flywheel and gearbox? The Leyland 600/680 engine was shorter than a 6LX giving more space. All sorts of reasons why the PDR1/2 was so poor compared with the standard PDR1/1. (Memory suggests that the Leyland engine Fleetline used a short propshaft – mind you, they were never as good as the Gardner version)

Ian Wild

27/02/14 – 07:34

The reason that the PDR1/2 Atlantean model suffered problems was due to the adoption of an Albion Lowlander dropped centre axle
Daimler supplied the right angle drive gearbox, as the Leyland PDR1/1 design could not be used.
In Sheffield a fleet of 99 PDR1/2 chassis were ordered. Disaster occurred in 1965 when a late duty to Worksop by an East Lancs bodied PDR1/2 shed its rear axle gearing when the Albion designed unit broke up. All the Sheffield PDR1/2 buses were returned for repair and modification over many months.

Keith Beeden

27/02/14 – 10:55

As far as I’m aware, the weakness of the PDR1/2 was in leakage from the flywheel oil seal – this would be consistent with ‘pools of oil’ and ‘slipping in top gear’. The oil seal itself was presumably every bit as good as the ones fitted to other marques, so the implication is that there was something about the transmission which upset the apple cart. I do recall that with the PDR1/2s there was noticeable vibration at moderate to high revs in the indirect gears.

David Call

28/02/14 – 07:52

That’s interesting Keith. I hadn’t realised that the rear axle in the PDR1/2 was such a problem. No doubt Sheffield’s hills exacerbated the problem. Does anyone know if the weakness in the rear axle also affected Lowlanders.

Ian Wild

30/11/14 – 10:29

Topless Guy

In the picture of the Birmingham PD2 towing a bus at Walsall, could this be the bus behind. I had taken the photo at Wolverhampton Falling Road Depot in the late 1960s

Philip Savin

Wallasey Corporation – Leyland Titans – BHF 497/AHF 854 – 78/58

Wallasey Corporation - Leyland Titans - BHF 497/AHF 854 - 78/58

Wallasey Corporation  –  1952  – Leyland Titan PD2/12  – Weymann H30/26R                            

Wallasey Corporation – 1951 – Leyland Titan PD2/1 – Metro Cammell H30/26R

The 75 buses of the quaintly named Wallasey Corporation Motors were absorbed – along with those of the Corporations of Birkenhead and Liverpool – into the newly formed Merseyside Passenger Transport Executive on 1st December 1969.
On an enthusiasts’ visit the following August I photographed this pair of Leyland Titans, still wearing their original livery and fleet names. I think they make an interesting comparison.
On the left, 78 (BHF 497) is a PD2/12 with Weymann H30/26R body new in 1952. To the right, 58 (AHF 854) is a PD2/1 with Metro-Cammell H30/26R body new in 1951.
It is quite amazing to me that this pair – both bodied by companies associated through the MCW group – were built within a year or so of one another, the design of 58 being a throwback to the early 1930’s yet still being built in 1951. Admittedly that on 78 can possibly also partly trace its origins back to a Weymann design of around 1939, such as that used on Brighton Corporation’s famous FUF-registered Regents and others, but how much more modern it looks.

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer

28/02/14 – 07:55

What is equally amazing is that some eight years after 58 entered service, Wallasey had one of the first production Atlanteans – a massive jump in design in an always interesting fleet.

Phil Blinkhorn

28/02/14 – 07:57

What a super pair! I was taken on holiday to New Brighton in my early years and still remember the Wallasey fleet such as those pictured. Just a pity the PTE had removed the ornate ‘Wallasey Corporation Motors’ fleetname from the side. Only 75 buses but one of the first Operators to put an Atlantean in service (another contender being the even smaller fleet of James, Ammanford). I think it was in Meccano Magazine that a photo showed a temporary ‘gangplank’ being used at Seacombe ferry where the buses reversed up to the loading points thus enabling passengers to board fleet number 1 in safety.

Ian Wild

01/03/14 – 07:10

Massive route numbers, didn’t Birkenhead have large ones as well? Perhaps lots of short sighted passengers on the Wirral?

Ian Wild

01/03/14 – 13:39

West Bridgford did big route numbers too – as did Douglas IoM. You could tell from three stops away whether it was your bus approaching or not! Much better than scrolling digital displays that include bits of advertising and strange route descriptions instead of numbers.

Stephen Ford

08/10/14 – 06:58

I was employed on Wallasey buses and I was one of the first to drive an Atlantean bus in service, I think it was route 2 from Harrison Drive to Seacombe via Liscard

Trevor Hall

15/04/15 – 10:48

Growing up in Liverpool with its 1,200 corporation buses, the Wallasey fleet ‘over the water’ was always fascinatingly old fashioned in feel and looks, even featuring a clock on the platform giving the time of the next ferry. Always remember that when a ferry unloaded at Seacombe and the lined-up buses filled up, a Wallasey Corporation inspector would blow his whistle and every single bus would pull out, in convoy, bound for the posh Wallasey suburbs or New Brighton.

Mr Anon

02/09/15 – 07:09

I grew up in Wallasey in the fifties and remember the affection we had for our bus fleet. The shared routes such as 9, 10 and 11 with Birkenhead would always cause conflict with yellow and blue buses leapfrogging in rush hour to maximise custom. I recall the annual outings to Helsby when at least 10 Wallasey buses would take us urchins on a day out with a slap up tea and games, I would try to get an upstairs front seat and if possible on bus number 80 which was my adopted favourite.

