Bradford Corporation – Old bus photos

Bradford Corporation – Leyland Panther – NAK 512H – 512

Bradford Corporation Transport
1969
Leyland Panther PSUR1A/1
Marshall B45D

For 1969, Bradford Corporation ordered ten chassis of the rear horizontal engine variety, its first new single deckers since a couple of AEC Reliances in 1958. The ten new chassis were split between AEC’s Swift and Leyland’s Panther, but, since the chassis design of the two types was virtually identical apart from the engine manufacture and the radiator position – at the rear on the AEC and at the front on the Leyland – the exercise was probably intended to ascertain which power unit was best suited to the challenging Bradford terrain. All ten were equipped with Marshall B45D bodies. Seen above in April 1970 is the last of the batch, No. 512, NAK 512H which was delivered in December 1969. In the event, no further single deckers were to be bought by Bradford before the infliction upon all the West Yorkshire municipalities from 1st April 1974 of the all embracing WYPTE. In this new conglomeration, the five Bradford Panthers were the only examples of their type, and the PTE Director of Engineering, a certain Geoffrey Hilditch, soon sold them all to Chesterfield. A picture of one in service in that town may be seen here (a very long page, but about halfway down – search for Chesterfield in the browser :- www.mikesbuspages.com/municipalbuses.htm
In his book Steel Wheels and Rubber Tyres, GGH says that pictures of the Bradford Panthers in original livery are hard to come by – he should have asked me.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

11/09/17 – 06:38

Nice pic!
Stuart Emmet Another story on these 10 was they were bought to start OMO; however double decker OMO was approved legally soon after they were ordered, so they were redundant as far as that went. They spent their time inventing conversions to single decker routes and seemed to settle on the 61 as shown – about a 25-minute journey across town from Undercliffe to St. Enochs that went for around 5 mins over roads in the Canterbury Ave area that were not used by other routes.Effectively a peak hour route every 10 min from 0700 to 0900 and 1600 to 1800 with a few journeys between 1200 & 1400 hours that required 6 buses for the 10-minute headway. The rest of time they seemed to rest/in-filled as spares.

Stuart Emmet

12/09/17 – 06:46

From 1969, BCT participated in White Rose Express service X33, Bradford – Sheffield, which entered its area at Birkenshaw. The other joint operators reluctantly agreed, even though Bradford’s entitlement was no more than one journey per week! In practice, as explained to me by the late Stanley King, Bradford saved up their mileage until they were able to operate a bus for a whole week, replacing a Yorkshire Woollen duty.
BCT had few single deckers and I believe these Panthers and the contemporary Swifts were used. Does anyone recall seeing a photo of a Bradford bus on X33, as I’ve never seen one.

Geoff Kerr

12/09/17 – 06:47

Just about everyone was caught with the change of legislation which allowed DD OMO. Sheffield certainly was – initially with purchase of the Swifts and subsequently with the change of Bristol order from REs to VRs.

David Oldfield

13/09/17 – 06:46

In the lovely book Colours of West Yorkshire the author states that these were ordered because agreement could not be reached with the Unions to operate OMO double deckers. I.e. The legislation already permitted it but not the Unions until agreement was reached later on.

Sam Caunt

14/09/17 – 07:04

The Bradford manager at the time was not in favour of one man buses These and the Swifts were also used on the express X72 which ran between Bradford and Leeds at peak hours.

Chris Hough

15/09/17 – 06:45

I recall someone (who I believe was very knowledgeable) telling me that as late as 1981/2 that Bradford area buses of West Yorkshire PTE were around 80% crew operated.

Dave Towers

16/09/17 – 06:47

The change in legislation to permit double deck OPO was in 1966, and I doubt that an order for vehicles to be delivered in 1969 had been placed before that date – i.e. the fact that D/D OPO was possible would have been known.
I like to see a clear and readable destination display, but in this case I suspect that a slightly smaller window would have fitted the lines of the vehicle rather better!

Nigel Frampton

17/09/17 – 06:55

Another story was that the unions rejected the DD legislation but SD would be OK It was also said on delivery of these SD’s unions OKed the use of DD OMO How far this any of this is fact or fiction seems lost in time.

Stuart Emmet

18/09/17 – 07:19

I started working at Bradford City Transport in the Traffic Office in October 1973. The story of OMO at BCT is intriguing. I cannot comment on the position of General Manager Edward Deakin in relation to OMO, although I could find out as Bob Tidswell his PA is still heal and hearty. I can say that Traffic Superintendent John Hill was not very enthusiastic about OMO, and from all accounts the T&GWU branch was not very keen, either. Around 1971 or 1972 the position of Asst. Traffic Superintendent became vacant and Brian Eastwood, who was Traffic Superintendent at Maidstone Corporation, was appointed to the post. Maidstone had undertaken extensive conversion to OMO and BCT felt that Brian’s experience in this regard would be extremely useful. Many years later Brian told me that when he arrived at Forster Square – BCT Head Office – there was little enthusiasm for OMO. Earlier this year I had lunch with Brian and he said that many of the new ideas that he tried to bring to Bradford fell on stony ground. Maidstone had a very large circle OMO sign on the front of their Atlanteans and Brian arranged for one of the signs to be sent to Bradford for evaluation. John Hill rejected the idea. Bob Tidswell once told me that Edward Deakin had a policy of splitting chassis orders between manufacturers – and thus having small batches – on the basis that if one chassis type developed a serious fault then the impact on the operational fleet would be minimised. Some of the single-deckers were allocated to Ludlam Steet and were used on the 272 service to Leeds, the 61 and sometimes other routes operated from the depot, such as Eccleshill, Fagley and Haworth Road. They were used on the White Rose service and at weekends for private hire work at weddings etc. When the PTE was formed John Hill became Metro Bradford District Manager and the position of District Traffic Officer was given to Bert Henry from Leeds City Transport who was very keen to expand OMO across the Bradford route network.

Kevin Hey

19/09/17 – 06:01

Still trying to get “facts” and the best come across so far, is from the JS King book. The following is a timeline summary:
1967
BCT ordered the Swifts and Panthers (503-512 ) to start OMO and had the unions OK 8 and 10/1969. The Swifts and Panthers arrived but went to work with conductors on 61, 83 and 27-29/32. Cannot find a reason why they were not used for OMO. These buses were also available for breakdown cover for the other operators on the joint with 7 other operators “White Rose” express to Sheffield; BCT having only one journey a week which they “banked” so they could then a bus operate all week.
Mr King notes the SD were already “white elephants”, as by now DD OMO was acceptable, so seventy 33 foot DD were ordered, with union acceptance of OMO for these 2 door 33 foot vehicles.
8/1970
The DD start to arrive (401-470) but unions said no as are too long and the drivers’ view of exit door was insufficient. So OMO introduction postponed once again.
9/1971
SD work on the peak time only Leeds express (272) joint with Leeds CT who operated SD OMO, but BCT used conductors
31 Dec 1972
OMO finally starts using 30 foot DD (315 to 355) on routes 36-38 and 40-42 20 May 1973
OMO starts on joint working with Leeds on the 72 route
Footnote
This appears is a strange story, that however, shows the management/union environment at the time.

Stuart Emmet

19/09/17 – 06:02

Re Kevin Heys comments. There was a regular evening trip on service 46 to Buttershaw.
OMO operation commenced in Bradford with the conversion of the 72/78 services between Bradford and Leeds which were jointly operated with Leeds City Transport. This started in late May 1973. I cannot recall them being used on White Rose services during my time in Bradford in 1973.

Stephen Bloomfield

22/09/17 – 07:15

I suspect that when BCT ordered dual doorway buses the ‘agreement’ with the T&GWU was merely one of outline or agreement in principle to discuss the matter. It would appear that a detailed agreement with signatories was not secured until 1972. The initial conversions at the end of 1972 used single door Fleetlines, but evidently the T&GWU was prepared to allow two-door buses to be used on services to Leeds when these were converted in May 1973. The feeling I detected at Bradford was that neither management nor the T&GWU were keen to pursue OMO. Management believed that OMO made the service worse for passengers, while the T&GWU was against a reduction in potential members and staff – members – losing overtime.

Kevin Hey

21/11/17 – 08:30

Just a reminder that the 5 Panthers transferred to Calderdale in early PTE days. There was a serious blind spot problem with the blank front corners and all were modified with small corner windows. Memory fails me but I wonder if a serious/fatal accident blamed on lack of visibility occurred. I recall that these weren’t bad buses, hadn’t done a lot of mileage with Bradford.The biggest problem was (the lack of) pit length and accessibility with 36′ long buses in the Dock Shop at Skircoat Road. They were also a bit limited on allocation because of road/junction/camber problems on many routes. Someone out there will remind me how long they ran in Halifax prior to sale to Chesterfield where they put in a good number of years service.

Ian Wild

22/11/17 – 07:22

The first of the Bradford Panthers to arrive in Halifax was 2511 in October 1974, followed by 2508/10/12 in November and 2509 in December – all still in BCT blue and cream livery. They were allocated solely to the 5/6 West End Circular route, which required four vehicles during the daytime just going endlessly round and round, so presumably the fifth one was usually either parked up or ‘day in’ for maintenance. I don’t think the trade union would allow them to be used on any other route – I certainly don’t remember seeing them anywhere else.
Unfortunately one of them was involved in a fatal accident when operating a 6 (clockwise) journey and turning right from Heath Road into Free School Lane – just a couple of hundred yards from Skircoat Garage. They had very thick front corner pillars which caused a terrible blind spot for the driver. The bus had begun to take the right turn and was not cutting the corner when a young chap on a moped approached from the right and appeared to stop at the junction with the intention of going straight ahead after the bus had turned. However he must have decided to chance it and accelerated across the front of the bus, but due to the blind spot the driver couldn’t see him and a terrible accident ensued in which the lad was killed. The bus driver was shown to have been blameless.
The five were immediately taken off the road and, as Ian says, small (very small) windows were let into the pillars. My records only show that they were withdrawn during 1975, but that they passed to Chesterfield Corporation in the September. They ran them quite successfully until 1985/86 after which they saw even further service with CityBus in Manchester.

John Stringer

24/11/17 – 07:23

That sounded a terrible, tragic accident indeed for all concerned John, and it still amazes me that in this day and age just how many modern cars have quite serious blindspots, especially to the rear. West Yorkshire had a 1964 Bristol RELH6G express coach (ERG1/1001: AWR 401B) refurbished by Willowbrook in 1977, which included a new peaked front dome, Duple-type windscreen and revised front dash panel, grille and headlamps. On return to West Yorkshire, and before re-entry into service, the Duple screen was removed and the original ECW ‘wrap around’ version reinstated. This was not connected with night-time reflections as is often stated, but due to a serious blind spot either side of the windscreen. The Duple screen had curved sides, which on a Duple (or Plaxton) body would not have been a problem, as the body pillars/sides were also curved and therefore matched. The ECW body had straight pillars/sides, but the curved Duple screen was matched up to the front pillars using an infill panel at either side, which flared out towards the top. The local ‘Man from the Ministry’ would not pass the vehicle as he felt the blind spots were a serious hazard, hence the change back to original spec. We’ll never know, but the thoroughness of that Ministry Inspector may well have prevented a serious accident at some point, and even saved a life, for which we should be very thankful.

Brendan Smith

29/12/17 – 07:47

The reference to the Panthers being used on the White Rose appeared in a recent book- though I couldn’t find the reference when I looked for it, inevitably. I moved to Sheffield in 1969 and used the X33 regularly but never saw or heard of Bradford actually working on the White Rose; more significantly no record of such a working ever appeared in local enthusiast publications of the time and I never heard fellow enthusiasts mention it.’Joint operation in South Yorkshire’, published by the Omnibus Society in 1974, is also silent on the issue, despite mentioning that, for instance, Ribble provided duplicates on Yorkshire Traction’s X19 (Manchester-Barnsley). It would be interesting if anyone can produce chapter and verse on Bradford’s involvement.

Phil Drake

29/12/17 – 09:48

There was mention somewhere to the effect that the Bradford share, based on the miles of the route in Bradford, was small, therefore Bradford saved up the miles which meant something strange like one bus every x weeks or similar. Will try and find the reference for you. Additionally, Brasford was able to provide breakdown cover for any buses having issues.

