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.
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.
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
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.
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 ?
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.
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.
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.
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 – 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” .
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.
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!
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.
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.
This photo of Bradford “Regen” 607 was taken in 1944 outside Duckworth Lane depot and shows this trolleybus in dark blue with war time white paint and headlamp masks. The overhead wiring has flash guards fitted on the points as a blackout precaution. Also present are two Bradford motor buses in khaki livery which did not apply to any of the trolleybuses in the fleet. The bus on the left is a 1939 Daimler COG6/English Electric Company and the bus on the right is a 1936 Daimler COG6/Weymann. Behind 607 there is a parked 1935 “Regen” in the “new blue” livery introduced by Bradford in 1942. “New blue” was the description used by the Bradford engineering staff during the early years of this light blue and cream livery which remained the standard in Bradford up to April 1972 when WYPTE took over all the Corporation fleets in West Yorkshire. From my research I have found that 607 had a serious front accident in late December 1935 and was rebuilt with a full width cab and seating reduced to 58. The control contactors and shunt resistors were relocated from the chassis side to the cab. All the “Regens” except 632 were originally built with a half cab and 60 seats but all were rebuilt to full cabs as 607 in 1937/38 and the seating reduced to 58. Perversely due to the cramped half cabs, the main circuit breakers were located on the roof trolley gantry and operated by levers in the drivers’ cab connected by Boden cables with steel wires. Overtime these steel wires extended and often broke rendering the trolleybus inert and an operational disaster. It is surprising that Bradford did not fit cab located circuit breakers at the time when the full bulkheads were fitted. This work however did start in 1942 for some “Regens” but was not done to 607 where the large boxes are the circuit breakers which can be seen on the roof. 607 was withdrawn for re-bodying in June 1945 and returned to service with a Northern Coachbuilders Mark 1 56 seat body in September 1946.
The photo of 620 now with a 1949 Northern Coachbuilders Mark 2 56 seat body shows it accelerating noisily up Godwin Street in Bradford City Centre in October 1952. In the background is a Brush bodied “Regen” on the Allerton service to the City Centre terminus. 620 still wears the glorious Tattam livery with cream bands, black beading and yellow lining. It soon lost its cream bands, was moved from Duckworth Lane depot to Thornbury in 1954 and then could be seen elsewhere in the City, Sadly 620 was withdrawn from service prematurely in April 1958 due to a serious accident when it skidded and overturned on the Clayton route. Other “Regens” with NCB bodies lasted until November 1962 having given 28 years service, albeit with a troubled number of early years until re-bodied in the forties. Happy days, these unique “Regens” with their wailing and humming sound will always remain etched in my mind.
Photographs and Copy contributed by Richard Fieldhouse
Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.
01/02/11 – 18:41
What a treat to see the 2 “Regen” Bradford trolleybuses, and thanks to Richard for the technical data concerning the circuit breakers and full cab rebuilding. It all goes to emphasise the points I made about the severe problems with these early EEC metal bodies, mentioned in my own “Regen” post. In their rebodied form, I spent hours travelling in them, and, like Richard, will never forget their distinctive wailing sound. Also of interest is the rear of the EEC bodied COG6. My recent article on English Electric Bus Bodies mentions the 1937 re-design, and the well rounded rear dome of this bus illustrates this very well. There were very few takers for this design. I can only think of TD5s at Barrow, and lowbridge “Regens” at Southend. Anyone know of any more? The previous design had a very upright dome as can be seen on the “new blue” AAK “Regen” to the left of 607. My home was about a mile and a Half from Duckworth Lane depot, shown here, and I was about five when the photo was taken!
John Whitaker
01/02/11 – 18:47
Fascinating submission. This is not the first one which mentions noisy trolleybuses, yet I cannot ever recall hearing more than the odd whine and swish from them, and I must have visited and travelled on them in some 10 towns which operated them. Any reason for the noise?. I must confess that noise would have given individuality to an otherwise usually rather bland form of travel. Even so, I was always impressed by their 0-60 acceleration and indeed used to ride on the last trolleybus from Croydon to Mitcham which went flat out across the common (about 60) silently, bar the singing of the poles/wires and the vibration from a far from new class of trolleys. On reflection, I wonder if I saw the girlfriend, who gave me this routine, for longer than I might, simply for the trolleybus experience!!