Alan Johnstone

03/09/15 – 07:12

The interesting thing about Mr Anon’s description of the look and feel of Wallasey buses is that in 1958, of course, Wallasey Corporation Motors was the first operator in the country to put a new-fangled rear-engined double decker into service. But step aboard that bus, and its interior is just as “fascinatingly old-fashioned in feel and looks” as everything else was.

Peter Williamson

05/02/18 – 06:39

I grew up in Wallasey in the late 50’s, 60’s. We used to call the Atlanteans the ‘new buses’. Later in 1974 I trained as a bus driver with MPTE. We were called Instant Whips by the older drivers because we had never been conductors. I often drove some of the original Atlanteans which were still in service. Historic but not as nice to drive as the new ones which we called Jumbos. Later I drove for Crosville where they still had lots of back loaders and conductors. I then drove for Henry C Cox of New Brighton, one of the nicest men and best boss I ever had.

Dan Kelly

13/09/18 – 06:48

Dan, I grew up in Wallasey in the 60s and 70s, and remember well the period you mention. I was wondering though if you know what happened to the Cox’s Coaches business? We used them for trips to Blackpool and Lancaster, but the seem to have vanished without trace. I was asking around about then at the end of last year, but no one I spoke to could recall them.

J Lynch

26/02/19 – 07:18

My grandparents: Mr and Mrs Rupert Jones lived in Grosvenor Drive in the 1960s. Grandad drove the buses and my sister and I used to rollerskate all the way to Birkenhead along the prom to take him his sandwiches! We loved it when he drove the number 1 yellow double-decker bus, because we used to board that one to go to the “Guinea Gap” swimming baths. He used to bring home bus tickets, ticket machines and Wallasey Corporation Driver uniform caps and silver buttons for us to play with. Happy days

Marianne Baddeley

27/02/19 – 07:16

Has the Weymann been re-paneled below the lower deck windows?
All the ones with similar bodies that I’ve seen had an outward curve at the bottom above the under run guard rail

Ronnie Hoye

28/02/19 – 06:23

I think the Weymann flared skirt must have been an option. I have just checked Alan Oxley’s book on Midland General/Notts & Derby Traction. All the pictures of post-war Regents with Weymann body (of which they had quite a lot) were without the flare. Some of the photos are of early date, so unlikely to have been re-panelled. I assume the same was true of Mansfield District, in the same Balfour-Beatty Group.

Stephen Ford

28/02/19 – 06:24

Here’s another member of the batch with the same panels: www.sct61.org.uk/  Earlier Weymann bodies had had the outswept skirt panels, but by 1952 the practice was being phased out. Here’s one delivered further up the coast the same year: www.sct61.org.uk/

Peter Williamson

28/03/19 – 07:23

We too lived in that neck of the woods from the mid 60s onwards. The Wallasey bus colour was known as either “yellow” or “white” by various locals. Of the early Atlanteans, there were eventually 30, but I believe those were the last mainstream buses purchased until MPTE took over. They mainly held down the various routes out to Moreton, where you rarely saw one of the older vehicles, and some of the trunk runs between Seacombe and New Brighton. Everything else was the old half cabs.
The departure from Seacombe every 10-15 minutes, following each ferry arrival, was indeed something to watch. The bulk of the service routes started from there, with vehicles all lined up in echelon, when it looked like the last ferry passenger had come out (and not until) the inspector would blow a piercing whistle (audible all round the terminal), following which up to 10 Leyland engines would instantly roar into life together, and they were off, like a Le Mans start, close manoeuvring, gestures between crews, all pushing across Borough Road together and then fanning out to the different routes. There must have been one or two collisions there from time to time.
Regarding this longstanding Liverpool perception of “posh” Wallasey, goodness knows how that originated about a place which was principally dreary red brick terrace houses, and which had no logical centre.

Bill

29/03/19 – 06:19

You make it sound like Formula 1, Bill!

Chris Hebbron

04/03/20 – 06:39

In reply to J Lynch, what happened to Cox’s Coaches. Henry C Cox started his business in the early 1930’s. Along with Hardings it was one of the oldest coach firms on the Wirral. When I drove for him in the 1970’s, Mr Cox was probably in his own seventies but still driving coaches. As I said in my previous post he was a lovely man and a great boss. He had two sons Tim & David but neither were interested in the business. Mr Cox kept going until the early 1980’s when he retired. The garage in Cardigan Road was bought by a damp repairs company who later sold the land for building. All that remains today is Mr Cox’s house at the very end of the road on the left. He built this house along with the garage in the early 1970’s when he moved the business from Mason St to Cardigan Road. He retired to a bungalow in Pensby and died in 1989. A True Gent of the Road.

Dan Kelly

18/01/21 – 06:17

The Wallasey bus colour was known as Sea Green in Wallasey. The story goes that the first manager of the corporation buses was Mr Green and when they bought the first vehicles someone from the coachbuilders called to the council offices and said ‘What colour do you want the omnibuses painting in?’ The clerk didn’t know and replied ‘Oh see Green.’ And so they were painted Sea Green.