Stuart Emmett

30/12/17 – 08:46

Extracts from J S King (1995) Bradford Corporation Motorbuses pages 99 and 100. John King (RIP) is the acknowledged expert on all matters Bradford (trams, trolleys and buses).
Mexborough & Swinton had proposed a network of routes along the then new M1. A consortium of interested parties was formed with M&S, Sheffield JOC, Rotherham, YWD, YTC, WR and Hebble and a service from Sheffield to Bradford via Dewsbury was agreed.
On hearing of this Bradford applied and got consent but as the route in Bradford was less than 10% of the whole giving one journey a week, Bradford decided to accumulated mileage until there had enough for one bus for one week when they took over a YWD duty.
Sheffield, Barnsley and Mexborough were to now appear on all future Bradford buses, meanwhile, 505 to 512 were made available and were occasionally used.
A trial run by Bradford took place on the 14th October 1969 and service started four days later.

Stuart Emmett

08/01/18 – 07:21

Sorry about the delayed reply, but thanks to John Stringer for details of the fatal accident with one of the Panthers whilst in Halifax. It makes you wonder how they ever got through initial certification, I’m almost certain the blind spot would never have been accepted by the Yorkshire TA Certifying Officers. I recall a couple of Halifax Leopard/Weymann buses being ‘overhauled’ as an emergency measure by Willowbrook. They came back with new 6 year certificates (12/13 year old buses by this time) with far less work than we had to put in to obtain a grudging 5 years. This difference in standards in different Traffic Areas continued up to the day I retired!

Ian Wild

Bradford Corporation – Leyland Badger – KW 7604

Bradford Corporation
1930
Leyland Badger TA4
Plaxton B20F

The Leyland Badger was a haulage model introduced in 1920, but progressively developed for heavier weights up to the outbreak of WW2. This little bus, a TA4 4 tonner (denoting payload), was purchased by Bradford for its Welfare Department in 1930, when the city motorbus fleet then consisted of AEC 413, Leyland Lion PLSC and Bristol B full sized saloons, and Leyland TD1 double deckers. The B20F body is thought to be the oldest Plaxton product still in existence. Having served the Corporation for some 32 years, KW 7604 was deservedly sold into preservation in 1962. It is shown here on a Brighton HCVC Rally in the very early 1970s (sadly my slide is an undated Agfa) being followed by the Wigan Leyland PD1 JP 6032 through Preston Park, with the spectacular LBSC railway viaduct in the background.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

01/07/22 – 06:07

Bradford CT Miscellaneous Fleet number O23, worked for the Education Department and had daily runs to a special school in Lister Lane, Bradford whilst being maintained and garaged by the Transport Department. Most of the work from 1949 was done by Bedford OB’s numbered 024 to 026, leaving 023 available if needed.
Sold for preservation to the LVVS, it has appeared in various liveries and in films/TV. https://www.lvvs.org.uk/kw7604.htm gives further details.

Stuart Emmett

Bradford Corporation – Daimler CVG6 – EAK 232D – 232

Copyright Brendan Smith

Bradford Corporation
1966
Daimler CVG6LX/30
East Lancashire (Neepsend) H40/30F

Captured here waiting on Park Road, Bingley is Bradford CT 232, one of a batch of fifteen Daimler CVG6LX/30s supplied to the undertaking in the latter part of 1966. It is seen still wearing BCT’s attractive blue and cream livery, but has had its classic Bradford City Transport fleet name and coat of arms replaced by West Yorkshire PTE’s ‘Metro Bradford’ fleet name and PTE logo. (A ‘2’ prefix has also been added to the fleet number, denoting former Bradford ownership). They were very comfortable buses to ride in, and most handsome buses to look at, bearing a strong resemblance – particularly at the rear – to BCT’s forward-entrance re-bodied trolleybuses delivered a few years previously. Saltaire depot had an allocation of these fine machines, and they could often be seen on the 68 service from Bradford to Edwick/Dick Hudson’s, operated jointly with West Yorkshire Road Car. The Gardner 6LX engines fitted to the Daimlers would have been well-suited to the steady climb up to Gilstead and Eldwick.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Brendan Smith

17/09/12 – 07:18

All of this batch went new to Saltaire depot, but 234-40 were passed on to Ludlam Street when Saltaire received new Fleetlines 271-85, which was of course only a matter of months later. These latter, and the remaining CVG6s 226-33 constituted the principal complement of Saltaire’s vehicle allocation for several years, although I was surprised when, around 1970, there was also an East Lancs-bodied Regent III based there. While trolleybuses were still operative on service 40 to City via Thackley there were, I think, two trolleys also kept there overnight, outstationed from Thornbury depot. Does anyone know what effect the trolleybus abandonment had for Saltaire’s vehicle allocation?
The CVG6s were standard fare (pun intended) on route 68, indeed while they were around I don’t recall seeing anything else on BCT’s share of the service. Of course Eldwick didn’t need eight buses, so they also appeared on Manningham Lane services, although heavily outnumbered by Fleetlines. Thornbury depot also had a small presence on these routes, using Regent Vs.
In the early 1970s 234-40 moved on from Ludlam Street depot to Horton Bank Top, where they replaced Regent IIIs.

I can’t vouch for when these actually arrived, but I think only two had entered service by the end of 1966, the rest doing so early in 1967.

I’ve just had a look at my copy of the Stanley King book, and he quotes entries into service of between August and November 1966 – a bit at variance with my recollection, and the vehicles he quotes as the first two in service are not quite the same two I would have said. Still, I’ll stand corrected on this point if necessary.

David Call

17/09/12 – 07:19

I think, Brendan, that these 15 buses were “la creme de la creme” with regard to Bradford`s later fleet, and I travelled on them quite regularly when they were quite new. I also travelled (more often) on the 15 contemporary PD3s with identical bodies, which appeared on my “80” route.
The Daimlers, in particular, just oozed quality, and the sound of the Gardner engine, after so many screaming Regent Vs was a pure delight.
I do remember though, that some Bradford staff were not too happy with the Neepsend bodies, which did not seem as structurally sound as the Blackburn East Lancs version. They looked a lot better though, with the full original Bradford insignia!

John Whitaker

17/09/12 – 07:20

This batch of buses only 8 years old at the formation of the PTE never received PTE livery and remained blue and cream all their lives When quite new they were often seen on the former Ledgard Leeds-Pudsey-Bradford route and were a really nice bus to ride on.

Chris Hough

These vehicles were superb. 226-33 were allocated to Saltaire Depot from new and I remember them appearing on the service to Eldwick in the autumn of 1966. I travelled on them regularly to school. Later when I worked in the Traffic Office of BCT in Forster Square we worked alternate Saturdays and I’d travel on the 07:35 hours journey from Eldwick, which was a BCT Daimler CVG working.
Later still I was a member of a small group of staff that on Monday nights used to frequent the BCT Social Club in Sunbridge Road. The bus stops outside the Club were for services 15 and 16 – West Bowling and Allerton. The bus to Eldwick stopped some distance away in John Street. The last bus from Bradford (Chester Street) to Eldwick left at 10.20pm and I used to ring the Chief Inspector’s Office at Forster Square at about 10.10pm to say that I was “ready for home”. I’d make my way the best I could to the stop for the Allerton service just outside the Club and I’d then be joined by one of the Duty Inspectors. When the Daimler CVG came round the corner from Godwin Street into Sunbridge Road the Inspector would step purposefully into the road and stop the bus for me so that I could get on it. He’d then tell the conductor: “Make sure that he gets off at Eldwick Post Office.”
Ah, happy days, or should that be daze?

Kevin Hey

18/09/12 – 07:25

Huddersfield had a contemporary batch of sixteen CVG6LX-30s, 457-472 (HVH 457-472D). Half were bodied by East Lancs at Blackburn the other half by Neepsend. They became due for initial recertification shortly after I arrived at Huddersfield. I don’t recall that the Neepsend bodies were any worse at that stage than the Blackburn built examples. I do recall that one body type all suffered from body framing fractures above the entrance doors (Neepsend I think) whilst the other all had frame fractures on the staircase side. Some of this batch were particularly hard worked being 2 way radio fitted and hence allocated to the longest duties. Yes, the dulcet tones of these Daimlers were a vast improvement on the raucous cacophony from the eight forward entrance Regent Vs which were disliked by the crews.

Ian Wild

19/09/12 – 07:16

Huddersfield also had an earlier batch, 435-440, CCX 435-440B. There were detail differences in this earlier batch, from memory, mainly colour and layout of the staircase/luggage area.

Eric Bawden

Bradford Corporation – AEC Regent V – UKY 123 – 123

Bradford Corporation Transport
1961
AEC Regent V
MCW H39/31F

After my lengthy piece re the Routemaster yesterday I will keep the information on today’s bus to the point. It is a straight forward AEC Regent V with an AEC 9.6 litre engine, monocontrol four speed direct selection gearbox and air brakes, nothing controversial there unless you can come up with something, leave a comment if you do.

A full list of Regent V codes can be seen here.

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

I lived in Eldwick in the 60s. The village was originally served by the West Yorkshire services 62/62A from the forecourt of Bingley railway station. At some time these routs were extended through to Bradford and became jointly operated with the municipality. West Yorkshire ran its trusty FS Lodekkas and Bradford Corporation its Regents. The Service runs up the side of the Aire Valley escarpment to Eldwick on gradients of varying severity. The Lodekkas had vastly superior hill climbing qualities to the Regents. When Bradford dual sourced Daimlers and PD3s the Neepsend bodied Daimler CVG6LXs were a far better proposition for this service in respect to the hill climbing potential afforded by the Gardener engine.

Charles in Australia

Charles, greetings!

I lived in Eldwick from 1957 until 1983 and have fond memories of the 62/62A service, which for many years terminated in the car park at the Acorn Inn. In time this had to move to Spring Lane where buses had to undertake a very tricky reversing manoeuvre.
When West Yorkshire made application to extend the service to Bradford the Bradford Corporation sought licence for a rival service to the village. Eventually joint operation was agreed and I remember vividly the Bradford City Transport AEC Regents appearing in the village on driver route familiarisation duties. They made very heavy weather of the climb from Beck Bottom towards Dick Hudson’s.
When the joint service began on 6 March 1966 the Bradford City Transport used Regents (which were housed at Saltaire Depot). The period of Regent operation was quite brief as in the autumn of 1966 the Corporation received a batch of 15 Daimler CVG6/30 with East Lancashire (Neepsend) bodywork. As you say, they were a far better proposition for the Eldwick route. The first seven of the batch 226-233 (EAK 226-233D) were allocated to Saltaire Depot, the rest 234-240 (EAK 234-240D) going to Ludlam Street and later finishing their BCT-days at Horton Bank Top Depot where they were used on the 9/10/12 Buttershaw-Stanningly and 76/77 Bradford-Halifax services.
I was the last Junior Traffic Clerk to be employed by Bradford City Transport joining the undertaking on 1 October 1973. As I recall the Corporation’s Monday to Friday vehicle allocation to the Eldwick route was 2 buses (0625 out of Saltaire Depot and 0645). Saturday may have been different but Sunday was 1 bus (1005 out of Saltaire Depot).
The other interesting aspect about the Eldwick route that I recall is that prior to joint operation with Bradford City Transport the West Yorkshire allocation would often be a Keighley-West Yorkshire Lodekka.
In fact I recollect that in the autumn of 1966 not only did we have the new BCT CVGs but new Keighley-West Yorkshire Lodekkas (KDX 224-227).

Kevin Hey

15/08/11 – 13:32

This is No 123 one of the second batch of Monocontrol Mk V’s 121-125 which had the noisier dry liner AV590 engine rather than the previous A208 unit as used on the Mk III. They were reputed to be very thirsty and were outlasted by the previous 1959 batch of Monocontrol Mk V’s 106-120. With the arrival of new manager Wake from St Helens huge batches of St Helens spec synchromesh Mk V were ordered 126-225 to replace the trolleybuses. Bradford hills and ex trolleybus drivers made a lethal clutch destroying team and things got so bad two (224 225) were expensively fitted with Monocontrol and AV691 engines but with AEC fitting the heavy Mammoth Major clutch, things settled down and no more were done. Truly horrid things.

Kev

15/08/11 – 21:54

Well Kev, you have answered a question which has puzzled me for years, namely as to why the UKY batch were withdrawn before the PKY. Now I know!
I always thought the PKY series were much better quality vehicles than the later batches. They certainly gave that impression, and I was a regular Regent V customer. I well remember 224 and 225 being fitted with Monocontrol, and thought they were thereby improved, but, as a BCT enthusiast, the mark V Regents are, to me, probably best forgotten!

John Whitaker

15/08/11 – 22:02

Kev, the reliable AEC 9.6 litre engines up to A218 were all dry liner engines, and these were replaced from around 1958 by the wet liner AV590. All the Southall wet liner engines were a constant source of trouble, and AEC finally gave up the struggle with them and went back to dry liners with the AH505 and AV or AH691. When driving them, I always felt that AEC engines were inferior in the low speed torque area to Gardner and Leyland engines, yet the London RT was always a more lively performer on hills than the RTL. When some red RTLs were painted green and sent to the Country Area, they were quickly deemed to be unsatisfactory, and were sent back again to be replaced by RTs.

