West Yorkshire – Bristol L5G – CWT 869 – 128


Copyright S N J White

West Yorkshire Road Car Company
1938
Bristol L5G
ECW B32F

This bus is one of the final Bristol L5G pre-war single deckers in the series 110 to 205 which could be seen all over the operating territory of the West Yorkshire Road Car Company. It has a “bible indicator” with a minimum size “H” destination strip in place. The ECW body is more to the BET style, but an evolving body design preferred by West Yorkshire since the late twenties. The bus is parked in Leeds near the West Yorkshire Vicar Lane Bus Station circa 1950.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Richard Fieldhouse


22/07/12 – 11:28

It is always a pleasure to see photographs of this generation of Bristol! They are so “purposeful”, and full of character!
I particularly remember this West Yorkshire variety, as represented here by 128, and memories of riding on these buses, both locally, and longer distance on the Leeds to Bridlington run, come flooding back. I particularly remember the wonderful sounds they made, and hope to soon re-live that experience by sampling the near complete United example in the care of the Lincolnshire Vintage Vehicle Society! By a strange coincidence, some 20 of 128`s sisters, by now numbered in the SG series after the April 1954 renumbering, were sold to Lincolnshire in 1955 or 1956.
Richard points out the BET influence, which was particularly evident in the “porch” door arrangement.
I suppose, in the 1930s, there was more dovetailing of the shareholding between the BET, and TBAT groupings, the division of which became more distinct after the 1942 reorganisation.
I can also remember craning my neck out of the school window on Manningham Lane, in Bradford, as these wonderful buses growled by!

John Whitaker


23/07/12 – 08:14

With respect Richard, the number plate is blurred, 128 was CWT 869.
The bus was new to Ilkley depot and stayed there many years, and as an infant of five years old onwards I travelled to Ben Rhydding Primary School on it and its siblings throughout the War and beyond.
As John so rightly says, these vehicles were absolutely full of character in every way. Our childhood pranks, on the School Special service, included forcing weakly victims (I was often one) into the boxes with hinged lid which were next to each single seat over the rear axle. Other abominable conduct included “graffiti by deletion” in removing the gold “S” from “To seat 32 passengers” on the front bulkhead – the poor conductors usually preoccupied in trying to persuade the “Bellgraphic” ticket machines to issue fifty or sixty penny singles in a five minute journey !! Adjacent to the seating capacity transfer was another splendid gold four line notice which read :-
SMOKERS ARE
REQUESTED
TO OCCUPY
REAR SEATS
When I was four, and already hooked on the bus industry, I frequently dragged poor Dad to the depots and on one occasion a magnificent sight greeted us at Cunliffe Road. Standing on the angled forecourt stood 186 – DWW 591, newly delivered from Harrogate Headquarters and yet to carry its first “Bellgraphic” purchasing passenger !!
What very happy days those were – oh to return to them – and where have the last seventy one years gone ??
On a sombre note, and discarding the rose tinted spectacles for a moment, the War in Europe was reaching its worst severity and many residents of Ilkley were painfully aware of it, sadly.

Chris Youhill

Alt done thanks Chris


23/07/12 – 08:16

I’m not familiar with West Yorkshire’s territory, but surely these vehicles, with their 5LW engines, would have been a trial to drive in hilly terrain. The final days of some of them, in Lincolnshire, would certainly have been more suitable!
What was the driving force of the 1942 re-organisation, a strange thing to do in the middle of a war?

Chris Hebbron


23/07/12 – 13:06

These vehicles were relatively lightweight, and with a 32 passenger capacity never had to manage the same load as, say, a fully-laden 56-seat K5G double-decker. I never went up Whitwell or Garrowby Hill in one, but they always seemed to trundle along very satisfactorily. As John and Chris do, I have the fondest memories of them, in my case because the Service 97, on which they were regularly used, was the first time I was ever allowed on a bus alone.
I don’t know the precise reasons for the Tilling/BAT break-up, but I do know there was increasing tension between the parties, possibly over wartime vehicle allocation amongst other things. It seems just to have been felt that the two parties would do better in full charge of part of the empire rather to have to agree with each other about how to run all of it.

Roy Burke


23/07/12 – 18:24

Chris Youhill mentions disfiguring the gold leaf on the WYRCC buses In Leeds for many years a hypnotherapist advertised on LCT vehicles and I must own up some forty years later to amending the ad to read hypno the rapist on more than one occasion!

Chris Hough


23/07/12 – 18:24

Yes, Chris, I remember the “Smokers must occupy rear seats”, and “please tender exact fare, and state destination”, as well as the box over the wheel arch. My rose tinted specs are getting darker by the day! The WYRC territory is not all hills, Chris, it is just that there are some, severe in places, or long and arduous in others, but loads of “flat” in between.
In 1942, the 2 main groupings (this is a great over simplification!) were TBAT, (Tilling and British Automobile Traction), and the BET, which had BAT connections, hence the confusion.
In 1942, the company stockholdings were simplified, resulting in, basically, Tilling group, and BET. In the process, some companies “moved camp”. North Western became BET, and Crosville went the other way, to quote 2 examples. Wilts and Dorset, before 1942, were largely influenced by Southdown, but they too, moved to Tilling. Plenty more as well, but someone out there will know a lot more than I do!
Talking about hills, Chris, do you also remember the notice on Garrowby Hill;”Drivers are instructed to engage low gear”, headed West Yorkshire Road Car Company. No mention of EYMS!
I thought these memories originated only a couple of years ago, Chris !!
Other memories I have of these buses, and the earlier “J”s, is the trolleybus ride to Bingley, followed by the WY from Bingley to Dick Hudsons, walking across the Moor to Ilkley, and getting the WY back, stopping off for the best fish and chips in the world, at Guiseley.
Looking back, a most attractive world, but as you suggest, Chris, it is easy to put the less attractive aspects to one side. There were plenty of worries in the late wartime and early post war years.

John Whitaker


23/07/12 – 18:26

As an afterthought to the post above, I remember that West Yorkshire bus rides were at great speed, so the 5LW was never a problem! Even with a G or K so powered, the impression of speed was vivid.
On the other hand, it was just about possible to hear each cylinder firing in the 5LW when the double decker reached the summit of Baildon Brow, or Hollins Hill.
You can`t beat these old Bristols! They would have soldiered on for a 30 year stint or more, especially with the efficient management back up of one of the Tilling Group`s “flagship” fleets.
As Roy says, they trundled along very satisfactorily!

John Whitaker


24/07/12 – 06:43

Thx, John, for giving me a greater understanding of the split. When it comes to ‘keeping calm and carrying on’, in the war, I recall a GPO engineer on firewatch on the roof of a telephone exchange, being disciplined for, as it was delicately phrased at the time, ‘making water in his boots’, then tipping the contents away the next morning and putting said boots back on. Whatever the merits or otherwise of the case, it occurred to me when reading these old papers that thousands of Allied/Enemy troops, plus Jews, were dying every day and they were bothered about someone peeing in his boots! Another case was minutes of the Whitley Committee and concern that the GPO Home Guard were keeping ammunition in the building’s basement. What did they expect???
But I digress.

Chris Hebbron


24/07/12 – 18:12

Well well Chris Hough – the time for justice has come after all these years. I shall have no option but to inform Mr.M.A.Hamid’s solicitors of your confession. Only joking of course, and it was a very clever “adjustment” to the advertisement indeed !!

Chris Youhill


24/07/12 – 18:13

Another digression but so typically British any troops on active service (ie fighting) who appeared unshaven would be put on a charge!