Bill

Southdown – Leyland Titan PD2 – MUF 456 – 756

MUF 456

Southdown Motor Services Ltd
1953
Leyland Titan PD2/12
Northern Counties H30/26RD

Taken in the summer of 1963 in the Old Steine area of Brighton this photo is of Southdown 756 one of a batch of ten Leyland PD2/12’s with Northern Counties H30/26RD bodies No’s 755-764 delivered in 1953. These always appeared wider and heavier than any of the other four body builders used by Southdown on their PD2/12 fleet No’s 701-812 the others being Leyland (my personal favourites) 701-754, Park Royal 765-776, Beadle (on Park Royal frames) 777-788 and East Lancs 789-812 Southdown’s last half cabs. Prior to these came No 700 the well known coach bodied PD2/12 with Northern Counties FCH28/16RD body which was trialled on London express services from Eastbourne somewhat unsuccessfully due to body roll and a sluggish performance. This was Southdown’s only 4 bay D/D body and also had small extra windows above the lower deck half drops and quarter lights in the roof.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Diesel Dave

19/05/14 – 09:19

What an odd mixture of styles. The panelling and the roof look like a throwback to the 1930s the foremost and rearmost nearside upper deck windows and the half drop windows have a touch of RT about them yet the front upper deck windows are totally NCME.

Phil Blinkhorn

19/05/14 – 15:39

The Southdown PD2s (701-812) were buses I grew up with in Portsmouth, being seen on a daily basis, although not so frequently used due to my school route being along Copnor Road. Southdown did not have a regular service along that road, so I relied on Portsmouth Corporation routes. The NCME members of that series were my “least favourites”, as they all seemed rather “dark” inside. Were the windows smaller? However, they must have been good buses, as Southdown had “discovered” NCME with some of it’s Guy utilities and early post war Arab IIIs, and followed later by 285 Queen Mary’s. When they were new, we didn’t know them as Queen Mary’s, though. I only became familiar with the term many years later (c.1979). Diesel Dave also refers to 700, the PD2/NCME coach. It’s final years were spent at Bognor, and I saw it several times parked in the yard at the back. It didn’t seem well used! Rather a shame when other operators like Ribble and EYMS made good use of a small fleet of double-deck coaches. It’s a puzzle that Southdown didn’t succeed when others could, and did.

Michael Hampton

19/05/14 – 17:59

I also grew up with the Southdown PD2/12’s on Route 22 (Brighton – Midhurst) travelling to school at Steyning, and vesting grandparents in Brighton. NCME bodied ones were my least favourite, and agree with Michael that they always appeared dark inside, probably due to the brown rexine panelling and varnished wood strip below the window line, and also the half glazed doors. Southdown specified half drop windows up to 1955. All 1956 deliveries of PD2’s and Arab IV’s had sliding vents. My favourites were the East Lancs versions. These had fully glazed sliding doors, and the platform areas were finished in green rather than the murky brown previously used.

Roy Nicholson

09/01/15 – 05:52

Like Michael Hampton, I also grew up in Portsmouth riding the PD2/12’s. A big thank you to Diesel Dave for the data on the bodywork. One thing that has been bugging me for years – which of the bodies had the sliding door?

Frank Bulbeck

Moor-Dale – Leyland Titan PD2 – KGU 60

Moor-Dale - Leyland Titan PD2 - KGU 60

Moor-Dale Coaches
1949
Leyland Titan PD2
Metro Cammell H30/26R

Moor-Dale coaches were based in Longbenton to the North East of Newcastle. I don’t know if it was a takeover or a merger, but they became Moor-Dale Curtis. The fleet was moved to the much larger Curtis depot in Dudley, a former mining village in Northumberland which about seven miles to the north of Newcastle, they later bought out Rochester and Marshall who were based in Great Whittington Northumberland, all vehicles were painted in Moor-Dale livery, and the Curtis and R&M names were dropped and the company became the More-Dale Group. They are now part of a group which among others includes – Hylton Castle Coaches of Sunderland, Classic Coaches of Annfield Plain, Moor-Dale and Primrose. For may years they did. and to the best of my knowledge still do provide the Newcastle United team coach, by coach I mean the vehicle the players ride in, not the person who shows them how to pretend they’ve been hurt. Apart from a couple of executive vehicle ‘usually Volvo’ the coach fleet was usually made of Plaxton bodied Bedford’s, I don’t know if they were bought or leased, but about a third of the fleet changed every year, and they only seemed to have them for about three years at a time. The livery was very a very patriotic red white and blue, but the layout seemed to change with every new intake of vehicles. Double deck works and school contract vehicles were a different matter. I can remember an ex Southdown Leyland Titan ‘Park Royal I think’ the name was changed, but it was never repainted, but generally they were painted red, with blue centre band and blue mudguards. The two seen here are KGU 60, an H30/26R Metro Cammell bodied ex London Transport RTL from 1949; RTL610, and SFC 425; a former City of Oxford H30/26R Weymann bodied AEC Regent III, from 1952 numbered 425, they also had at leas one Ribble Leyland White Lady. One thing I could never understand, more or less on the doorstep, they had the Corporation fleets on Newcastle, South Shields and Sunderland, they also had the NGT group and United, but all their D/D’s seemed to come from well outside the area.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye

12/06/14 – 08:37

Now owned by ARRIVA if part of the same group that owns the others.