Roger Cox

16/08/11 – 09:00

I’m on record as acknowledging the weakness of the wet liner AH/AV590. However, I’m not aware of major problems with Sheffield’s series 2 Regent Vs. Bradford’s territory is no more punishing than Sheffield’s and I cannot comment whether they were nasty or not. Sheffield’s weren’t. Did Bradford lack the will to work with them (as LT did with more modern buses)? What were Bradford’s maintenance standards like? [I don’t know.]
Roger is correct about the characteristics of the three major engines. Noel Millier (respected PSV journalist of the ’60s and ’70s) calls the AECs the thoroughbreds, the Leylands and Gardners the reliable plodders. That is being realistically and honestly complementary to all three. OK, I am AEC man, but the PD2/3 is also one of my favourite buses. My experience with (albeit preserved) RTLs is that they move like slugs compared with RTs. Interestingly enough, experience driving RMs in service in Reading is quite the contrary. Reading Mainline’s Leyland powered RMs romped up Norcot Hill – so individual circumstances change constantly.

David Oldfield

17/08/11 – 07:21

Bradford were as good as anyone else at bus maintenance. The Mk Vs were purchased, I believe, as the cheapest option for mass trolleybus replacement. anyone connected with the City`s transport will tell you what horrors they were!
I too like AEC`s, David, but not from that generation!
They were noisy, juddering, rough riding and slow, and were hated by everyone in the City!

John Whitaker

17/08/11 – 07:24

David, it is a curious thing that London Transport always seemed to be the exception in proving any rule. The Fleetline debacle was probably the most extreme example, and much of the blame lay with the LT engineering system. Aldenham was designed to overhaul buses that could be dismantled like Meccano, and the RT/RTL/RTW, RF and RM classes were specifically designed to be taken to pieces and reconstructed accordingly. Other types like the Fleetline and Swift/Merlin, didn’t fit this bill. Yet LT, unlike many provincial operators, seemed to have very little trouble with the wet liner AV590 in the RM, though the story with the wet liner Reliance in LTE service was very different. The RW, RC and RP classes and their utilisation graphically demonstrated London Transport’s ability to waste public money.

Roger Cox

17/08/11 – 10:29

There is a clue in what John says. I recall, I think, that Bradford’s trolleybus withdrawal was not scheduled: do I remember that there was an accident- possibly a fatality- involving falling trolley booms and the Corporation took fright & withdrew the trolleys as quickly as possible? They may have then found that the plant- poles & wires- were in poor condition. This may have led to bargains being sought from manufacturers whose buses were going out of fashion? It would be typically Bradford not to embrace the “new” bustle buses, but look to tradition! Have I got my history right or are memories muddled?

Joe

17/08/11 – 13:22

Yes Joe, there was a trolley head fatality at Four Lane Ends which may have affected the abandonment schedule, but I think the main reason was the over hasty city centre redevelopment, most of which has itself now been demolished. BCT certainly utilised much second hand trolleybus equipment in the fifties and sixties, enabling it to last as long as it did, but events overtook them a bit, and they were faced with inflated motorbus demands.
AEC were probably the cheapest option, and the Mark Vs were very unpopular among the public, even amongst the “a bus is a bus” brigade. Letters were written to the Telegraph and Argus about Bradford’s latest monstrosities!
I am only an enthusiast, so cannot comment technically, and the Mark Vs did have some attraction to the enthusiast, even if it were just the unpopular aura which surrounded them! Were they really built by the same organisation who built the 1-40 batch some 12 years earlier?

John Whitaker

23/08/11 – 10:07

The Mark Vs in Bradford service had two major problems as far as I am aware. These were broken injector pipes, there being a fitter stationed at Forster Square to deal with these on a full time basis, and blown cylinder head gaskets probably caused by bad driving on steep hills where labouring the engine would cause this sort of problem. The injector pipe problem was of BCTs own making as the anti vibration clips were often not refitted at replacement. The problem was eventually cured by redesigning replacement pipes to something akin to a Gardner injector pipe so I was told by a gentleman who did this and later set up a business supplying pipes to Volvo for use on their engines. I have it on good authority from former chief engineer Bernard Browne that the difficulties in obtaining spares and the problems of day to day operation led to the later purchases of CVG6 and PD3A to enable replacement of early examples and provide more reliable motorbuses for the fleet

David Hudson

Bradford Corporation – AEC Regent V – 2168 KW – 168

Bradford Corporation Transport
1963
AEC Regent V 2D3RA
MCW H40/30F

I have a personal “adoration” for these BCT Mark V Regents – a liking in which I appear to be virtually alone !! The “Mononcontrol” vehicles were in the minority, the first twenty only, the remainder of the large fleet being of three pedal four speed synchromesh specification. The Bradford attractive livery and superb internal fittings, materials and seats cured any suggestion of “plain-ness” in the MCW bodies. However it was in the mechanical area that these buses were so appealing. They had the open exhaust system with exhaust brakes and made magnificent sound effects, both when slowing down or when pulling hard away from stops and up hills – Church Bank was a treat not to be missed. The wonderful pre-war vintage type sounds from the AEC gearboxes and arguably inadequate clutches completed this delightful mobile symphony. Sadly though they appear to have been loathed by drivers and passengers alike, apparently giving a very rough ride indeed unless expertly handled by someone with a real interest in the job. There is a fabulous chapter about them in Mr. J. S. King’s superb volume on BCT buses, in which their Southall character is well and truly assassinated from all quarters of the City.
I remember one Saturday evening visiting Saltaire Depot after the last trolleybus had left there for ever. The yard was full of brand new Mark Vs, and someone had taken the trouble to very accurately set every route number to “OIL” to rub it in so to speak.
Here is a picture of one of the synchromesh motors, number 168, making noisy (magnificent for me) but light work of Morley Street en route for Buttershaw.

Copy contributed by C. Youhill

A full list of Regent V codes can be seen here.

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

These were direct contempories of Sheffield 64 – 73 whose only sin was to have monocontrol rather than synchromesh boxes. In this respect, their 1960 sisters 435 – 460 had the edge. As an out and out Roe man, I am, nonetheless, a Weymann supporter. Apart from an aberration with the 1956/7 Regent III/V with lightweight bodies, all Sheffield Weymanns – including the two batches mentioned above – were finished to the highest standards. I never felt noisy or rough riding were apt descriptions of Regent Vs and I preferred the sounds of the manual versions – although the monocontrols did have a slight suggestion of the preselect sound!

David Oldfield

Although I am unfamiliar, personally, with these vehicles, I can readily understand why drivers disliked their exhaust brakes if they were anything like the ones I knew. Maidstone & District, a company about which I do know a little bit, had some Guy Arabs with exhaust brakes, which made an appalling, quite deafening noise in the cab when the brakes were applied. Half an hour driving a bus fitted with one would give you a headache for the rest of the day. They were only an auxiliary, of course, and either the mechanism failed in use or was disconnected at Chatham Depot, where the vehicles were based. A truly dreadful feature.

Roy Burke

Having driven Bradford 220 at Keighley Bus Museum many times I can understand why drivers disliked these Regent Vs. They are noisy, with very fierce brakes and a juddering clutch which makes them difficult to drive smoothly, especially in traffic or in hilly country (and Bradford has the odd hill!).
In Bradford Corporation Transport days they were notorious for breaking injector pipes, to the point where a fitter was employed virtually full-time in the City Centre just to keep up with breakdowns.
One of our (sadly deceased) former members who worked for YWD always referred to the Regent Vs as “overtime buses” he reckoned they were the finest bus ever invented for generating overtime for fitters!

David Jones

I have to agree with Chris Youhill’s sentiments regarding Bradford’s Regent Vs as I too adored them! I recall them taking over from the lovely trolleys on the Saltaire/Bingley/Crossflatts services in the sixties. As a ten year old I was bowled over by the wonderful sound effects and impression of speed when riding on these beasts. The rear ‘stopping’ signs beneath the back windows instead of traditional brake lights were so modern. Certainly the attractive Bradford Corporation Transport livery showed the bodywork off to good effect, and they could hold their own with the West Yorkshire Lodekkas plying alongside, as far as interiors were concerned. Raucous? No-just full of character!

Brendan Smith

Thank you for your support Brendan – much appreciated indeed.

Chris Youhill

Fine Machines!.. Unloved by most people, but simple to work on, Melodically on Parr with a popular Beethoven!.. As regards the exhaust brake?.. I did come across a brand new one boxed up in our stock sometime ago.. in time I shall track it down and install it!

Mick Holian – B.C.T. 220 Custodian

I know from Sandtoft and elsewhere Mick that you DO know how to drive these characterful machines properly, 220 in particular, so keep up the good work !! You won’t remember me, but you once long ago very kindly allowed me to turn back the clock and sit again behind the wheel of Leeds City Transport 980 in the museum at Keighley. Then we had a useful chat about a certain aspect of Mark V accelerator pedals.

Chris Youhill

Well, Well, Well! Yes I do recall that conversation Chris!.. that’s sometime ago isn’t it?… I sorted the problem with some rubber hose & new springs! to say the clatter on the over run was a niggle was a massive understatement… it drove me mad! And yes I remember being scalded by the Sandtoft Natives for making too much noise & driving too fast!
You will be pleased to know that I have been quietly rebuilding the front of Leeds City Transport 980 from parts sourced from an Ex-Southampton turned glider winch Regent V, The museum is planning to use it on a class 6 from early 2011, If I have my way? which I should as I’m doing the work? it will be presented in the livery with the red wheels.. fingers crossed! can’t wait to hear that go through its gears!
I am also hoping to have Bradford Corporation Transport 355 Fleetline make an appearance later this year, its coming together nicely, take care Chris, really good to hear from you & watch this space!

Mick Holian- Keighley bus Museum.

Many thanks Mick for your kind message and news of very impressive progress – I agree that 980 will be most authentic and impressive in the “red wheels” livery. I’ve never yet been to the new Keighley premises and must do so soon. My first experience of the Mark V “pedal chatter” was with the six new ones which we had at Samuel Ledgards, 1949-54 U. These had synchromesh gearboxes and the large flat pedal as opposed to the smaller “ball” type. The half mile where the quirk was at its worst was when descending the A65 from Horsforth to Kirkstall Forge. There were at that time a good many hidden ripples in the road surface, and during braking the free rattling of the accelerator pedals was actually sufficient to cause the engine to pull against the brakes – a very strange sensation indeed.

Chris Youhill

After the really top of the job Mark III the Mark V was a different animal, bigger heavier and with the AV690 engine they were a let down, a 50’s obsession in the industry with fuel consumption had them fitted with synchro boxes.
Generally with easier steering, softer feel brakes they were nicer than contemporary Leylands but not as mechanically strong.
The Met Cam Aurora body was not good, they rotted badly, rained inside, had poor heaters and were often described as fitters friends.
WYPTE examined fitting Dorman V8 engines in an effort to improve performance but opted to put 95 Metropolitans into Bradford instead, they were mechanically even worse! especially the HR501 hydraulic gearbox.
The last two were much much better with mono control and 760 12.47litre engines VROOM!!!!!!!!!!

Christopher

The mists of time have caused most folk to forget that the first forty Scania Metropolitans were ordered by Leeds City Transport – an absolutely astonishing move for such a conservative and careful operator. They were delivered to LCT, but not placed in service, just before the formation of the PTE in April 1974, and many were first stored at Middleton Garage where they huddled uncomfortably together – many top decks touching – as their air bags were of course empty after a while. I know they had a wonderful performance, but I believe the fuel consumption didn’t bear thinking about. Despite their very limited success, I thought they were most handsome vehicles.

Chris Youhill

One of Leylands better legacies was that, through licensing manufacture of what were excellent engines – particularly the 0.600/0.680 family – the line lives on in the superb modern units produced by both Scania and DAF/PACCAR.

The Metropolitans suffered by being quick and encouraging a sprightly style of driving which was not very economical. This might have been forgivable, but the bizarre use of a two speed torque converter transmission gave these machines a big “drink problem”.

The biggest weakness – which was never solved to the end of MCW days – was a tendency for the metal frames to rot. This often gave “modern” MCW products a shorter life than they perhaps should have enjoyed.

