Eastern Scottish 1949 AEC Regent III 9612E Duple L27/26R
This would of been a lovely shot apart from the glare on the front upper deck but then again it does not take anything away from the sleek lines of a Duple bodied bus. There is as usual the decoration associated with Duple more a coach than a bus builder on this vehicle which did spoil the looks sometimes. I started looking into the history of this operator but what a minefield Scottish Omnibuses Ltd was made up of three separate operators Eastern Scottish, Baxter’s Bus Service and Stark’s Motor Services. I think the history of the Scottish Bus Group of Alexander, Highland Omnibuses, MacBrayne, S.M.T. and Scottish Omnibuses is far to complicated for this posting more for an article if anybody is up to it.
I liked these Duple bodies with the mouldings. However, am I right in thinking that Duple only made lowbridge versions with these features? I can’t think of any highbridge examples. I’d love to be proved wrong.
Paul Haywood
As far as I know you’re dead right about there having been no highbridge Duples of this design on AEC chassis, more’s the pity. The Red and White group had a number of very nice examples of both lowbridge and highbridge design on Guy Arab III chassis though. In addition to the “home fleet” four highbridge models were delivered to the Venture, Basingstoke fleet in 1950. These were reallocated to the former Newbury and District fleet when only a few months old. Here they joined one highbridge and two lowbridge examples of a similar vintage, all of which survived in Thames Valley ownership until 1968. Newbury depot also had some utility highbridge Guys and, following a couple of low bridge incidents when highbridge vehicles had been allowed to accidentally strayed onto the Lambourn road it was decided to renumber them in a series H1-H16, the splendid Duple bodied examples being H10 (the original N&D example) and H13-6 (the former Venture vehicles). The two lowbridge vehicles, which had platform doors and heaters as well as what were effectively dual purpose seats from new and which had been chosen to compete with the Lambourn Valley railway on the Newbury – Lambourn routes, retained their original numbers, 170/1. I quite literally grew up with these buses and they were absolutely superb. The highbridge examples were a little less luxurious than the lowbridge but still of a very high spec. Despite being non standard in the Thames Valley Bristol/ECW fleet they were very well thought of by both drivers and engineering staff and were both well used and beautifully presented throughout their lives. The two lowbridge examples were still invariably on all day workings up to their withdrawal. Sadly, despite rumours to the contrary none survived to see further service or preservation as at the time of their withdrawal Gardner engines were worth a fortune and all seven of these are believed to have ended up powering junks in Hong Kong! The buses that they came from were all scrapped very quickly thereafter. A beautiful Red and White highbridge example lives on in preservation though.
Dave Wilder
19/09/13 – 18:08
This AEC Regent would have been new, or acquired, to SMT Scottish Motor Traction and is seen in a variant livery in the transition to Scottish Bus Group, which was created ca 1964 and reorganised the SMT companies into Western SMT, Central SMT and Eastern Scottish, and the Alexander’s empire into Midland, Fife and Northern. The Edinburgh SMT company had changed to Scottish Omnibuses, to differentiate itself from SMT Motors (the original parent), which continued as a Vauxhall dealership in Edinburgh Fountainbridge and Lothian Road. Scottish Omnibuses had acquired/merged with Stark’s Dunbar, Baxter’s Coatbridge and Lowland Omnibuses (all over the Borders). The first two retained their liveries and identities into the 70s.
David Scott
09/10/13 – 08:29
Somewhat belatedly, may I add some clarification to one or two of David’s remarks? This vehicle would have been new to Scottish Omnibuses: they had 20 in all, BB61-80, GSF644-GSF663. All the constituent companies of the Scottish Bus Group pre-date its formation. Western SMT and Central SMT both date from June 1932. Alexander’s dates from 1914 although the familiar ‘W Alexander & Sons’ name was only introduced in 1924; prior to that, the company had been known as Alexander’s Motor Services. The ‘split’, which created Midland, Fife and Northern took effect on 15 May 1961 although the empire had been split, operationally, into Southern, Fife and Northern Areas prior to that, not to mention David Lawson of Kirkintilloch which was purchased in 1936 but retained as an operating subsidiary until it was absorbed by the newly-created Midland company in 1961. The history of SMT and its various fleetnames is complex. SMT operated its first bus on 1 January 1906. The bus company split from SMT Sales & Servicing at the time of Nationalisation in 1949 but secured an agreement to retain the SMT fleetname for a limited period; the legal name became Scottish Omnibuses Ltd, though. Coaches started appearing with both SMT and Scottish Omnibuses fleetnames in 1959 although, in 1961, the SMT was dropped. In 1963 the fleetname ‘=Scottish=’ made its debut but the SMT diamond was resurrected after about a year, before the company finally settled on ‘Eastern Scottish’ in late 1964. Stark’s Motor Services of Dunbar was taken over on 1 January 1964. From about the mid-50s, however, buses on the Dunbar to Edinburgh service, which was co-ordinated with the SMT and United services over the same stretch of route, carried SMT diamond fleetnames and a reversed SMT livery. After takeover, the Stark’s livery was slightly revised and Stark’s fleetnames were carried by all vehicles operating from Dunbar and North Berwick depots; the Stark’s livery was retained for 15 years. (And, yes, this does mean that the SMT fleetname was carried by certain vehicles when they were owned by Stark’s whilst the Stark’s flletname was carried after they were owned by SMT!) Baxter’s Bus Service was acquired on 1 December 1962 and, initially, buses operating the former Baxter’s routes were painted in a revised version of the SMT light-green livery. The management in Edinburgh, however, not for the first time – or the last – out of touch with operations in the West of Scotland, seriously underestimated the loyalty of the people of Airdrie and Coatbridge towards their local operator; within a few months, after considerable disquiet and criticism in the local press, the management realised their error and Baxter’s blue livery and fleetnames started reappearing on Victoria depot’s buses. This arrangement remained until 1977. When David mentions “Lowland Omnibuses (all over the borders)” he may be mixing the formation of Lowland Scottish in 1985 with the purchase of Lowland Motorways of Shettleston on 13 January 1958. Lowland Motorways’ services to the East of Glasgow and their vehicles, hitherto painted in an attractive livery of two shades of green, were all taken over and their livery disappeared. Lowland Scottish, on the other hand, took over all of Eastern Scottish’s depots in the Borders and, additionally, the former Stark’s depots at Dunbar and North Berwick. Interestingly though, in view of events 25 years later, in May 1960, Stark’s were short of vehicles and hired one from SMT; knowing of Stark’s liking for Leylands, SMT sent them the ex-Lowland Motorways’ prototype Tiger Cub H106, LYS943, and this operated for Stark’s for a very short period.
Alan Hall
06/01/15 – 05:47
The 20 Duple bodied AEC Regent IIIs were the only Duple bodied AEC double deckers built for anybody. There were a large number of highbridge bodies built to this or a similar design, most notably the Red & White Guy Arab IIIs, but also the 60 bodies supplied to Edinburgh Corporation in 1952 (finished by Nudd Bros & Lockyer, part of the Duple group) on reconditioned ex London wartime Guy Arab II (5LW engines apart from one fitted with a 6LW). These had a partial full front body, but the remainder of the body was the same.
Harry Barker
06/01/15 – 09:39
The bodies on the ex LT Edinburgh Guy Arabs were not quite the same, Harry. Though based on similar frames, they were built to an extremely lightweight specification that offered a truly spartan level of interior finish. OBP does have a contribution on these buses.
Roger Cox
10/02/17 – 16:51
I well remember that when the ‘Scotties’ paid their annual exchange visits to YTC at Barnsley in the early sixties, they travelled in AEC coaches with pre selector gearboxes. I seem to remember taking one off the inspection pit as no one knew how these gearboxes worked, except the apprentices who were studying them at collage at the time, and we didn’t have them at the time and in fact never ran the type with the bus-bar ‘Clutch.’ Can anyone tell me about these Coaches which were very luxurious and had toilet facilities and each seat was provided with a travelling rug for the passenger.
ELJ Tracky Lad
17/02/17 – 06:45
Scottish Omnibuses had some AEC Regal IVs with Alexander bodies, dating from 1951/3, which match the description – 9821E/9822E chassis and C30Ft bodies. I must say I’m surprised if some of them retained that configuration into the 1960s though. A couple of photos, one from each batch: https://flic.kr/p/Gd9DoGhttps://flic.kr/p/nbGwHd
Peter Williamson
18/02/17 – 06:50
Sorry, I’ve just noticed that the Regal IV coach in the second photo I linked to above had been rebodied in 1957. BLOTW says it was Alexander again, although it doesn’t resemble any Alexander body I’ve ever seen.
Peter Williamson
11/07/17 – 06:50
The AEC by Alexanders registered KSC was damaged in an accident when it came off the A68 at Soutra Hill in snow on its way to London. Alexanders Falkirk fitted a 1955 style front when repairing it. This 1953 coach was one of a pair which had a pseudo Seagull coach line to its side appearance. Noticeable by its hybrid style, I saw this refurbished coach once or twice in Edinburgh.
Photograph taken by Robert Mack in 1956 copyright held by Don Akrigg
Hebble Motor Services 1950 AEC Regent III 9612E Roe L27/26R
This a shot of a Roe lowbridge bodied Regent III owned by Hebble there as been a shot of one of their Willowbrook lowbridge bodied Regents on site before – search for “Hebble” in the “Find” section of this site. This bus is on route 17 which was Bradford to Halifax via Queensbury. Bradford Corporation did not have any lowbridge vehicles nor did Halifax and both ran services to Queensbury so why did Hebble only have lowbridge vehicles at the time this shot was taken. Hebble acquired their first highbridge vehicles in 1957 and were three rear entrance Regent Vs, there must of been another route that needed the lowbridge vehicles. Hebble did have a Bradford to Bingley route via Wilsden which may have encountered a low bridge of the old railway line. If you know why Hebble had an all lowbridge fleet until 1957 please leave a comment. This vehicle was originally numbered 46 but was renumbered in 1957 and was withdrawn from service in 1962 only twelve years.
Hebble had no highbridge buses until the depot was modified, after this highbridge buses for some years (Regent V’s) had cream fronts to distinguish them from lowbridge buses. The depot roof being raised but not the full area and thus there were dangerous places for high buses to go. Oddly Todmorden had the same problem and both ended up as part of Halifax.
Christopher
I had a very soft spot for these fine vehicles in their lovely traditional maroon and brown original livery. They shared the Samuel Ledgard terminus in King Street Leeds by the GPO wooden parcels office, and appear in the background on many Ledgard pictures. They set off here for Burnley or Rochdale on services 15 and 28, and left at twenty past and ten to the hour. A particularly congested time was from 5.15pm to 5.30pm Mondays to Fridays when there were six departures in ten minutes:- two of the fine Hebble vehicles and, four good old Ledgard’s, 5.27pm to Rawdon, 5.28pm to Guiseley White Cross, 5.29pm to Ilkley and 5.30pm to Ilkley. All were heavily loaded and the bus industry was still healthy, although about to “catch a cold” in those happy days.