Stephen Howarth

12/06/14 – 14:24

Curtis was purchased by Northumbria in the late 1980s along with Hunters of Seaton Delaval. For a time Curtis, Moor-Dale and Hunters buses were kept at the site at Dudley.
According to Wikipedia, Moor-Dale was sold back to its original directors at the time Northumbria was bought by British Bus (1994): British Bus eventually merged into Arriva. However the present registered office of Moor-Dale is the same as that of Arriva, so either the company name never in fact left the Northumbria – British Bus – Arriva consolidation chain or in the last 20 years was brought back in.

Paul Robson

12/06/14 – 14:58

I often used to travel to Newcastle from the Lakes in the 1970s to visit relatives and there were always plenty of Moor-Dale coaches heading in the opposite direction, all of them new as you mention Ronnie. There was also a steady stream of colourful coaches from other North-East operators during the season, especially Beeline (Goldcase Group) and T&WPTE (still branded as Armstrong-Galley) as well as Primrose (Bisset), H E Craiggs, and Priory. The only Moor-dale decker I recall was NFV 316, an ex Blackpool PD2/27, which I saw in Newcastle in 1977.

Mike Morton

13/06/14 – 11:34

Among other D/D’s bought by Moor-Dale that are relevant to this site were
DUF 154; 1950 Northern Counties Leyland TD4
EUF 176; Park Royal? Leyland ??? both Ex Southdown, and both possibly pre war rebodies. Neither were ever repainted in Moor-Dale livery.
LUC 355; another 1950 former LT MCW bodied RTL, this was RTL 980.
DCK 209; 1950 FCL27/22RD East Lancs bodied Leyland PD2/37. Former Ribble White Lady 1238, I think it was one of a pair.
WDC 76; 1959 H33/28R MCW Oron bodied Leyland PD2/37, new to Brighton Corporation.
They the above were all used as School and works contract vehicles, but after deregulation, and presumably after they had been bought out by Northumbria, Moor-Dale started stage carriage services, and vehiles were bought from many sources to run the services

Ronnie Hoye

Tyneside – Leyland Titan – GTY 163 – 39

Tyneside - Leyland Titan - GTY 163 - 39

Tyneside Omnibus Company
1954
Leyland Titan PD2/12
MCW H32/26R

GTY 169; 39, one that Chris Youhill will no doubt recognise, but not in this livery. It was one of nine H32/26R MCW Orion bodied Leyland PD2/12’s delivered to Tyneside in 1954, GTY 169/177 numbered 39/47. Shortly after they were delivered, the number plates were moved from the radiator to the front panel under the windscreen, so the photo must be 1954. They remained in service until 1966, and all of them had a second life.
39 – Samuel Ledgard
40 – Wells of Hatfield, Peverel
43/44 – Paton Brothers, Renfrew
41/2/5/6&7 remained with the NGT Group.

GTY 175

Four of them became Driver Training vehicles.

GTY 177

But 47 was turned over to the engineering department. It was cut down, and at first it became a mobile workshop/towing vehicle, it later became a ‘tree lopper’ and was still around in 1980.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye

23/06/14 – 11:17

Thx, Ronnie, for the interesting photos showing the story of their lives.
I’m intrigued about tree-lopping. This always seemed to be done by bus companies originally, witness the number of tree-loppers around in past times, but I don’t know who does it now, if anyone at all, by the looks of some deckers’ front domes! Was there originally any statutory requirement for bus companies to do this and what is the current situation?

Chris Hebbron

23/06/14 – 16:30

About twenty years ago Luton & District did it, under contract, for Buckinghamshire C C. I believe this is where tree lopping ended up but with cut backs (pun not intended) money dried up in local authorities and I suspect this is the reason for the dire condition of buses now – because no-one takes responsibility. I think it still lies with local authorities but an operator friend of mine said that anyone was entitled to cut back trees overhanging the public highway – even when they were growing on private property, often behind fence or boundary lines. He always carried a pair of strong cutters on his coach. [He operated new, expensive, coaches in a rural area.]

David Oldfield

24/06/14 – 07:42

David, I think you’re correct: where trees over-grow private or public land then the owner or any member of the public has the right to cut back over-hanging branches to the boundary . . . as long as they offer any severed wood back to land-owner on who’s land the tree stood.
According to James Freeman’s history of King Alfred Motor Services the company were, after a rather too enthusiastic/dramatic session, prohibited from lopping trees in Winchester by the local authority – after which the tree-lopping vehicle was lain up within the depot.
Within my locality of the old Aireborough UDC there is evidence of tree-lopping, but I’ve never seen anybody doing any . . . and I can’t believe First or Centrebus/Yorkshire Tiger would bother to keep the resources themselves.

Philip Rushworth

24/06/14 – 07:45

The current legislation concerning the obstruction of the public highway by trees may be found in the Highways Act 1980. The responsibilities lie with the Highway Authorities, but there may often be a delay in the carrying out of remedial action. Clearances should be 2.4m over a footpath and 5.3m over a roadway. Even trees covered by a preservation order are required to comply, but only the very minimum amount of pruning is acceptable in such cases. In the past, many, if not most of the larger operators kept their own tree cutting vehicles to minimise the expensive damage to roof domes, but, in the aggressively profit driven bus industry of modern times, this “avoidable cost” has long since been expunged from the P/L account. The big groups of today seem to have no pride in fleet presentation.