David Oldfield

I am so happy that I found this site by accident, although quite a veteran myself I’m in the modern passenger transport industry – a driving instructor for Arriva, the Shires.
I am in awe of the knowledge of your principal contributors.
As a boy in Shipley W Yorks., I used West Yorkshire’s 66 service to Forster Square, Bradford and Bradford Transport’s trolley to school in Saltaire.

Bill Loy

Oh what happy days Bill – I was a young conductor on West Yorkshire (Ilkley Depot) in 1960/1 and many’s the time our Lodekka drivers were left gasping in the offside lane by the wonderful Bradford trolleybuses as they “mischievously launched at speed” from the stops in Manningham Lane and Frizinghall. I spent my last fourteen years of a fabulous and enjoyable forty four year career as a driver for South Yorkshire Road Transort/Caldaire/British Bus/Arriva “serving Yorkshire” at Pontefract Depot (now demolished).

Chris Youhill

Leeds 150 short AEC Regent V delivered in 1956/57 were all light weight affairs but the body style was pure Roe being a natural follow-on to the AEC Regent III delivered in 1954 The lightweight vehicles in later years were absolute rattlers with every opening window and seat back vibrating as they idled, particularly on hills. The first 30ft AEC Regent V were a very different kettle of fish being bodied by MCW and being unusual as they carried exposed radiators. They had a massive presence in the flesh and were and still are amongst my favourite Leeds buses.

Chris Hough

I was a student in the late 70s in Bradford. Unfortunately by that time the Bradford blue had been replaced by the none too attractive green and cream of WYPTE. Nonetheless, I always wondered how they ever managed to climb the hills out of the town centre. 2168 was a regular on the 63/636 up to Heights Lane and Sandy Lane and hearing the gears crash as it set off up Oak Lane out of St Mary Rd. Compared to the CVG6s which also operated the route they were noisy beasts but had loads of character. Ah, fond memories!

Phil Ashton

I agree entirely with Chris Hough about the fifteen exposed radiator Mark Vs at Leeds – they were magnificent motors and in my opinion very handsome too – although after all these years I am now used to endlessly defending the “Orion” type bodies which are much maligned for some reason. I try not to decry batches of buses per se in their entirety, but oh how I loathed the gutless rolling little lightweight Mark Vs at Leeds. Mind you its perhaps fortunate that the Leeds policy of “cutting engines down” restricted them to only just over 30 mph. That rearward facing seat for five was nothing short of obscene, with passengers’ knees unavoidably jammed between those of people sitting opposite. As I said earlier in this topic, there can be few batches of vehicles with as much individual character and impressive performance as the wonderful Bradford Mark Vs – I’ve always loved ’em !!

Chris Youhill

As I’ve suspected for a long time, Chris Youhill is a man after my own heart. My preference is always for a big engine with plenty of torque. An AEC man to my marrow, I have never been much of one for the medium weights – particularly the deckers. We never had any in Sheffield, they would never have coped with the hills!

David Oldfield

The photograph of 168 labouring up Morley Street with the sun shining after a spell of rain is superb.
Services 9/10/12 Buttershaw-Stanningley were operated jointly by Horton Bank Top and Thornbury Depot. I would hazard a guess that 168 was a Thornbury vehicle.
I was the last person to be employed in the BCT Traffic Office at Forster Square. I joined the undertaking on 1 October 1973. By this stage the bulk of the Regents were to be found at Ludlam Street and Thornbury Depots with small allocations only at Bankfoot, Bowling Depots etc. Ludlam Street operated the following rosters: Eccleshill (43/44), Fagley (14/34), Haworth Road (29/32/33/35), Huddersfield (63/64) Leeds (72/78/272), Tyersal (30) and The MBMR (Motorbus Miscellaneous Rota – ‘The Old Mans Road’). Funnily enough the Stanningley roster at Thornbury was full (as were most Thornbury rosters, except Wibsey which covered the 45/46) except for one driving line against a conductor whose name I cannot remember but whom no one was prepared to work with on a regular basis.
I recall vividly that the Eccleshill, Fagley and Haworth Road rosters had few regular drivers, which was something of a puzzle. Now, looking back, I wonder whether this was due to the Mark Vs, which were often to be found allocated to these duties. I suspect that the drivers felt that working a duty on these rosters with a Mark V on overtime was just reward for the effort involved.

Kevin Hey

Always loved the Regents, living in Fairweather Green as a kid we tended to get Leylands on Thornton Road but the AECs were always a favourite. Im more of a lorry enthusiast and surprise surprise a big AEC fan

Paul G

Re. Bradford`s Mk V Regents; I rode on these regularly, and they always made me think how inferior they were compared with the refinements of the Mk.111 !! However, they were something to enthuse over, and became something like a “Bradford Standard”. I could never forgive them though for their part in the demise of the BCT trolleybus system!

John Whitaker

I did about 4 years at BCT in the early sixties , and remember the Regent Vs as fantastic work horses – but the brakes were rather “savage”. I worked out of Ludlam St. but also had a 12 month spell out of Duckworth Depot mostly on the Thornton route – many fond memories.

Tom Mirfield

26/08/11 – 07:21

I remember the original batch of PKY-registered Bradford Mk. V’s bursting impressively and noisily on to the scene on the 64 service when travelling from Brighouse to Huddersfield with my mother to visit my grandfather. I was seven years old, already a bus enthusiast, and I was very impressed with them.
I started driving for Halifax Passenger Transport in 1973. There were still more than half of their own Metro-Cammell bodied Mk V’s in service, and they were OK, though getting a bit tired and leaky. There were also three ex-Hebble ones – one having Northern Counties bodywork – and these went much better, and were far nicer to drive.
Then shortly after the formation of WYPTE, Metro Calderdale found itself with a serious vehicle shortage, and a number of interesting buses were borrowed from other districts for a few days. Amongst these were several ex-Bradford Mk. V’s, all still in blue and cream. This didn’t go down very well with most of the drivers, who generally detested AEC’s. They were returned after a week or so, but then in October 1975 two more – 2209 & 2213, also in blue – appeared, this time officially transferred.
2213’s stay was only to be very brief, coming to a sticky end when it failed to negotiate the right-angled bend over the disused railway bridge at Holmfield Mills one frosty morning. 2209 stayed for six months. I got to drive it a couple of times and it was brilliant compared to ‘our own’ Mk V’s.
Then a further three came in February 1976. 2136, 2137 and 2138 they were in PTE livery, and they stayed with us until the July. I have always been an AEC man, but these were a revelation. Yes they were noisy, whiny and raucous, had jangly accelerator pedals and may not have been as technically durable as they could have been, but they had so much in-your-face character and were an aural delight.
In fact, I have driven buses in Halifax for over 38 years now, and if I had to nominate my all time favourite bus from the point of view of absolute driving pleasure, it would definitely be 2137.
On Saturdays we had a duty which came out of Garage at 10:43 then worked Boothtown ‘flashbacks’ – three per hour in between the 76 Bradfords. I always tried to persuade the Shed Foreman to allocate me a Bradford Mk. V, and he usually obliged in order to get rid of one to a driver he knew would not ring it in. This could well be a really tedious duty, especially if lumbered with a tired out old PD2, or a thoroughly horrible early Fleetline, but with a Bradford Mk. V I was like a pig in you-know-what all day. In those days Boothtown Road was built up just about all the way, and the trick was to adjust the engine revs, gearing etc. to create maximum aural effect, so that the raucous, growling, booming exhaust reverberated off the stone buildings. Our own Mk. V’s did not have the ‘booming’ exhaust feature and so were nothing like as gratifying.
Finally one Saturday, word came that they had to go back to Bradford. There were not enough garage staff to oblige so being a spare driver that day I was asked if I would take one over to Ludlam Street. Silly question of course, and I grabbed 2137 and headed in a roughly Bradford direction. This must have been the longest journey a bus ever made between Halifax and Bradford ! Eventually I reached the City Centre and decided as a final gesture I must take it around Forster Square and sweep up Church Bank as I had seen – and particularly heard – them do so many times in the past. The sound effects still echo in my mind to this day. Brilliant !

John Stringer

26/08/11 – 09:23

Nice story John, I can still hear that exhaust!

Roger Broughton

26/08/11 – 10:07

What a wonderful story John, and you are obviously as fond of the Bradford Mark Vs as I am. There can be few models/batches in PSV/PCV history with as much gutsy and unashamed character as these buses – they seemed to cheekily proclaim “Hold onto your hats for a thrilling ride, and if you can’t take it get a taxi !!” You did right to fit in a memorial ascent of Church Bank and I too, can still hear the magnificent concerto. I believe that there were frequent vacancies for organists at the Cathedral as few could compete with the Southall Symposium !! Somewhere I have a very old cassette which I recorded one Saturday night on a Bradford Moor bound Regent – propelled by undoubtedly the worst driver ever – he should never have passed his test, but for enthusiast pleasure purposes it was magnificent ride never to be forgotten.

Chris Youhill

26/08/11 – 14:27

The regular vacancies for organists at the Cathedral were due to the clergy from hell. [I mean it can back up my comments with evidence!] You can’t blame it on the Regent Vs.

David Oldfield

26/08/11 – 18:03

I have really enjoyed the correspondence on Bradford`s notorious Mark Vs, especially the comments from those “in the know” who drove them!
As an enthusiast, I well remember the first ones in 1959, the PKYs, and the 5 1961 UKY batch. They all seemed to be quite heavy and substantial buses, and made nice noises (!!). They were ordered by the Master himself, C.T.Humpidge, and were the first dd. motorbus orders since the 1952/3 HKW batch of Mark 111s, and consequently re-ignited a lot of enthusiast interest in what was still the “Trolleybus era”.
126-135 though, were ordered by Mr Wake, and made the most unpleasant reverberating noise, and, replacing trolleys on the Bradford Moor route, seemed almost static when climbing Church Bank. The trolleys just glided up!
The following 90, up to 225 in 1964 were more like the 126 batch, and what I can say, with certainty, is that most Bradfordians expressed a hatred for them, as did, I believe, the engineering staff.
This is not to say that there wasn’t a certain attraction about them. I was a regular rider, and cannot remember any other batches which suffered so many breakdowns and problems, but it is this notoriety which, as an enthusiast, attracted me to them.
I would say, looking back, that most of the Bradford bus enthusiast fraternity were of the trolleybus ilk. I was as far as BCT was concerned, and it is perhaps this which colours our remembrances of them. They were trolleybus replacement vehicles. How dare they! I am sure, however, that they did not demonstrate that level of sophistication which the Mark 111s had, or the PD2/3, and subsequent Leyland and Daimler deliveries. Nice, however, that they are so well remembered, and I must visit the preserved one at Keighley! Does anyone know when the last survivor ran for the PTE fleet?

John Whitaker

26/08/11 – 18:04

The mention of Halifax brought back memories of my own experiences with the HPTD Regent Vs. I was a Traffic Clerk at Skircoat Road in the mid nineteen sixties, and we office types (having been put through the PSV test by GGH) would volunteer to cover the second half of late turns in the week, or a full late on Saturdays. I much preferred to do a turn on the Brighouse – Hebden Bridge run whenever possible, and a Regent V was frequently the beast that turned up on taking over the wheel. They were easy to drive, having much lighter steering than a PD3, and the all synchromesh box was a doddle to use, but the noise from the engine and gearbox was unimaginable at times, including the hellish racket from the accelerator pedal when one was braking or descending hills. The very light clutch needed careful handling to avoid judder on pulling away. Also, unlike those of the Regent III, AEC brakes of that period were not progressive. Depression of the pedal brought no effect until suddenly the the brakes came on fiercely. Easing off the pedal then did nothing until, with a hiss of air escaping, the braking effect was lost. Why AEC lost the ability to design smooth progressive air brakes I do not know, but this was a feature of AEC air braked buses, including the Reliance, for years afterwards. I am not a great AEC fan, and the Regent V is part of the reason for this. Geoff Hilditch of Halifax was not an admirer of the Regent V either.

Roger Cox

27/08/11 – 07:20

Oh Heck David – I’m in deep water here am I not ?? My comment about the ability of the Mk Vs to “see off” the Cathedral organ was meant to be a comical one – I had no idea that there had actually been a high turnover of organists caused by the “opposition clergy” to who you refer.

Chris Youhill

27/08/11 – 07:21

Roger says in his last post that Geoff Hilditch was not a fan of Regent Vs In his guise as “Gortonian” in the sixties and seventies he rightly states the Regent III was one of the best buses he had the pleasure of working with. My home town Leeds certainly got the best out of their 30ft AEC/Roe Regent Vs However the short light weight tram replacement examples dating from the late fifties were nowhere near as good being absolute rattlers by the end of their lives. Now the MCCW bodied 30 footers of 1960 were a whole different kettle of fish and to mix metaphors were definitely my cup of tea!