Chris Hebbron
02/02/11 – 06:14
Chris, I think the noise was generated by the double reduction gears in the rear axle differential that were straight cut teeth. Similar to tram motor gearing so a similar noise. I am pleased you found these Regens pictures interesting.
Richard Fieldhouse
05/02/11 – 16:07
Glasgow must have had very quiet trolleybuses. My dad can remember them being almost silent to pedestrians and they became known as ‘the silent death’. I hadn’t ever heard this mentioned anywhere else but reading Ken Houstin’s excellent ‘The Corporation Bus’ (Grosvenor House, £9.99 from Waterstones) lastnight I came across mention of one Dionne Warwick vs Glasgow Corporation. It seems the singer left the Glasgow Odeon after a concert using the back door on to West Nile Street. This being shrouded in thick fog, she didn’t hear or see a trolleybus and was struck by it and an out-of-court settlement smoothed things over!
Scott Anderson
29/04/11 – 06:49
One of the class lasted until 1965 having become trainer no. 060 in 1962. This was the former 597 with an NCB (mk2) body. I photographed it in this role outside Thornbury depot in July 1963. On withdrawal in 1965 it had achieved almost 31 years of service. No. 603 was repainted in the 1911 style livery to celebrate Bradford’s Golden Jubilee in 1961. According to Stanley King no. 603 attained 1 million miles in service on 24 April 1962.
Malcolm Wells
26/03/12 – 07:53
I have just put together a gallery to commemorate 40 years since the end of Bradford trolleybuses. This incorporates over 500 photos including a section on the ‘Regens’ which I hope will shed some new light on the issues they experienced. Richard Fieldhouse has given me some useful information which has helped to interpret the photos, a lot of which relate to the structure of the body. There is also route-by-route coverage. The gallery can be found at: //davidbeilby.zenfolio.com/ Hope you enjoy it!
David Beilby
26/03/12 – 13:21
David, the Bradford additions to your gallery are absolutely superb. Many thanks for your efforts, and particularly the EEC views, which to us Bradford enthusiasts are unbelievable. We would never have believed that such a wonderful archive even existed, let alone become available. The Regens have always been my main transport “love”, as I grew up with them, and have previously said on a 606 posting, they were “personal friends” in the way that true transport enthusiasts will readily understand.
John Whitaker
27/03/12 – 07:17
Thx, David B, for putting Bradford’s trolleybuses on your website. Interestingly, the range 597-632 is virtually identical to (2)16-(2)24 (and especially (2)24 in Portsmouth Corporation’s fleet. Bradford re-bodied them around the end of the war, but Pompey’s carried their original bodies until they were scrapped, mainly in the 1957-8 period. What was news to me were the five AEC ‘Q’ trolleybuses, presumably all with English Electric bodies, although whoever built the ‘Q’ (trolley)bus bodies, usually seemed to make them all look very similar. Bradford’s ‘Q’, 633, had a relatively short life (1934-1942). To withdraw a vehicle in mid-war would seem to indicate a really serious deficiency somewhere. The clue might lie with Southend’s ‘Q’ trolleybus No. 123, originally on hire from AEC Ltd., from 1934. It was rebuilt by Sunny Dawes in 1943 and again by Beale in 1945, finally being withdrawn in 1949. Intriguingly, Peter Gould’s website shows this vehicle as being a lowbridge example.
Chris Hebbron
27/03/12 – 15:47
Chris. Bradfords Regens were the first EEC metal framed trolleybus bodies. Like their BCN Leyland TD3 cousins, the bodies were literally shaken to pieces after 10 years, due to body weakness, cobbled streets, and the double reduction drive. EEC had learnt a few lessons by the time PCT received theirs, and there was a redesign in 1937, as exemplified by 635 etc in the BCPT fleet. the Q (“Queenie”, No 633) was sold to South Shields in 1942, where she ran until c.1950. She was non standard in Bradford, regarded as draughty, and there were problems with the front overhang. A MOWT directive instructed BCPT to sell earlier 6 wheelers, and 633, South Shields and Newcastle being the recipients in 1942, and 1945. Bradford had, of course, received 10 Sunbeam MF2s in 1942 under MOWT directive, which enabled these transactions to proceed. I refer to the “Joburghs”, 693-702. We could write paragraphs on the “Regens”, so I will leave it there!