Chris Hough


24/07/12 – 18:14

You say, John, that old Bristols ‘would have soldiered on for a 30 year stint’. Well, some of them pretty well did, as an earlier posting on this very site shows: the York-West Yorkshire 1939 K5Gs.
To be fair, the chassis were extensively modified and the new bodies dated from 1954/5, but the mechanicals lasted until 1969, when the vehicles even went on to get an extended life with Yorkshire Woollen District. A great example of the high quality of Bristol and Gardner engineering. My beloved Maidstone & District, while specifying AEC engines in their own postwar Bristols, chose K5Gs for Chatham & District, operating in the hilliest patch of M&D’s entire territory.
Gardner fan though I am, by the mid-1950s motor vehicles of all types were becoming more powerful, and the limitations of the 5LW made it a retrograde choice for double deckers; the more progressive decision was to specify 6LWs. Southdown, as you will know very well, Chris (Hebbron), not only specified 6LWs in all their postwar Guys, but fitted them retrospectively in the seven of their wartime Arab IIs that originally had 5LWs.
Finally, Chris, (since we WY aficionados are always so pleased to see a Southerner take an interest in that wonderful company that we want to make the most of it), do you know what induced Southdown, such a devoted Leyland customer, to enter into their affair with Guy? It was quite a big one: Southdown had as many Guys as M&D had PD2s.

Roy Burke


24/07/12 – 18:16

PLEASE LOWER YOUR HEAD was always ripe for modification, too, when it appeared in the downstairs saloon on a lowbridge double decker. There’s a direction sign a short walk from where I now live, which is supposed to point to Butlocks Heath. I’ll let you imagine how the local mischief makers convert it with insulating tape and correcting fluid!

Pete Davies


25/07/12 – 07:03

Oh blimey Pete, I do hope that “modification” was not a slur on a one time Prime Minister of this Land !!

Chris Youhill


25/07/12 – 07:05

Was it not World War 2 that induced Southdown to buy Guys? They were issued with Utility models and like other operators found them to be tough, reliable and economical.

Paragon


25/07/12 – 07:06

To pick up on the TBAT thread – before returning to WYRCC. The reason for the division of TBAT interests in 1942 was that (officially) it was in the interests of efficiency: TBAT companied had representatives from both BET and Tilling on their board of Directors and the Chairmanship rotated in alternate years, now BET and Tilling had differing ideas on how things should be done . . . John Hibbs quotes Claude Crossland-Taylor (GM of one-time TBAT-owned Crosville) as having stated that BET’s W.S.Wreathall felt that the arrangement “never worked” and that at board level “there was the feeling that it was no use doing this or that because next year it might be cancelled by the next Chairman”. One of the main problems seems to have been Tillings Chairman, J.F.Heaton: he had his own ideas on how things should be conducted (read the relevant parts of the three-volume “The Years Between 1909-1969” [the history of NOTC/WNOC/SNOC/ENOC] to see how ruthlessly he drove the senior management of NOTC out of their business after Tilling acquired control) and both Sidney Garke and R.J.Howley of BET found Heaton difficult to deal with (Howley is on record as having described certain of Heaton’s ideas as “rot” [strong stuff for the 1930s one imagines!])- it was Howley that convinced the BET board to divide the TBAT assets.
TBAT had been set up in 1928 to tidy up what had become rather complicated share-holdings by BAT (the BET subsidiary charged with developing bus operations) and Tilling: BAT had interests in 19 companies, of which Tilling had an interest in 11 . . . but Tilling also held an interest in BAT itself. TBAT was formed by reconstituting BAT, and Tilling gave up its shares in the various operating companies in exchange for an increased shareholding in TBAT. At the same time those BET companies – YTC being one – whose bus operations had outgrown their tramway origins were transferred from BET to TBAT control. After the Railway (Road Transport) Acts of August 1928, which allowed the four main-line railway companies to legally operate buses and haulage vehicles, it was agreed in November of that year – presumably to stave off development of a “railway-owned group” by encouraging investment alongside TBAT – that the railway shareholding in any TBAT-associated company should be exactly equal to the TBAT holding . . . although that didn’t stop the railways trying to do their own thing regarding Crosville and United.
Some BET companies (YWD, PET/PMT, SWT, NGT) remained outside TBAT (and were later joined by Hebble and the various subsidiaries of NECCo [COMS, Rhondda, WWOC, DGOC, “Mexborough”]), as did purely-Tilling companies (NOTC etc, BT&CC, BH&D) later joined by Westcliffe-on-Sea and UCOC).
At the time of its formation TBAT probably seemed a good idea in terms of tidying-up shareholding and presenting a united face against the railways’ intentions. But by 1942 the tensions were probably beginning to show, and the war provided a good excuse to unbundle things in the interests of inefficiency. The BET/Tilling shareholdings in the TBAT companies were not transferred to the holding companies, instead two new companies were formed to acquire the shareholdings – BET Omnibus Services and Tilling Motor Services.
So OK, back to WYRCC! Looking at the division of TBAT assets – WYRCC seems to have been the only TBAT company with a reasonable proportion of urban/rural mileage to to have been allocated to TMS. Crosville had some urban mileage in South Lancashire and the Wirral, but that was more than balanced out by the thin territory in North Wales.
Sorry, but I can’t get excited about the bus! Too many Bristols with similar bodies painted in standard Tilling red/green.
But why did WYRCC persevere with “bible” indicators long after linen blinds had been shown, by their adoption by nearly all operators, as being a much better/more practical alternative? Still “bible” indicators were better than Crosville’s ludicrous “Widd board” system of the same period.

Philip Rushworth


25/07/12 – 07:06

One of these vehicles (116 CWT 857) by then renumbered SG7 was (I believe) taken out of store, repainted and pressed in to service to run a shuttle service from Forster Square to Shipley (to avoid crossing the City Centre during re-development). I am guessing this to be in 1958 but I might be plus or minus a year or so. It was used for a West Yorkshire Information Service tour and I have a Box Brownie photo of it in the newly built Market Square in Shipley.

Gordon Green


25/07/12 – 10:20

No, Mr Youhill, it isn’t intended to have any connection with Lord Broadstairs (as he is mentioned in one of the Jeffrey Archer books) but he did keep his yacht nearby . . .

Pete Davies


25/07/12 – 11:24

I’m sure you’re right, Paragon, about Southdown’s introduction to Guys, and I couldn’t agree with you more about the qualities of these vehicles. It’s Southdown’s postwar fleet buying policy that intrigues me. They bought Leyland PD1s in 1947 and a whole load more in 1948, in which year they also bought about a dozen Arab IIIs. That might be explained by postwar supply issues, (I don’t know). However, Southdown bought Leylands regularly throughout the 1950’s, (for stage carriage they bought only Leylands), but for reasons I’ve never understood, included 48 Arab IVs amongst them during 1955/6. They never bought any more. M&D had special operational reasons for buying Arab IVs, but as far as I can see, Southdown didn’t. In so predominantly a Leyland fleet, the one-off Guy order just seems odd. If the company’s experience with Guys led them to prefer them over Leylands, fair enough; but why then buy more Leylands at the same time and stick with Leyland exclusively thereafter?

Roy Burke


25/07/12 – 11:24

Interesting posts…. it is not just now that the bus industry is mired in the politics of business. “Bible indicators” could have been regarded as a heritage feature in York (or Yark as they call it locally), together with those ancient high-nosed Bristols. My recollection of them in Rotherham or Doncaster (can’t remember which) is that the ? 5G engine would reach peak revs in seconds in first gear, so they would always set off with a screaming clatter: it all added to the heritage feel! The engines had a later life of course- on the back of showmen’s wagons, still, failing memory suggests, with red paint & Bristol badge.