Chris Youhill
15/08/11 – 13:25
I rode on these often on the 17 Bradford-Halifax via Queensbury route. This route was interworked with the Halifax-Bradford via Shelf Route 7 in that the bus started on Route 17 Halifax-Queensbury-Bradford then Route 7 Bradford-Shelf-Halifax then 7 to Bradford via Shelf and finally 17 back to Halifax via Queensbury. It used to take two and a half hours full trip (I’ve done it). This arrangement survived the demise of Hebble when the routes become joint Bradford CT and Halifax routes 76/77 and then PTE routes 576 577. I remember round trips on Metro Halifax’s Ailsa and the Metropolitan demo. Hope this may be of interest.
Kev
15/08/11 – 21:49
Before using the 9.6 litre Regents on the 19 service, Bradford to Bingley, Hebble used their 1946 Regal II single decks, with Weymann bodies, new in 1946. 19 was on “home territory” and I do not recollect any lowbridge necessity on the route. What intrigues me is why Hebble reverted to 7.7 Regents with the CJX Willowbrook batch. I well remember some City of Oxford lowbridge utility Guys running, on loan, on the 19 route, but I cannot remember the year! Mind you, cannot remember much of note these days!
John Whitaker
26/08/11 – 07:11
Hebble’s fifteen Roe-bodied Regent III’s 26-37, and 44-46 were 0961 or 9612E models with 9.6 litre engines and preselector gearboxes. The four Willowbrook-bodied Regent III’s 67-70, were not 7.7 models, but type 9613A with 9.6 litre engines and D124 crash gearboxes. This previously long running and successful gearbox design proved troublesome when matched to the 9.6 unit and after a short time these four had them replaced with synchromesh boxes as used on the Regent V. Some late Regent III’s had this box fitted from new, being model 9613S, but these Hebble ones remained officially 9613A. They were wonderful buses apart from the poor visibility through the front upper deck windows. Their interiors had polished woodwork which gave a much more quality feel than the painted wood of the Roe-bodied ones. They sounded great too.
John Stringer
27/08/11 – 14:18
The 9613A was fitted to quite a few post 1950 Regent IIIs and was not up to the challenge. Most were retro-fitted with syncromesh boxes – as was the case with Sheffield’s 1952 Roe bodied batch of 9. They were meant to be delivered with syncro boxes but apparently AECs own syncro box had not been developed sufficiently so they were delivered, in the interim, with D124 boxes. [So the story goes.]
David Oldfield
01/07/12 – 09:48
This has been a very nostalgic visit. I was trying to find out what buses would take people from Bradford to Shipley Glen in 1959, and thought maybe it was the Hebble. Can anyone confirm that? My mother used to say, ‘Time, tide and Hebble wait for no man and once you’re on ’em, they can shek yer liver pin out.’ !
Lynda Finn
04/07/12 – 05:10
Lynda It wouldn’t have been Hebble to Shipley Glen, the nearest they would be would be Cottingley Bar on the Duckworth Lane to Bingley route – a good 2 miles away. Until the withdrawal of the trolleybuses the nearest you could get on the South side of the river would be Saltaire (either by Trolleybus or West Yorkshire Keighley bound buses – necessitating a walk down Victoria Road and across the river. When motorbuses were introduced Bradford City Transport (blue buses) introduced a service down Victoria Road to Salts Mill (23) which showed ‘Shipley Glen’ on the front but you still had to walk across the river – and then in all cases you had to either use the Shipley Glen Tramway if it was running or walk up the path to the Glen. On the North side of the river West Yorkshire buses to Baildon via Baildon Green (61) got you a tad nearer and they eventually introduced a service 60 in the early 60’s along the Coach Road virtually to the bottom of the tramway. I think this also showed (more accurately) ‘Shipley Glen’. By the way – and John Whitaker will confirm – your Mum was absolutely right with her saying !
Samuel Ledgard 1948 AEC Regent III East Lancs H33/26R
Here is a happy picture of yours truly enjoying my work immensely with Samuel Ledgard at Otley Depot. I am returning from the Estate on one of the local town services and have just crossed the River Wharfe bridge. Before I am reprimanded for “incorrect destination” I must explain that the display was officially shown in both directions as “Weston Estate” to avoid passenger confusion with the other town service which shared the river crossing – a little local quirk which suited everyone. GDK 401 was one of a batch of five (GDK 401 – 5) which came from Rochdale in February 1962 and had most handsome and functional East Lancashire bodywork. Notable features were the superior quality blue leather seats and the spacious very safe platform and “easy” staircase. The entire batch retained gold Rochdale fleet numbers (201 – 205) in both saloons – a nice little touch I thought. The vehicles were also the first that we had with air operated brakes and gearboxes. A nice little anecdote, and a true one, goes with 401. When the batch was acquired this vehicle alone was sent to Otley depot for complete and prompt overhaul for early entry into service with the others at Armley Head depot. However its appeal and charms were instantly apparent to all, and in a very uncharacteristic “Luddite” operation the normally highly efficient overhaul process was delayed by a myriad of “difficulties” for a very considerable time. When the bus was eventually ready for certification the powers that be at mighty Armley, normally unbending in any way, for some reason capitulated and lovely 401 remained with us at Otley till the end of the Company. The initial very basic plans for the West Yorkshire Road Car Co takeover contained the allocation of WYRCC numbers for the whole Ledgard fleet – this scheme as we know was completely revised before the day, and so our Rochdale friend never became “DAW 1” (Double, AEC engine, Wide) after all.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Youhill
Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.
Such a shame that Samuel Ledgard sold out. It would be interesting to see what vehicles they would be running today.
Terry Malloy
Yes, it is a shame, Terry – the buses look fantastic in full livery – but fifty years down the line, is it not possible that we would be looking at them in Barbie colours? Lots of mistakes made in the industry, but death and other things have always enforced change!
David Oldfield
Quote: (Double, AEC engine, Wide)
I assume that the Wide means that it had an 8′ wide body. It certainly appears to have one, in a surprisingly obvious way, just like LT’s RTW class.
Nice to see a Ledgard vehicle in colour; it’s my first time of seeing one of them in all its glory!
By the way what is an ‘easy’ staircase?
Chris Hebbron
I’m sure Chris Youhill will fill us in about the easy staircase. Is it like the Roe safety staircase and the Birmingham staircase – straight, or with 90% bends, with no “dangerous” curves during its length?
David Oldfield
Yes Chris, the “W” in the West Yorkshire fleet numbering system did indeed mean 8 feet wide – just as an interesting point, they had some vehicles with 8 feet wide bodies on 7’6″ chassis – as did a good few Bristol/ECW customers.
Chris and David, the word “easy” was just my own way of describing these vehicles – the stairs were of the 90 degree pattern and were wider than usual and were situated safely well away from the edge of a generous sized platform – somewhat difficult to explain, but splendidly designed.
Chris Youhill
A query for Chris: my hazy recollection of “Exors of Samuel Ledgard” buses- as it legally proclaimed- was that the were a dark navy blue- not this jaunty colour: 1. am I wrong? 2. does the camera lie? 3. is it anything to do with its former existence in Rochdale?
Joe
Well this is indeed an interesting point, and memory does play tricks as we all know. However I have to say that the answer lies somewhere between the shades of blue in the picture of GDK 401 and that in the link for RT MXX 148. The only fair comment I can make is that, as Peter says, the colour in the picture of GDK 401 is a bit light and bright due to the sun etc. Certainly though the shade shown in the view of the RT is far darker than the actual, and I can confidently say that the Otley picture is much nearer to being spot on than the Bradford one. The Rochdale livery is not relevant at all, as every acquired bus was thoroughly rubbed down, primed and undercoated to remove any trace whatsoever of previous ownership. The attached view of newly acquired BCK 427 from Ribble in the paintshop at Armley Head Depot is as good a sample as we could wish for – despite the different light aspects the lower saloon panels are exactly as the livery was. Hope this helps clear the mists of time for those interested.
Chris Youhill
…..and there is also the splendid RLH (forget which number) which was rallying last year in full Ledgard colours. Quite a bright blue – neither royal nor navy.
David Oldfield
The purpose of the photo may well have been to clarify SL’s livery, but this is a nice photo in itself and shows off this attractive vehicle’s bodylines very well, aided by the total lack of adverts. Good to see a rear’ish view for a change. It may be a trick of the light, but has the rear lower body panel been well punched by a very cross 10 year old?
Chris Hebbron
I see what you mean – the panel seems well and truly “waffled”, but I think it is in fact just a mirror image of activity nearby in the garage what lloks like the floor can be seen, and possibly a mechanic’s overall legs. It is a strange optical effect, but please do rest assured that the panel will have been perfect before painting.
Chris Youhill
Hi David – the magnificent vehicle to which you refer is RLH 32 – MXX 232. It is part of the heritage fleet of Time Bus Travel of St. Albans and the proprietors, the Pring Family, did the Samuel Ledgard Society an immeasurable and generous kindness by having the bus professionally and immaculately painted in Samuel Ledgard colours for our 40th Anniversary Re-enactment running day on Sunday 14th October 2007. I was humbled and highly honoured to conduct it almost all the time it ran on Samuel Ledgard routes giving free rides to delighted and nostalgic passengers – I wore my original Samuel Ledgard uniform and used my Otley Depot Setright ticket machine – SL 40.
Chris Youhill
Re Chris Youhill’s latest comment about RLH 32 under the heading of AEC Regent III GDK 401, here’s a photo of the bus in question on the day in question.
Peter Williamson
Thank you Peter W for that lovely view, which captures the atmosphere of that wonderful day perfectly. Judging by the load, the RLH is about to leave for Guiseley and the driver is Mr. Ewan Pring who handles the vehicle magnificently and sympathetically, as you would expect from the owner of such a cherished gem. While you took the photo I will have been on the platform, about to issue the authentic souvenir tickets to the passengers. I can’t begin to explain my feelings on that day which was fifty years exactly since I eagerly started work for the Company – a day on which the RLH will still, of course, have been hard at work in London !!
Chris Youhill
I’ve always been fascinated by the myriad variations on the theme of how to get passengers upstairs, so Chris Youhill’s reference to the East Lancs “easy staircase” tickled my curiosity. I imagine that, as on post-war ECW highbridge bodies until about 1957, the top step will have caused a 9″x9″ protrusion into the lower saloon, above the offside transverse seat. The loss of headroom would be no more than that entailed by a lowbridge side gangway: a very small price to pay for the virtue of having the bottom step 9″ farther in from the platform edge. Until the mid-1920s it seems that body designers tried to get the bottom step as NEAR as possible to the platform edge, presumably so that passengers could leap straight up top from the street, leaving the platform free for those timid souls who preferred to travel inside. I’ve never understood why this hazardous arrangement persisted so long with some makers. Lowbridge bodies needed only 7 steps (6 treads), yet Leyland and MCW, for example, never took advantage of that, preferring their top step to stop about 9″ back from the bulkhead or (Leyland) to give the top two steps 13.5″ treads instead of 9″. Was standardisation of parts between lowbridge and highbridge a factor? I love the Roe Safety Staircase: by intruding into the lower saloon you can bring the bottom step well inboard and therefore have a seat for three right at the back upstairs with no risk of bumping your head on the underside of that seat. Perfectly logical: you lose a seat downstairs and gain one on top. Much rarer was the pattern found on Burnley, Colne and Nelson deckers: the 9″x9″ box was moved 4″ forward and the step below it protruded downstairs just enough to fill the space above your shoulder but not enough to compromise headroom. With a bit of angling of the bottom few steps the stairs still touched ground far enough from the platform edge to allow a 3-seater at the back upstairs. Do any of these survive? I fancy I came across a similar arrangement on a bus in Yorkshire (Rotherham) but my wires may be crossed. Then there was the West Bridgford arrangement, and Alan Townsin’s mention of “semi-straight”and “side” staircases in his book on Park Royal, but I’d better not get carried away…
Ian Thompson
Why not get carried away, Ian. It’s fascinating. It’s what real enthusiasm is – not just “bus spotting”! I can bore for Britain over Roe – my favourite builder – but it is interesting to discover that they weren’t the only builder doing a variation on safety staircases.