John Whitaker
28/03/12 – 08:31
Thanks, John, for filling in the gaps. We tend to forget cobbled streets and the effect they had on vehicles of the time, and probably to a lesser extent now as well. I sometimes wonder if East End of London cobbles were a prime reason for London Transport’s chassisless bodies coming into service. Although one or two small orders had their weaknesses, most survived the punishment well, although a large maintenance workforce would have helped.
Chris Hebbron
28/03/12 – 18:23
It has always amazed me Chris, that the LPTB chassisless trolleys performed as well as they did, and that the concept was not followed up apart from, I suppose, the RM input. Interesting point! Re. Bradford’s Q trolley, I think an identical, or near identical body was fitted to the Halifax Motorbus Q. Have a look on David’s site. Most Q motorbuses had MCW bodies as did Bradford’s. As you say, Southend’s EEC Q was lowbridge, as were the earlier 661Ts! What a fascinating fleet that was! re. Portsmouth, I am assuming that their EE bodied 5 bay AEC 661T trolleys were metal framed, as I always assumed, perhaps wrongly, that they were. The earlier 6bay EEC bodies, and their 6 wheel equivalents were definitely composite, as the BCPT ones, delivered from November 1934, were definitely the first trolleys from EEC with metal framing.The Burnley C and N Titans were their first all metal motorbus bodies, and caused horrendous problems, as has been stated before. What a great hobby interest we share!!
John Whitaker
02/12/14 – 16:14
I always thought these Bradford Corporation AEC 661Ts 597 to 632 (built 1934/35) with double-reduction differential rear axle drives were unique. This belief was wrong as I have now found details in the recently published Portsmouth Trolleybus book by David R H Bowler that their AEC 661Ts 16 to 24 were also fitted with double-reduction drives and also made a loud noise when running. These Portsmouth trolleybuses with English Electric bodies were built in 1935 and followed the Bradford order and were similar in appearance. By 1936 I believe a worm drive with stronger bearings had emerged from AEC, no doubt due to London Transport influence, and future orders by Bradford and Portsmouth were for AEC 661Ts with worm drives which were much quieter in their operation.
Richard Fieldhouse
03/12/14 – 05:39
Nice to hear from you again, Richard. If you go to ‘More Pages’ on this website, then Old Bus Sounds, the first item is a Portsmouth trolleybus of the later type, but still with a noisy rear axle, albeit because it was worn, perhaps, near the end of its days! It’s certainly not a silent one! I confess that I never heard one of the 16-24 type, to my knowledge. They didn’t possess battery power movement and were usually relegated to peak time workings and were scrapped earlier than would otherwise have been the case. They also had a neglected air about them, with faded paintwork. Sad, because I always thought they had the most attractive bodies of all of Pompey’s trolleybus fleet.
Chris Hebbron
03/12/14 – 10:26
Many thanks Chris for your kind words and advice on the Bus Sound section for the sound of a Portsmouth AEC 661T/Craven trolleybus. I believe the General Manager Mr Ben Hall of Portsmouth was very wise to specify at a late stage Battery Traction availability for the large AEC 661T/Craven order. With the damage due to bombing during World War II, the trolleybuses in Portsmouth were still able to operate by using temporary turning points on battery power. Regarding trolleybus noise, this was also common in Bradford with some of their AEC 661Ts with worn worm drives adding to the “music”. It made every trolleybus seem to be a character. Interestingly the Karrier E4s (677 to 692; built 1938) used to make a more growling noise even when newly overhauled. Perhaps these were the bass section.
