Tag: AEC

Rochdale Corporation – AEC Swift – MDK 735G – 35

Rochdale Corporation AEC Swift

Rochdale Corporation
1969
AEC Swift MP2R
Seddon B46F

My Thanks to Ian Beswick for contributing the above excellent shot of this Rochdale Corporation AEC Swift with its Seddon body who also supplied bus bodies under the name of Pennine.
The Swift was AECs move into the rear engined single decker market. It first appeared at the 1964 commercial motor show and there were two versions a low frame for bus work and a high frame for coach operations. Operators also had the choice of either the 16ft 6in wheelbase for a vehicle length of 33ft or 18ft 6in for a 36ft vehicle. The high frame version allowed for luggage to be stored in underfloor side lockers due to the fact that the rear of the vehicle housed the horizontal six cylinder diesel engine. Yet again there was a choice of two engines the AH505 ?? litre or the AH691 11·3 litre. London transport acquired several 36 ft 11·3 litre Swifts which they called Merlins (MB) for some reason best known to them, but the manoeuvrability was poor so the shorter version (SM) were acquired but due to the shorter length they had to have the AH508 8·2 litre engine which rendered them well under powered.

Photograph contributed by Ian Beswick

When AEC first announced its rear-engined single deckers, there were to be two models, the medium-weight Swift with the AH505 engine (33ft or 36ft), and the heavy-duty Merlin with the AH691 (36ft only). London Transport ordered their Merlins at that stage.
By the time the two models went into production, they had been harmonised to such a degree that AEC renamed them Swift 505 and Swift 691. But LT always persisted with the original names.

Peter Williamson

Can someone give technical information on the Swift Chassis, like its length, weight, width and other information?

Charlie

The Swift was the first joint production with Leyland after the 1962 “merger”.
The main chassis frame, and other components, were common to the Swift and the Panther. The engines and axles were unique to each respective model.
There was a 32’6″ (AH505) model (Leyland was the Panther Cub with 0.400 engine). There was a 36’0″ long (AH505 or AH691) model (Leyland was the 0.600 Panther).
All were 8’2½” wide. There was the most common bus version with a lower front frame and the high frame model intended for coach work. In the event, no AEC Swifts were built with high frames but there were a number of high frame Panthers, some with 0.680 engines.

David Oldfield

Does anybody by chance know the weight of the AEC SWIFT AH505 Chassis?

Charlie

13/02/12 – 07:18

I once worked with a former London Transport engineer, who told me how Merlins were constantly being reported for defective engine stops. Quite often the true explanation turned out to be that the awful engine had worn its cylinder bores oval, so the bus was actually burning its own sump oil which was leaking past the piston rings! No good cutting off the diesel if that isn’t what’s burning…!
And, I once attended a Traffic Commissioner’s hearing in Southampton where Bill Lewis, then General Manager, responded to a question about the Southampton Swifts by saying: “If only someone would make me an offer for them!”. Not one of AEC’s best efforts!

David Jones

21/04/12 – 11:38

I had a couple of holidays in South Australia in the mid 90s where I saw many ex Adelaide Swifts in various guises. Their were some in a yard at Port Adelaide being converted for further use. In Port Pirie the local bus company had about 6 in use. There was one on town service in Port Lincoln. One at Port Kenny as a caravan which had a Hino engine a popular conversion with mobile home conversions. A further mobile home in North Adelaide. Another in Woolaston near Gawler. In a Marina at Port Adelaide I found one in use as a support vehicle for a film company who had four more in stock for the same purpose all still with their AEC engines, one of which had just returned from filming a documentary in the out back doing many miles off road. I read a couple of years ago the some Swifts had been refurbished and sold to a mining company on an island in Indonesia for staff transport. All this info suggests that the poor reputation of the Swifts might be unjustified.