David Oldfield
wow… talk about nostalgia. When going to Leeds I would often take “Sammy’s” route through Pudsey rather than the Leeds/Bradford joint route (72) through Stanningley Bottoms. I used the route the day after the closure. It just wasn’t the same with green municipal buses and a route number (78). Do you have any images of my favourite Ledgard Regents, 1949/50 U before they assumed their West Yorkshire identities, DGW 11-12? Charles
Hello Charles – fear not, there are literally dozens of pictures around showing your two favourite vehicles at all ages – by the way with respect they became DAW 5/6. DGW 11/12 were the two Daimlers XUG 141 and SDU 711.
Chris Youhill
Thanks for putting me right on the WY fleet numbers for 1949/50-U. I lost interest in these vehicles once they donned Tilling red but I still think Roe/AEC combos were vehicles made in heaven. I marked my 57th year as a bus enthusiast when I hit the big 67 recently. Over the last 40 years I have observed the British scene from Australia so I am pleased that a young(er) member of the fraternity can take time out to refresh the ageing grey cells
Charles
Ian, I can only echo David’s wise words and there is no harm at all in being “carried away” by mature detailed discussion on any public transport topic. I have to admit that you have completely “baffled me with science” about the upper reaches of many staircases and, in all honesty I cannot remember what happened “up aloft” on GDK 401 – 405. However I am pretty certain that the top flight ended exactly at the bulkhead and that you then made use of the space behind the rear offside seat to proceed into the upper saloon – this was definitely the norm with Leyland bodies and also with the Park Royal relaxed utilities on the ex London D class Daimlers. I think the particular success of the East Lancashire formula arose from the fact that each tread seemed very generous and safe in depth and in lateral dimensions, hence my term “easy.”
Chris Youhill
I am trying to match the blue and cream colours of the Ledgard busses for somebody. Does anybody know the exact colour code? I’ve crossed checked RAl and British standard colours of the day but unfortunately cannot get it exactly right.
Kevin Harvey
Rochdale withdrew AEC Regent III’s 201-205 out of sequence as the older Weymann bodied 7ft 6in Regent III’s 31-48 were kept for several more years. It was reported that the East Lancs 4 bay body design had inherent weakness and this could have been the reason. I remember riding on one of the batch shortly before they disappeared to Yorkshire and there was evidence of severe corrosion of the window pans inside the vehicle. East Lancs standardised on 5 bay designs afterwards and this reputedly solved any problems. Rochdale’s final five Regent III’s had 5 bay bodies by East Lancs and these had full service lives. One is preserved.
Philip Halstead
You are absolutely right about the window pans Philip and in fact Samuel Ledgard had them all replaced with newly manufactured ones – my picture at the top of this feature shows GDK 401 so fitted.
Chris Youhill
25/04/11 – 17:57
Blue colour paints – you have to bear in mind that until the advent of purely chemical paints, blue was particularly prone to change of colour in its life, becoming darker and acquiring a purple sheen – this may explain the different views of the colour tone. I’m sure an expert in paint could explain this far more accurately.
Anon
26/04/11 – 07:10
Further thoughts and hazy remembrance of silk screen printing… blue is a “translucent” colour and therefore the final colour may also depend on what is underneath. The darker the primer….
Joe
27/04/11 – 07:20
It’s not only dyed-in-the-wool enthusiasts that wax lyrical over Samuel Ledgard. On Easter Day I met a Leeds man who was down here visiting his family, and when I was introduced as a bus fanatic he immediately began to reminisce about his prewar schoolboy trips on Ledgard buses. Unfortunately there wasn’t time to go into detail, but then there never is…
Ian Thompson
04/10/11 – 14:18
Just had to thank Chris Youhill for his comments regarding the book, Beer and Blue Buses, of which I have managed to track down a signed copy. Thanks again Chris, I look forward to reading it.
Roger Broughton
12/10/17 – 07:01
Wasn’t sure where to put this comment, but the pic here is a classic (and that’s just Chris) The Yorkshire Evening Post (Leeds) has a little feature to tell us that its 50 years since Ledgards closed. It is thin on detail but does mention that Saml was a publican from a family of publicans whose business developed from a pub in Armley and the practice of charabancing your lorries at weekends. The rest, I suppose is history.
Joe
20/10/17 – 06:55
Lot of coverage in local papers about Ledgard’s 50th- closure that is- anniversary. Try this link which includes a photo gallery, and guess who is in the first picture? I also saw a First bus this week in a sort of Ledgard’s livery.
Joe
24/10/17 – 06:40
Joe – The first photo, with Chris Y in it, is not what it one might surmise. HLW 159 was never an SL bus, but was sold to Bradford and seems to be in their livery, although we’ve argued about photo colours before. Other clues are that the front blind display seems to be original (SL reduced them to one smaller one) and that Bradford were the only successor who, bizarrely, went to the trouble of removing the plate on the bonnet side which originally surrounded the RT fleet number, which, in this case, was RT172. This range of buses were a bargain, for most of them were overhauled only around 12 months before disposal by LT. More silly money-wasting nonsense from the London giant!
Chris Hebbron
25/10/17 – 07:26
HLW 159 is ex Bradford and was the only one of 25 to retain its roof box throughout its time at Bradford. The other roof box-bodied buses and most of the non-roof box-bodied buses had eventually, the normal Bradford indicators fitted. A picture of 410 is on //www.sct61.org.uk/bf410c
Stuart Emmett
25/10/17 – 07:30
Chris H- quite right. How the bus and Chris Y came to be cosied together, only he can tell us. I am caught posting Fake News or Noos as the man himself says. The slip in the window doesn’t say Saml Ledgard but On Hire to… Blue can be of its nature a variable colour as we have discussed, but this is indeed Bradford- the sign written number plate? Does it live in the transport museum?
Joe
28/10/17 – 16:54
I have read the very interesting contribution that Stuart Emmett has made in ‘Buses Yearbook 2018’ telling the story of the Bradford RT buses. Credit due to him. I was unaware that some were painted in a ‘quick fix’ Bradford livery featuring less cream relief.
David Slater
27/07/19 – 09:45
Here is a 1965 shot of fellow ex Rochdale Regent GDK 405 leaving in the company of a Hebble Reliance amid the wanton destruction of historic Bradford to facilitate the encroachment of soulless architectural excrescences.
Roger Cox
29/07/19 – 06:37
Regarding this latest shot added I think you will find that the “Hebble Reliance” is actually a Ribble Leopard on service J1.
John Kaye
29/07/19 – 06:38
Roger, I may be wrong but the “Hebble Reliance” looks to be Ribble Leopard.
John Blackburn
29/07/19 – 06:39
A great action shot of two most handsome vehicles Roger, as they no doubt vie for pole position on their way to Chester Street Bus Station. I totally agree with you regarding the wanton destruction of historic Bradford. Many wonderful gems have been lost over the years and even the lovely view of Forster Square with its Victorian Post Office and Cathedral backdrop can no longer be seen from the bottom of Cheapside, as the new all-encompassing Broadway shopping complex completely blocks it. Now sorry to nitpick slightly Roger, but that Hebble Reliance looks suspiciously like a dual-purpose Ribble Leopard to me…
Brendan Smith
30/07/19 – 07:36
Thank you for the corrections, gentlemen. I should have looked more carefully at the Hebble vehicle. You can’t get away with sloppy work on OBP.
Roger Cox
Further to my previous abject apology, a very close study of the original slide reveals that the vehicle behind the Ledgard Regent is, indeed, Ribble Leyland Leopard PSU3/4R, Marshall DP49F No.831, CRN 831D.
Photographer unknown – if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.
Potteries Motor Traction 1952 AEC Regent III 9613A Northern Counties H32/26R
This is a rather nice looking Northern Counties bodied Regent III the front of the upper deck looks a bit Massey-ish but the flared skirt just adds that little extra touch. PMT had a very varied fleet one reason for this was that when they took over a rival operator they absorbed their vehicles into their own fleet. In 1951 PMT took over five companies and 150 vehicles I do not think that REH 500 fleet number H500 was one of them. REH 500 was a Daimler CLG5 I have not come across many of those in my researching, mind you, they only had the one, the L by the way stood for lightweight. With regards Daimler and PMT they were the largest operator of the Roadliner having almost seventy of them, but that is another sad story which should really be told with a photo of a PMT Roadliner above it, unfortunately I do not have one.
A full list of Regent III and Daimler codes can be seen here.
For Daimler CLG5 see my comment under the heading of Manchester Daimler NNB 231. PMT’s REH 500 was one of the two prototypes. It also carried the prototype MCW Orion body and appeared at the 1952 Commercial Motor Show.
Peter Williamson
I also seem to recollect that PMT had the first 30′ Orion on a PD3 – which was unique in having six short bays (of same size as on 27′ models) rather than the standard five longer bays.
David Oldfield
These were a splendid vehicle they gave a nice comfortable ride and were quite quick I have driven this vehicle and also been a conductor on this vehicle.
Michael Crofts
This vehicle was one of a batch of twelve, ordered in 1951 jointly by two independents, Stoke Motors and Thomas Tilstone with a view to a merger of the two businesses. It is written that this prospect alarmed PMT so much that they made a more than generous offer to the proprietors, hence a batch of Regents delivered to a fleet not known hitherto for AEC purchases, although they became common later with Reliances.
Chris Barker
Also worthy of note the AEC Regents above had the air cleaner from the engine attached by pipe work to the upper saloon which is why the front window pillar is so thick and this kept the air in the saloon clear of cigarette smoke, the ceiling looked like a crib board.
York Pullman Bus Company Ltd 1954 AEC Regent III 6812A Roe H33/25RD
The last in my collection of York Pullman vehicles, that’s worth showing that is, shot into sun again, apart from having my finger in front of the lens I couldn’t have got it more wrong. Anyway this shot does show off York Pullmans distinctive livery, there was a darker yellow band below the windows unfortunately the upper band does not show very well in this shot. York Pullman took delivery of three of these Regent IIIs in 1954 JDN 667-9 fleet numbers 63-5 fortunately number 64 was restored by Tony Peart to a very high standard and on his death passed to the Lincolnshire Vintage Vehicle Society.
Chassis, body, operator – almost perfection. [Well you know I prefer heavy weight AECs – or heavy anything, come to that!] …..and if my bad photos turned out like this one I’d be very happy.