Roger Cox

24/06/14 – 13:49

And, Roger, there’s the ever-present “Safety Elf”, who says it isn’t safe for company staff to do the work, even without the operator’s legal advisers who worry about being prosecuted by the trees’ owners!

Pete Davies

26/06/14 – 14:10

Most modern double deckers now have tree guards on the nearside (or on both sides) to protect the front windows and bodywork from damage by trees.
There are now vastly more trees near roads (and railways) and little attempt seems to be made to keep them cut back.

Geoff Kerr

27/06/14 – 07:05

Geoff. This was the problem which Network Rail had with the big storms last Winter. Trees on embankments were falling like mad and trains were having to move slowly to avoid accidents causing chaos. In steam days, trees were cleared to avoid sparks setting light to them.
And grass verges seem to be getting overgrown now. The other day, on a bypass, foliage was brushing the side of my car and I was 12″ away from the kerb!

Chris Hebbron

27/06/14 – 13:32

There is another aspect of overhanging trees and bushes not being cut back by anyone (owners, local authorities, highway agency of bus companies). That is the fact that at road junctions, road signs and / or traffic lights are being hidden from view until the motorist is nearly on them. If driving on an unfamiliar road, and looking for directions, this can be particularly hazardous. Sometimes I wish I had access to a certain company’s Guy Arab tree-loppers, and take a crew along some of our main roads. (I refer to Southdown 460/461 – the only way this modern day comment can count as being relevant to this site!).

Michael Hampton

28/06/14 – 14:22

Yes, Michael, the Guy Arab tree loppers. I also recall they had a Queen Mary one and a Bristol VR the latter in yellow with blue trimmings (genuine Freudian slip, this!). Sad that Portsmouth Corporation never had need of one. Wonder what they would have converted if they had? I’d have wanted one of their TSM’s!

Chris Hebbron

28/06/14 – 14:59

Chris – Your dreams have come true. Portsmouth Corporation did have a TSM tree lopper. 80 RV 1143. The vehicle was stolen from Eastney depot, and driven through the Fareham Railway arch. I have vague recollections of it attending to the trees in Stubbington Avenue around 1950.

Pat Jennings

29/06/14 – 07:15

Now THAT really is news to me, Pat – wishful thinking come true! I wonder if any photos exist of it in that state. My post of one of CPPTD’s TSM’s, in the second photo, shows 80 in original condition.

Chris Hebbron

17/12/15 – 07:41

Reading the various comments about tree lopping brings to mind an incident I became involved in on the A591 alongside Thirlmere lake about 1975 a section of road very much in the news at present where 9 landslides occurred as a result of the very heavy rain. I was a haulage contractor at the time operating a Foden S80 cabbed 8 wheel bulk animal feed blower which had a high box body with catwalk down the middle. Early one morning travelling through the Lakes to a farm in the Ulverston area I was flagged down by a Ribble driver and an inspector parked hard against the tree covered mountainside. They asked if they could climb on top of my lorry and try and cut off a broken low hanging branch that had been striking double deckers on the 555 service. They had thought they could stand on the roof of the Marshall bodied Leopard they had and cut the branch off but found they could not scramble onto the smooth curved roof from the high roadside embankment. Elf n Safety at its best !! However I took the bushman saw they had and knowing where to tread on top of my load was soon able to reach the branch and quickly cut it off. Just another episode of driving lorries and buses through the lakes.

Gerald Walker

Birkenhead Corporation – Leyland Titan – FBG 910 – 10

FBG 910

Birkenhead Corporation
1958
Leyland Titan PD2/40
Massey H31/28R

Birkenhead 10 entered service in January 1958 with Birkenhead Corporation Transport. It has bodywork by Massey Brothers of Wigan which had been a major supplier of bus bodies to Birkenhead for various chassis since 1931. From 1957 to 1967 Birkenhead had almost totally standardised on the Leyland PD2s with Massey bodywork. Although there were inevitable changes in body design, there where essentially only two external appearances of body. The later design that had a more upright front profile is shown on the Wirral Transport Museum’s Birkenhead 152.
In 1969 10 passed to the Merseyside Passenger Transport Executive (MPTE) where it served until February 1974. Although out of public service, 10 then spent a further six years of service in the driver training school. In 1980 Birkenhead 10 became part of the 201 bus preservation society. It is seen at NWVRT open day in June 2014 at Kirkby.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ken Jones

01/09/14 – 07:30

Just a classic. Nothing more to say.

Phil Blinkhorn

01/09/14 – 18:50

I’ve always felt Massey’s bodies to be a bit of a mixed bag, in terms of some designs, but this one can’t be faulted. The Wirral was very colourful in this era, what with Birkenhead and Wallasey Corporations’ cheery liveries.

Chris Hebbron

02/09/14 – 06:46

The epitome of a British municipal bus. Straightforward chassis and body design coupled with a superb and tasteful livery. The fleetname and crest show a high degree of civic pride that existed with most municipals in those days. Also a clear and easily legible destination display with no need for the bus to be daubed in route branding graffiti like today. Sheer class.

Philip Halstead

16/04/15 – 06:46

Class indeed, and what a sight it used to be at the Woodside Ferry terminal to see dozens of these lined up, always looking smart, with the dull green Crosville buses terminating farther up the hill. I remember you could get off a bus (or a ferry) at Woodside and catch a train from Woodside Station to London Paddington. Now it’s all gone.