Ron Stringer

21/07/12 – 12:19

As an enthusiastic operator of AEC’s Swift. I find it difficult to imagine how a few operators apparently had so much trouble with them. From working for an independent who acquired nine of them second hand … and with more to put into service had he not passed away, to running four of my own, I found them excellent, reliable and economical work-horses. Any mechanical maladies were easily attended to as everything was practically laid out in typical AEC fashion. There are few more challenging bus operating areas than North Staffordshire with it’s mix of dense urban environment and steep hills. All ours were 505 powered which generally allowed 10mpg on service and any feeling of being underpowered was usually attributable to a stretched accelerator cable in my experience. Were I still operating today, I’d have no hesitation in having one around as a spare bus … indeed I share a preserved one. (ps. The 505 was generally regarded as being just under 8.2 litres swept volume and had power outputs up to about 160bhp)

Martyn Hearson

20/03/14 – 17:37

Happened on this site purely by accident. In no way consider myself a bus enthusiast. Rootes Classic cars are my scene.
But many of the photos on this site have stirred up some vivid childhood memories from growing up in Alkrington, Middleton on the 17 Manchester / Rochdale route.
Like – how immaculate the Rochdale buses on this route always were. Loved the blue/cream livery and the deep blue seats. AND on this route were Lady Conductors! Unheard of in Manchester. As a 10 yo I developed a hopeless crush on one particularly pretty chatty girl and it was a thrill when she came along to issue the ticket.
I’m pretty sure that this route 17 and the 24 to Rochdale via Broadway/Royton are two of very few to have retained their original route numbers to the present day since WW2 and maybe before. The 17 was certainly the tram route number way back when (not that I remember that far back!)

Paul Blackwell

21/03/14 – 17:58

Yes, the 17 has a very long history and as a bus service it has the longest possible history of using the same number in Manchester, as it dates from the introduction of route numbering in 1930 although at that point it was an express service from Bacup to Flixton. It took its current form in 1932.
Whilst there are several routes that have remained essentially the same for many years, the 17 has avoided being renumbered in all that time. The 24, by contrast, is a comparative youngster, as it dates from the acquisition of the Yelloway service from Manchester to Rochdale at that time.

David Beilby

22/03/14 – 08:20

Another route 17 (and 18) is that of Portsmouth Corporation (and successors’) tennis racquet-shaped route from Dockyard-Eastney-Dockyard. It lasted, unchanged, for about 82 years, until a major re-arrangement of services brought its demise last year.
Here is a trolleybus on the route- www.old-bus-photos.co.uk/

Chris Hebbron

05/12/15 – 06:53

I used to live in Rochdale & remember the 17 that ran to Manchester, both Manchester Corporation “Red” & Rochdale Corporation “Blue Bus”. The buses had a peculiar idle sound, where the engine would rev up then coast, never settling at a constant speed until driven off.
Can anyone tell me what this was? Was this a design feature or a worn engine? Also what make were they? I seem to recall “AEC” & “Leyland” on the driver’s steering wheel but I’m not sure if these were the type of buses in question. I’ve heard sound samples of Routemasters (the only type I’ve identified recently) but they seem to have a normal idle sound.
I live overseas now so can’t research this in person. Thanks in advance.

Mike

07/12/15 – 06:18

Mike, I think that the distinctive engine sound you heard probably relates to Leyland buses of the late 40s/50s. Leyland engines of the period often had pneumatic rather than mechanical governors fitted to their fuel injection pumps (usually supplied by CAV or Simms and both offering a choice of governor type). The fitting of a pneumatic governor gave rise to the characteristic ‘hunting’ at tickover, and other vehicles with this fitment and idling characteristic which spring to mind are the 4-cylinder Ford Thames Trader, and 4-cylinder underfloor-engined Albion Claymore lightweight trucks. The Claymore’s Albion EN250H engine was also fitted to the Albion Nimbus and Bristol SU psv chassis. Personally I found the ‘rise and fall’ tickover quite endearing, especially on Bradford City Transport’s Leyland Titan PD2s, which gave the impression of “contented mechanical purring” when idling.

Brendan Smith

07/12/15 – 17:12

I don’t know how these Pennine bodies fared on the AEC Swift chassis (or on the Lancashire streets) but we had two almost identical bodies on 33ft Fleetline chassis, also G registered, at Halifax which fell to pieces.