David Oldfield
A very handsome vehicle in a very handsome livery, and the shadow cast by the sun shows the waist rail up a treat. For anyone interested, there is a video clip on ‘you tube’ aboard 64 (JDN 668), touring around Lincoln. Whilst watching and listening to this, I could not help thinking that the gearbox sounds were very similar to those of pre-war AECs. Was the gearbox of prewar design by any chance, or a modified version perhaps?
Brendan Smith
I suspect the aural beauty of all manual AEC boxes lay in their pre-war origins.
David Oldfield
I would also like to associate myself with the affection expressed for the music of the AEC manual gearbox. My early recollections are of Midland General specimens (including some pre-war front entrance Regents), various Trent examples, and later Grimsby’s ex-London Transport STLs. Just a few weeks ago I had the enjoyment of the same sounds on a preserved Regal/Strachans during the Kingsbridge 7ft 6in running day – all the way from Kingsbridge to Totnes and back – a hilly run with plenty of second and even first gear work.
Stephen Ford
Yet another vote here for the glorious sounds of the AEC manual gearboxes. The much travelled and totally rebuilt example that we had at Samuel Ledgard’s (FJW 938) was a fine example of the original sounds with further fascination from a good deal of wear – originally a Birmingham Corporation Regent 1 it arrived with us as a “Regal” coach with Burlingham bodywork (the rebuilding by Don Everall of Wolverhampton). It was a joy to work on but its raucous subtleties (if that’s not a contradiction in terms) didn’t filter through to the passengers – their loss of course !! When the new Regent Vs arrived further aural delights were to be enjoyed. These fine vehicles had a rather higher pitched and “purer” sound which disguised the already civilised and quiet 9.6 litre engines somewhat and gave a distinct “petrol” impression – those senior ones among us have experienced some glorious times which are not to be had on service work today.
Chris Youhill
Oh Chris. Don’t get me started again about STD Regents on the hills of Sheffield and Derbyshire!
David Oldfield
The place to stand, if I recall hazy memories, was the middle of Shude Hill in Sheffield as the many buses climbed towards High Street. The AEC’s, especially the “big bore” Regent V’s would blast hot exhaust across the central island, but the III’s would sometimes seem to have what we boy racers would call valve bounce. As for the tin-front Titans- was it more a sort of strangled wheeze? That may be inaccurate, but I do remember one Regent going up at full chat and a man saying to a woman next to me “that’ll singe tha nylons luv”!
Quite awhile ago on the ‘Q&As’ page there was a question titled “Ex Rhondda Regents” which questioned the number of AEC Regents that joined the fleet of Smiths Luxury Coaches from the Rhondda. The question was answered but as usual the thread took on a different direction as to whether they had an AEC or Crossley gearbox, this resulted in the contribution by David Beilby of the above vehicle.
David also provided the following copy, NTG 137 was formerly Rhondda 284 and is seen here in April 1968. The hidden connection to the “ex Rhondda Regents” question is that it was working the somewhat ill-fated Crossley Omnibus Society Grand Southern tour over the Easter Weekend. Ill-fated as the Society’s ex-Oldham Crossley 368, which was due to work the first leg from Manchester to Reading, had a differential failure at Stone in Staffordshire (the upside of that is that it was fitted with a reconditioned differential afterwards by Oldham Corporation). I wasn’t on the tour but Stan Fitton, the Secretary of the Society and tour organiser, was and this photo is one of his taken on this fascinating tour which involved visits to the Bournemouth and Reading trolleybus systems and Provincial (Gosport and Fareham) NTG 137 provided the transport for most of the tour. If anyone can tell me where this photograph was taken I would be very grateful as I’ve no idea. The fairground ride in the background may provide a clue and I think it’s safe to assume the bus didn’t reach this location through the arched bridge behind. Unfortunately in the strip of negatives containing the above shot the previous photo is of Oldham 368 at Manchester Victoria and the one after is in Weymouth. So it’s somewhere between Manchester and Weymouth!
Well that narrows it down a bit David.
The “Ex Rhondda Regents” question can be read here.
Photograph and part copy contributed by David Beilby
05/02/11 – 09:30
I can shed no light on the mystery location, but NTG 137 brings back memories. My original question was poorly worded: I probably gave the impression that both the ex-South Wales Regent Vs and the ex-Rhondda Regent IIIs were spongy to drive. The Vs WERE, but the IIIs were nice and crisp. I’m also grateful for the clarifications about Crossley’s role in AEC gearbox design and production.
Ian Thompson
26/03/11 – 07:30
I started at Smiths in 1968 aged 15 as an apprentice coachbuilder and left in 1978. I have many happy memories of my time there in particular the many characters that worked there. Alf Smith the Guvnor as we had to call him was a true gent, he lent me 20 quid from his wallet to buy a Lambretta which I had to pay back at 10 bob a week. I would love to hear from anybody else that worked there.
Barry Armstrong
28/03/11 – 10:30
Barry, I left Smiths in 68, so we may or may not have overlapped, but I’m equally keen to meet other ex-Smiths folk. You’re right about the Guvnor: until you got to know him he seemed a bit remote in his smart clothes, sweeping into the yard in his Jaguar, but he was really a very kind, decent man. A pal of mine is scanning hundreds of photos he took in the 50s and 60s, including many of Smiths Coaches. What we haven’t got are pictures of the characters, in all their variety!
Ian Thompson
21/07/12 – 17:11
I was on that ‘ill-fated’ tour but it was a long time ago and the old memory ain’t what it was. As I recall, after we broke down at Stone we had a long wait until a very comfortable coach arrived from Reading. This got us to Reading in the wee small hours and we changed onto the Regent III. All I can remember is that it was damned cold and I couldn’t sleep – unlike some! I don’t think we stopped again until we got to Weymouth, where we stopped for brekky. After that the stops (as I recall) were Gosport and Fareham, Portsmouth Corporation and Bournemouth, where we had a somewhat shortened trolleybus ride to that originally planned. Then it was back to Reading, where Stan Fitton canvassed b&b places, starting off with us youngsters, and had the job of convincing sundry landladies were were not Aldermaston Marchers. I think some of the oldsters had to kip on benches in Reading pubs, but again, memory fades. So I guess the answer is likely to be Weymouth or Bournemouth, but I honestly don’t know.
Brian Wainwright
08/06/14 – 07:29
The location is the old Westham Coach Park in Weymouth, as confirmed by the ‘Wild Mouse’ in the background, and by my wife, who grew up just along from the coach park in Abbotsbury Road, and as a girl used to cut through it.
Sheffield Corporation 1955 AEC Regent III 9613S Roe H33/25R
Sheffield bought 86 AEC Regent III in 1955/6 incorporating the new look front more usually associated with the Regent V model. The first to arrive were a batch of 32 for the B fleet numbered 1251 – 1282 with handsome Roe bodies. 1265 is shown outside the Roe premises at Crossgates, Leeds prior to delivery. I wonder if this was the first of the batch to be completed hence the official photograph? I always felt that these were a bit heavy looking with the blue radiator surround, I believe they were referred to as ‘bluebottles’. The total batch for the B fleet numbered 41 buses but what were to have been Roe bodied 1283 – 1291 were delivered to the A fleet as 736 – 744 and an equivalent number of the original A fleet order (bodied by Weymann) were fitted with lowbridge bodywork and took the numbers 1283 – 1291 in the B fleet. These were used to double deck the Dinnington services 6 and 19 which operated under a restricted height bridge at South Anston. Roe were quite capable of building lowbridge bodies (see other Roe product photos on this site) and I wonder why Roe didn’t simply supply the last nine as lowbridge vehicles? No doubt there was a reason for it at the time. Although this particular bus was withdrawn in 1969, 1251 and 1254 lasted until 1973 – at 18 years old, a fair age for what was by then a low capacity obsolete (open rear platform) design. All ended up with various Barnsley area scrapmen. A few points to note in the photograph: the difference in shading between the 12 and 65 of the front and side fleet numbers and the legal ownership by the British Transport Commission, also the missing fog lamp and the semaphore trafficator arm in front of the nearside front window.
I would like to help with the Sheffield J.O.C query regarding the 1955 intake of AEC Regent III buses. At the time of the order, SJOC required 41 chassis with 9.6 litre engines and synchromesh gearboxes. An important requirement was for the “New Look” bonnet structure. At the time, the Mark V model featured a revised bonnet design, but only with the 7.75 litre engine. To meet the Sheffield request, AEC agreed to supply 41 Regent III chassis, to incorporate the “New Look” structure. C.H.Roe were to supply 41 bodies to H33/25R layout, to a height of 14ft 2 1/2ins. The modified design featured a lower deck framed in teak and upper deck in light alloy. A problem arose when SJOC wished to increase fares on the category B services.The Yorkshire Transport Authority refused the application and the reason was that there were too many single deck services, some needing duplicate buses. The YTA suggested that more efficiency was needed, suggesting that some low height double deckers should be acquired. To this end Sheffield asked C.H Roe to modify nine of the outstanding contract to be built to low height 55 seaters. Although nine of the 41 chassis had not been delivered ALL the bodies had been built, some placed on trestles to await the chassis delivery. The result was that Weymann were asked to change an order for 45 similar Regent chassis, from H32/26R layout to L27/28R on 9 of the chassis. In consequence, Roe lettered the 9 completed buses to category A finish and the Weymann 9 lettered for the B fleet.
Keith Beeden
30/04/11 – 15:25
Thank you for the explanation Keith. Clear and concise as always.
John Darwent
30/04/11 – 20:50
Thank you Keith for that really interesting explanation about the highbridge/lowbridge body supply swap.
Ian Wild
02/05/11 – 12:59
Why haven’t you heard me pontificating about this picture? I’ve been away! Keith certainly answers the question of why they weren’t Regent Vs. Subsequent D3RV Regent Vs were almost identical to these Regent IIIs. It’s a shame that Roe didn’t build the low heights. The Weymann Regent IIIs and Vs were the nadir of the coach-builders art (stripped back and single skinned) and 1283 – 1291 were by far the ugliest non Utility buses ever operated by STD. Roe would have made a far better – or at least far more attractive – job of it.
David Oldfield
03/05/11 – 08:17
Wonderful looking vehicles these, especially in this Roe version of the Sheffield livery, and even after first repaint, when they acquired a grey roof. Perhaps the nicest sounding buses ever in the fleet, as well. Although not visible in this view, I feel pretty certain it was this batch at least that had a white stick with a small red ball on top, attached to the top of the nearside wing, to aid drivers when pulling into the kerb, considering these ‘new look’ fronts did not afford the same view from the cab that the traditional narrower bonnet and ‘stand alone’ mudguard arrangement did. Could these have been fitted at Queens Road after suggestions from driving staff, perhaps?
Dave Careless
03/05/11 – 16:42
Dave, you are absolutely correct about the markers. I suspect it was a Queens Road affair because I seem to recall a few, but not all, of the Weymann Regent IIIs with markers. You can’t beat AEC/Roe for me, but these combined the musical (pre-war style) manual gearbox with the throaty exhaust. The latter disappeared with the Regent V but there were odd members of both the Regent III and V Weymanns (such as 751 and 792) which had a different gearbox which was “even more musical” – almost like the crash boxes in Guy Arab IV/V and Daimler CCG6.