Chris Hough

Truth is always stranger than fiction, Chris.
My spies in the South confirm that Sheffield had no particular problems with Regent Vs and Charles Halls states that engineers regarded the late ones as among the best vehicles they had run. Regent IIIs were evidently better, but so were later dry-liner Reliances (AH691/AH760)….. and I wouldn’t give a Medium (really light) weight decker house room anyway (whether AEC or Alexander Dennis)!

David Oldfield

28/08/11 – 15:48

This may be an urban myth but I was always told that Yorkshire Woollen cut down the engines of their Regent Vs and that AEC ordered that their AEC triangle badges be removed. A certain person who is today a PCSO who worked in the paint shop at Dewsbury kept them in his locker.

Philip Carlton

29/08/11 – 07:52

Philip, it may be an urban myth but it’s a widely known one.

David Oldfield

28/09/11 – 07:06

Re Aec badges on YWD Regents.
Quote from Buses Illustrated Dec1964
“The AEC Regent Vs are being “spoiled”, we hear.
The chromium radiator surrounds are being painted red and the grilles black. The famous AEC triangle is being removed”.

John Blackburn

14/11/11 – 07:53

Sorry but can’t share your enthusiasm for Bradfords manual Regent V’s bought by the ex St Helens Manager (Wake) for Trolleybus replacement although I must admit they lookrd very attractive in Bradfords Blue and Buttermilk. AEC’s straight cut gears gave an almost 30’s sound.
The manual gears were not really suitable for stop start on Bradfords hills and with the help of ex trolleybus drivers clutch life was appalling until AEC fitted Mamorth Major (Very Stiff) clutches, To try and improve things the last two 224 and 225 were expensively converted to AV691 engines and Monocontrol gears but no more were done due to cost.
My mother used to refer to them as “those jerky buses” and often waited for one of my beloved AEC Regent III’s with very musical preselectors from Bank top shed.
The last batch 195-225 were better trimmed in “felt pen friendly” light blue and dispensed with the fierce exhaust brakes of the earlier ones..

Kev

28/11/11 – 10:35

Oh Dear ! People are very polarised about the merits or otherwise of AEC Mark Fives it seems, but sometimes I feel the point is completely missed.
It all depends on your point of view. As a bus driver, but also an enthusiast, I found that driving a good one was simply a most enjoyable experience, particularly in the sound effects department. Very sensuous even. Sorry, but I just did ! This despite all their indisputable shortcomings – unreliability, self-detaching injector pipes, weak and temperamental hydraulic clutches, general noise level, rattily accelerator pedals, bonnet lids that blew open in crosswinds, keen brakes and poor accessibility for maintenance due to their tin fronts….. and so on.
As a passenger or general observer, but also an enthusiast, I still believe that Hebble’s earlier Mark Fives – the rear entrance ones with the Mark Three type A218 9.6 engines were the most aurally spectacular buses I have ever encountered, with their loud, growly open exhausts and booming exhaust brakes which could be heard long before you ever saw them. They were also very lively performers. Some of the best, most exciting bus journeys I ever had were between Halifax and Bradford on these buses, being driven with vigour. This despite their harsh riding characteristics, thin uncomfortable seat cushions, and very basic, lightweight and ultimately rust-buckety Orion bodywork – the first two having the most unprepossessingly ugly and uncomfortable lowbridge version. Actually, these two were not as lightweight (at 7tons 5cwt) as the three highbridge ones (at 6tons 16cwts).
Non-enthusiast drivers, which accounted for the majority, generally detested them – certainly they did at Halifax. However, Mark Fives were in a minority there, outnumbered by PD2’s and PD3’s. Most Halifax drivers tended to adopt a ‘Leyland Style’ of driving, and were not inclined to adapt to the different requirements of the AEC’s. Ex-Hebble drivers, previously used to little else, appeared to be more sympathetic towards them. You had to drive an AEC like an AEC.
Non-enthusiast passengers riding on them probably just found them very noisy and a bit hard riding. Non-enthusiast passers by and people living nearby their routes probably found them unacceptably raucous.
Certainly from a purely non-emotional, operational, engineer’s or passenger’s point of view they were often far from ideal. The previous 9.6 litre Mark Three with preselector gearbox was certainly considerably more reliable, durable, refined and easier to drive – in my opinion one of the best city buses ever. I have driven several different preserved ones in the distant past – ex-Halifax, Huddersfield, Morecambe & Heysham, Liverpool and London Transport examples – and they were all great buses, although the Halifax one was a bit noisy and had Park Royal bodywork constructed from matchsticks. Its framework creaked alarmingly and seemed to move in several directions at once, and the experience was like driving a large, rotting preselector garden shed on wheels. I believe it’s a lot better nowadays.
From the late 50’s Halifax would almost certainly have been far better off with a fleet of Daimler CVG6LX’s with semi-automatic gearboxes – like neighbouring Huddersfield – especially if they could have had Roe bodies as well. Excellent, reliable, indestructible, powerful, worthy Gardner-engined chassis, yet from my experience as a enthusiastic driver (we had some ex-Leeds ones for a while), well……a bit lacking in character. Dull even, some have said. Similarly equipped Guy Arabs would have been similarly worthy, and would probably also have whistled too. Bristol FLF Lodekkas were also really sound, engineers’ buses, but we couldn’t have those.
Then what was a Regent V anyway ? It came in many forms. It could be medium or heavy duty. Tin-fronted or with traditional exposed Regent III front. It could have the earlier A218 9.6 unit from the Mark Three, and the similar but larger A222 for export. AV470, AV590 or AV690 wet liner engines, A few late ones had the far superior AV691 dry liner unit (surprisingly the excellent AV505 was never offered in place of the AV470). Some even had Gardner 6LW’s and mechanical preselector boxes, and even the 5LW was offered quietly. They could have synchromesh or Monocontrol semi-automatic gearboxes. They could be 27 or 30 feet long, 34 feet for export. Right or left-hand drive. The Mark Threes and Fives were a bit ‘mix n’match’ in the 50’s, and Alan Townsin (The Oracle) stated that the only crucial distinguishing feature that determined a Mark Five from a Mark Three was the use of four inch wide front springs, instead of three and a half inches. Some combinations were quite good, others not so.
There were undoubtedly ‘better’ buses, but the thing about being an bus enthusiast is that you can be as irrational and illogical as you like in your choice of favourites. You don’t have to be too concerned about reliability and all those things – just appreciate them, warts and all, just as you do with your family and friends. Great, isn’t it ?

John Stringer

Bradford Corporation – AEC Regent V – 6208 KW – 208

Copyright Roger Cox

Bradford Corporation
1964
AEC Regent V 2D3RA
Metro Cammell H40/30F

A while ago there was a thread re Bradfords Regent Vs so I thought I would contribute one of my shots it is of 208 a 2D3RA type with clutch and four speed synchromesh gearbox, and MCW H40/30F bodywork. When I worked in the Traffic Office for Halifax Passenger Transport in the mid 1960s, I used to ride from time to time on Bradford buses between Queensbury and the city centre. The howl of the conventional transmission Regent V in the intermediate gears on hills was part of the soundtrack of life in that part of West Yorkshire in those days – Hebble and Halifax also had buses of this type. In theory, the blue/cream livery should have been quite attractive, but in practice Bradford’s buses always had a slightly disappointing appearance to me. It was often said back then that blue paint did not wear as well as red or green, and this seemed to be borne out by the matt finish that Bradford’s buses seemed to acquire very quickly. Perhaps the Corporation’s bus washing equipment had a deleterious effect upon the paintwork.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

A full list of Regent V codes can be seen here.

29/09/11 – 09:02

I was once with a company whose corporate colour was light blue. It was not a very stable colour & depended too for its appearance very much on what colour was underneath it.

Joe

30/09/11 – 12:23

Bradford`s blue was always subject to quick fading, and the problem seemed to worsen when the Humpidge livery eliminated cream bands, grey roofs, and yellow lining. There was no finer sight than a newly repainted Bradford bus, but, alas, after a week, the same old look of faded gentility would appear!
Perhaps BCPT should have resisted the temptation of using the Southend blue which so inspired them in 1942 when 4 trolleybuses from that town appeared on loan. The original dark blue was quite sombre, but had a certain elegance which seemed to emphasise the no nonsense attitude of a busy industrial city.
I cannot imagine what the MkVs would have looked like though!

John Whitaker

30/09/11 – 15:22

I think the overall effect would be akin to the Lytham & St Annes blue or perhaps Pontypridd UDC both of these used a dark blue as their main colour.

Chris Hough

30/09/11 – 16:28

Hi Chris.
No, I knew the Lytham fleet well, Bradford`s pre war blue was VERY dark, almost like EYMS. Lytham blue was more a royal blue, whereas Bradford’s was classed as ultramarine. Check it out on preserved tram 104.

John Whitaker

Just so happen to have a model AEC Regal in Bradfords old Livery.

Peter

30/09/11 – 21:59

To change the subject from paint to move to that transmission howl. Being brought up in Rochdale in the 1950’s I was obviously a great admirer of AEC Regent V’s. In the early 1960’s I made a journey to Huddersfield to look at the trolleys and after taking the Hebble 28 to Halifax over Blackstone Edge I changed to a 43 for Huddersfield. It was a Halifax LJX Regent V. I was absolutely distraught at the howling and whining sounds made by the bus especially on the long climb up to Ainley Top from Elland. Our Regent V’s in Rochdale never made sounds like that. Of course I found out later as my knowledge of bus engineering expanded that the Rochdale vehicles had fluid transmission, either pre-selectors (NDK batch) or Monocontrol on the later ODK, RDK and TDK registered vehicles. The NDK batch also had Gardner 6LW engines. I was never such a fan of the more common synchromesh Regent V’s after that experience.

Philip Halstead

12/11/11 – 06:11

Ah! The Bradford Regent Vs. They appeared to fall into two distinct camps – people either loved them or loathed them, and I make no apologies for nailing my colours to the loved ’em mast every time! As a youngster I used to try and guess which batch an approaching Regent V was from, before the number plate became visible. If memory serves correctly, taking the first batch (the PKYs) as a yardstick, these had fixed glazing in the front upper deck windows with a ventilator in the roof dome above them. The UKYs were broadly similar but whereas the PKYs had a straight lower front edge to the front wings, the UKYs (and subsequent batches) had a somewhat racier rounded lower front edge to them. Then came the YAKs, similar to the UKYs, but with opening front ventilators in the front upper deck windows and no ventilator in the front dome. The most noticeable change came with the YKWs, as they were the first to sport St Helen’s-style destination displays showing ultimate, via and route number information boldly and clearly (a classic display if ever there was one). They also had single rather than two-piece windscreens, fuller roof domes and a subtly deeper area of cream above the lower deck windows and cab/canopy. They lacked front dome ventilators but retained the opening vents in the front upper deck windows. Then came the 2xxx KW batch, seemingly identical to the YKWs, but the eagle-eyed would spot that the roof dome ventilator was back! The final batch – the 6xxx KWs – were the ones that I had to admit defeat on as they looked every inch the same as the 2xxx’s. However, once aboard, you immediately knew which was which as the 6xxx buses had light blue internal window surrounds rather than the cream used hitherto. In later years the Transport Department converted the PKYs, UKYs and YAKs to the St Helen’s-style destination displays, but they were still readily identifiable as they retained the original smaller route number blinds and tracks. Later they also added roof dome ventilators to the YKWs too, bringing them into line with the two batches of KWs. Fond memories of buses with undeniable character.

Brendan Smith

06/07/13 – 07:00

Has has been said many times the Bradford livery was superb when ex works. I can remember the FKY batch of Regent IIIs were always immaculate when returned from two year recertification. FKY 7, which was probably the last to gain a five year certificate, could always be easily identified at a distance by the creamy brown window pans caused by rust coming through, and the faded blue livery, until its later recertification, which transformed it from the ugly duckling to a magnificent machine in line with its sisters.

David Hudson

06/07/13 – 09:18

I have always been quite distressed by the vicious condemnation from many quarters of the Bradford Mark Vs. The exaggerated accounts of rough and violent rides are wicked to hear, and any such discomfort must surely have arisen largely from careless or deliberate bad driving. I drove many Mark Vs in my time, both two pedal and live gearbox, and never had any trouble with them. I was even allowed, for a reason I can’t remember, to drive a full load of folks around the Sandtoft circuit in preserved M & D VKR 37 – at the time I’d obviously never seen that vehicle previously, nor had I driven any Mark V for many years, but it gave no problems at all. Possibly the mountainous roads in Bradford encouraged “forceful” driving but, if so, there’s no excuse for this. Certainly the superb pure howling of the Mark V manual transmission in the first three ratios was glorious to hear, as indeed was the “petrol engine” smooth quietness in top !! I’ll never forget the civilised magic of the Ledgard Roe sextet 1949 – 1954 U when they appeared in September 1957. Incredibly, despite the use of the green demonstrator 88 CMV, they were not expected by the staff in general – surely one of the best kept secrets ever, especially within a relatively small operator.