Joe


25/07/12 – 16:43

Well isn’t it amazing Pete, what interesting facts we learn in these topics. I either never knew, or had perhaps forgotten, that Mr. Heath had ended his career in the Upper House.

Chris Youhill


25/07/12 – 16:44

Roy, as a regular here, I am really surprised that another reason hasn’t dawned upon you.
Many operators had a dual sourcing policy – AEC/Leyland at Sheffield; Leyland/Daimler at Manchester, or even triple as did Leeds and Birmingham. This also extended to regular preferred coach-builders. As much as anything, this was to spread the load and ensure early deliveries rather than putting all eggs in one basket. Southdown were obviously a Leyland operator but also happy with their allocation of war-time Guys. Maybe they had a need for quick delivery of vehicles which couldn’t be met by Leyland. They certainly did this at other times with Commers and Fords.
SUT and Yelloway were AEC operators who supplemented the front line fleet with Fords and Bedfords at various times – as indeed did Wallace Arnold.

David Oldfield


25/07/12 – 16:45

Philip Rushworth is entirely accurate in his assessment of the fundamental reason for the Tilling – BAT split in 1942. In retrospect, it does seem that a major industrial reorganisation at a time of severe national peril was rather curious, but the matter was brought about almost entirely because of the personality of J.F. Heaton. The Tilling involvement with BET came when Richard Tilling agreed to work jointly with BET in developing public transport, and, in 1928, took a shareholding in the BET’s subsidiary BAT. Richard Tilling died the following year, and when Heaton was appointed vice chairman, all the Tilling family members resigned from the board. Heaton, who later became chairman, came from an insurance background, and was appointed secretary of the Tilling insurance arms, Road Transport and General from 1919, and Motor Credit Services from 1922. From here he increased his influence over the Tilling transport interests, whilst remaining a director of the insurance business (which was taken over in 1923 by General Accident, now Aviva) until 1933. His style as chairman of Tilling was autocratic and intolerant, and the rift in management style with his fellow directors of TBAT caused frictions from the early ‘thirties. Heaton’s financial background was a major factor in his “one size fits all” mentality that imposed the rigid standardisation upon Bristol products on Tilling group companies, in marked contrast to the much more flexible BET approach to management. Whatever the solid engineering merits of the Bristol K5G and L5G, they were decidedly unsophisticated. Even Guy, in the midst of wartime expediency, could design and produce an effective, reliable flexible engine mounting, a feature that eluded Bristol until around 1950. Heaton’s total preoccupation with maximising quick financial return over all other considerations (seems to ring bells with the present day financial sector) brought him quickly to the negotiating table in 1948 when the new Labour government expressed a desire to nationalise road transport. The BET took a totally different view, and remained independent for 20 more years.

Roger Cox


25/07/12 – 16:46

Entertaining, Joe, though your version is of the local pronunciation of the name of my home city, my favourite rendition of it comes from the railway station. I have memories of arriving there in the horrid small hours of a cold winter’s night, to hear echoing around the vast, cavernous but deserted space of the main line platform the announcement: ‘Nyorg! This is Nyorg!’ The effect is best reproduced if you shout into a bucket while holding your nose.
I find West Yorkshire’s fetish for Bible indicatora as perplexing as I do Southdown’s flirtation with Guy. And why ‘Bible’? There doesn’t seem anything terribly ecclesiastical about any of WY’s destinations. At York, (sorry, Joe, Yark – or even Nyorg if you prefer), I never heard them referred to as anything other than ‘flap boards’.

Roy Burke


26/07/12 – 07:23

Fearful of opening a can of worms, can I make the tentative suggestion that the purchasing policies of some bus companies may have been subject to influences other than operational performance or builder delivery times? In those pre-subsidised days, when all manufacturers and many operators lived or died by pure, unfettered capitalism (as opposed to municipal rate juggling etc), the salesmen of chassis and body makers would undoubtedly have tried to influence chief engineers, proprietors and committee members. Not suggesting baksheesh, heaven forbid, but there must have been some out-of-hours wining and dining arranged by the under-dogs to try to break the stranglehold of the big boys. This may, possibly, explain why years of consistent purchasing policy suddenly changed for no apparent reason, only to change back soon after.
Sorry, gents, this is WAY off the WY L5G thread, but that’s what’s good about OBP – it makes one thread into a tapestry!

Paul Haywood


26/07/12 – 07:28

Things seem to have moved on since you posted the note to me, Roy, but here goes.
During the war, passengers waned fast as holiday/excursion traffic evaporated, coastal towns/beaches suffered severe movement restrictions and routes were modified away from seafronts, to avoid folk seeing coastal defences. The need for buses decreased, too, but, with 162 Southdown buses being requisitioned and expected deliveries diverted, Southdown had to make good some shortfall and borrowed from East Kent and Eastbourne. The waxing started with D-Day and 99 Guy Arabs arrived between 1943 and early 1946, an above-average 44 with the excellent metal-framed Northern Counties bodies and some with 6LW engines. Such was the build-up or bus traffic around Portsmouth/Gosport/Southwick (Allied Operational HQ at Southwick) that Southdown was ordered to take over Fareham Bus Station from Hants & Dorset.Long story short, the Portsmouth Area Manager (AFR Carling) during these frenetic times, took over as Southdown’s General Manager in 1947, His respect for the 6LW Guys’ performance, whilst being flogged mercilessly in the late unpleasantness, was the reason why he ordered Guys from time to time thereafter.
And we all know that it was a wise buy.
However, I don’t recall ever seeing many post-war ones around Pompey, although the open-top austerity ones were at Hayling Island.
As for bible indicators/flap boards and other such Northern quirks, this arcane system of indicators was quite new to me. Linen blinds and slip boards is all I’d ever come across. You learn something new every day, even though you didn’t really want to (actually quite interesting, but that’s between us)!

Chris Hebbron


26/07/12 – 07:28

I agree Roy about the Bible indicators – I bet many a staff member slipping on the pathetic metal footholds while trying to lift the enormous thing aloft, perhaps painfully grazing a shin, would come out with loud remarks which were anything but ecclesiastical !!
Much scoffing these days is directed at Health and Safety legislation, but such a dangerous practice as this should certainly have been outlawed – and of course in the case of the earlier “J” types the infernal thing even leaned forward when installed and the triggers had to be thrown to secure it.

Chris Youhill


26/07/12 – 07:29

Philip Rushworth’s post about Tilling’s J. Frederick Heaton is spot-on.
When Brighton Town Clerk and some councillors went to Thos. Tilling to discuss some sort of take-over of Tilling’s Brighton fleet, they found that they’d entered a lion’s den!
They said later that Heaton ‘was a man who could persuade others that he could make more money for them running their businesses that they could themselves’. He flatly refused any suggestion of selling Tilling’s Brighton business and the councillors found themselves agreeing to a completely different deal, albeit not a bad one in the end!

Chris Hebbron


26/07/12 – 07:30

As well as WYRCC using “bible indicators” Eastern Counties were also fans of these perhaps they were called this because they actually resembled Jewish Talmudic scrolls.
Lancs United also had a system of slot in stencils rather than roller blinds. The tin boards were kept under the stairs and were prone to falling onto the platform with a resounding clatter! The stencils were back lit at night.
Like WYRCC and ECOC LUT adopted normal roller blinds in the early fifties

Chris Hough


26/07/12 – 07:31

Bible indicators/flap boards, Widd cards, BMMO’s persistence with painted boards on single deckers, and Ribble’s externally-illuminated destination blinds . . . if you want to sell a product then the public have to know what you’re selling (in the case of road transport that means where you’re going). How many potential passengers missed their bus because – especially in the hours of darkness – they couldn’t identify the destination? Me! Well, I’m not old enough to to have fallen prey to any of the above but scrolling LED displays and other illegible/faint electronic displays have caught me out when in unfamiliar territory – will the industry never learn?
And I’ll add to the above list United Counties’s use of a tiny, cramped font on its linen blinds during the 1980s.
Rant over.