David Oldfield
04/05/11 – 06:35
Interesting comment David, re-AEC music. I visited Paignton in 1960 when most of the Devon General services were operated by Regent/Weymanns of, I guess, about 1950 vintage. The sound was neither the melodious pre-war type crash gearbox, nor the “wail” of the manual Regent V (I know I’m liable to get lynched for calling it that), though it is some resemblance to both. It was certainly not the classic pre-selector sound either. I never came across it anywhere else, though I guess it must have been a standard transmission option.
Stephen Ford
04/05/11 – 06:37
I don’t remember Roe lowbridge bodies of this particular style being very numerous on AEC Regents, of course West Riding had them aplenty on Guy and Leyland. But if the Sheffield ones had been supplied by Roe, we can have a good impression of how they would have looked from the view of UWT 876 in the United Services posting, perhaps without the platform doors, but very handsome!
Chris Barker
04/05/11 – 06:42
I share your appreciation of the fine standard of Roe elegance coupled to the inspirational sounds of the Regent 111 9613S vehicles.751 and 792 (a D3RV type) may have been fitted with hardened gear wheels, which resulted from the earlier synchromesh problems. This modification did endow a similar whine to the Guy Arab 1V.Incidentally, at least one of the three Regal 1V/Roe single deckers, OWE 12-14 received this modification to emit Guy type sounds. There is one more significant fact to report which relates to the 45 Regent 9613S chassis with Weymann Orion bodies, which were altered to nine to low height buses. Originally, 45 Leyland PD2/20 chassis were ordered with Orion bodies to the new “Tin Front” style. They were for the Walkley-Intake tramway conversion, due in 1956. Previously, the Leyland synchromesh gearbox featured constant mesh for 1st gear and Synchromesh on 2nd,3rd and 4th. After the contract had been signed and sealed, the Contracts engineer C.C.Hall discovered that second gear had constant mesh engagement, only 3rd and 4th having synchromesh. This was disastrous, as the Walkley and Intake routes featured some very steep hills and many of the drivers would be ex tram men. An easy change from 1st to 2nd or 3rd to 2nd was essential. Sheffield offered to pay extra to include an easy change 2nd ratio. Unfortunately, Leyland refused to provide this facility. The outcome was that the PD2/20 order was cancelled and AEC were asked to supply 45 more 9613S chassis, in addition to the 41 already on order. This situation was resolved by good old competition, where an alternative supplier was available!
Keith Beeden
05/05/11 – 06:48
As an AEC man from a boy (!) riding to aforementioned Weymann Regent IIIs and Vs on both the 95 and the 51, it shocked me to read in C C Halls excellent book that Sheffield were in fact Leyland operators who dual sourced from AEC rather than either an AEC operator or a 50/50 operator. As I’ve said before, old age and maturity have also made me a Leyland man, but definitely second to AEC. This Leyland lack of syncro on second was very evident on the PD3s (recently posted) when setting off from rest at the bottom of Meadowhead – especially with a full load. Interesting, though, that 43 self-same PD2/20 were delivered (with Roe bodywork) in 1957 and then 40 PD2/30 in 1957/8 divided equally between Roe and Weymann – the latter being of the type you mentioned in the cancelled order.
David Oldfield
05/05/11 – 06:50
It is interesting to consider different operators views on the ‘new look’ front from within the same county. Sheffield specified Regent III’s with the Regent V type front to give the vehicles a modern appearance at a time when Britain was emerging out of post-WW2 austerity. In contrast Doncaster, Leeds and Huddersfield bought Regent V’s but specified the Regent III style exposed radiator. It seems the view of these three operators was the very reverse of Sheffield’s. These three Yorkshire operators were sticking to tradition and apparently having nowt to do with modernity! On the other hand this being Yorkshire – was the Regent III type radiator cheaper? (Provocative comment from a Lancastrian – couldn’t resist!)
Philip Halstead
05/05/11 – 12:16
Aye, but we’re a rum lot in Sheffield – being on the edge of outer darkness with Derbyshire. Canny wi’ brass but appreciating the finer things in life!?
David Oldfield
06/05/11 – 06:44
Nottingham also went for the old look exposed radiators on its 65 Regent V/Park Royals (209-273) delivered 1955/56.
Stephen Ford
06/05/11 – 07:04
In reply to the two David’s comments on the AEC Regent 111/Mark V with bonnet markers, I can confirm that they were fitted at Queens Road works. Some drivers complained of poor visibility to the nearside when approaching stops or close passing. During the early and mid thirties, AEC fitted this type of marker on Regent and Regal vehicles. This knowledge would be known by the engineering staff, to be produced in house.
Keith Beeden
06/05/11 – 07:07
Leeds took both AEC and Leyland chassis with exposed radiators for ease of maintenance. It took a change of GM to bring in enclosed radiators on both chassis and only 20 Leylands were delivered with this layout. To the very end Leeds AECs had a polished bonnet an anachronism maybe but a sight to set the juices flowing for this (then) teenager. Absolute poetry in motion!
Chris Hough
11/12/11 – 07:01
what about MANSFIELD DISTRICT TRACTION? Nobody hardly ever mentions these buses,also very few coloured photos about.They shared the same depot on Sutton Road Mansfield Notts.
Newcastle Corporation 1950 AEC Regent III 9612A Northern Coachbuilders H30/26R
Not a very good picture I’m afraid. I got my PSV licence in 1967 with Tynemouth & Wakefields (Northern General). By the time of the Queens Silver Jubilee in 1977 I was with Armstrong Galley, the coaching division of Tyne & Wear PTE. The PTE decided to commemorate the Jubilee by using two buses that were in service at the time of the Coronation in 1953. This 1950 Northern Coachbuilders bodied AEC was one of them, the other was a 1948 Leyland Titan. The Leyland was in its original livery of blue and cream, and I think it was part of the last batch to be delivered before the colour’s were changed to livery seen here in the picture. The route ran between Newcastle City Centre and Gosforth, however, by 1977 the PTE had a shortage of drivers with an any type licence, so on occasion drivers from the coaching division were drafted in to fill in gaps. I don’t know who the vehicles belonged to at the time, but they’re still around and belong to a member or members of the North East Bus Preservation Trust Ltd.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye
17/10/11 – 07:34
Thx, Ronnie, for the nice photo. The body is very nicely proportioned, although it does give the air of being a lowbridge vehicle for some reason. Newcastle corporation’s livery was very attractive. I refreshed my memory only a couple of weeks ago when I visited the East Anglia Museum and 501 (LTN 501), on loan from Beamish, was doing the rounds.
Chris Hebbron
17/10/11 – 07:35
The post war NCB bodies were, like many others, notoriously badly built (structurally) and this was partly the reason for their folding up in 1950/51. At the last gasp, someone from ECW came along to try and resurrect the fortunes – hence the looks of these, NCB’s last, bodies. Alas to no avail. After NCB closed, Roe bought machinery and timber from the receivers. They did not buy the company itself which disappeared.
David Oldfield
13/10/15 – 06:41
Dave Oldfield’s a little unfair. NCB had problems with green timber but so did Massey to a Much larger extent and even (whisper it) ECW. It wasn’t because of failures with the product that NCB’s coachworks, machinery and stock in trade was sold, it was to pay death duties on the estate of the founder Sam Smith, the Smith family had to let go of one of their interests and rightly saw the coachwork boom coming to an end.
Stephen Allcroft
01/03/20 – 06:32
I was looking at the last bus from the Newcastle Transport and which was for Gosforth Park and would like to get the information of the route number which the buses was during those period of the 1970s and this help will be welcomed to get this route destinations onto my models required for the layout system.
Christopher Norris
02/03/20 – 06:49
Christopher, the commemorative route number this bus and LVK 123 were used on in 1977 was Route number 44
Ronnie Hoye
03/03/20 – 06:31
Christopher, I’ll give you the full route inbound from Gosforth Park, as its easier to explain. South from Gosforth Park into Newcastle City Centre, was a straight run down The Great North Road, which until the Tyne Tunnel opened in the late 60’s was still the A1. As I said, it was a straight run, but it went through several name changes. For about the first three miles, it was the Gt North Road, then for about two miles, it became Gosforth High Street, then back to the Great North Road. On entering the City, it first became Barras Bridge, then Northumberland Street, and finally Pilgrim Street. At this point the 44 turned right, into Market Street, which lead into Grainger Street. At the bottom of Grainger Street, it turned right into Neville Street, where it stopped outside the Central Station, it would then turn right into Bewick Street, which was the terminus. From there, it would turn right in to Clayton Street, then right again into Westgate Road, then left into Grainger Street, and then the reverse of the inbound route.
London Transport 1952 AEC Regent III 9613E Weymann L53R
Just a short contribution but I thought you may be interested in the above shots of ex London Transport RLH 32 which looked a real treat at the Oxford bus rally last Sunday 16th October. As you can see it is still in the Samuel Ledgard livery which it received in 2007 for the 40th Anniversary of the Samuel Ledgard Society Re-enactment running day on Sunday 14th October of that year. The vehicle has been owned by Time Bus Travel of St. Albans since 1997 fortunately it narrowly escaped being converted into a mobile home in 1975
Ah, the RLH, one of my favourites! Looking forward to seeing RLH 48 later today at Cobham/Brooklands Museum’s first major event at the new museum site. RLH 32 will gladden the heart of Chris Y.
David Oldfield
23/10/11 – 11:27
……and it gladdens my heart to see one, too, David, since I recall them, in my three years spent in London, running on the South Wimbledon circular 127 route. The strange thing is, that although they were originally bound for Midland General, I have never actually seen a photo of one in that company’s livery. It certainly looks smart in SL’s livery, though. Nice post!
Chris Hebbron
23/10/11 – 11:30
I had the honour, and I mean that most seriously, of conducting RLH 32 all day and evening on the day of the Samuel Ledgard commemoration – the beautifully restored vehicle represented the four RLHs which Samuel Ledgard operated (RLH2/4/6/8). Free public journeys, massively supported, were operated on Ledgard routes. I wore my genuine uniform which I’ve kept all these years, and used Setright machine SL 40 (I bought it some years ago) and real SL tickets. The day was even more memorable for me, as it was fifty years almost to the day since I started work as an eager young conductor in October 1957. SL 40 was also at our Otley and Ilkley depots throughout its existence. Just to add the final touch of nostalgia to the day preserved ex Bristol Leyland PD1/ECW LAE 13 was present – my first Ledgard bus in passenger service when I started driving in 1961 was LAE 12 !! Its scarcely possible to express sufficiently our gratitude to the gentlemen Messrs Pring for their expensive and superb restoration of MXX 232 and for bringing it all the way north to star in the Day’s events. You can see me in my smart conductors uniform and a shot of RLH 32 whilst way up north at this link.
Chris Youhill
24/10/11 – 07:44
Brooklands was the “very best of London Buses” – and it certainly was. Everything seemed to be in showroom shine condition and there was an excellent cross section of vehicles with a good route network. …..and yes, RL48 was in excellent condition and on top form out on the road. Chris H – I’m not sure any of them actually got to Midland General. They, along with Notts & Derbys, got some rather splendid KSW6G/ECW instead in 1953. They weren’t AEC/Weymann but they rather fine nonetheless.