Ian Wild

08/12/15 – 05:50

Portsmouth had 12 Pennine single-deck bodies on double-deck Leyland PDR2/1 Atlantean chassis, delivered in 1971/72. This followed deliveries of 26 Leyland Panther Cubs and 12 AEC Swifts, with a mixture of Marshall and MCCW bodies. At that time I was only an occasional visitor to Portsmouth, but I remember the Panther Cubs and Swifts as sometimes seeming rather sluggish in pulling away, but the Atlantean saloons being strong performers. However, the bodies really shook, rattled and rolled! It is of interest, though, that after the MAP project in 1981, the Corporation withdrew all the remaining Panther Cubs, all 12 Swifts, and 14 newer Leyland Nationals (new 1976). These Seddon-bodied Atlanteans continued their shaking rattling movements for several more years. Their numbers dwindled slowly with the last going c.1986/87. So the Corporation must have been satisfied enough to persevere with these, in spite of any faults that there may have been.

Michael Hampton

08/12/15 – 13:53

I travelled on the single-deck Atlanteans a few times up until 1976, when I left Pompey. The bodies rattled and rolled after about two years service, even on the more sturdy double-deck chassis. They were certainly lively vehicles, but one wonders why they were ever purchased for the virtually flat terrain of Portsea Island, save for Fratton and Copnor Bridges, which crossed the railway lines and were hardly vertiginous!
This does raise the thought of who else bought single deck Atlanteans, I recall Great Yarmouth and Glasgow, if memory serves, not hilly places, either!

Chris Hebbron

09/12/15 – 06:18

The early rear underfloor engined single deckers suffered from structural problems, particularly the longer 36′ types, but this probably affected the shorter versions, such as those in Portsmouth, to some extent as well. The Panther Cub used the Leyland 400 engine, and was, I believe, generally regarded as underpowered, and not particularly satisfactory in other respects as well.
So it is perhaps not so surprising that Portsmouth looked for something different for the next batch, and single deck Atlanteans would have offered the additional benefit of standardisation with the double deck fleet. The 33′ Atlanteans had a short rear overhang, so the structural problems should have been less. When it came to the later clearing out of some of the single deckers, I would imagine that the fuel consumption counted against the Leyland Nationals – although the potential ease of selling the Nationals against the “oddball” single deck Atlanteans might also have been a factor.
I think that Glasgow’s single deck Atlantean was rebuilt from a fire-damaged double decker, and not purchased new as such. On the other hand, Merseyside PTE had two s/d Atlanteans, that had been ordered by Birkenhead, with Northern Counties bodies. In later years, a number of operators had old Atlantean chassis fitted with new single deck bodies, including the Southampton East Lancs bodied “Sprints”. As I understand it, their performance in this form did not live up to the name!

Nigel Frampton

18/12/20 – 07:05

Regarding the rear engined AEC swifts a friend of mine who was a Senior Foreman in the workshops at Mellor Street, told me that after they had been in service for a short while complaints from drivers that they lacked power started to be logged. The engineers at first could not find any problems when they were trying to determine the problem from the rear engine compartment, but then on road test they lacked power. Further investigation found the problem to be stretched accelerator cables. The engine was not getting full throttle opening. The cables were over 30 foot long and ran the full length of the bus from front to back!

David Newton

19/12/20 – 06:16

History repeats itself, but the lessons seem not always to be learned. The early Dennis Darts suffered from exactly the same cable stretch problem, and the cable adjustment provision was totally inadequate to take up the excessive slack.

Roger Cox

19/12/20 – 14:02

Seems as if the maxim about history repeating itself applies here as well. Cables are/were an expedient but also a two edged sword – as many pros as cons. DAF made excellent buses and coaches. ZF make excellent gearboxes, especially the old 6 speed fitted to many coaches of various manufacture. The Achilles heel in the DAF was the cable connection in the gear shift. A new and/or well set up cable connection was a delight to drive but, when the cables stretched, the coach became an absolute pig to drive. [As a part-time/occasional driver, I noticed this over a period of time with one of my favourite steeds – a 6 speed ZF DAF coach.]