Philip Rushworth


26/07/12 – 07:33

I have learnt a great deal from my posting of this West Yorkshire Bristol L5G so many thanks to all the many people who have made a contribution. I have particularly found the character of J. F. Heaton of great interest and this may explain why the West Yorkshire Road Car Company had such an austere pre-war fleet and retained the use of its ‘bible indicators” well into the mid fifties. The term “bible indicator” was always the description used in by the crews in Bradford but I agree it was hardly ecclesiastical. I do think the TBAT/Tilling/BET descriptions and information are worthy of filing elsewhere on this site for easy reference.

Richard Fieldhouse


26/07/12 – 11:09

That’s no rant Philip, but is perfectly valid comment.
The tiny “off centre” font is no doubt yet another interference by highly paid “consultants.” West Yorkshire were guilty (I use the word without apology) of this to some tune on all classes of vehicle. Not only was the font tiny, and concentrated in around a third of the display width at the nearside, but it was in lower case lettering !!
Telescopes and/or magnifying glasses were needed to decipher “Ilkley”, “Otley”, “Leeds” etc. I suppose I’m often guilty of saying “I despair” – well I am, and I do !!

Chris Youhill


26/07/12 – 11:11

Apologies, first, for taking up yet more space, especially about southern BET operations in a posting about a northern Tilling company. You may well be right, David, and I thank you for offering your suggestions. As you say, dual sourcing and mixed fleets were common – just look at Southdown’s neighbour – but if that did become Southdown’s policy, it clearly didn’t last long. After 1956 they reverted to Leyland as sole supplier, (I exclude the Commer coaches, for which there is an operational explanation), and by the time I joined them, Southdown’s Engineering Department was very, very Leyland only. So if dual sourcing was the reason for buying Guys, the policy was, as they might have said at West Yorkshire, ‘neither nowt nor summat’. Supply difficulties might also be a reason, I agree, but being aware of the senior personalities at Stratton House at the time, I’m inclined to think Southdown would have got Leylands if they really wanted them. O.K. No more from me.

Roy Burke


26/07/12 – 11:12

Perhaps companies should adopt the Wigan Corporation policy of two green lights on either side of the indicator to inform prospective passengers that it was their bus as a ratepayer so they dint catch a Ribble or LUT vehicle by mistake.
Even when ECOC adopted linen blinds they often showed Eastern Counties or Service as a destination not very useful to intending passengers. Of course the SBG were renowned for paper stickers on windscreens as a destination with the proper indicator often left blank!

Chris Hough


26/07/12 – 11:13

Following on from awkward/dangerous blinds, I recall that a few of the earliest of LUT’s double-deck ‘Diddlers’ had a bracket, front and back, on the roof, which held the route number in metal stencil form. You’d have needed a ladder to climb up and change the darned things and also carrying a stencil up and down to-boot! There would have been a desire to keep the same trolleys on the same route, save for a catastrophe, but common-sense prevailed very quickly!
I’ll second Richard F’s suggestion of 26/7/12.
Could someone please describe a Widd Card to me?

Chris Hebbron


26/07/12 – 11:15

The subject of Bible Blinds and other methods brings me on to the subject of so called Tram Boards.I wonder if any other operator uses them as here at Lothian Buses.All buses have a metal holder in the lower front window and at various times the display shows Limited Stop etc or a variation of a route.At all three depots there is a large area holding the various boards.

Philip Carlton


26/07/12 – 14:02

For many years Morecambe & Heysham did not use route numbers when they were adopted many of the AEC Regents had a slot in card for this in the nearside upper deck front window totally unseeable in the dark!

Chris Hough


26/07/12 – 14:02

Apart from the Routemasters, all Northern General half cabs had a flip down ‘DUPLICATE’ sign mounted to the left of the windscreen

Ronnie Hoye


26/07/12 – 14:20

It has been said umpteen times here on OBP about the character of our long departed vehicles but I have to make a comment on the “scrolling LED`s” of today`s monstrosities, if you stand to the side the destinations cannot be read and if the sun is on them, equally they cannot be read, even with today`s technology on some scrolling LED boards lower case is also used.

David Henighan


27/07/12 – 08:16

I always thought the archetypal BTC display was best – separate single line destination in a good bold font, and a two or three line “via” display, sometimes incorporating the route number, or alternatively with a separate three track route number display. But, as Chris Hough pointed out, only good if it was used properly. What good came of showing destination “Western National” via “Service No.” I shall never know! Midland General/Notts & Derby had a slightly different layout (well, they would, wouldn’t they!) in which the destination was below the “via” screen, so the route was described in correct sequence, for example “Eastwood, Brinsley, Selston, ALFRETON” – except that the “via” displays were not repeated in reverse order so they were always back-to-front in one direction! City operators tended to go for simplicity on the assumption that the vast majority of passengers were locals who knew the network (London being a noble exception). Nottingham for many years had one-piece blinds which incorporated route number, destination and if necessary a “via” line, but on inward journeys usually didn’t bother with route numbers, just showing “CITY”. Later, suburb names replaced specific destinations, so that routes 20/52/57/69 were all just “Arnold”, 6/18/28 “Bestwood” and so on.

Stephen Ford


27/07/12 – 08:16

I remember these vehicles well in my childhood. Travelling from Leeds to Kirk Deighton on the Leeds-Knaresborough 36 route I think it was. They could cover the distance with speed…even faster when one of the Roseville Road drivers with a big handlebar moustache was driving he made the Bristol sing. I remember he once got on at Vicar Lane going to the garage and the young lad who was driving was not going fast enough for him he kept tapping on the cab window and waving him to go faster, I think he was late for his shift. On Sundays there used to be about 20 West Yorkshire both single and double deckers pass going to Scotton Sanatorium which dealt with TB in those days, the busses were all packed with visitors from Leeds. They Started about 1:30 and they were in convoy for a good 20 minutes and then they would return around 4:30. I used to sit on the wall and watch them all pass on the Sundays I stayed at my Aunts.

Brian Lunn


27/07/12 – 08:17

Having been born in Glasgow in the early 1930s, I can`t remember seeing anything other than roller blinds on either buses or trams. Maybe Scotland was way ahead of the rest of the country, at least in something!

Jim Hepburn


Widd plates [sic] were a sheet of paper sandwiched between two layers of celluloid bounded by a metal frame. They were displayed in holders under the front canopy/inside the front window (or for the route letters used for the double-decked Liverpool-Warrington services in the front upper nearside window). Crosville actually replaced the roller blinds it previously-used with this sytem in the 1920s: seemingly, linen blinds and destination equipment were considered too costly in terms of maintenance – when the TBAT-owned Western Transport and Llandudno Blues were absorbed in the 1930s the linen blinds were ripped out of the acquired vehicles and Widd boards substituted. What did Crosville display in the destination boxes of its buses? – a paper label stating “Crosville”. The Widd plate system lasted into the post-war years until replaced by the then standard two-piece Tilling display from 1946 onwards: apparently, Crosville had been required to pay Widd (the name of the firm owning the “technology” [there is a company called Widd Signs based in Leeds to this day]) for the rights to manufacture the signs itself . . . and that payment had to be justified. Having read previous posts, about the only point one could make in favour of the Widd plate system was that it must have been less risky/more convenient for the conductor than having to handle heavy metal bible plates.
Back to CWT 869. As pictured this vehicle is fitted with a “H” board, used for one-line displays (the display being on the horizontal bar, and the verticals fitting into the holders on the vehicle). Comprehensive displays were catered for by a rectangular board that filled the whole area of the indicator. Most boards had a flip hinged at the mid-line (either vertically or horizontally) so that with the flap left/right or up/down, as the case may be, the details for one direction were shown . . . at the terminus swing/lift/drop the flap and the reverse information was displayed, thereby saving the hassle of changing over the board at the end of every journey. That’s where I understand the term “bible indicator” comes from – swinging a vertically-hinged flap was like opening one of the huge leather-bound church or family bibles with which people in those days would have been familiar.