Mr Anon

07/10/19 – 07:25

Not all entirely gone as buses still go down to the Woodside ferry just nowhere near as many but the same goes for the river Mersey which once was busy with ships, boats, ferries up and down now a thing of the past but will once again be back but then even busier not in my lifetime though.
My father in law drove this bus, and when he sadly passed away this exact same bus led the funeral cars to the church.

Nikki

Blackburn Corporation – Leyland Titan – PCB 25 – 25

Blackburn Corporation - Leyland Titan - PCB 25 - 25

Blackburn Corporation – Blackburn Borough Transport
1962
Leyland Titan PD2A/24
East Lancs H35/28R

The local government reorganisation of 1974 resulted in the merger of the municipal fleets of Blackburn and Darwen. The initial livery was a compromise, using Darwen’s red and Blackburn’s green, although the shades of these colours were rather brighter than those previously used. The combined undertaking was titled “Blackburn Borough Transport”, the word “Corporation” ceased to be used at this time (at least for bus fleets) except in Douglas The main subject of this picture is 25 (PCB 25) a Leyland Titan PD2A/24 with East Lancs H35/28R bodywork, one of twelve delivered to Blackburn Corporation in 1962; a further twelve identical vehicles followed in 1964. These followed batches of Guy Arab IV’s, and I’m sure the drivers will have appreciated the semi-automatic gearboxes on these Titans. Other vehicles of both Blackburn and Ribble can be seen, including the rear of an Atlantean in the previous Blackburn livery. After a few years a version of the latter livery was applied to the whole fleet.

The photograph was taken at The Boulevard bus terminus, which was right outside Blackburn Railway Station. This terminus served the town well until recently, but at the time of writing this area is a building site, with temporary traffic lights causing delays to buses entering or leaving the town from the south. A new bus station is under construction near to the market hall, and a temporary bus station has been built nearby. Nowadays the former municipal services are operated by Transdev Lancashire United, which revives a once proud name, although not in it’s original operating area.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Don McKeown

11/09/14 – 077:00

Don, there was another exception – Barrow-in-Furness Corporation Transport. Buses proudly carried the fleet name ‘Barrow Corporation’ well into the 1980s. They retained their smart cream and dark blue livery and a coat of arms too. Nice picture with plenty of background interest which captures the era well.

Mike Morton

13/09/14 – 06:35

The semi-automatic PD2 (as opposed to PD3) was a pretty rare vehicle really. And I don’t recall the centrifugal clutches rattling on these PD2s the way they did on Ribble, Wigan, Preston etc PD3s when idling.

Michael Keeley

14/09/14 – 07:26

There were indeed more semi-automatic PD3s built for UK operators than semi-automatic PD2s, but not all that many more.
I can think of 391 PD2s, whereas the total for PD3s was, I think, about 580. The main customer for two-pedal PD2s was Glasgow Corporation Transport, which took 325. Others operators which spring to mind are Blackburn (24), Leeds (20), Huddersfield (6), Manchester (6), Swindon (5), King Alfred (2), Ramsbottom (1), Walsall (1), Demonstrator (1).
Taking Glasgow out of the equation gives 66 PD2s and about 440 PD3s, so, outside Glasgow, two-pedal PD2s were indeed relatively rare. There’s no way a centrifugal clutch couldn’t rattle, so if the Blackburn PD2A/24s didn’t rattle then there’s no way they could have been centrifugal clutch, they must have been fluid flywheel, which is what I would have said they were anyway.
Of the Ribble two-pedal PD3s, only 1706-1800 were centrifugal clutch, the final batch (1815-50) being fluid flywheel.
All two-pedal Preston PD3s were centrifugal clutch, but they only took the one batch (of seven), choosing manual transmissions for all subsequent PD3s.
I never seriously encountered the Wigan PD3s, sorry.

David Call

16/09/14 – 07:52

Never realised Glasgow had so many, their half-cabs were long gone by the first time I visited that city. Come to think of it, it was only the Ribble 1700s that rattled. The Wigans rattled with a vengeance as evidenced by the video of HEK 705 on Youtube. Some early Atlanteans had centrifugal clutches I believe, but had them quickly replaced by fluid flywheels, what did they sound like I wonder.

Michael Keeley

13/08/20 – 10:26

Brighton buses also proclaimed “Brighton Corporation” well into the eighties.

Eddie Leslie

Newport Corporation – Leyland Titan – PDW 484 – 178

PDW 484

Newport Corporation
1958
Leyland Titan PD2/40
Longwell Green H30/28R

I don’t recall seeing any example of Longwell Green bodywork on here, so here it is. This Leyland Titan PD2/40 was new to Newport as their number 178 in 1958. Seating arrangement is H30/28R. An unusual feature is the upward bow of the canopy line. This picture was taken at Bus & Coach Wales, in Merthyr Tydfil, 14/09/2014, She looks good for 56 years old!

Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson

22/09/14 – 07:15

The upward bow to the canopy gave a rather old fashioned look to a late 1950’s bus. Otherwise this design seems to have similarities to Burlingham bodies of the same era. The fairly heavily radiused windows being the major similarity. This is a totally different design to the Stockport PD2’s which were the only Longwell Green bodies I was familiar with. The Stockport bodies were more akin to a Park Royal style.