In the early evening of Thursday the 8th June 1961, I noticed a motorbus was operating on the trolleybus route that went past our Eccleshill home. We lived alongside the 33 Eccleshill/City/44 St Enochs Road Top route and normally had four trolleys operating a 15-minute headway. But that night, motorbuses were operating. Something clearly had gone wrong, so, when the “unexpected” motorbuses kept coming, I jumped on my bike to see what was going on at Bolton Junction, about a mile away. Here the 33/44 route joined with the trolleybus routes 40 from Saltaire and the 42 from Greengates. At Bolton Junction, they then went down Bolton Road to the City. However, when I got to the nearby Bolton Junction, at around 19:25 hours, routes 40 and 42 both had trolleys working outbound from City. Crikey what was going on? But then, at 19:30 hours inbound came a motorbus from Greengates on the 42! So perhaps these other trolleybus routes had also been out? Also at Bolton Junction was the terminus of the trolleybus radial route 34 to Bankfoot that ran over the UK’s first trolleybus route from Laisterdyke to Dudley Hill in 1911. There on the 34, a trolleybus was ready to leave the terminus. So, I quickly made my way back home and watched developments on the 33/44. The first motor bus I had seen was at 18:55 hours and this bus returned the 19:55 hours departure, as indeed did the another three up to the 20:40 hour departure. Then, with the 20:55 hour departure, we were back to the trolleybus. Situation now normal! What went wrong I never found out, but as did not see any “run out of lecky” standing/stranded trolleybuses; I therefore always suspected it was a planned event scheduled for just after the evening peak? So for the record, on the 8th June 1961, we had, the following 4 intruding motorbuses, on the 33/44. They are shown in their running order for that evening. Additionally they give a nice overview of the Bradford motorbus fleet in June 1961: 38 FKY 38 from the batch 1-40 (FKY) that were new in 1949/1950 AEC Regent III 9612E, with gorgeous 4 bay Weymann H56R, latterly H59R, bodies. Bradford also had 8 similar (FKU registered) trolleybuses from 1950/1951 with 5 bays bodies, along with second hand 7’6″ wide Weymann trolleybuses from Notts & Derby, Hastings and Brighton. It would be great if someone could do a definitive history of these Weymann beauties. 38 had entered service in March 1950 and was one of the last of the batch to be withdrawn in October 1968. From this 40 bus batch, 1 to 20 were initially allocated to Horton Bank Top where they stayed for over 20 years working principally on the Great Horton Road routes into the large 1950’s Buttershaw council estate and up to Queensbury, that in 1961 was the largest highest populated village in the UK. However, after the post 1974 boundary changes it was no longer such, but the new Queensbury ward still had several hamlets with great, names like Catherine Slack, Hunger Hill, Mountain, Old Dolphin, and Scarlet Heights! 21 to 40 initially started out at Thornbury depot (for the Stanningley and Leeds routes) and also at Ludlam Street, where they could appear on any route. Sadly, most of this batch was scrapped between 1963 and 1969, although number 10 was held back in 1969 to be a training/learner bus numbered 069, but this was not proceeded with; however, number 7 however was successful as it served as a training/learning bus numbered 066 from 1970 to 1972 when, with 069, was scrapped. They were the best Bradford motorbuses ever for me, and later on in 1967 to 1969, I used to ride on them 4 times a day (joy oh joy) to/from Queensbury.
22 is outbound for Queensbury, note the “innovative” via indicator board (Stuart Emmett collection)
Meanwhile back to the plot, as there are still some buses to go. The next was another real beauty: 539 EKU 539 came from the batch 524 to 543 (EKU) that were new in 1947/1948, AEC Regent III 09611’s, with very lovely NCB H59R bodies that were re-seated in 1956/57 to H57R. 539 had entered service on the 5th March 1948 and destined to be withdrawn on the 30th April 1963. The whole batch apart from two went for scrap between 1960 and 1963 with 541 and 543 finding new work in the service fleet from 1961 as a grit wagon and pole painter’s wagon respectively. These were finally withdrawn in 1973 and 1972 respectively; when after their extra 10 year lease of life, they, like the others went for scrap. Very good looking motorbuses buses and paralleled in Bradford’s trolleybus fleet with 27 NCB re-bodied 1934 KY/1935 AAK registered AEC’s that had re-entered service from 1946 to 1949. Some of the trolleybuses served up to 1962 and number 603, an AEC (1934) with a 1947 Northern Coachbuilders (NCB) body was especially repainted in a representation of the 1911 livery. 603 went on to complete over 1 million miles in service in April 1962, and was finally, withdrawn in June 1962.