Chris Youhill

07/07/13 – 07:36

Well said, Chris. Despite having the (slightly) suspect wet-liner AV590, Sheffield’s 2D3RA and 2D2RA Regent Vs gave full value and service lives in the mountains of Sheffield and the Peak District. […..and the “Pre-war Howl” of the 2D3RA was part of their (musical) attraction.]

David Oldfield

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

14/07/13 – 07:50

Chris, I heartily endorse your defence of the much maligned Bradford AEC Regent Vs. Having had the pleasure of riding on many of the ‘YKWs’ and ‘KWs’ over the years, I feel much of the ‘problem’ as you rightly say was down to very poor driving. Whether they had lower ratio rear axles to cope better with Bradford’s many hills I do not know, but this would give improved acceleration on the flat, such as the services along Manningham Lane to Saltaire, Bingley and Crossflatts. Also if the engines were fully rated, this combination would no doubt encourage ‘spirited’ performances from BCT’s small band of would-be rally drivers. Exhaust brakes were also fitted to the buses, giving increased deceleration on braking if needed, so in the hands of said rally drivers – well you can imagine passenger comments! (Not to mention those of the poor conductor saddled for a full shift).
Having also ridden on East Yorkshire Bridgemasters and Renowns, which shared many mechanical components with the Regent Vs, these did not appear to have the same afflictions. They generally seemed to be treated with much more respect by their drivers, and the ride was all the better for it. Another benefit of a more relaxed driving style with the AECs was that passengers were treated to the wonderful musical tones of the gearbox, as mentioned by Chris Y and David O, for that much longer!

Brendan Smith

14/07/13 – 10:04

Thank you indeed Brendan and David for your supporting views, and I’m sure that if a survey had ever been carried out amongst thinking folks as to the popularity of the Mark Vs the “Ayes would have had it.” We all have regrets on the lines of “Oh, if only I’d had my camera” and just such an occasion for me and a friend was when we foolishly omitted to take ours to Saltaire on the last evening of trolleybus operation. The trolleybuses had left that morning to take up service and were never to return to Saltaire Depot. In that quiet Saturday mid evening the front yard was full of new Mark V AEC Regents, and someone had taken the trouble to set all the route numbers to “O I L” – rather a nice touch really. So, to the lay passengers, its perhaps understandable to a degree that the complete difference in the nature of their future riding experience came as a culture shock, especially as I suppose only a minority were gifted as devotees of classical auto-mechanical music !!

Chris Youhill

14/07/13 – 14:21

My first contribution to this site quite a while back now was in defence of the much maligned Bradford Mk.V’s – and Mk.V’s in general – and I remember being heartened by Chris Youhill’s brilliantly worded response, as I then realised I wasn’t the only person on the planet who appreciated their qualities and characteristics.
At the risk of covering old ground, Regent V’s were most certainly not Southall’s most durable and troublefree model, nor the most refined – that accolade in my opinion belongs with their 9.6 preselector Mk.III. I admit that Bristol, Guy and Daimler probably all turned out far more rugged, reliable, and economical products.
There were so many different variants on the Mk.V theme. Permutations of short ones, long ones, lightweight and heavyweight, AV470/590/690/691’s, ones with the old 9.6, synchromesh or Monocontrol, tin front or conventional – they were all fascinatingly different, with widely varying characters and levels of durability and performance.
Even apparently similar ones could perform quite differently. At Halifax we had sixteen of our ‘own’ and a small number of ex-Hebble ones. Though all were 30ft. AV590/Synchromesh types I believe ‘ours’ had in-line fuel pumps, whereas the Hebble ones had rotary pumps and performed quite differently – much better actually. Some could even be a bit dull – I always thought that Yorkshire Woollen’s Metro-Cammell-bodied ones were rather lacking in something.
Then in PTE days we received quite a few ex-Bradford ones either on loan or transferred. These were a revelation, infinitely better than any of ours, and from my own purely personal enthusiast/driver/non-engineering point of view were the most satisfyingly pleasurable buses that I have ever driven during my 40 year career.
Absolutely loved ’em !

John Stringer

15/07/13 – 08:27

36 hours ago I was enjoying working on Leigh Renown 28.
A journey from West Yorkshire to the East Coast and back for tea! Fantastic gearbox music and a booming exhaust.
I am a Bradford lad and loved the Mark Vs.

Geoff S

15/07/13 – 08:28

Just because one holds a less than rhapsodic view of a particular piece of machinery, that does not automatically brand one as an insensitive or clumsy driver. My driving experience of the Regent V was limited to the Halifax examples, and I make no apology for stating that I found them crude and unpleasant machines. On the plus side, they were quite lively, the steering was pleasantly light, and the all synchromesh gearbox was extremely easy to use. However, the clutch was excessively light and vague in operation, so that, unlike the much heavier but predictable Leyland clutch, one could never be exactly sure when transmission engagement would occur. Many drivers got round this by slipping the clutch in at (to my mind) excessive revs, which, in turn, gave rise to a juddery take off from rest, but I would endeavour to take greater care (yes, even though I was not the greatest fan of the Regent V). The ear splitting gearbox howl in the indirect ratios, which were perpetually required on the Halifax hills, plus the indescribable racket from the accelerator pedal as it rattled freely when released under braking or when descending hills, made the Regent V the noisiest bus, by a huge margin, that I have ever driven (though the Seddon Pennine IV is close behind). The accelerator pedal had an incredibly light return spring, so that holding the pedal at an intermediate position for driving at modest speeds left one with an aching ankle, and the air brakes had a totally non progressive feel to them. A gradual depression of the pedal produced no effect at all until suddenly over application came about. Easing off again then produced no result until, with a whoosh of escaping air, the brakes released entirely. This was a feature of AEC air brakes on other contemporary bus models, such as the Reliance. How Southall lost the knack of designing smooth progressive brakes after the excellent Regal III/Regent III, puzzles me to this day. John Stringer’s comment re in line v distributor fuel pumps is interesting, as it is generally held that the in line pump is more tolerant of variable fuel quality. I suspect the the distributor pumps on the Hebble buses were set rather more generously.
We all have our own favourites and bete noires, and such views should surely be respected. I certainly refute the implication that my opinion of the Regent V arises from a shortfall in competence.

Roger Cox

15/07/13 – 10:25

I think the gentleman protesteth too much. I may have missed something, but I cannot recollect anyone accusing Roger of incompetence.

David Oldfield

15/07/13 – 10:26

As far as I can see, nobody has implied that at all Roger.

John Stringer

Bradford Corporation – AEC Regent III – FKY 24 – 24

Bradford Corporation Transport
1950
AEC Regent III 9612E
Weymann H30/26R

This photo was taken just up the road from the Alhambra Theatre passing the entrance of the old bus station. This 1950 Regent III is on route to Queensbury and believe you me it is uphill all the way. There is a good saying referring to Queensbury which is just under 1000 feet above sea level it goes like this “Queensbury has 3 months of winter and 9 months of bad weather” not strictly true but its a good Yorkshireism.

A full list of Regent III codes can be seen here.

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

AEC Regent III 9612E with 8ft wide Weymann Body one of the 1-40 batch 1949/50. FKY 1 to 40.
Riding on them almost every day to school these became my favourite buses of all time and I used to know the 18 or so based at Horton Bank Top Shed as old friends. They were a good buy with last ones 7 and 13 going in 1970 and were preferred to the later tin front East Lancs ones 66-105 who’s bodies were not as good. Sadly none were preserved, indeed I don’t think there are any Regent III pre-selectors with the popular 8ft Weymann flared skirt body preserved, anywhere.

Kev

I also loved these buses as I lived in Great Horton from 1954 to 1971 and travelled on these buses nearly every day and I nearly have some 100 pictures of them some of which I took myself at bank top shed in the mid 60’s although not very good and I also have the original front number plate of FKY 17 (maybe the only surviving part of any of these buses) the nearest surviving bus I find to these is Morecambe & Heysham 73 which is under restoration at the Keighley Bus Museum.

Norman Shepherd

I can remember hearing the melodious tones of these vehicles whining their way up Great Horton Road on a Sunday morning when all was quiet and little traffic around. I have the back number plate off FKY 13 and dozens of photographs of them in service. FKY 1 was the first bus I wanted to preserve, but unfortunately this was not to be. Instead I have to endure “Bullnose” HKW 82 (nowhere near as handsome) and RT HLW 159 (not originally a Bradford bus) but that noise still haunts me to this day!!!!!

David Hudson

07/09/11 – 14:59

It’s interesting to observe the trend with these bodies to bring the paint down the front corners of the roofs. Amongst other operators, it was done with the postwar ‘provincial’ London Transport STL’s (and, bizarrely, one prewar RT late in life!)

Chris Hebbron

06/11/11 – 07:14

The paint style used on these vehicles varied over the years. When new the roofs were grey, and this did not come down the corners. They also had thin orange lining under the windows. Later the roofs were blue but they were not painted down the corners initially, this only happening in later years. Also there are variations as to where the cream was on the lower nearside bulkhead.

David Hudson

06/11/11 – 22:00

I recall these buses being used on the joint B.C.T and Yorkshire Woollen District service 4 to Dewsbury.

Philip Carlton

07/11/11 – 07:35

Trolleybuses 752-759 (FKU 752-9) had the same Weymann bodies, apart of course from the lower deck front end. In May 1952, 758 became the first British bus with flashing trafficators; it was the only one of the batch to survive until the end of the system, and is now preserved.

Martin S

07/11/11 – 12:16

752-759 were 5 bay though.
758 is slowly being restored at Sandtoft, under BTA (Bradford Trolleybus Association) ownership. My recollections of the 1-40 batch were that they were absolutely superb buses, and the quietest motorbuses I ever rode on. 1-22 (or 23?) were shedded at Banktop depot when new, as tram replacements, and were the most immaculate buses in the fleet for many years.

John Whitaker

29/01/13 – 15:33

I went to Bradford often as it was my favourite trolleybus system. The first visit was Saturday August 5th 1967 on a Dennis Loline from Manchester on the X12. Strange to recall that same vehicle 906 has been modelled by EFE on the X12! The trolleybus on that day were wonderful to see and ride on. However I also became aware of two other interesting observations. Firstly the constant drone of Bristol engined West Yorkshire Lodekkas slogging up Manchester Road to turn into the bus station and secondly the melodic sounds of Regent V buses echoing across the hills around the city centre. I always liked these buses despite being trolley replacements at various times. Used them on the joint service to Leeds the 72. The last time I rode on one was on one of the Christmas day services run from Keighley and I have a lovely video recording of 220 going to Dick Hudsons on another occasion.

Ralph Oakes-Garnett

15/11/19 – 07:26

Looks very similar to Burys pair, BEN 176/7, which became Selnec 6376/7. These were two of my favourite buses and one is preserved, 177.

David Pomfret

16/11/19 – 06:22

Re FKY 24 I have in my possession a roundel from an AEC wheel. Endorsed on the back ‘From the hub of FKY24 â€“ B.C.P.T. Ticker’.
I guess Ticker worked at the Bingley breakers yard. For full story and 2 pictures go to “Flea Market Find” .

Roy Dodsworth

Bradford Corporation – AEC Regent III – FKY 40 – 40

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

Bradford Corporation Transport
1950
AEC Regent III 9612E
Weymann H30/26R

This was the last of a batch of forty AEC Regent IIIs with what Kev from Bradford calls the 8ft wide Weymann flared skirt body you can see why. I’m afraid it is looking a little tired in this shot taken about 1964 outside one of Bradfords bus depots. Four years latter this vehicle went to scrap, one year after that fleet number 33 was the last one of the batch of forty to go the same way.
In 1957 the seating capacity of the upper deck was increased by 3 to 33, a 10% increase, 2 extra seats I can understand easier than 3, unless the original rear seat was only for 2, if anyone has any clues on this please leave a comment.

A full list of Regent III codes can be seen here.

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

Your assumption about the rear upper seat is correct. All post-war Bradford buses prior to the HKW batch originally had 30 upstair-seats (15 x 2). Most (possibly all, apart from the ex-London RTs, in which there was no room for this) had in due course an additional 3-seat unit added to the nearside rear.