Philip Halstead

22/09/14 – 15:01

You notice one thing & others follow…Whence came those funny bobble indicator lights? You can’t see them when alongside. A lot of “standard” sets (behind cab & rear) were retrofitted, I know, and there was a brief time of jumbo-trafficators but were they compulsory & in orange by this date?
Deep top panel of windscreen- when did these become generally one-piece and why two piece for so long? Small front saloon window- heater? Windows seem proud……. Lovely looking restoration.

Joe

22/09/14 – 15:02

Philip, I beg to differ. The Stockport vehicles were very much based on the Burlingham design. See my article “Stockport Corporation Transport 1958-1969. The Stockport bodies had no relationship to the Park Royal design. You are thinking of the previous batch of PD2s which were Crossley bodies built to Park Royal drawings as Crossley were under the same ownership as Park Royal.

Phil Blinkhorn

22/09/14 – 15:02


Copyright tarboat – Flickr

Stockport’s Longwell Green bodies are thought to have been built using Burlingham frames and from the rear look very similar to the two batches of Burlingham bodies supplied to Manchester (TNA 471-579). There are other similarities too in the radii used on the number blinds etc. The windows look different partly because of Stockport’s preference for wind down windows and the associated drip rails.
However the Stockport buses that look really akin to the Park Royal style are the Crossley bodied PD2s delivered in 1958 which were built on Park Royal 4 bay frames.

Orla Nutting

23/02/15 – 07:25

I remember these buses being newly delivered. One bus, the first, ODW 298 had a straight front. The flashing indicators were fitted from new if memory serves me well.
This vehicle passed to a local scout group and was repurchased by N.C.T.

Brian

04/02/22 – 05:47

Opening windscreens on PSVs was mandatory until around 1957/8 in theory so the driver could open the windscreen for better vision in fog. Whilst coaches adopted large curve fixed windscreens almost immediately service buses continued with tradition until the early 60s (Routemasters until end of production except for the NGT & BEA ones).

Anthony Smith

Liverpool City Transport – Leyland Titan – VKB 711 – L255

Liverpool City Transport - Leyland Titan - VKB 711 - L255

Liverpool City Transport
1956
Leyland Titan PD2/20
Crossley H33/29R

New in November 1956, L255 was one of a batch of 65 Leyland Titan PD2/20 chassis that had been ordered back in 1955, partly to enable the 19 & 44 tram routes to be converted to bus operation. It was originally painted in the Dark green livery with two cream bands.
When new L255 was allocated to Carnegie Road garage, but its stay there was only short lived as it was transferred to Walton in March 1957. There it was used on routes such as 19/44/92/93 serving the new expanding housing estates of Kirkby, Southdene and Tower Hill as well as the Corporations own Kirkby Industrial Estate. where it lives today!
When Walton closed for rebuilding in October 1962, L255, along with the majority of Waltons allocation moved to the new Gillmoss garage . Following overhauls in 1966 and 1971 it returned to Gillmoss.
It then moved to Litherland garage in August 1973 and saw use on services 28,51,52,53,55,55A,56,57,57A,58,59 to Ford, Netherton and Sefton. L255’s stay at Litherland was a short one as it was transferred for the last time in April 1975 to Green Lane. There it was used mainly on peak hour extras and industrial workings until it was finally withdrawn from service in March 1976.
Purchased for preservation in May 1976 and joined the other vehicles in the growing Mersey and Calder Preservation group in 1977. As L255 was in basically good condition it was soon rubbed down and painted back into the early 1960’s livery of green with cream staircase panel and window surrounds.
In 1996 after more than 20 years in active preservation and with more than 25 years since a major overhaul, it was time for some major body restoration. After stripping every external panel off the bus, it was soon found that there was a fair amount of work involved.
Following a flurry of activity in early 2007, L255 was eventually completed finally passing the MOT 2 days before the Mersey Transport Trust’s annual running day in September 2007, proving a popular attraction during the day. During 2009 a rechromed drivers window surround was fitted and in 2010 side adverts were added much improving its appearance. It is seen at the 2014 Kirkby running day.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ken Jones

28/10/14 – 07:03

I always thought that the Liverpool bonnet assembly detracted from the overall look of these buses. The flush windscreen and unusual livery application didn’t really help either

Chris Hough

29/10/14 – 07:12

Totally agree Chris. Much better looking examples of what was a PRV design were operated in the North West by Oldham and Stockport.

Phil Blinkhorn

29/10/14 – 15:59

When compared to other tin fronts of the period, the front panel and the area around the windscreen, give it a sort of DIY in-house accident repair appearance, rather than one that was built that way in the first place.

Ronnie Hoye

30/10/14 – 07:16

There is a lot of confusion about Crossley bodies of this period. Despite employing the PRV rear emergency window, I don’t believe this was the PRV design (as supplied later to Stockport and Oldham), and neither does the Crossley book (Eyre Heaps & Townsin). Mind you, that book isn’t foolproof; identical bodies supplied to Darwen are coded as the PRV design, while those supplied to Sunderland are coded as a Liverpool design.
The flat front to the upper deck is something specifically requested by Liverpool and used on Crossley bodies elsewhere. The standard Midland Red assembly would not have allowed this, and in fact later Liverpool bodies with the Midland Red assembly had bow-fronted bodies by Duple and Alexander.