David Oldfield
24/10/11 – 07:45
Lovely photos. The Weymann bodied Regent III was certainly a classic and an all time favourite of mine. I travelled home from school daily on Rochdale’s highbridge versions in the early 60’s. Just also noticed the Ford 100E behind in both views was exactly like my first car, a 1956 model acquired in 1965 – ah nostalgia!
Philip Halstead
24/10/11 – 13:44
Here is a picture of RLH 32 taken in 1970 at Woking early in London Country days. It was then allocated to Addlestone Garage, but it didn’t last much longer with LCBS as it was withdrawn in July 1970. The Ledgard RLHs were Nos 2,4,6 and 8, KYY 502/4/6/8, which arrived at Armley between December 1964 and February 1965.
Roger Cox
25/10/11 – 06:55
Nice to see the bus in Woking, Roger C, a place I had and still have connexions with. They were based not just at Addlestone, but also Guildford Garage, but many of the routes didn’t need lowbridge vehicles at all. always felt that the red livery suited them best. My understanding, David O, was that Midland General ordered thirty, but only took ten in the end, the other twenty going to LTE.
Chris Hebbron
25/10/11 – 06:59
RLH 2/4/6/8/ were purchased by Ledgard specifically for the Horsforth to Otley services, operated from Yeadon Depot, which required lowbridge vehicles. Funny though how “needs must”, and on Saturday nights Otley depot operated three dance specials from Ilkley Town Hall, one of which was to Yeadon. Allocation of drivers for these appeared on the typewritten weekly master sheet at Otley and Ilkley Depots and in red block letters was shown as :-
DOUBLE DECK – KEEP TO CENTRE OF ROAD UNDER HENSHAW BRIDGE !!
Chris Youhill
25/10/11 – 07:01
I’m afraid this subject always arouses a little hostility in me because I never seem to see these vehicles ascribed correctly. In 1948, Midland General ordered thirty of these vehicles but it was decreed by the British Transport Commission that ten would have to suffice and when they were delivered in 1950, being registered ONU 630-639, the remaining twenty were diverted to London Transport. Midland General received payment from LT for them. The correct description should therefore be (in my opinion!) ‘London Transport’s Midland General type Regents’ Alas, I don’t hold out much hope of this but I’m as nostalgic about one sadly missed blue operator as Chris Y is about another!
Chris Barker
25/10/11 – 07:02
Before being taken over by the BTC, Midland General ordered 30 Regent/Weymann lowbridge buses when they only needed 10, in the hope of staving off the Bristol invasion for as long as possible. BTC was having none of this, and diverted 20 to London Transport, where they became the first 20 RLHs. That left 10 at Midland General, one of which is seen here //www.sct61.org.uk/mg426.htm
Peter Williamson
25/10/11 – 11:34
I believe there were one or two routes in the Chesterfield/Alfreton area that required lowbridge buses. In addition the B8, Nottingham – Mansfield (by a peculiar circuitous route) also required them on account of a railway bridge near Bestwood Colliery. Despite being deprived of the remaining 20 lowbridge Regents, I think I am right in saying that no Bristols reached Midland General until the Lodekkas in 1954. The 15 KSW6Gs delivered in 1953 were actually designated Notts & Derby Traction, to replace trolleybuses on the A1 Nottingham – Ripley service. Actually, when the trolleybuses were withdrawn, the A1 (via Basford) ceased to be the main Riply service, and the KSWs operated on the parallel B1 (via Bobbersmill), displacing, in the main, highbridge preselector Regent IIIs of around 1949 vintage.
Stephen Ford
25/10/11 – 11:35
One of my not very good shots I’m afraid the original is very very dark but it is in colour.
Peter
26/10/11 – 05:50
Thx, folks, for the full story (with link and colour photo) of these interesting buses. How different the MG ones look from their LTE cousins, with different destination display, upstairs roof ventilators and square number plate below windscreen. LTE did not change the side windows from the sliding version, though. I only saw MG vehicles when visiting relatives in Chesterfield and don’t recall seeing these at all. MG buses seemed to lurk in this town. Maybe, from the brief glimpses of their vehicles, I didn’t recognise them for what they were.
Chris Hebbron
26/10/11 – 15:51
It occurs to me that although Midland General became a constituent part of BTC in 1948 (and failed in its ploy to stave off Bristols for as long as possible!) it managed to keep its livery for many years. What other BTC companies, if any, retained their individual liveries? I exclude London Transport.
Chris Hebbron
26/10/11 – 16:53
MG was part of Balfour Beattie – who of course still exist in transport infrastructure (i.e. railways). They generated their own electricity for Notts and Derby and were thereby nationalised under the nationalisation of the power industry. It has not occurred to me until this recent post that MG had deliberately over ordered so that they could have as many of their beloved AEC/Weymanns as possible. [Pity they were rumbled.] Red and White and Cheltenham and District were also Balfour Beattie and retained their own distinctive liveries until NBC days – just that reds and whites didn’t stick out so much. Even so, there was still a greater element of freedom of liveries with BTC/Tilling than with NBC. [United and Crosville coach liveries not to mention Brighton and Hove.]
David Oldfield
26/10/11 – 17:48
With respect, I don’t think that the Red and White group of companies was associated with Balfour Beatty. Balfour Beatty certainly owned Notts and Derby, Midland General and Mansfield and District, but Red and White United Transport was a separate group which included, apart from Red and White’s own services, those of Cheltenham District, Newbury and District, South Midland, United Welsh and Venture of Basingstoke. The group sold out its British bus operations to the BTC in 1950, but retained its overseas interests under the name United Transport Company, until it disposed of these to the BET group in 1971.
Roger Cox
26/10/11 – 18:20
Glad my photos of RLH32 have given pleasure. I was particularly interested in Roger’s photo of RLH32 working out of Addlestone Garage (WY). In the late’60s, I was working at Plessey Radar in Addlestone and spent many a happy lunch hour around the garage. I am sure I must have seen her then, but regrettably have no photos.
Allan Machon
27/10/11 – 07:23
I have a feeling that the Red & White Group were always independent until voluntarily selling out to the BTC – how they must have cursed, because they were (to the best of my knowledge) the last company to succumb (at least voluntarily) before the Labour Government fell. Cheltenham District were owned by Balfour Beatty until Red & White bought them out a short time before the outbreak of war. It was stupid of me to have forgotten about C & D, which were on my doorstep. As you say, David O, they didn’t stick out so much (and I’m colour-blind)!
Chris Hebbron
27/10/11 – 07:24
Cheltenham District had been a Balfour Beatty company but was sold to the Red & White group in 1939. Another BB company was Llanelli & District which was absorbed by South Wales in 1952. Interesting comments about the ordering of these vehicles, Midland General had some very lucrative services and also some very hilly routes. Perhaps the thought of fully loaded buses going up steep hills led them to conclude that the 9.6 litre Regent was a better prospect than what they were destined to receive from Bristol!
Chris Barker
27/10/11 – 12:08
Yes, Midland General can’t have been over-impressed by their first experience of Bristols – in my earlier posting I had forgotten that in 1953 they received three second hand lowbridge K5Gs from Hants & Dorset (two 1939 and one 1940 vintage). Thrashing one of them up the hill from Langley Mill to Heanor market place would have been a slow and noisy experience! About 1963, the 7.7 litre crash gearbox Regent IIs only came out on Saturdays on the Nottingham – Alfreton run (B3/C5). Yet I recall hearing a driver express his strong preference even for these over the everyday Lodekkas. His comment was, “Put one of these [Regents] in first and it’ll climb up the side of a house.”
Stephen Ford
30/10/11 – 06:26
I was always told that Red and White was started by the Watts family who I believe are still in business as tyre fitters.
Philip Carlton
30/10/11 – 17:35
Correct: Watts of Lydney, Glos., are a very large tyre company with a global presence,including aircraft, fork lift truck and industrial tyres.
Chris Hebbron
23/03/12 – 06:46
Reading Chris’s story about drivers of double deckers being strongly advised to keep to the centre of the road under a certain bridge reminded me of at least one other notice. When much younger I liked to sit in the seat behind the driver, I was fascinated by a notice in the cab of Maidstone & District double deckers which read ” This a highbridge double decker not to be driven into Bexhill, Sittingbourne or Tenterden garages”. As none of the local companies operated lowbridge buses in the area I was at that time unsure of the difference between the two types this being around 65 years ago. I know that at a later date an extension was built onto Bexhill garage to allow highbridge buses into that part only, I only drove coaches into Tenterden garage so I am sure if any alterations were made there and never even saw Sittingbourne garage
Diesel Dave
23/03/12 – 16:38
London Transport had to pick their bus garages carefully when they received their austerity buses during the war, as they were taller than the usual LT spec. Their garages were inherited from a motley collection of past companies and fortunately some had high-enough entrances to cater for them. Most Guys finished up in East London and most Daimlers in Merton/Sutton Garages.
Chris Hebbron
26/05/12 – 07:01
This might be one for Chris Youhill (who’s postings I’ve followed on other sites): why work for Ledgard’s, as opposed to LCT, BCT or WYRCC? I suppose location might be a factor: only Ledgard had a depot in Otley or Yeadon, but in Bradford surely BCT offered better working conditions? Similarly in Ilkley wouldn’t WYRCC have offered better conditions than Ledgard? And couldn’t Armley-based staff have travelled on the frequent LCT services to LCT’s Bramley depot? WYRCC/BCT/LCC all ran more modern fleets . . . What was it that tied staff to Ledgard’s? And, for that matter, why did staff in any town with both a company and “corpo” depot (Halifax for example) choose the former over the latter – location of depots? or what??
Philip Rushworth
26/05/12 – 09:30
Well there’s another cat put among the pigeons, Philip!
David Oldfield
26/05/12 – 16:48
While Chris Y is getting steam up (for which I am waiting with baited breath!), I’ll throw in my pennyworth. All sorts of reasons. Leaving aside the political “labour/public versus conservative/private” debate, different operators created different impressions and reputations for themselves. “Xyz is a lousy company and I wouldn’t work for them if they were the last employer on earth” etc. You will know from my comments elsewhere that I was a fan of Nottingham City Transport – it always seemed efficient and competent, and its buses were usually well-kept – even the older ones. BUT NCT had a reputation – they waited for nobody. With the conductor on the platform, they would ring off with you no more than three paces away, and a pre-selector Regent , second gear engaged and held only on the footbrake would take off like a greyhound. You stood no chance! Barton’s on the other hand, and South Notts too, would wait for any runners, and their conductors were generally more considerate, helping with pushchairs, luggage etc. Obviously there is more scope to re-coup time on longer interurban journeys, so in a way this is understandable. On the other hand, Barton as an employer had a reputation for being high-handed. The company belonged to the family, and any driver who damaged a bus got his marching orders. Obviously staff who were also enthusiasts might have their own reasons for wanting to work for this, rather than that operator – especially those that ran varied and interesting fleets. And don’t forget that in the 1950s and 60s there was a degree of government control over pay through the Ministry of Labour’s Wages Inspectorate – so it was not necessarily a case of small private operators paying significantly lower wages.