Julien Melville

The location appears to be the old Thornbury works yard which was attached to the operating depot. It was a common sight to see de-licensed trolleys and buses parked here in less than sparkling condition often with smashed windows etc. The whole complex at Thornbury still exists as a warehouse facility.
Until the end of its life under the PTE the sign over the works entrance read car works!

Chris Hough

Bradford Corporation – AEC Regent III – HKW 82 – 82

Copyright John Stringer

Bradford Corporation
1952
AEC Regent III 9613E
East Lancs. H35/26R

The trend for concealing the front ends of halfcab buses underneath what was to often later referred to as a ‘tin front’ was initiated in the immediate postwar period by BMMO with its homemade D5 model. Shortly afterwards, neighbouring Birmingham City Transport decided to follow suit and a different design of their own was hatched which was first fitted to a batch of Crossley DD42’s, but then also to subsequent Daimler CVG6’s and Guy Arab IV’s, giving the three different makes a totally uniform appearance.
It seems likely that Crossley produced this particular design, which became known as the ‘New Look’ – a term then currently in use for the latest Christian Dior womens’ fashion styles. Daimler and Guy then adopted the design as the standard option on their models generally, but no more Crossleys were so fitted. However, Crossley had passed into the hands of the ACV Group, which owned AEC, and around 1952/53 a number of Regent III’s were fitted with the ‘New Look’ front – the customers being Devon General, Rhondda Transport South Wales, Hull and Bradford. However, clearly not wishing their products to resemble Daimlers and Guys, AEC soon got to work on producing a unique design of their own, which first appeared on the Regent V, then later graced Bridgemasters and Renowns, and even a few Regent III’s for Sheffield.
Bradford City Transport 82 was one of a batch of 40 (66-105, HKW 66-105) delivered in 1952/53. Originally H33/26R, they had a couple more seats inserted upstairs in 1957. It is seen here under the trolleybus overhead in Glydegate (which no longer exists) – an extremely short street linking Little Horton Lane with Morley Street opposite the Alhambra Theatre. Just behind on the extreme right is the newly opened Museum of Photography, Film and Television.
82 was withdrawn in 1971, and after a long period in storage was acquired for preservation and magnificently restored by Darren Hunt and Jim Speed. Nowadays it is part of the Aire Valley Transport Collection.

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer

31/03/13 – 08:58

Just a historical puzzler… when was the the National Museum of Photography etc actually opened? After 1971, possibly. It stood empty for a long time, intended I think for use as a theatre. It became known as “Wardley’s Folly” after the City Engineer who planned it. Then the Museum came along, looking for premises, and the rest is history!
In the early 50’s bus bodies got very smart, part possibly of a move to better design inspired by the Festival of Britain. The period piece on this one is the slopey windscreen- a Birmingham hangover?

Joe

31/03/13 – 09:23

It’s my recollection that it was South Wales, rather than Rhondda, which had ‘tin-front’ Regent IIIs. I’ll stand corrected, of course.
An interesting thing about the twelve Devon General examples is that after sale three turned up in West Yorkshire (2 Ledgard, 1 Longstaff) and I believe the Ledgard ones (in their short time with Ledgard, of course) regularly worked into Bradford from Leeds via Pudsey. A further three worked into what was at the time West Yorkshire, from what was Nottinghamshire (with Leon).

David Call

31/03/13 – 12:39

The Museum, now the National Media Museum, opened on June 16 1983. I think John is correct that the tin front came out of Errwood Rd as a result of the collaboration with Birmingham. There are a very few minor changes, just as Leyland tinkered with the BMMO design for its tin front.

Phil Blinkhorn

31/03/13 – 12:40

You’re right David of course, it was South Wales and not Rhondda – I don’t know where that came from !
I remember both the Ledgard and Longstaff’s ex-Devon General AEC’s, I rode on all three and they were most wonderful buses – especially in the sound effects department as I recall. The Longstaff one’s aural delights were a little stifled though, as following a brief blast up Webster Hill out of Dewsbury it was never really able to proceed beyond a steady amble around the back lanes of Ravensthorpe and Northorpe.

John Stringer

31/03/13 – 17:45

David – sorry to be pedantic – it was not West Yorkshire (a 1974 invention) but the good old West Riding of Yorkshire – later to become (in that area) another 1974 invention – South Yorkshire.
The old West Riding was vast, stretching from Goole in the East to Bentham and the outskirts of Lancaster in the West and from the area you describe in the South to Dent and Sedbergh in the North

Gordon Green

31/03/13 – 17:46

As an eleven year old schoolboy, I remember with great excitement when some of these first “new look” AEC Regent IIIs entered service on the 1 November 1952. These were the first true “Humpidge” buses after prior taste of C T Humpidge influence with the Crossley re-bodied trolleybuses that had appeared in the previous March. I can confirm that the “tin fronts” were made and fitted at Crossley Motors at Errwood Park. I do recall seeing the final 15 chassis (91 -105) with “tin fronts” stored in the Tin Sheds at Thornbury as these buses entered service later in 1953.
These final 15 buses did differ in appearance to the previous 25 (66 -90) buses as these were the first to have a blue roof in place of the mid grey which was the style used by the previous General Manager C R Tattam.

Richard Fieldhouse

01/04/13 – 07:50

The ‘new look’ or tin front certainly made buses so adorned look much more modern in comparison to those fitted with traditional radiators. Rochdale had a batch of Regent III’s fitted with virtually identical East Lancs bodies dating from 1951 but they had the traditional AEC exposed radiator and looked to be from a different generation than the Bradford vehicles despite being only two years older.
I always found it interesting how the two adjacent Yorkshire cities of Bradford and Leeds had markedly differing vehicle policies. Bradford went early on for tin fronts and then froward entrances on the large fleet of Regent V’s while Leeds ploughed the traditional furrow with 7’6″ wide buses until the 30 footers came, exposed radiators and rear open platforms for many years. The small batch of forward entrance Daimler CVG6’s bought by Leeds was I understand due to persuasion from Bradford to run forward entrance buses on the joint Leeds-Bradford route.

Philip Halstead

01/04/13 – 07:51

If my memory serves me correctly, Glydegate was the last road in the UK to be newly wired for trolleybuses coming after the final Teesside extension. It served to allow inbound trolleybuses from Wibsey and Buttershaw to cope with road works and lasted until later in 1971 when the services were withdrawn.

Ken Aveyard

01/04/13 – 07:53

Richard – I well remember these vehicles as from new they were the mainstay of services 79 & 80 (Heaton & Little Horton via Heaton) and I used them daily to School. (One old penny half fare from Heaton to Lister Park Gates !)
I always suspected that these new vehicles were so allocated for two reasons – one being that Heaton in those days was ‘posh’ (I wasn’t) and secondly Chaceley Humpidge lived in Heaton where he was a lay preacher at my local Church.
A couple of years ago I renewed my acquaintance with 82 (which each year provides a shuttle bus service in Haworth for the annual ‘Forties’ war re-enactment weekend) by taking ride. Nostalgia indeed.

Gordon Green

01/04/13 – 07:54

Liverpool had some Regent IIIs with Crossley bodies with this radiator fitted.

Jim Hepburn

01/04/13 – 07:58

An interesting sidelight arises from Richard’s post and my earlier one on this thread. He refers to Errwood Park, I refer to Errwood Rd.
When Crossley originally bought the site it was referred to as Errwood Park, though its location on the Stockport side of the boundary is across what is now Crossley Rd from Errwood Park which still exists and is in Manchester. In those days Crossley Rd was an un-named thoroughfare dividing Cringle Fields from Errwood Park and crossed the boundary between Stockport and Manchester, leading from Stockport Rd at Lloyd Rd to Errwood Rd itself.
The Crossley site, bounded by the railway line and Cringle Fields, which eventually became a large number of football pitches on which I played many a match on a cold Sunday morning, was originally part of Cringle Fields a piece of open grazing land between Errwood Rd and the railway, so it may be assumed that Crossley wanted to give some elegance to their address after leaving the very industrial sounding Pottery Lane, Gorton and Cringle Fields sounded too agricultural whereas Errwood Park was more reminiscent of a country park!
Most people I was brought up with in the adjacent area of Heaton Moor referred to Crossley’s Errwood Rd, though there was no entrance from that thoroughfare without traversing Crossley Rd! Fairey Aviation and later Fairey Engineering which occupied the site at various times always referred to it as Heaton Chapel Works, as did Stevenson’s Box Works who moved in after Crossley closed, Heaton Chapel being the suburb of Stockport in which the works was located.
I wonder if the Errwood Rd usage was actually put about by Crossley whose very existence in the bus world was so dependant on Manchester’s patronage in the 1930s as Errwood Rd was in Manchester whereas the boundary between Manchester and Stockport ran along their wall built to divide the factory from the rump of Cringle Fields, Manchester.
A 1970 copy of the Manchester A-Z interestingly shows the site all within Stockport with Errwood Park Works shown as the major part of the site yet the site where most buses were built is shown still as “Motor Car Works”!
Dig the bones out of that.

Phil Blinkhorn

02/04/13 – 08:17

Philip H makes a good point about the divergent vehicle policies of Bradford and Leeds.
I think I’m right in saying that Leeds had Regent Vs, but with exposed radiators. Why on earth would an operator wish to remove such a graceful and well proportioned front end to revert to the ‘old fashioned’ look of an exposed AEC radiator. Nothing wrong with the exposed AEC rad, but surely it had had its day by the time the Regent Vs came along.

Petras409

02/04/13 – 08:17

The Liverpool Regent IIIs that Jim H refers to certainly had concealed radiators, but while the grille was identical, the front end design was completely different, using a full-width flat front, as seen in this view of A40. www.old-bus-photos.co.uk

Alan Murray-Rust

02/04/13 – 08:18

The Liverpool Regent III’s had a different tin front unique to Liverpool. It was virtually a full width bonnet and incorporated the front mudguards more on the lines of the Leyland BMMO front than the Birmingham design. There’s a picture of one of the Saunders-Roe bodied buses with this front under the Liverpool link on this website.

Philip Halstead

02/04/13 – 08:19

Ken, Somewhere in my mind is the idea that Glydegate was the last public highway in the UK to be wired for trolleybus operation. The road layout at this point was a gyratory: Little Horton Lane between Princess Way and Glydegate was one way from Princess Way, and Morley Street was one way from Glydegate to Princess Way. Glydegate acted as the road connecting the top of the one-way sections of Little Horton Lane and Morley Street.
According to Stanley King’s book ‘Bradford Corporation Trolleybuses’ Glydegate came into use on 18 May, 1969. The shot of number 82 on service 11 to Queensbury must have been before 1 March 1971 when the services were recast and the joint services to Halifax came into operation.

Kevin Hey

02/04/13 – 12:08

Leeds stuck with exposed radiators until the manger changed in 1961 this was due in some part to ease of maintenance. After that all buses were tin fronted or rear engined Philip mentions the front entrance Daimlers these 5 buses were considered so non standard they were offered for sale in the late sixties In the event they hung on to be the only Leeds buses to be allocated to all four divisions of the PTE and the only front engined Leeds buses to wear PTE livery 574 has been restored and often appears at rallies.

Chris Hough

02/04/13 – 13:03

There is a picture on this site of a Doncaster Regent 5 looking like a 3 with exposed radiator. They stuck with them, too the last front engined Titans in the mid 60’s had exposed radiators like the recent Stockport posting. I think it was also a sort of macho thing like Atkinson lorries.

Joe

02/04/13 – 14:50

The use of exposed radiators was by no means a “macho thing”. Proponents of the exposed radiator point to easier maintenance access, better driver visibility and better cooling, so much so that when Daimler insisted it would not provide exposed radiators and Manchester was not impressed with the tin front offered, it eventually designed its own concealed radiator for its Daimlers which was all but a reversion to the dimensions of the exposed radiator and was such a success that it was adopted by the manufacturer as its standard.

Phil Blinkhorn

02/04/13 – 14:50

I stand corrected over the Liverpool Regent IIIs. Well it is over 50 years since I’ve seen one!

Jim Hepburn

02/04/13 – 16:34

I still reckon an exposed radiator was seen as a proper “man’s bus” (I’m talking in the unliberated past!) like an Atkinson or a Mack and pretty fronts went with heaters, power steering, trafficators and no climbing into the cab. (Remove tongue from cheek)

Joe

02/04/13 – 17:58

I agree with Joe – tin fronts = mutton dressed up as lamb if you ask me!