Peter Williamson

31/10/14 – 06:27

As the owner of the bus, I can confirm that the Crossley body is of Park Royal design, I have restored both L255 & Park Royal bodied Barrow 170 CEO 957, the only difference being the window frames. Liverpool using glass mounted from the inside with a window ledge inside as against the Standard Park Royal body on 170 with windows mounted from the outside with a ledge outside. The last true Crossley designed body supplied to Liverpool was L224, L225 to L244 also carried Crossley framework but the coachwork was completed by LCPT at Edge lane works.
I hope this clarifies it more.

Rob Wilson

03/11/14 – 06:34

Thanks for your clarification, Rob. It probably means I’ve been spouting rubbish on various forums for some time, thanks to believing what experts write in books. One thing that fooled me (not clear in this view but there are plenty of other photos around) was the small rectangular windows in the front bulkhead, which Crossley had used on their own-framed bodies. On other Park Royal-framed Crossley bodies the bulkhead is the standard Park Royal type with a deeply arched lower rail to the windows. Perhaps this is again due to the different glazing system used for Liverpool (and Darwen, Sunderland and Aberdeen).

Peter Williamson

03/11/14 – 10:19

A quick scan on SCT61 pages suggests that Liverpool specified that size of front bulkhead window on all their contemporary Leyland deckers be they Saunders-Roe, Duple, Alexander or Crossley bodied.
On Stockport’s Crossley bodied Leyland deckers with PRV frames the bulkhead window bottom rail does follow the line of the engine cover but it, and those on the next batch of Longwell Green bodies, is still a very narrow window (made to look even more so by the top opening vent) compared with that fitted to their later East Lancs bodied St Helens front PD2s.

Orla Nutting

03/11/14 – 16:28

Liverpool made a habit of taking framed chassis from the likes of Weymann and Crossley but then changing the profiles. There were some very odd Weymann/Liverpool bodies on Regent IIs with an upright profile which ruined the general style of the Weymann original – and I believe they also had non-Weymann upper deck tear emergency exits. Even the Met-Camm Orion Regent Vs were not standard Met-Camm. That accolade went to the the famous Nottingham PD2s famous because they were the first Nottingham PD2s.

David Oldfield

04/11/14 – 06:45

…..and of course there were the 1949 all Crossley DD42s that Sheffield acquired new as a cancelled Liverpool order. These were neither the popularly remembered Crossley outline, nor did they have the PRV framed body. These were identical to the Regent IIIs and the first Regent Vs which Liverpool took delivery of and kept hold of. Although L255 is obviously based on the PRV design, there are also elements of the earlier design around the front (especially upper deck).

David Oldfield

05/11/14 – 06:40

Hopefully a rather extensive restoration of Barrow 170 will be completed soon by the Barrow Transport group.
So I hope that when it ventures to our NWVRT Open day at Kirkby (plug 31/5/2015)we can get them parked together to record similarities.
Another Park Royal trait that L255 carries internally is the pressed out lighting mounts along the cove panels in the upper saloon ,just like the ones on 170 & Park Royal bodied Liverpool E1.
The Crossley Bodies AEC’s and the Liverpool PD2’s up to L224 had their lights at the edge of the ceiling . Was this a standard Crossley practice ?

Rob Wilson

11/11/14 – 18:20

I now have to eat some more of my words. Earlier I said that use of the standard Leyland (originally Midland Red) bonnet assembly would not have allowed Liverpool to have their much-loved flat-fronted upper deck. I got this idea from Alan Townsin’s Duple book, which says that the uncharacteristic bow fronts of the Duple bodies on L91-140 were dictated by the design of the Leyland tin-front.
However, I now find that Darwen’s pair of Crossley-bodied PD2/20s managed to incorporate both the Leyland tin front and the Liverpool-style flat-fronted upper deck perfectly well – see www.sct61.org.uk/dw15
I also think I have solved the conundrum of the bulkhead window. Other photos of L255 show it to have a much wider bulkhead window than the Crossley-framed bodies, and the reason for departing from the standard PRV window was almost certainly the rearward-facing seat behind the bulkhead, which I had forgotten about. I have reverted to my earlier belief that other Crossley bodies with the narrow window (Darwen, Sunderland, Aberdeen) were Crossley-framed.

Peter Williamson

04/06/16 – 07:07

JUV 127

I thought I had a photo of a Liverpool Crossley DD42 and have now found it. C642 taken at Pier Head on July 5, 1962, still in cream bands livery and by this time only appearing on school, university and short workings.

Geoff Pullin

08/01/21 – 07:33

I loved the batch of Leylands that replaced the trams.
When I became a bus spotter circa 1962, the fleet still had remnants of pre war buses when it was difficult to buy one.
When Leyland Atlanteans were used on my school route 61 to Aigburth, occasionally in the peak hours you would get a 1947/8 Leyland Titan PD2/1 (L425-428) with Leyland coachwork with moquette seats, very harsh with short kegs (trousers). They were almost posh for their time and its such a shame that none of them were saved.
I believe L316-318 were not painted as A40. Shame they were not saved as well.
I used to go to the Edge Lane depot and walk around the withdrawals, Daimlers, early AEC Regent IIIs (grim). Those lovely enamelled AEC badges on the radiators and bell pushes……
I was only 11.

Muckel Price