Stephen Ford
26/05/12 – 20:33
Many full-time employees of smaller, private companies started as part-timers, something not countenanced by most of the larger companies – except in Scotland.
Alan Hall
26/05/12 – 20:41
In the Halifax case, Philip, and very probably in other Corporation v Company scenarios, the influencing factors were the higher standards of wages and conditions on the municipalities.
Roger Cox
27/05/12 – 06:38
Stephen mentions the high handed attitude to staff from the Barton management the same autocratic attitude was practised by Samuel Ledgard prior to his death in 1952. There are many apocryphal stories about his attitude to staff. One is of a guard being sacked after Mr Ledgard saw him riding a motor bike and told he was not paid enough to have such a machine and he was sacked! Another is when an elderly passenger told a crew they were running early. The guard told the passenger it was”nowt to do with thee” The next day the man was summoned to see Mr Ledgard aka the old man. Leeds Corporation were also strict although higher pay was the norm with numerous stringent fines and restrictions for transgressors.
Chris Hough
30/05/12 – 07:25
I was most amused by Stephen’s accurate expectation that I shall be “getting steam up” and he won’t be disappointed !! However I’m going on holiday for ten days or so and therefore I’ll write it when I get back. The matter of staff loyalty to independent operators is a complex one and I should be able to outline many aspects which will, I think, surprise Philip.
Chris Youhill
12/06/12 – 07:09
In answer to Philip’s query of the 26th Ultimo (as “last month” used to be referred to in the days of quills and ink) I think that, to avoid writing a complex book here on OBP, I can sum up the subject in two simple words – “JOB SATISFACTION.” In the case of the Samuel Ledgard undertaking it was of course not the usual small independent operator but was a large concern with five depots, or to be strictly accurate four depots and one “running shed.” The Firm was a very good employer indeed and paid wage rates well above what was necessary, but quite reasonably in return insisted rigidly that “the job was done properly” – as a minority who thought otherwise soon found out as they queued at the Labour Exchange !! The network of busy tightly timed services was an interesting one, varying between well patronised interurban routes through local town facilities to medium length outer district forays. Comprehensive rotas were in force at all depots and all staff worked interestingly on all routes operated from those premises. The Contract, Private Hire, Express Service and Excursion functions were thriving and varied. The fleet was quite magnificent in its variety of chassis and bodywork makes and models – new and, after the demise of the Founder Samuel, second hand. A duty could easily involve a new synchromesh AEC, followed by a new or second hand manual Leyland PD and, later in the day a preselector Daimler (new or “previously owned”) – and perhaps an Albion Valkrie or a 1930 ex Birmingham Regent 1 very successfully posing as a Burlingham veteran luxury coach/maid of all work thirty years “new.” Well, enough of the nostalgia which really made the job so very enjoyable and varied. It must be stressed that the Firm’s services were so totally reliable, and greatly appreciated by the Public, that such a level has never been seen in the area since and is still greatly missed. The vehicles, regardless of pedigree, were superbly maintained by very proud craftsmen staff and well treated by drivers with a pride, and ANY lost mileage (which was so rare as to be a sensation followed by a searching enquiry) was regarded as a very serious matter indeed and was virtually never caused by a breakdown. Yes, the Municipal and Group operators may have appeared to offer better conditions and in some ways did, but some of their modes of operation were the road to boredom and insanity. I have also worked for Leeds City Transport where OPO drivers or crews lived on the same route year in year out and, in the case of the crews, with the same “mate” day in day out. This system encouraged widespread work dodging as a science by those so inclined of whom there were plenty (classed conceitedly by themselves as “fast men” which in reality meant gearbox, flywheel and diff wreckers) and double the work for those who wouldn’t lower their standards. I also worked for West Yorkshire at Ilkley which was better, as you did all the routes and had a different colleague every week. I finished my career for the last fourteen years with the Pontefract family owned firm of South Yorkshire – in effect a miniature version of Samuel Ledgard’s – where good wages were paid and the vehicles were also superbly maintained, and everyone worked all the routes long and local. By the way Philip, just a small point, but West Yorkshire did in fact have a depot in Yeadon High Street. So, there you have it, I’ve tried to explain as briefly as possible “Why work for Ledgard’s” – believe me I wish I could turn back the clock to October 1957 and start all over again – as Mr. Sinatra famously sang “I did it my way.”
Chris Youhill
12/06/12 – 18:47
Nice to see you on the platform of D213/HGF 690, which Sam’l Ledgard had from 1954 to 1960. I’d like to have seen them in SL’s excellent livery. Did you start as a conductor and work up to driver? I think your reply was very appropriate. Within reason, pay is less important than job satisfaction and a good employer encourages a loyal and stable workforce. And you were lucky to have lived in an era of buses of various ages, makes and technical differences. It needed skill and empathy to drive a vehicle with a crash, then synchromesh gearbox, then a pre-selective gearbox, and make a good job of it.
Chris Hebbron
13/06/12 – 09:30
Sorry, I meant HGF890. My abiding memory of these buses was how imposing they looked from the outside, being very tall at 14′ 6″, and spacious inside, due, I suppose, to their high roofs. they sported LT’s three-piece indicators, which was unattractive at the rear, seemingly stuck on with glue! Looks as if SL unstuck them from the above photo!
Chris Hebbron
13/06/12 – 09:33
Chris Y s comments on LCT are interesting when my dad was a guard from 1953-1984 he had a total of three drivers in that time For much of the period different garages worked allocated routes although this changed as OMO spread and crews moved to the remaining 2 man routes and the use of universal rostering meant that all depots eventually worked all routes. There also existed a “senior rota” for long serving crews whereby they did not have extremes of starting and finishing times Like many bus operators LCT had to take what it could get in terms of recruits when people were reluctant to work unsocial hours in a time of full employment this did not in many cases lend itself to good customer relations and the service and the publics perception of the service suffered As a result a whole phalanx of potential passengers were lost for good
Chris Hough
13/06/12 – 09:34
Thanks Chris Hebbron – yes the London Sutton depot “HGFs” were a fine model full of real character. One hundred of them were delivered between May and November 1946 – Daimler CWA6/Park Royal. In 1953/4 we acquired no less than twenty two of them at a time when the prewar fleet had to be replaced – they performed heroically and handled heavily loaded services punctually and reliably on very harsh roads. They retained a lovely London feature in the cabs above the windscreens, in Gill Sans lettering, “DOUBLE DECK- HEIGHT 14’6” To my utter amazement they were apparently the first London buses to feature a continuous cord bell in the lower saloon – I was always under the impression that this had been a London feature !! The sound emitted by the cab roof buzzer to indicate that the upper saloon bell push was being used was sheer joy, and bestowed a most beneficial free foot massage on the front seat passengers up there. The picture was taken at Ilkley in December 1957 in my second month as a conductor. The Firm did not teach people to drive, and so I obtained my PSV licence elsewhere before eagerly returning to where my heart lay, and my first duty as a driver was a late turn on a Friday on the very busy Leeds – Guiseley – Ilkley service. The bus was ex Bristol Leyland PD1/ECW LAE 12 which behaved like a dream and performed like a trooper.
Chris Youhill
13/05/13 – 07:34
Chris et al, sorry! I’ve only just stumbled on your replies to my question: the answers were, quite frankly, staring me in the face.
Philip Rushworth
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
09/03/19 – 06:01
Thank you all for all these wonderful postings … and a special thank you to the delivery driver of one ex LT RT, who stopped and rescued me and other hitch-hikers from freezing to death at the side of the A1 back in November 1963. He dropped me at the baths on Kirkstall Road having turned left on his way to the Armley Depot. It was a slow ride in thick fog.
Nottingham City Transport 1954 AEC Regent III 9613S Park Royal L27/26R
After Nottingham City Transport had obtained the ex Bradford lowbridge Daimlers to start the services to the then newly developing Clifton Estate, an existing order for Park Royal bodied AEC Regent IIIs was amended, and 10 were delivered in April and June 1954 with lowbridge bodies as 199-208 (SAU 199-208). These lowbridge vehicles were needed as the railway bridge on Wilford Lane (ex GC main line) precluded highbridge deckers being used. However, in March 1958, another bridge over the River Trent was opened, and NCT services serving Clifton Estate were diverted over this new bridge, known as Clifton Bridge. This meant NCT no longer needed lowbridge vehicles, but West Bridgford and South Notts continued to use Wilford Lane. By 1964/5, I think the lowbridge Regents tended to be used on works extras, and service 2, between Goldsmith Street and Valley Road. The first of the batch were withdrawn in early 1967, when 199-202 were taken out of service and sold. 199 stayed locally, becoming Barton 1087 until 1972, when it was withdrawn and exported to America. However, in September 1968, NCT took over the West Bridgford fleet and inherited their Clifton services with its lowbridge requirement. At this point, the remaining SAU Regents, 203-8, came into their own again, reappearing on the Wilford Lane services to Clifton, quickly replacing the non standard pair of ex WBUDC Willowbrook bodied Regent IIIs, ORR 139/40, which were 6812A chassis, with the 7.7 engine and crash gearbox, rather than the 9.6 engine and synchromesh gearbox of the SAUs. These buses were delivered in the traditional NCT livery of green with three cream bands, but all were repainted in the brighter livery adopted in the early 1960s. 203 was photographed in August 1969, at the Clifton terminus of service 67. 203-8 were withdrawn in 1970/1, along with the ex WBUDC Reading bodied Regent Vs, and were replaced by Atlanteans 395-400 (VAU 395-400J), which were a special lowheight version of the then standard Nottingham design on PDR1/3 chassis. As a postscript, history repeated itself a few years later when the Atlanteans were themselves rendered surplus to requirements as lowheight vehicles early in their life, with the removal of the low railway bridge on Wilford Lane in autumn 1974. They remained in the fleet until withdrawn in 1981, when five of the six were exported to Hong Kong, via Paul Sykes, but that’s another story!
OK, I’ll be the smart alec that reckons this must have been a Saturday morning (assuming the timetable was still the same as two years later). The clock shows 11.43. On Mondays – Fridays, the 67 only ran via Trent Bridge hourly, and its departure time from Langstrath Road was 41 past. Sundays it was hourly at 56 past. But on Saturdays it was every 24 minutes, and on the odd hours this was 00, 24 and 48 past. The journey to Broad Marsh took 22 minutes – it was only 19 via Clifton Bridge. For many years the numbers were the same by either route.
Stephen Ford
19/01/12 – 12:32
Stephen – Spot on! August 2nd, to be precise. Thanks for the additional information.