Philip Rushworth


27/07/12 – 08:44

No, CY, he didn’t actually get “elevated”. That’s just a figment of the novelist’s imagination, even though it has quite a ring to it. He only ever got as far as “Sir”.
Now, dot matrix indicators. Am I the only one [surely not!!!] to notice the things are almost impossible to photograph, and even worse on a digital camera?

Pete Davies


27/07/12 – 15:35

Thank you indeed to Brian Lunn for his memories of the wonderful J5G and L5G days – actually though the Wetherby/Knaresborough services were 37/38/39 – the classic 36 was Leeds – Harrogate – Ripon, and still is. I’m quite sure that every victim of “Mr.Handlebars”, both human and mechanical, will always remember him – the unchallenged holder of the title “The World’s most atrocious and callous bus driver ever.” How he could sleep at night I can’t imagine – he can’t have had any conscience about all the wrecked gearboxes and diffs, and abandoned passengers and early running for which he was daily responsible. My last experience personally was when I attempted to board the celebrated DX 82 at what was then the top stop in Cookridge Street on the 34 Ilkley route. The forward entrance Lodekka had already been thrashed into maximum speed uphill from the Terminus and, despite holding out a timid hand, I was left to wait for the next bus.
I’m surprised, well perhaps not, to hear that he had the arrogance to rap on any other driver’s cab window for increased speed – that says it all. Characters like him are one of the key reasons why people can’t be “coaxed out of their cars and onto the buses” !!
Now where’s that bottle of vintage embrocation ? – I think there was a drop left from the 1960s !!

You’re quite right PD in mentioning the difficulty in photographing dot matrix displays. Only if the display is not changing, and the light is favourable, and the lettering is not faded or worn, is there any chance of a decent picture – and of course intending passengers have even more to lose.
I think that the “Dayglow” destination blinds, with bright clear yellow lettering on black material are the best we are ever likely to enjoy – photographers and passengers alike.

Chris Youhill


28/07/12 – 08:30

Dot Matrix. Now wasn’t she a conductress at West Yorkshire’s Bradford depot?

Brendan Smith


28/07/12 – 15:57

Yes indeed she was Brendan, but perhaps you hadn’t heard that she’d got tied up with a PNEU driver called MOCY CLIC – they both went absent without notice and haven’t been heard of since – very sad.

Chris Youhill


Vehicle reminder shot for this posting


30/01/18 – 05:36

I wonder if Chris Youhill remembers the glorious aroma at Vicar Lane Bus Station in Leeds?
It came from Thornes Confectionary who made Butter Dainties a very tasty caramel sweet with a chocolate centre. Sadly when you were on West Yorkshire RCC it was missed when the company moved.

David Thorpe

Wilts & Dorset – Bristol LWL5G – LAM 107 – 557


Copyright Pete Davies

Wilts & Dorset Motor Services
1954
Bristol LWL5G
ECW FB39F

LAM 107 was built for Wilts & Dorset in 1954. By the time I photographed her, on a dull Sunday afternoon in March, 1976, she had been relegated to the role of staff transport for Husband’s Shipyard, of Marchwood. The village is opposite Southampton’s Western docks and the military base there was home to the MULBERRY harbour project for D Day. In this view, she had been modified to have an Eastern Coachworks FB39F body and was LWL5G mechanically. Her successor at Husbands was a Bedford VAL which had been new to Blue Bus of Willington.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies


This was modified in 1959 to make it suitable for OMO. Apparently they were known locally as “conkerboxes” but I have no idea why.

Paragon


16/02/13 – 07:25

Well this one has obviously seen better days but I think that with this style of full front added, the standard ECW/Bristol L was transformed into a very nice, modern looking bus. I’m surprised it wasn’t done to a greater extent by Tilling companies, although some of them perhaps thought it was money that didn’t need to be spent!

Chris Barker


18/02/13 – 17:32

The comment about conkerboxes reminded me of my time with Bristol Omnibus Co. We called the L5Gs with the nearside cab window adjusted for O.M.O.duties conkerboxes, rattling old crates as they were, completely devoid of any mod cons and very tiring to work on, the side window conversion resulted in a very painful neck at the end of a shift. I often wonder why I have never seen one so converted at a rally? By the way I believe that the conkerbox nickname related to the sound effects produced sometimes when engaging the “overdrive” 5th gear, a bit like a loose cannon ball in a steel tank. They really were noisy old things to drive, nice to see at rallies, but to have to drive constantly a real pain, luckily we only had a few of them to put up with, the rest of our steeds were LS5Gs and MW5Gs, which comparatively speaking were much more acceptable, of course they were all light years away from the REs yet to appear in the fleet.

Dave Knapp


14/02/14 – 17:07

On the subject of Excetera, the buses have personal number plates with letters ETC, the accepted abbreviation for “et cetera”, but the company spells its name eXcetera. No idea why!

Andy

Western National – Bristol L5G – DOD 518 – 333


Copyright Les Dickinson

Western National Omnibus Co Ltd
1939
Bristol L5G
Beadle B35R

This view of ex Western National No333 was taken at the Bristol Waterfront Running Day in 2011. It has a Beadle thirty-five-seat body and was in great shape, as can be seen. Thanks to all of you who have the ability, time (and money) to preserve wonderful examples like this.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson


10/05/13 – 06:41

…..and so say all of us, Les.

David Oldfield


10/05/13 – 17:26

Well said, Mr Oldfield!

Pete Davies


11/05/13 – 08:23

What a superb restoration! It is so different yet so similar to the standard ECW product. The subtle curves of the nearside and cab area are truly delightful.

Chris Hough

Western National – Bristol L6A – HOD 30 – 1228

Western National - Bristol L6A - HOD 30 - 1228

Western National Omnibus Co Ltd
1948
Bristol L6A
Beadle C31F

H0D 30 is a Western National Royal Blue with fleet number 1228 dating from 1948. It’s a Bristol L6A with Beadle C31F body. It is fitted with a 7.7 litre AEC engine as specified by Royal Blue, the coachwork largely to Duple design, was contracted out to Beadles of Dartford as the coach building capacity during the post war recovery period was overstretched. It features staggered seating to allow a little more elbow room in the 7’6″ width of the vehicle.
Withdrawn from service in 1960, HOD30 was one of a number of vehicles sold to a china clay company for staff transport which aided its survival until 1968 when it was finally withdrawn.
It had a number of owners between 1960 when it was taken out of service to when Greg Lawson acquired it in 1996. It is part of the growing number of Aire Valley heritage fleet vehicles
The picture was taken in 2011 at the Heaton Park rally

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ken Jones


14/06/13 – 07:47

I’m not sure just how correct Ken is in saying that Royal Blue “specified” the AEC engine. It is true that it is the basically the same engine as that specified in Royal Blue’s 1937 batch of AEC Regals, fleet nos 1050-1065, but the first post war batch of JUO registered Bristol Ls, (1200-1224) delivered in spring and summer 1948 were Bristol engined as were the later summer 1949 batch of HOD registered coaches 1230-1234 and 1240-1244. Those delivered very late in 1948 and early 1949, 1225-1229 and 1238/9 were the only 7 post war AEC engined Royal Blue Bristol Ls, and I suspect that a shortage of Bristol AVW engines may have created the necessity for this batch to be fitted with AEC engines.