525 on Union Street outbound for Bierley (Stuart Emmett collection)
408 HLW 155 from the batch numbered 401 to 425 (HLW and HLX registered) were 1947 AEC RT 09610/1’s ex London Transport with either Park Royal, Weymann or Saunders H56R bodies. They were bought in 1958 when Bradford Corporation Transport had a problem, as it was still running many utility double deckers. Clearly the cost of re-certifying them was looked at and instead, a decision was eventually taken to buy, from the dealers Birds in Stratford on Avon, 25×1947 London RT’s, with the utilities going to Birds in a part exchange plus cash deal. Bradford did have a “full” history of using second hand trolleybuses, but apart from the purchases of ex demonstrators, these RT’s were the first major second hand bus purchases. According to J.S. Kings 1995 lovely book, the RT’s came in 1958 with a 5 year certificate of fitness. This was unusual for 11 year buses but perhaps there is an explanation due to London’s virtual Aldenham works “rebuild as new” chassis and body separation maintenance policy. The first Aldenham major overhauls for the 25 that came to Bradford are known to have been in 1957 and now they had a certification free life until 1963. Then 5 were withdrawn, these were followed by 3 in 1964, 2 in 1967, 11 in 1968 and the last 4 withdrawals in April 1969; this was a variable service life in Bradford, and apart from 410 that was preserved, all were scrapped. 408 had entered service in 1st July 1958 and like the others, were given a one coat of drab blue paint with a cream/primrose narrow band, along retaining where fitted, the London roof box indicator. However, in 1960/1961 the whole 25 were painted into normal Bradford blue and cream livery, and many of them, also, had their roof box removed (where fitted), and replaced with full Bradford standard indicators. An interesting purchase and a story I am working on, of good buses, which served Bradford very well.
402 at Manchester Road “City” for Wyke. Originally in Bradford as a non roof box RT, it was later fitted with standard indicators 2/3 years after entering service (Stuart Emmett collection)
56 GKU 56 was from the batch 41 to 65 (GKU) that entered service in September /October 1950, this being after the last of the FKY’s 21 to 40 had entered service in March 1950. They were Leyland PD2/3 with Leyland H56R (later to be H59R) bodies. 56 had entered service on the 1st October 1950 and all of them started life at Bankfoot depot on the Manchester Road routes to Shelf and Woodside, to Wyke and Oakenshaw and further out to Huddersfield (jointly operated with Hebble and Huddersfield Corporation). They were withdrawn between 1966 and 1970 and all were scrapped, apart from 59 and 61 which joined the service fleet as learner buses in 1971 (as 068 and in 1971 was renumbered 035) and 1968 (as 060 and renumbered 036 ) respectively. These were passed over to West Yorkshire PTE in April 1974 and their fate is not known.
The last in the batch, 65 ready for Huddersfield that was a joint service with Hebble, Huddersfield Corporation and quote: the British Transport Commission, (aka the Huddersfield “B” Joint Committee buses). (Stuart Emmett collection) So that was the four on the 33/44, but there was one more, the bus I had also seen at Bolton Junction on the 42 route: 118 PKY 118 was new to Bradford on the 1st July 1959 in the batch of 106 to 120 (PKY registrations) and were AEV Regent V’s with lightweight MCW H70FD bodies that started entering service from May 1959. They were the first forward entrance motorbuses for Bradford Corporation, although Hebble had the first similar ones in Bradford with their 1958 JCP 672/3 with fleet numbers 304/305 (but 304 soon became 306). These worked on the two main routes they had between Bradford and Halifax, one via Shelf and one via Queensbury. Bradford already had trolleybuses with forward entrances, as their 785 to 793 (GHN xxx) that had entered service between December 1958 and February 1959 (and after these, all the subsequent re-bodied trolleybuses were so equipped). These 15 Regent V’s were also the first of 120 that were delivered between 1959 and 1964. These were all body wise, broadly similar, but with small detail differences in the indicators and the roof/window ventilations. The chassis also varied, as whilst 106 to 125 had monocontrol gears and were infinitely smoother and non “body shaking”, the subsequent synchromesh manual gear boxes on 126 to 225 were “shaking tin boxes” (according to one description of these buses). All of the Regent V’s were eventually passed over to the WTPTE in 1974.