David Oldfield

20/12/20 – 06:41

I can remember, when cables on our older cars stretched so far that the outer cable adjuster was no longer sufficient, we used to fit this sort of auxiliary adjuster. www.oldclassiccar.co.uk/cable-adjusters.htm

John Lomas

Southampton Corporation – AEC Swift – TCR 293H – 7

Southampton Corporation - AEC Swift - TCR 293H - 7


Copyright Pete Davies

Southampton Corporation
1969
AEC 2MP2R Swift
East Lancs B47D

Here are an off side front and a near side rear view of Southampton Corporation TCR 293H fleet number 7. This AEC 2MP2R Swift was built in 1969 with East Lancs B47D bodywork. She is seen in Pound Tree Road between duties. I captured her on film in April 1976. There is something odd about the name of this road, which might be resolved if the UK ever goes fully “European”. Does it refer to Kilogram or Euro? After all, there are people who think money grows on trees!

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

13/01/13 – 10:27

Please refer to the “Gallery” entry on the King Alfred Running Day for comparative views of the Strachan body on similar chassis.

Pete Davies

13/01/13 – 10:28

Not sure I like ‘peak’ at the front, but otherwise, it’s a nice design in a simple livery. I recall that Seddon bodywork had similar peaks. Sign of the time, I suppose.
I think it’s fair to say that East Lancs bodies were not common along or near the South Coast. They are not too familiar to me as a Southerner.
Maybe the road should be re-named Poundstretcher Road, in recognition of the country’s plight!

Chris Hebbron

13/01/13 – 15:07

No, Chris, EL bodies don’t seem to have had much of a following in the South. I think Eastbourne was the only other Municipal, plus Aldershot & District and Southdown. Southampton bought them because, as one Manager told me, they were “cheap and cheerful”!

Pete Davies

13/01/13 – 15:08

I have a picture of another Southampton Swift/Strachan, MTR 424F, which I hope to submit in a Southampton gallery at some time. As for the rarity of East Lancs bodywork “south of Watford”, you’re right, Chris. Aldershot & District and Eastbourne and Luton Corporations had them. To the east, Southend had some, and Lowestoft had a couple of PD2s in 1965. Otherwise, nothing, unless, of course, anyone else knows differently.

It occurs to me that Gideon Osborne would be looking to set up huge plantations of Pound Trees accessed by a thoroughfare called Recovery Road.

Roger Cox

13/01/13 – 17:19

Roger: just the 8 Reliances and 26 Lolines at Reading, of course. Not southern, but geographically south of Watford, there was also also Cardiff with a sizeable number; the Merthyr fleet doesn’t quite qualify as ‘south of Watford’!
The Pound of Pound Tree is surely the place to which illegally parked, or similarly recalcitrant, buses would be towed; in order to suitably screen any double-deckers from public view, it would have been surrounded by trees, the traditional corrugated iron fence being insufficiently tall.

Alan Murray-Rust

13/01/13 – 17:19

East Lancs bodies south of Watford must also include Southdown’s rebodied TD4 and TD5’s carried out between 1946 and 1950 of which there were a total of fifty nine plus of course their final batch of PD2/12’s Nos789-812 considered by many to be the best of the various body builders used on that chassis.
In later years East Lancs became much more popular in the region being bought by Brighton, Portsmouth, Southampton and Plymouth municipalities all outside of the sites timescale I know.

Diesel Dave

14/01/13 – 07:12

I must say, I like Alan’s theory of how the road got its name and Roger’s idea of a plantation of this sort of tree. It may be of interest that the bit of public open space to the nearside of the bus forms a gyratory layout, and is known – among bus crews at least – as WINO ISLAND. Guess why!
Thank you, Dave, for your thoughts on other South Coast operators of the EL (or Neepsend!) bodywork. Almost all of Southampton’s Atlanteans had the product and almost all are too new for these pages. I think the same applies to the Brightons and Portsmouths. The Southampton ones with other bodywork came from Plymouth and were well and truly clapped out when they arrived.
I look forward to Roger’s forthcoming “Southampton Gallery”!

Pete Davies

14/01/13 – 07:13

I can’t imagine how I came to forget the Southdown examples of East Lancs, Dave. I saw them many times when I popped down to Brighton from Croydon. Thanks for reminding me. I agree that the Welsh examples should be included in our survey, Alan. Cardiff is certainly south of Watford, and I doubt that the people of Merthyr would consider themselves to be “northerners” or even “midlanders”.