John Grigg

Bristol Tramways – Bristol L6B – NAE 3 – 2467

Bristol Tramways - Bristol L6B - NAE 3 - 2467

Bristol Tramways
1950
Bristol L6B
ECW C31F

Whilst there are plenty of Bristols on the site, I don’t think I’ve seen this one represented so far. This exposed-rad Bristol L6B was shot at the Bristol Waterfront Running Day in 2011. New to Bristol Tramways in 1950, so sixty-one years old in this picture and looking well!

Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson


27/06/13 – 08:56

Nice view, Les! What I find especially interesting is the combination of the usual Tilling green and cream livery with the greyhound logo. In my experience, the logo was accompanied by a red and cream . . .

Pete Davies


01/07/13 – 06:50

Greyhound coaches were cream and green during my youth in Bristol. The first to appear in cream and red were some 1963/4 Bristol RELHs and the new livery was then applied to older coaches but, by then, the three L6Bs had been withdrawn.

Geoff Kerr


01/07/13 – 09:17

The superb ECW interiors of these vehicles were glorious. Whether in red or green “Tilling group” fleets the interior scheme was, I believe, light green with “marble effect” panelling. Flooring and ceiling linings were also green and the seating moquette delightful. I’ve had many a wonderful journey from Leeds to London on West Yorkshire ones – nine hours and three refreshment breaks, and every mile an acoustic and comfort joy. Somewhere I have a very poor box camera picture of such a vehicle during a break on one of my many trips.

Chris Youhill


02/07/13 – 09:00

JWU 892_int
JWU 892

Further to Chris Youhill’s enthusing about these L6B coaches, particularly the West Yorkshire ones, I thought I would add a picture of the interior which he was describing. I think that the interior panelling colour was called eau de nil and even the lino flooring had a green marble effect colour. The interior shot and the rear view are from official ECW stock.

JWU 894

I have also added the highly cropped photo because it was the first bus photo I ever took – very predictable! It’s a pity that the old box Brownie didn’t give a satisfactory end result. This would have been about 1960/61, when the L6Bs were painted with large areas of red as they were demoted.

David Rhodes


03/07/13 – 07:02

Brilliant photos, David R. At this stage, the vestiges of Art Deco were still around, notably, in this case, with the sunrise backs to the seat.
And those enormous side windows, something which I’d never seen before in a coach of this era.
Very interesting – thx.

Chris Hebbron


03/07/13 – 15:18

…..but like contemporary Plaxtons, Chris, they are divided in the middle by a bright metal strip.

David Oldfield


18/07/13 – 07:43

The ‘Hants & Dorset’ open-toppers used on the journeys to Poole & Sandbanks in the 1960s had the cream & green livery almost identical to the Bristol coach pictured. It looked nice when clean, but did not wear well in wet weather.

Grahame Arnold


17/12/14 – 05:32

There was a period during my time at school in Bristol (1953-9) when BT&CC / BOC coaches had black trim instead of green and then afterwards went to Maroon!

Geoff Pullin


31/07/16 – 07:12

The Greyhound L6B coach was delivered with green trim, as were many of Bristol’s coaches, before having a brief flutter with black, then maroon and finally red. When new and in green the Greyhound in Wheel logo would NOT have been carried by NAE 3 (or NAE 1 and 2), but was by subsequent coaches. I have had it fitted to NAE 3 to confirm it’s previous identity – and I believe that it does not look out of place!

M Walker


03/08/16 – 14:31

NHY 946

I am surprised that MW says that NAE 1-3 did not have a metal Greyhound logo from new, but I cannot remember accurately back to those days! I imagine, with my experience of getting ECW to do anything out of the ordinary, that the logos would have been attached at Lawrence Hill upon delivery and pre-service inspection, together with fleet number transfers (later plates) – that was the way Tilling operators usually coped! I attach a photo of wider and longer LWL6B coach (NHY946 by then 2066) in maroon trim and the elegant Bristol Greyhound script at Bath bus station arrivals platform on September 15, 1963. I thought it looked very elegant and cosy in those days despite the body style being very dated compared to the current LS coaches already in service.

Geoff Pullin


30/07/17 – 06:51

My recollection agrees with Mike Walkers. My father a Bristolian who would have been around 20 when the Greyhound name disappeared would mention Greyhound occasionally. It was clearly regarded as a quality service compared to Tramways. In Bristol of the late 1950’s BT&CC were a monopoly as far as bus and express services were concerned. Excursions and tours were a different matter where there were a number of competing operators the main one being Wessex whose day or part day excursion program was probably three times the size of Tramways. My parents were regular Wessex customers and, as I wanted to try out one of the Bristol coaches, it took quite a bit of persuasion from a 7 or 8 year old to get them on to a BT&CC excursion – we went to Slimbridge I recall. Tramway’s coaches were the reverse of the bus livery; cream with green relief instead of green with cream relief. Around about 1960 or 1961, BOC as they then were, swapped the green in the coach livery for maroon and then a few years later for red. At the same time as the change in colour, the fleetname Bristol Greyhound and the motif were added. At the same time, or very close to it, the coach fleet, which had fleet numbers mixed indiscriminately with single deck buses, were renumbered in their series which made it much easier to remember which were coaches and which were buses. I am fairly sure that the idea of the colour change and resurrection of the Greyhound name was to create a distinction between Bristol’s coaches and the bus services.

Peter Cook

Crosville – Bristol LWL – LFM 810 – KW 229

Crosville - Bristol LWL - LFM 810 - KW 229

Crosville Motor Services
1951
Bristol LWL6B
ECW B39R

Quite a number of Crosville’s L-types have survived in preservation, and this year two of them have changed ownership after many years in the same homes. This example is KW 229, later numbered SLB 229, registration LFM 810. This superb vehicle was owned by the late John Prince for forty years, but has recently been purchased by Mr. Clive Myers.
KW 229 was used on the 18th April 2015 by the Crosville Enthusiasts Club for a tour of the former network of rural Crosville bus routes in the Vale of Clwyd. Just over twenty of us had an excellent day out in beautiful scenery, in this real classic vehicle. Wherever we went, heads were turning and passers by took photographs of the bus! Here it is seen at Penycefn, on the long abandoned service M59.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Don McKeown


04/05/15 – 08:00

Nice, Don! Thanks for posting. Most of my experience with vehicles in Tilling livery had them in red (Cumberland and West Yorkshire) before I moved south, with very rare views of Crosville. Down here in the “Sunny south” – swilling down as I type this! – it was the other way, mainly Hants & Dorset in green with the occasional Wilts & Dorset.

Pete Davies


04/05/15 – 08:01

If ever there was a truly classic bus then this Bristol/ECW combination must surely be it!

Larry B


05/05/15 – 07:29

Beautiful! Brings back schoolboy memories of Hants & Dorset’s 73 and 73A, as well as the very short-lived 73B (Lee-on-Solent to Fareham direct, missing out Stubbington).

David Wragg


06/08/16 – 07:18

What a fine condition this bus looks to be in here and nice to see it’s in the hands of an ex-NBC owner! Did Crosville vehicles have green wheels in those days?

LFM 757

I rarely visited Crosville territory, other than Liverpool, but one swift foray on July 3, 1962 to Llandudno resulted in this photo of LFM 757 Crosville fleet no. SLB176 (formerly KW176) showing, what I now see on the classicbuses website, a unique attachment. The GPO box appears to be in a scruffier condition than the bus!
Although SLB176 has a very close registration to KW 229, it is of the 7ft 6in wide, 30ft long LL6B variety. The 8ft wide ECW body fitted to some LL chassis and the LWL chassis had two rear windows thus providing a quick identification from the rear.