110 on the City Circle that was about 2 miles out of the city centre and at a timing stop, in Bankfoot outside the Red Lion pub on Rooley Lane and is heading for Dudley Hill. The absent driver has perhaps nipped over the road behind the bus to the Bankfoot depot? The absence of an AEC badge on this can be noted, it being replaced by an enamel badge of the Bradford Coat of Arms. (Stuart Emmett collection). Out of the above five types, Bradford only had three other batches of motorbuses in service at this time. Two of these were very similar to the ones above, for example the 1949 Leyland PD2’s EKY 554 to 573, were like 41 to 65; and the 1961 Regent V’s UKY 121 to 125, were like 106 to 120. However, the 40 batch 66 to 105 (HKW 66 to 105) were different. These were 1952/1953 Regent III’s that were fitted at Crossley Motors with Birmingham style concealed radiator fronts, presumably whilst on their way to East Lancashire Coachbuilders in Blackburn where they got their H59R bodies. This was to be the start of Bradford’s long association with East Lancs who went onto re-body 98 trolleybuses in 8 batches from late 1955 to early 1963. The 40 x HKW’s were mainly withdrawn in 1966/1967 but 10 were kept on until 1971/1972 when two then became trainers, but eventually 39 were scrapped. One (82) is fortunately preserved after it had an extended life as a service vehicle/mobile generator in 1972 (this to be ready for the then three day week and power supply issues).
85 at the bottom of Manchester Road amid the 1960’s city centre demolition, the fine Alhambra theatre on the left is still magnificent today and the dome on the right was the then Gaumont Cinema where the Beatles also performed. Used/unused on /off for decades since 1968, it is now owned since 2013 by the Council who have to develop it. The absence of an AEC badge can also be noted on 85. (Stuart Emmett collection)
References Bradford Corporation Motorbuses, J S King, 1995 Fleet History of Bradford Corporation, PB58, PSV Circle 1993
Stuart Emmett 05/2017
08/05/17 – 08:02
A most interesting account Stuart, and not one of which I was previously aware. Certainly, I do not recall such an event in the “Duckworth” group of routes where I lived, so perhaps it was a localised feeder problem, maybe at Five Lane Ends? I must say, I endorse your comments regarding the 1-40 group of motorbuses. They were comfortable, quiet, and smooth to such an extent, in my memory at least, to surpass anything before or since. Bradford had a history of using Weymann all metal bodywork from 1934 onwards with Daimler and AEC motorbus chassis, and also the 1938/9 Karrier E4 trolleybuses., so the Weymann Mk111s and the 8 BUTs were in the true Bradford spirit. The other main supplier, English Electric, did not supply bus bodies in the post war period, and Bradford turned to NCB and others for its alternative post war supply, including Leyland of course. It was very rare for motorbuses to be seen on trolleybus routes. My only memory was a rush hour working on the 32 Chapel Lane service, with a CWA6, although “foreign” trolleys (Tracklesses as older Bradfordians referred to them !) often appeared from Thornbury on Duckworth Depot routes. How nice it was to see the Weymann stock augmented by second hand trolleybus purchases from Notts and Derby and Brighton, although the 2 from Hastings never seemed to be quite as majestic somehow, perhaps because of their composite construction. Thanks Stuart, for a most fascinating account.
John Whitaker
09/05/17 – 07:38
Thanks John There is actually two mentions in Stan Ledgards books about your route 8 having buses on them John. First one in “Nannying” in the early 1960’s when lower Westgate was closed due to a fire and buses used James Street inbound and Grattan Road and New John Street outbound. A photo on Leyland 63 is shown on 8. Second one in “Show Up” on the 19th October 1967 when an inbound 8 took Godwin Street too fast and brought down wires and spans so bringing in buses on 8 and 16 for a few hours. RT 401 is shown on 8.