Stephen Ford

03/04/13 – 07:50

There doesn’t seem to be that much (anything?) on Glydegate at the time the photograph was taken! For the past few years I’ve driven past a similar street in Bradford, which amounted to no more than a left-turn slip road at a set of traffic lights – no buildings on either side – but retained its street name. I think Chester Street (of WYRCC bus station fame) may still exist in this sort of vestigial format – though I’m not certain that the name remains.
From the first time I saw one I always thought that there was “something” about the Manchester-fronted CVGs of Bradford and Huddersfield (Leeds was unexplored territory in those days!): as much as I tried to stay loyal to AEC/Hebble I still have to admit that – much like Clodagh Rogers – those Manchester-fronted CVGs looked classy.
Halifax? Sorry, your exposed-radiator PD2/3s didn’t even get a look in . . . you should have stuck with Regent Vs – attractive enough in the Susan George mold, but not a patch on Clodagh! And I still can’t work out whether the
St Helens front on Bradford’s PD3s was “industrial” or just plain ugly – like, like . . .
Anyway, for Glydegate to be able to claim that it was last road to be wired for trolleybus operation seems to be stretching things for was by then just part of a gyratory system.

Philip Rushworth

I have very fond memories of conducting 82 even though I never had the pleasure of working for BCT. “Well then what’s he talking about” you may understandably ask !!
This superb vehicle played a welcome and major part in the 40th anniversary commemoration running day on 14th October 2007 marking the sad end of the Samuel Ledgard era. The fifteen hour running extravaganza culminated in a simulation of the 23:00 hours departure from Leeds to Ilkley via Guiseley – a journey performed very appropriately by the preserved Bradford RT – the real thing forty years earlier featured HLX 157, a Ledgard RT, which ran out of fuel a mile short of the Ilkley terminus. That circumstance, unheard of normally in Ledgard days, remains a mystery to this day. The Bradford RT was made to simulate a similar failure at the same spot. In 1967 the RT was replaced by Ledgard’s own 1953 U, a Mark V Regent, but in 2007 Bradford 82 played the part having “been summoned from Otley depot.” So there we have it, 82 completed the journey to Ilkley and then operated the late running 2355 from Ilkley to Otley. I had been conducting all day from 09:00, mainly on the superbly restored MXX 232 (RLH 32) so very kindly provided in perfect Samuel Ledgard livery by Timebus of St. Alban’s. The feeling of “deja vu” in that last couple of hours was almost unbearable, but nevertheless I felt very honoured to be asked to do it, wearing my genuine Ledgard uniform and using an actual Otley depot Setright which I own.

Chris Youhill

03/04/13 – 11:43

I always considered Hull’s “tin-fronted” Weymann bodied AEC Regent IIIs (336-341) to be the city’s best looking buses until the dual door Atlanteans came along in 1969. The overall body profile combined with the typical upswept bottom panels and the front end resulted in a very handsome bus one of which can be seen here.

Malcolm Wells

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

05/04/13 – 05:48

This discussion makes me wonder if there would ever have been such a thing as a tin front if it hadn’t been for Midland Red uniquely combining the roles of chassis designer, body designer and operator. Being in the vanguard of underfloor-engined development, which revolutionised the appearance of single deckers, it was probably inevitable that they would do something with their double deckers as well. Then I suppose BCT, seeing all these modern apparitions coming in and out of their city, felt obliged to keep their end up by doing something similar, and it all took off from there.
I remember being very impressed as a youngster with the tin-fronted PD2s of Oldham and Southport. But ultimately, as so often happens, something which was designed specifically to create an appearance of modernity in its own time ends up rapidly becoming very dated.

Peter Williamson

Bradford Corporation – AEC 661T – AAK 422 – 620

R F Mack

Bradford Corporation Transport
1935
AEC 661T
English Electric H32/26R

We all have our personal favourites as far as buses are concerned, and I have to confess that mine are, (or were), trolleybuses.
Amongst my earliest memories were the late war years in Bradford, where I so clearly recall the sight, and sound, of Bradford’s “Regen” trolleybuses. These were AEC 661T types based at my home depot of Duckworth Lane, and were unlike any trolleybuses anywhere else, as they made a NOISE. Their mournful wail could be heard for miles about, especially when braking, and this was due to the double reduction rear axle and full regenerative control. How Bradfordians distinguished them from the Air Raid “all clear” signal I shall never know! They were new in 2 batches, in 1934 (597-617 KY 8200-8220) and 1935 (618-632 AAK 420-434), and carried early examples of English Electric metal framed bodies, which recent research has discovered, were extremely troublesome right from the off. English Electric metal bodies at that time did not benefit from the expertise demonstrated in the products of Metro Cammel. Having said that, the situation was not helped by tight and hilly schedules, the aforesaid unusual double reduction rear axles, and the fully regenerative control, such that these bodies were virtually shaken to bits after a troublesome 10 year life on Bradford’s granite setts.
Failures were occurring at an alarming rate by the war years, and BCT received permission to rebody 9 of them with Brush utility bodies in 1944, during which process, the regenerative control was reduced. The remainder were rebodied by Northern Coachbuilders in 2 styles, between 1946 and 1949, the last of the English Electric all metal bodies being consigned to scrap in 1947, and these trolleybuses, with their composite bodies, then settled down to a “second life” which was to last into the 1960s.
They still made plenty of noise in their new guise and being a regular rider to school, each one developed its own character for me, and they became firm friends. Sad, I know!

I attach a poor quality Brownie Box photo of 606, one of the Brush rebodies, and always my favourites, taken on a quiet 1953 Sunday morning. This photograph is full of nostalgia for me, especially as it was one of the last to carry the older Tattam livery with cream bands and rear dome.
Happy Days! If only I could ride on one again at Sandtoft!

Photographs and Copy contributed by John Whitaker

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

Not sad at all – some vehicles, just like people, have characters and the more eccentric ones get recalled the most! How amazing that permission was given to re-body vehicles while the war was on, something I’ve not previously heard of.
I always had a soft spot for the London United Tramways (later LT) A1 and A2 class ‘Diddler’ trolleybuses, unique and also frail bodywise!

Chris Hebbron

Fear not John, as Chris H rightly says there’s nothing sad in being fortunate enough to be able to recognise the characteristics of vehicles. It is a fact that, even in large batches of brand new ones, individual machines very quickly display their own particular “natures.” As a teenager on frequent visits to relations in South London I was also totally fascinated by the “Diddlers” on outings to Hampton Court and the area.

Chris Youhill

Thanks Chris H and Chris Y for the reassuring remarks about my deceased friends!! Good to know that other enthusiasts are just as moved as myself when referring to man-made inanimate objects !!

Thanks for comments about London “Diddlers” from Chris Y and Chris H. I too was fascinated by them, but never saw them “in the flesh”. I hold my very fleeting memories of Bradfords EEC 6 wheelers, and single deckers in the same light, as I can only just remember them. It would be great to hear about other trolleybus interests from fellow enthusiasts, as my enthusiasm is for anything old in the psv line, including trams!

But I wont go there!

John Whitaker

Chris Hebbron raises an interesting point re. re-bodying of vehicles during WW2. The MOWT (Ministry of War Transport) controlled all allocations of chassis and body manufacture, and supply to customers. I doubt whether operators had much say in most cases; Body builders were allocated orders in batches, and hence Pickering, for example, built small numbers of utility bodies in 1942/3 on unfrozen, and early Guy Arabs, (including a minority on Mk2 chassis), they disappeared again until late 1945, when they were allocated a contract for relaxed single deck utility bodies on Albion chassis, for Scottish operators.
East Lancs were used for re-bodying only, several fleets receiving all metal bodies on reconditioned chassis (mainly AEC) to almost peacetime standard. Brush were unusual, but not unique, in being used for new and reconditioned chassis, viz the Bradford trolleybuses and early AEC Regents for Birmingham. Bradford had 10 AEC Regents with all metal English Electric bodies which dated from 1935/6, and these were just as worn out as their trolleybus cousins by 1944, such that 7 were given new East Lancs bodies that year. I intend to look at the English Electric situation as far as metal framed bodies are concerned, as there were other disasters, notably with a batch of TD3/TD3c buses for Burnley Colne and Nelson JTC. I will submit a post on the subject if there is sufficient interest.

John Whitaker

I was delighted to see the Bradford AEC 661T “Regens” 620 and 606 posted on this web site by my best friend John. These were my favourite group of trolleybuses as they made a loud noise and had regenerative braking. Over the last few years I have been doing research into the early years of these trolleybuses 597 to 632 built 1934/35. My findings have been published in the Journal of the Bradford Trolleybus Association “Trackless” 200 to 205 inc. and 211. I can confirm the double reduction differential rear axle drive and the fierce regenerative braking were the main contributory factors leading to the failure of their EEC metal-framed bodies. The noise and vibration made it impossible for passengers to have a conversation inside these trolleybuses when running at speed, such as from Springhead Road to Bell Dean Road on the Thornton route. This leads me to ponder why Bradford specified a double reduction differential drive when a single worm drive differential was working quietly and efficiently on a very similar AEC 661T/EEC in London, namely LTPB 63 delivered some months earlier.

Richard Fieldhouse

This site has certainly brought back some memories.
I served an apprenticeship with the English Electric Co. at the Thornbury works in Bradford in the late 50’s. The Trolleybus motors kept the Traction Department busy for many years.
I recall working on the motors in both production and refurbishment and for it’s output it was very compact, good for it’s purpose, but a pain to work on. A common fault with motors returned for Overhaul was the “Square Commutator” Not really square but appearing so due to abnormal wear on opposite sides. Caused it turned out by slightly eccentric brake drums on some vehicles resulting in the motors always stopping and starting at the same point in it’s rotation.

Phil Johnson

Amazing the sort of problems which crop up – I should think it required some thinking about to identify THAT problem!

Chris Hebbron

I found Phils’ comments and experience at the English Electric Co at Thornbury most interesting and wonder which type of trolleybus traction motors were being overhauled and who were the regular customers. Can I assume Bradford City Transport was a regular as it was a loyal supporter of English Electric traction equipment?

Richard Fieldhouse

19/04/11 – 19:20

In the comments on the page for Bradford Corporation AEC661T trolleybuses, some correspondents mention the LUT “Diddler” trolleybuses. In 1962 the last trolleybuses were withdrawn in London and living in a road near the last trolleybus route to close I took my 18 month old son to see the last trolleybus from Hammersmith to the depot at Fulwell. In the event the modern bus was preceded by a “Diddler” from the London Transport Museum decorated with bunting, etc. as for its opening day. Alas, my son does not recall the sight.
For those of you who are interested, if you log on to the “You Tube” website and type in the Search Box “Twickenham Trolleybuses” (without the quotes) there is a film of the first day of operation of the diddlers taken in 1932. It is in black and white and, originally, was silent but a sound track of 1930’s band music has been added.
If you look carefully you will notice that they do not have headlights but it was shortly afterwards at the insistence of the police that a single headlight was put in the centre of the panel replacing the radiator on a IC engined bus.

Phi Jones

Bradford Corporation Transport1969Leyland Panther PSUR1A/1Marshall B45D

Bradford Corporation1930Leyland Badger TA4Plaxton B20F

Bradford Corporation1966Daimler CVG6LX/30East Lancashire (Neepsend) H40/30F

Bradford Corporation Transport 1961AEC Regent VMCW H39/31F

Bradford Corporation Transport1963AEC Regent V 2D3RAMCW H40/30F

Bradford Corporation1964AEC Regent V 2D3RAMetro Cammell H40/30F

Bradford Corporation Transport1950AEC Regent III 9612E Weymann H30/26R

Bradford Corporation Transport1950AEC Regent III 9612EWeymann H30/26R

Bradford Corporation1952AEC Regent III 9613EEast Lancs. H35/26R

Bradford Corporation Transport1935AEC 661TEnglish Electric H32/26R

Bradford Corporation Transport
1969
Leyland Panther PSUR1A/1
Marshall B45D

Bradford Corporation
1930
Leyland Badger TA4
Plaxton B20F

Bradford Corporation
1966
Daimler CVG6LX/30
East Lancashire (Neepsend) H40/30F

Bradford Corporation Transport
1961
AEC Regent V
MCW H39/31F

Bradford Corporation Transport
1963
AEC Regent V 2D3RA
MCW H40/30F

Bradford Corporation
1964
AEC Regent V 2D3RA
Metro Cammell H40/30F

Bradford Corporation Transport
1950
AEC Regent III 9612E
Weymann H30/26R

Bradford Corporation Transport
1950
AEC Regent III 9612E
Weymann H30/26R

Bradford Corporation
1952
AEC Regent III 9613E
East Lancs. H35/26R

Bradford Corporation Transport
1935
AEC 661T
English Electric H32/26R