Geoff Pullin


08/08/16 – 06:56

One assumes that the opening boot no longer opens on LFM 757.

Petras409

Hants & Dorset – Bristol LL – KLJ 749 – 779

KLJ 749
KLJ 749_2

Hants & Dorset Motor Services  
1950
Bristol LL6G
Portsmouth Aviation DP36R

A Happy New Year to you all! It seems strange to hear that in May, but it was heard several times at Winchester on 4th May! Many enthusiasts and passers by gathered to give this Running Day a welcome at this new May date. The weather was certainly an improvement.

Illustrated here is Bristol LL6G KLJ 749, new to Hants & Dorset in 1950. It is unusual in having bodywork by Portsmouth Aviation (DP36R), one of ten supplied to Hants & Dorset in this batch. It is seen at Colden Common, before returning to The Broadway. The interior shot shows the multiplicity of notices displayed on the bulkhead.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Michael Hampton


19/05/15 – 06:11

Very nice photos of a fine bus, but–at the risk of being a tiresome pedant–I’m sure it’s an LL6G. That Garner 6LW makes it really fly along!

Ian T


19/05/15 – 06:13

A very handsome vehicle only slightly let down by the indicator box which looks to be from an earlier era and the slope doesn’t help.
It looks to be beautifully restored throughout but what a pity that a modern prohibition sign has been placed on the front bulkhead pillar. ‘elf and safety no doubt rearing its ugly, pedantic head again.

Phil Blinkhorn


19/05/15 – 06:13

Thx for posting a view of this vehicle, Michael, which certainly gets around in its dotage. It’s amazing how shades of art deco remained in coach design for quite a time after the war.
Why on earth did Hants & Dorset go to Portsmouth Aviation to body these vehicles rather than ECW, one wonders, although the finished article is attractive.
What do we know of Portsmouth Aviation? I know nothing.

Chris Hebbron


19/05/15 – 07:46

The reason this didn’t have an ECW body was the length of the Gardner 6LW engine. It required the front bulkhead to be further back and this would be a major change to a standardised body that it appears ECW weren’t prepared to do.
As a consequence the numbers of K6Gs and L5Gs were rather limited and all had ‘other’ body builders. The best illustration of the difference can be found in the Pontypridd fleet as they had both Ls and Ks with 5- and 6-cylinder engines, all with Beadle bodies and the difference in engine can readily be seen in the body.

David Beilby


20/05/15 – 06:05

I agree with Phil Blinkhorn’s comment re-the indicator box. I can’t help thinking that the effect is made worse by that H&D idiosyncrasy – the sun-visor over the driver’s windscreen. Was it really all that much more sunny in their territory than, say, Southern Vectis just across the water, or Southern National a bit farther west in Weymouth? I guess someone will come up with the reason for this appendage, and the name of him who decreed that all H&D buses must have one!

Stephen Ford


20/05/15 – 06:06

You’re quite right Chris- Art Deco seemed to be the decor of choice for coaches- especially half cabs- for a long time. The story of the Gardner engine is a glimpse of the past. It at first seems amazing that fleets of buses were obliged to use one chassis/coachbuilder and then that the coachbuilder should work on what later became a British Leyland principle of- effectively- dictating what your chassis was to be. How did the economics work? Were they negotiated contracts? And how, in reality, different are things in more recent times with Government telling you what sort of vast bussernaut to run? And how appropriate was tendering anyway? And were BET in reality any better than Tilling? Is it the case that civic pride and local councillor pressure often worked to passengers’ benefit in the municipalities? Questions, questions…

Joe


20/05/15 – 06:07

What a superbly handsome vehicle indeed with a glorious traditional high quality interior too. I do agree with Phil that the slope of the destination display might make for difficulty in reading, especially in certain bright conditions, but on balance I feel that the ECW “near vertical” pattern would have spoilt the look of the bus, particularly the flow of the roofline. The ECW type did though, of course, blend perfectly well with the Lowestoft design in what were, in my view, the finest looking and most practical front engined deckers of the postwar era.

Chris Youhill


23/05/15 – 07:11

Chris Hebbron asks about Portsmouth Aviation. I know little about this company but browsed a book about it some years ago. Photographs showed rebuilding of the bodies of some of Portsmouth Corporation’s Leyland TD4’s.
Examination of the Company’s website and Wikipedia page shows that it is still in existence but not in the business of bus bodybuilding or rebuilding.

Andy Hemming


24/05/15 – 07:33

Thx, Andy, for shedding a little more light; doing work on Portsmouth Corporation’s TD4’s. They must have been under pressure to farm out work like that.

Chris Hebbron


02/08/16 – 06:54

KLJ 749 is still going strong. It is owned by two members of the Bristol Vintage Bus Group and was a star turn at the Group’s running day on the 31st July, 2016. I was privileged to act as conductor/banksman on a number of trips. Its climbing ability with a full load was quite impressive

Jerry Wilkes


04/08/16 – 09:14

In response to Chris Hebbron’s enquiry about Portsmouth Aviation, here is a bit of information, though the bus industry features only briefly in its history.
Portsmouth Aviation was formed on 6 April 1929 as Inland Flying Services at Romford in Essex before moving in May 1930 to a small airfield on the Isle of Wight at Apse Manor, near Shanklin, where it undertook light aircraft maintenance work and offered pleasure flights. Meanwhile, in response to a 1928 government suggestion that all towns with a population of 20,000 or more should provide aviation facilities, Portsmouth Airport, a municipal venture, was developed from 1930 on the north east corner of Portsea Island. The first flight into the new airfield took place on 14 December 1930, although the official opening did not occur until 2 July 1932. Inland Flying Services then transferred its base to the new mainland airport and began operating a local air service to Ryde on the Isle of Wight, adopting the new name of the Portsmouth, Southsea and Isle of Wight Aviation Company. The inclusion of Southsea in the title was purely to encourage seaside custom; there was never an airport there. The Ryde airfield was opened by PSIOWA in 1932, becoming fully operational the following year. The company used typical aircraft of the period, amongst others the De Havilland Moth, Puss Moth, Dragon, Westland Wessex and Airspeed Envoy (Airspeed had transferred its business from York to Portsmouth in 1933). Developing rapidly, the firm began serving a number of air ferry destinations around the south coast, at the same time expanding its aviation engineering, maintenance and repair facilities. With the outbreak of hostilities in 1939, PSIOWA were ordered by the government to cease the flying services and concentrate upon aircraft maintenance, repair and modification duties, and this continued for the duration of the war. With the return of peace in 1946, PSIOWA changed its name to Portsmouth Aviation to reflect its core activities, but took on a wider range of work beyond the air industry. One such new venture was the construction of commercial vehicle bodywork to meet the post war surge in demand. It did, however, design and build one example of the Portsmouth Aviation Aerocar Major, a pod fuselage, twin engined, twin boom machine for a pilot and five passengers. The 1946 prototype was flown briefly in 1947 and exhibited at the 1948 and 1949 SBAC Farnborough Shows. Not having the resources for volume output, the firm made arrangements for series production to be undertaken in India, but the plan fell through, and the machine was scrapped in 1950. The bus bodywork side of the business fared rather better, with deliveries of single deckers on Bristol chassis to Hants & Dorset and Wilts & Dorset, plus others on Bedford OB chassis to the Independent sector. Remedial single and double deck bodywork attention was undertaken, including some Aldershot & District Dennis Lances and Portsmouth Corporation TD4s. Some Hants & Dorset lowbridge utility Guys are said to have been rebodied by the firm, but it is probable that the original Brush bodywork was rebuilt. In 1950, Portsmouth Aviation, like many others, dropped out of this declining market to concentrate on aviation and military business. The firm still exists on the site today, but this is not the case with Portsmouth Airport itself which closed in 1973 after some accidents that were attributed to the its inadequate size for modern aircraft. At that time it was the last significant commercial airport still relying upon a grass runway.