Stuart Emmett
09/05/17 – 07:38
I certainly agree that it was very rare for Bradford motorbuses to appear on trolleybus routes, although I do recall an instance (in the mid-sixties, probably) of travelling on a PD2 on service 38 (Pasture Lane). The 38 was a Thornbury depot route, and Thornbury depot was, at the time, a combined motorbus/trolleybus depot, perhaps that was a factor, or maybe a sudden shortage had led to a vehicle being summoned from Ludlam Street. One thing I do remember about that journey was that the driver must have been a bit rough for the conductress, and she took a tumble. The only other occasion I can recall seeing motorbuses on a trolleybus route was one evening in late summer 1970, when the trolleys working the Duckworth Lane service were replaced by motorbuses for about an hour while a defective crossover received attention. The motorbuses used were dual-doorway Fleetlines of the 401-40 batch, which were new at the time. The service headway was ten minutes, so three vehicles would have been required to maintain the service. It was Brighton which provided just two trolleys for Bradford, Hastings provided twelve. If I remember correctly, Bradford’s secondhand trolleys came from Notts & Derby (32), Maidstone & District (12 – new to Hastings Tramways), South Wales (10 – new to Llanelly & District), Darlington (9), St Helens (8), Mexborough & Swinton (7); Docaster (5 – new to Darlington), Brighton (2). Those totals relate to vehicles actually entering service in Bradford, many more were acquired for spares, of course.
David Call
09/05/17 – 16:59
Thanks for the 8 route information Stuart. I am sure there were several other such occasions which have not been recorded too. With regard to the Hastings (MandD) trolleybuses which Bradford purchased, 802 – 813 were bodied by Park Royal. The 2 Weymanns to which I referred were 814 and 815. The remaining Hastings post war Weymanns were snapped up by Maidstone and Walsall. Looking back at the late trolleybus “surge” in Bradford, I am always full of admiration for Mr Humpidge and his staff at the economical and efficient way they produced such modern style vehicles from older chassis. Longer and wider than the original. I am not an engineer, but The BCT staff of the time were extremely adept at the process in typical “waste not want not” Yorkshire style and deserve the greatest acclaim! Just a pity the abandonment process accelerated so quickly. I think Stanley King used the “silk purse” analogy when referring to the Bradford rebuilds!
John Whitaker
11/05/17 – 19:13
Hear hear on Mr Humpidge. As I note in an upcoming article on Bradford’s trolleybuses in their pinnacle year, 1961, Bradford had the magical management of its General Manager, Chaceley Humpidge. John King has also called him “The Apostle of the Trolleybus”.
Stuart Emmett
12/05/17 – 06:54
A great story. Bradford had some lovely buses, which were often overlooked by the attraction of the trolleybus fleet. Such big batches of buses were bought back in those days – a show of great confidence. A small niggle. You observe that the AEC badges were absent from the tin-fronted models, whereas, in fact, they were relegated to the bottom of the radiator panels (which I always felt was an unjustified demotion for such an important manufacturer).
Petras409
13/05/17 – 07:06
…and painted over, by the look of the photo, Petras409!
Chris Hebbron
13/05/17 – 07:08
Sorry about that, Petras409! Mr Humpidge was keen to implant a “new image” to BCT and he decided to place enamel Bradford “coats of arms” where the AEC badge was meant to go, a practice continued with all new BCT stock until its demise. 66-105 also started the new standard destination layout. I was a regular traveller on the BCT Mark Vs and must confess, they were the most jerky and noisy buses I ever rode on. As an enthusiast, I liked them, but the general public most certainly did NOT ! 106 -125 had monocontrol transmission, and a heavier style of Orion body, but 126 – 225 were the real culprits, and BCT decided to fit 224 and 225 with larger engines and monocontrol transmission in 1966. However, the remainder were not so treated. I do not recall sampling 224 or 225 after this and would love to know whether any enthusiasts have such memories. Look forward to your next trolleybus offering Stuart and thanks for bringing it all back “to life” !