Roger Cox

14/01/13 – 15:34

Southdown also had 40 East Lancs bodied Leyland Royal Tiger PSU1/13 saloons. The first 10 had rear entrances and the rest had centre entrances. All were later converted to front entrance OMO.

Roy Nicholson

16/06/13 – 06:55

To stray from the bus theme but to stay with the ‘Old ‘ bit, a Pound was something every village had back to Norman times, before land was enclosed by greedy landowners. Animals were grazed around the village but strays were rounded up and put in the Pound, released when a fine was paid, The connection with life today is obvious.

Roger Ingle

29/06/14 – 17:27

I cannot add anything to the debate about the name of Pound Tree Road, except to point out that for most of its length the road is between two parks, so there are plenty of trees. If there’s any corrugated iron in the area, it’s on the bus shelters.
As far as East Lancs bodywork is concerned, it might have been cheap – certainly the Venture history of East Lancs reports that their tender for a batch of Mancunians was very competitive. However, it was nevertheless considered to be of good quality, being both substantially built and well finished. The most notable weakness was a tendency to change minor details on every batch of vehicles! I worked for the Transport Department during part of the 1980s, and the engineers were happy with the EL products. SCT did later acquire about a dozen Park Royal/Roe bodied Atlanteans from Plymouth, but as Pete Davies says above, they were past their best, but the interiors were also very utilitarian. Maybe that was down to the operator, but Park Royal seemed to have been on to a cost reduction ‘tick’ since the Leyland PD2s and AEC Regents of the very early 1960s.
I must confess that I quite liked the look of these four Swifts, as the EL single deck styling was subtly different to the contemporary BET design, which had several imitators. Of course. it wasn’t as good as ECW bodied RE, but an interesting contrast. I think the peak at the front, that Chris Hebbron refers to, is a result of the rather high set Swift chassis. A rather neater effect could be achieved on a Bristol RE chassis, with the accompanying benefit of a better mechanical setup!

Nigel Frampton

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


Copyright John Stringer

Lancashire United Transport
1969
AEC Swift MP2R
Alexander B43D

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer

19/05/13 – 11:31

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

Phil Blinkhorn

19/05/13 – 12:08

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

David Oldfield

20/05/13 – 07:33

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

Philip Rushworth

20/05/13 – 07:34

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

Dave Careless

20/05/13 – 09:08

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

Chris Hebbron

20/05/13 – 09:09

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

Pete Davies

20/05/13 – 11:36

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

David Oldfield

20/05/13 – 16:56

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

Dave Careless

20/05/13 – 16:58

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

Chris Hough

21/05/13 – 07:37

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

Pete Davies

21/05/13 – 07:38

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

Philip Halstead

21/05/13 – 12:40

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

Chris Hebbron

21/05/13 – 15:50

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

Michael Hampton

21/05/13 – 16:50

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

Chris Hebbron

22/05/13 – 07:27

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

Roger Cox

22/05/13 – 17:46

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

Michael Hampton

23/05/13 – 07:49

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

Berwyn Prys Jones

04/07/13 – 17:33

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

Chris Hough

14/07/13 – 14:25

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

Mike Norris

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

11/04/16 – 16:22

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

Mr Anon

12/04/16 – 06:05

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

Stephen Allcroft

13/04/16 – 13:38

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

Chris Youhill

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

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

Leeds City Transport
1967
AEC Swift MP2R
Roe B48D

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hough

05/09/13 – 14:30

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

Pete Davies

05/09/13 – 14:30

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

Chris Youhill

06/09/13 – 08:21

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

Chris Hough

06/09/13 – 08:22

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

David Call

10/09/13 – 06:33

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

Chris Youhill

10/09/13 – 16:30

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

David Oldfield

10/09/13 – 16:30

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

John Stringer

11/09/13 – 08:30

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

David Oldfield

11/09/13 – 16:30

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

Chris Hough

12/09/13 – 08:30

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

Chris Youhill

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

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

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

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ken Jones

13/04/14 – 18:30

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

Joe

14/04/14 – 07:43

Both sets of doors are open.