Bob Gell
19/01/12 – 12:32
Timetables on the buses on Clifton ?!?! We never needed to bother. All the services from Nottingham to Clifton entered Clifton at the same road and then spread out to different terminus points within the Estate. We lived in a house located before the buses spread out, so we could use any of the route numbers from Nottingham. And on the return journey out of Clifton we were at the point where all the services converged, so all the different routes went past our bus stop. Never had to wait more than a few minutes for anything
KC
19/01/12 – 17:58
Timetabling to serve three different termini, each by two different routes, with different end to end journey times, and joint working with South Notts on the Trent Bridge services, was quite complex – especially when you remember that the actual buses were not interchangeable between the Clifton Bridge and Trent Bridge variants! The main routes were 61A, 67 and 68, each running either via Clifton Bridge or Trent Bridge. The 61 and 66 were by this time rush hour short workings. Monday-Friday daytime had a combined 10 minute interval service via Clifton Bridge (half-hourly to each terminus). There was a 20 minute interval service via Trent Bridge (hourly to each terminus). Overall, buses left Broad Marsh in a repeating sequence of 10,5,5,10,5,5 minutes. On Saturdays, all six services (three by each bridge) ran on a 24 minute headway. You might expect this to level out to an overall 4 minute interval service (every 8 minutes via each bridge). Such was not the case, however, no doubt for good logistical reasons. Instead the Saturday departures from Broad March were in the repeating sequence of 6,4,2,6,4,2 minutes, and the interval over each of the bridges was 6,10,8,6,10,8 etc. I wonder who worked that lot out!
Stephen Ford
20/01/12 – 07:39
I note the photo was taken in 1969. So I’m sure one of the experts can answer the question “When did Nottingham City Transport finally stop using open rear platform buses?”. My memory (unreliable) tells me that there weren’t any beyond the early 1970s. They seemed to disappear relatively early compared to other operators.
KC
20/01/12 – 07:40
Of course it’s obvious now but something which hadn’t really occurred to me before is that South Notts had a strong presence at both Huntingdon Street and Broad Marsh. Was there ever anyone on hand to supervise the departures or were they left to their own devices? I’m not suggesting for a moment that they (or the others) would have been anything less than professional but as Stephen says, it was a complex operation. I wonder if South Notts rosters contained any inter-working with the Loughborough service or if Clifton services were kept totally separate?
Chris Barker
20/01/12 – 12:32
They had exposed radiator AEC Regent Vs running in 1971 The last open platform deckers bought dated from 1959 so withdrawal in the seventies would be reasonable.
Chris Hough
20/01/12 – 12:33
KC NCT’s last open platform buses were withdrawn in 1976. (11 Regent Vs from 1956, and 6 PD2s from 1959). The final ex WB Regent Vs had been withdrawn in 1974. The last half cabs in the fleet, the 1965 Renowns, were withdrawn in 1976/7.
Bob Gell
22/01/12 – 06:50
Unlike many, I quite like the enclosed Regent V front, but – like the PD2s and PD3s – I do prefer the exposed radiators. There is a dignity in style which is missing on so many “tin fronts”.
David Oldfield
23/01/12 – 07:48
I think the reason for the emergence of the tin front was the revolution in the appearance of single deckers. Half-cab single deckers became obsolete almost overnight in 1951, making double deckers look dreadfully old-fashioned by comparison with the new underfloors. I must say that as a bus-mad child in the 1950s I was completely sold on the idea. I thought the tin-front Leylands of Oldham and Southport looked far better than Manchester’s archaic exposed radiators. It was only when the tin fronts themselves started to look dated that the traditional purity of the exposed radiator won out over the (by then) out dated attempt to disguise it. The enclosed Regent V front looked like a reshaped radiator rather than a disguised one. Car manufacturers had already started doing the same thing, retaining the distinctive features of their traditional radiators in their new grilles but in a lower, wider shape (the most obvious comparison is Rover), and by common consent AEC’s approach was more successful and stylistically durable than the others.
Peter Williamson
27/01/12 – 06:37
Am I right in thinking that in my time at Nottingham (66-69) one make (AEC or Leyland) was in the majority on Derby Road north of the university campus, and the other make in the majority on University Boulevard south of the campus? or does my memory play tricks? Atlanteans were in evidence from City centre to Trent Bridge for the football, but I only recall open platform designs serving the University. I do remember once travelling in a lowbridge side gangway vehicle from University boulevard to Beeston. I also remember a late night city centre start with a full bus and flat battery, the bus was facing uphill so reverse was engaged and the engine started with no problem.
Nigel Richards
27/01/12 – 11:14
Nigel, the 5 (Beeston via Derby Road) and 5A (via Castle Boulevard) were certainly operated by the same buses. They ran as a circular route – outward as a 5, inward as a 5A and vice versa. This avoided the need to reverse in the congested centre of Beeston before the bus station was built. However it may well be that the other north side services (19 and 63) used a separate group of vehicles from the other south side services (4 and 4A). Both the 4 and 5 displayed “Beeston via Derby Road” but they were completely different routes. The 4 turned off Derby Road at Gregory Street, Old Lenton, joining the 4A route along the southern perimeter of the campus (University Boulevard). The 4 and 4A avoided the reversal problem by continuing beyond Beeston Square along Chilwell Road, and round the block Collin Street, Gladstone Street to terminate at Imperial Road.
Stephen Ford
28/01/12 – 06:42
Nigel, Stephen I seem to remember that in 67/8, 4,4A, 5,5A were a 50/50 split between AEC Regent Vs and Leyland PD2s. Don’t know about 19 and 63 though.
Bob Gell
28/01/12 – 14:35
Hi Bob, yes, you are probably right. My point really was that there couldn’t have been an operational segregation between the “south side” and “north side” services, since the 5 and 5A at least were the same vehicles running out by one route and in by the other. I think by this time the Regent Vs and PD2s were the only back-loading half-cabs left (and no doubt many of these had also been withdrawn). I can’t remember whether the Renowns ever got onto these routes. Incidentally, in checking with the 1971 timetable, I discovered that the 63 was routinely scheduled a 15 minute layover at the outer terminus (Wollaton Vale) – 20 minutes journey and 15 minutes layover. Nice work if you can get it!
Stephen Ford
03/05/12 – 08:56
Bob – I think the SAU Regents became an embarrassment to NCT after the diversion of their Clifton services via Clifton Bridge. Here was a batch of ten buses no more than four years old and with three years of the initial certificates of fitness still to run with no real work to do. As you say they found employment on works services. The only requirement for lowbridge buses was the once or twice a week service to the White City dog track on Trent Lane from Clinton Street. I recall seeing an SAU regularly on a service 4 going into Nottingham when on my way home from work during 1967. Stephen – in 1969 there was still a 30 minute service on Sundays via both bridges. In the days of NCT/WBUDC and South Notts sharing the service the number of buses required was:- NCT (via Clifton Bridge) Sunday – 5 buses Monday to Friday peaks – 11 buses Monday to Friday inter peak – 5 buses Monday to Friday evenings – 5 buses Saturday daytime – 6 buses Saturday evening – 5 buses
South Notts/WBUDC (via Trent Bridge) Sunday – SN – 3 buses; WB 2 buses Monday to Friday am peak – SN 7 buses; WB 5 buses Monday to Friday morning interpeak – SN 2 buses; WB 1 bus Monday to Friday afternoon interpeak – SN 1 bus; WB 2 buses Monday to Friday pm peak SN 6 Buses; WB 6 buses Monday to Friday evenings – SN 2 buses; WB 1 bus Saturday daytime SN 4 buses; WB 3 buses Saturday evening SB 3 buses; WB 2 buses. NCT was the major operator with 55% of the mileage operated. South Notts had 25% and West Bridgford 20%. Chris – South Notts Clifton workings were kept separate from its ‘main line’ services. There were some early morning journeys from Gotham garage running out to take up service at Clifton advertised and passengers using these journeys had to pay the relevant fare from Clifton as well as a fare from Gotham to Clifton. On the question of supervision, although South Notts had two Inspectors I cannot remember seeing them at Broad Marsh during the period I was using Clifton services. I did however see NCT Inspectors at Broad Marsh – mainly during the teatime peak – observing departures of NCT buses. West Bridgford also had Inspectors but I don’t remember seeing them at Broad Marsh.
Michael Elliott
23/05/12 – 09:12
Thanks for all the insight into early Clifton Estate runnings, I must admit it has always confused me how the percentages were worked out. Certainly a lot more interesting than todays services on the Estate!
Gareth Perkins
24/11/20 – 06:50
Better late than never, this is a response to Nigel Richards on 27/01/12 @ 06:37 and Stephen Ford (not related to me!) on 27/01/12 @ 11:14. My memory tells me that in my time in Nottingham (1961-1964) the 4 and 4A were operated by AEC Regents (XTO etc) (as were the City – Arnold services). The 5 & 5A were operated by older AEC Regents (KTV etc), as were the 19 & 63. I used the 6, 17, 18 & 28 via Hucknall Road and the 45 via Derby Road, these were operated by Leyland PD2’s (ATO reversed registrations), these were newer but much lighter weight with a consequent bumpier ride than the Regents.
Vernon Ford
25/11/20 – 07:49
Hello Vernon (true – we aren’t related!) My recollection is that certain groups of routes had more or less dedicated series of vehicles, whereas others were operated with a more eclectic mix. Certainly the Bilborough group – served from Bilborough Depot, were almost exclusively the OTV series Regent IIIs (prior to that ISTR it was pre-war Regents, plus some of the KTV 100 series (actually 97-126) on the 13, 56 and later 60. The Arnold routes (10, 20, 20A, 52, 57 and later 69) pl us the Mapperley 31 were served from Sherwood Depot by their fleet of XTO Regent Vs, as you say. Before their arrival most were in the hands of pre-war Regents, supplemented by the 1948/49 KTV 200 series Daimler CVD6s – which were nearly ubiquitous on the 31. I think the Beeston routes were served by Parliament Street Depot, and may have had a bit more variety (the 4/4A was a cross city service from Arnold until about 1952). I recall the KTV 100 Met Cam, KTV 300 Roberts, and OTV Park Royal Regents, plus the XTOs. I lived in Aspley until 1954, on the Hanley Street (1, 7 and 22) routes – which at that time and for some years after were virtually always KTV 300s from Bulwell depot, with just a few extras at peak hours, that might be pre-war Regents or Utility Guys or Daimlers. 1958 PD2s introduced Clifton Bridge routes, when the bridge was first opened, and also the Trinity Square series as you say. The seat spacing was a bit cramped with very upright seat-backs, but on the whole I liked them.
Stephen Ford
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
01/12/20 – 05:40
Stephen, your comment about the PD2’s seats being very upright is true – is my memory correct that the seat width was the same as would have been used on 7′ 6″ wide buses? The gangway always seemed very wide. Also you mention the 1948/49 CVD6’s, by the time I got to Nottingham in 1961 these were generally out of use except for rush-hours, I had many a ride on them to the University. At that date there was no regular service onto Highfield Campus, only two or three buses arriving just before 9am.
Vernon Ford
03/12/20 – 06:40
Vernon, not too sure about the seat widths on the PD2s. My first experience of one, virtually brand new, was on a tour of Nottingham, which NCT used to operate on occasional bank holidays. The CVD6s were a postwar purchase, bought, I suspect, to replace pre-war Regents on the 31 with its steep hills. I have read that in the early post-war period AEC (Henry Ford style – also no relation!) would supply any mechanical configuration as long as it was 7.7 litre and crash gearbox! NCT wanted a bit more “umph” for Woodborough Road and the CVD was 8.6 litre – and of course, pre-selector. The strange thing is that subsequently I don’t ever remember seeing any 9.6 litre Regent III on the 31 – even though the KTV100s and 300s arrived in quick succession about the same time in 1948/49.