John Whitaker
13/05/17 – 07:10
Bradford`s Mark V AEC Regents. I have always understood 121 – 125 as being fitted with monocontrol transmission, as were 106 – 120. However, my records show 106 etc as being type LD2RA, whereas 121 – 125 were 2D3RA. The subsequent 100 vehicles, with synchromesh transmission were also type 2D3RA even with this difference. There was obviously something different with 121 – 125 as they were the first withdrawals by some considerable time, not surviving like the others, until PTE takeover. I always loved the AEC designation system from more traditional days, but the newer system from the Mk.V era is , to me anyway, most confusing! I know that dry liner engines have something to do with it but if one of our contributors can explain all this, I would be most grateful!
John Whitaker
13/05/17 – 07:12
Yes, the Regent V’s did have AEC badges fitted, and it would certainly have been clearer if I had actually said something like “The absence of an AEC badge in the normal position can be noted” There is however, actually, no AEC badge on HKW 85. On all of the pictures I have of the Crossley fitted tin front HKW’s, none of them have AEC badges, despite the triangular space being there at the bottom. Besides the Regent V’s and HKW’s, the coat of arms badges were fitted to all of the post 1956 re-bodied East Lancashire trolleybuses, to all of the Fleetlines and Atlanteans and to the small single decker fleet. However, they were not used on the half cab front entrance Leyland’s and Daimlers. I guess this was because it would be difficult to find an appropriate space on the standard Leyland and Daimler engine cowls, whereas they could be more easily fitted to the full fronts of the trolleys etc. As an aside, the badges were made by Bradford’s Fattorini jewellers; who also made the 1911 FA Cup. This is still being used today and the first winners of this cup was, coincidentally, Bradford City!
Stuart Emmett
13/05/17 – 09:50
Well Stuart….I never realised, looking back, that the Titan and Daimler F/E buses of post 1966 did not have the enamel coats of arms. I left Bradford in 1968 so perhaps have some excuse! Great to hear the Fattorini connection mentioned too. Up the Bantams!!
Just found a photo of 87 still with grey roof and therefore before its first repaint, and it is definitely fitted with the low placed AEC badge. My other photos of this batch do not seem to have them fitted, so it looks as though they were removed quite early on. I will check Stanley.s book and other sources to gain a “bigger picture”
John Whitaker
13/05/17 – 15:57
121-125 were definitely Monocontrol and the PSV Circle Fleet History shows them as being of type 2D2RA (i.e. the revised version with AV590 as opposed to A218 engine, amongst other things). Confusingly though it shows the first batch (106-120) as type MD2RA, which was the 27ft AV470 model, but I would presume that this was an unfortunate typo’ and that they should be LD2RA.
John Stringer
14/05/17 – 07:26
A most fascinating article Stuart, and thank you for posting it. As John (W) has pointed out, the event may well have been the result of a feeder problem or other localised issue, causing disruption until repairs were safely completed. Interestingly in Stanley King’s book ‘Bradford Corporation Trolleybuses’, the author states that in 1961 “an unusual crop of trolleybus dewirements (one outside the manager’s window) caused delays. In a normal year motor-bus failures exceeded trolleybus failures eleven months out of twelve, but in December, 1961, the trolleybus figures were less favourable than usual”. Around this time many transport undertakings, Bradford included, were experiencing staffing shortages. Now this is purely speculation on my part, but could BCT’s 1961 trolleybus reliability problems have been due in part to a few hapless new recruits unwittingly dewiring vehicles at critical locations simply due to inexperience? If a dewirement took place due to inappropriate positioning or speed at a frog or crossover, the potential for serious overhead damage would be far greater than a dewirement on a stretch of straight wire for example. The time taken to repair any damage would probably take much longer, and damage at a junction or roundabout (such as the one at Five Lane Ends already mentioned) could obviously affect more than one route, as Stuart’s observations noted. Fifty six years after the event, I guess we’ll never really know what caused the ‘outage’, but it is still interesting to speculate nonetheless isn’t it?