Roger Burdett

14/04/14 – 07:43

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

Phil Blinkhorn

14/04/14 – 08:44

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

Joe

14/04/14 – 08:44

Two pictures for your consideration

KOX 663F_2

one showing that the vehicle does have doors

KOX 663F_3

and one internal shot showing the standing area.

Ken Jones

14/04/14 – 18:19

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

Joe

14/04/14 – 18:19

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

David Oldfield

15/04/14 – 06:57

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

Ken Jones

15/04/14 – 06:57

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

Ian Wild

15/04/14 – 06:57

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

Joe

15/04/14 – 06:58

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

Peter Williamson

15/04/14 – 10:49

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

David Oldfield

15/04/14 – 10:51

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

KOX 663_4

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

Philip Lamb

15/04/14 – 18:11

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

Joe

16/04/14 – 06:49

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

Phil Blinkhorn

16/04/14 – 06:50

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

David Oldfield

16/04/14 – 11:09

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

Chris Youhill

16/04/14 – 18:24

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

Richard McAllister

16/04/14 – 18:25

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

Diesel Dave

16/04/14 – 19:02

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

Phil Blinkhorn

17/04/14 – 06:29

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

Peter Williamson

26/04/14 – 18:15

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

Robert Carson

27/04/14 – 08:13

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

Chris Hebbron

28/04/14 – 09:49

KOX 663_4

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

Tony Martin

24/12/15 – 12:11

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

Ray Trendy

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

01/01/16 – 16:51

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

Nigel Frampton

Southampton Corporation – AEC Swift – MTR 420F – 2

Southampton Corporation - AEC Swift - MTR420F - 2

Southampton Corporation
1968
AEC Swift MP2R
Strachans B47D

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by Diesel Dave

05/06/14 – 07:38

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

Pete Davies

05/06/14 – 07:39

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

Mike Morton

05/06/14 – 17:41

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

Neville Mercer

05/06/14 – 17:41

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

Chris Hebbron

06/06/14 – 07:39

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

Roger Cox

06/06/14 – 08:46

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

Pete Davies

07/06/14 – 08:17

Roof? No, sorry! I meant ceiling!

Pete Davies

07/06/14 – 08:17

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

Petras409

07/06/14 – 08:18

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

Chris Hebbron

07/06/14 – 10:00

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

Phil Blinkhorn

Lowestoft Corporation – AEC Swift – YRT 898H – 4

Lowestoft Corporation - AEC Swift - YRT 898H - 4

Lowestoft Corporation
1969
AEC Swift 2MP2R
ECW B45D

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

YRT 898H_2

The Municipal Crest and fleetname form this second view.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

29/12/16 – 07:05

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

Petras409

29/12/16 – 09:58

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

Roger Cox

30/12/16 – 07:03

YRT 896H_1
YRT 896H_2

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

Keith Newton

30/12/16 – 11:42

TGH 769F

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

John Lomas

30/12/16 – 14:44

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

John Lomas

30/12/16 – 14:45

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

Pete Davies

30/12/16 – 14:47

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

Alan Coulson

30/12/16 – 14:48

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

Keith Newton

25/11/17 – 14:51

YRT 896H

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

Geoff Pullin

24/01/19 – 07:03

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

Stephen Allcroft

25/01/19 – 06:49

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

Geoff Pullin

25/01/19 – 06:50

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

Nigel Frampton

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

MUB 193F

Leeds City Transport
1968
AEC Swift MP2R
MCW B48D

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

26/06/19 – 09:48

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

Chris Hough

28/10/20 – 05:36

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

Ken

01/11/20 – 06:07

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

Peter Williamson

Sheffield Corporation – AEC Swift – TWE 123F – 1023

Sheffield Corporation - AEC Swift - TWE 123F - 1023

Sheffield Corporation
1968
AEC Swift 2P2R
Park Royal B53F

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

29/06/20 – 06:21

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

David Oldfield

15/07/20 – 06:45

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

Philip Hanwell

17/07/20 – 07:33

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

David Oldfield

London General – AEC S-Type – XM 7345


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

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

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron

14/06/21 – 06:28

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

Peter Cook

15/06/21 – 06:34

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

Chris Hebbron

13/09/22 – 06:50

XM 7345

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

Roger Cox