Roger Cox


06/08/16 – 06:35

More than I could have hoped for, Roger, many thanks. FWIW, The airport was doomed when, during a wet summer and soggy grass, a Hawker Siddeley 748 on Channel Isles’ service skidded almost onto the dual-carriageway Eastern Road arterial road into Portsmouth, with its mate almost doing the same thing 45 mins later! Aircraft this large were banned shortly afterwards and another operator used three Twin Pioneer planes, painted red, blue and yellow, but not big enough to be profitable. This proved to be the airport’s death knell. There was the opportunity to buy the closed Thorney Island RAF Station nearby, but Portsmouth Council said No and the more sensibly-sited Eastleigh (Southampton) Airport has taken over the mantle.

Chris Hebbron

Western National – Bristol L – DOD 518 – 333

Western National - Bristol L - DOD 518 - 333
Western National - Bristol L - DOD 518 - 333

Western National Omnibus Co Ltd
1940
Bristol L5G
Beadle B36R

This vehicle has appeared on this site before but I thought a rear view of it may be of interest. DOD 518 is a Bristol L5G dating from 1940, but she was rebodied in 1950, receiving the Beadle B36R unit (with door) that we see here. The first view shows it in the rally at Netley on 23 July 1989 and the second one shows it at Southsea on 10 June 1990.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies


08/11/16 – 07:31

At first glance, you could be forgiven for thinking it was an ECW body that’s had a bit of front end alteration.

Ronnie Hoye


08/11/16 – 15:21

My thoughts exactly, Ronnie, one wonders if it was a rebuild or a rebody.

Chris Hebbron


09/11/16 – 09:01

Think you will find it is a rebody as a rebuild would be to make again in the same style.

Roger Burdett


09/11/16 – 09:23

Either way, it’s a superb-looking machine, and mechanically every bit as well designed as the appearance suggests. Roger Burdett’s point makes perfect sense, yet many of Thames Valley’s numerous and varied rebuilt TD1s looked very different from the originals. I wonder where we draw the line?

Ian Thompson


09/11/16 – 14:33

Thank you for your various comments gents. All I’ve been able to find about this vehicle says she’s a 1950 rebody.

Pete Davies


10/11/16 – 07:37

Chris, the ‘Bristol SU’ and ‘Classic Buses’ (Survivors) websites give 333’s original body as being Bristol (BBW) B31R, later reseated to B35R.

Brendan Smith


10/11/16 – 07:38

This is a 1950 Beadle body but it was built to a Tilling/THC standard which is why it resembles so closely the standard ECW body. The original body was by Bristol (BBW).

David Beilby


10/11/16 – 07:38

Genuine curiosity: why is this bus in an elegant “Derby Green” when I expected the usual Tilling green from my childhood holidays?

Joe


10/11/16 – 09:02

Joe, I think it’s a combination of lighting, film, and being scanned that produces this effect. I recall Derby green as being of an olive tone. This isn’t.

Pete Davies


10/11/16 – 14:34

Looks a bit olivey to me on this pic…Todmorden green or even Salford- but not really Tilling! Must be Fuji!

Joe

Bristol Tramways – Bristol L – NHY 947 – 2815

Bristol Tramways - Bristol L - NHY 947 - 2815

Bristol Tramways & Carriage Company Limited
1951
Bristol LWL6B
ECW FC35F

NHY 947 is an ECW ‘Queen Mary’ coach body with the sort of chassis one might expect underneath – not the AEC Regal rebuild in Tilling livery submitted a while ago! This Bristol LWL6B was new in 1951, with ECW FC35F body. We see it on Southampton Common on the sunny morning of 7 May 1979, while taking part in the Southampton City Transport Centenary rally.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies


16/01/17 – 06:29

The only batch of these bodies sold to a Scottish operator were on Daimler chassis.

Stephen Allcroft


17/01/17 – 07:03

NHY 946

This photo of fellow LWL6B, NHY 946, No.2814, was taken in Railway Place, Bath in August 1958. The term “Queen Mary” has been applied in enthusiast circles to a number of psv types, notably the full fronted PD3s of Southdown, though in that latter instance the accuracy of the sobriquet is strongly disputed in some quarters. I always understood that the intended analogy was with the low loading military articulated lorries designed for the carriage of tanks and heavy plant rather than the Cunard liner, and was meant to suggest a certain degree of ponderousness in appearance and progress. This style of ECW body did suffer from rather heavy frontal treatment, but it compared quite favourably with the dreadful full fronted efforts of some other contemporary coachbuilders on front engined chassis.

Roger Cox


17/01/17 – 07:05

NHY 946 is pictured in this thread Bristol Tramways “Bristol L6B” NAE 3 – 2467  this time in the cream and maroon livery of 1963.

Geoff Pullin

South Midland – Bristol L – FMO 937

South Midland - Bristol L - FMO 937

South Midland Ltd (Witney)
1950
Bristol L6B
Windover C33F

Photographed in Oxford in the summer of 1960 is South Midland Ltd. FMO 937, a Bristol L6B of 1950 with a Windover “Huntingdon” C33F body. Windover was a very old established firm that was known as a saddler and harness maker in Ottery St Mary from the year 1600. The family later became carriage builders, moving first to Grantham and then, in 1856, to Huntingdon where, by the 1920s, it became one of the largest employers in the town. Manufacturing premises held by other members of the Windover family in Manchester and Bradford were acquired in 1893. Production transferred in 1924 to Hendon until the firm sold out to the car dealers Henley in 1956. South Midland was a subsidiary of Thames Valley, with whom this coach first entered service as No. 555 in July 1950 before passing to South Midland some nine years later. It didn’t stay long at Witney, for, by October 1960, it was back with Thames Valley for a further year until withdrawal in October 1961. The following month it was sold to the Hampshire firm, Creamline of Borden, its subsequent fate being unrecorded.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox


29/01/17 – 07:11

I had forgotten Windover had supplied Thames Valley/ South Midland with coaches on Bristol Chassis. Other outside coach bodies on Bristol L and LL I can think of at the time were Western and Southern National- Beadle and Duple. Hants & Dorset/ Wilts and Dorset Portsmouth Aviation and United Automobile Services Harrington; can anyone think of any more?

Stephen Allcroft


29/01/17 – 08:45

Interesting post, Roger. Thank you. I think Borden relates to a chemical company and that you mean Bordon, in Longmoor Military Railway territory.
Wandering, nay running, wildly off-topic, there is a roundabout at the junction of A27 and B3397 (Hamble Lane) which is officially Windhover Roundabout. Note the H. In this context it means a Kestrel. Does anyone know or have any ideas about the meaning in the coach builder’s context?

Pete Davies


29/01/17 – 09:48

Six Eventful Generations
Bartholomew WINDOVER was a bespoke saddler and harness maker working and living in the town with his wife Mary.
From 1633 when Bartholomew was born to 1796 when Charles James Windover died, six generations of the family lived through some of the most exciting times in British history.
More here:- www.windovers.co.uk/default.htm

John Lomas


29/01/17 – 11:27

I have a model of this vehicle in North Western Road Car Company livery.

Richard Hill


30/01/17 – 07:12

Should have added the fleet number, 270, and the registration DDB 270.

Richard Hill


30/01/17 – 07:13

Yes, Pete, it’s a typo. I mean Bordon – at one period in my varied transport career I regularly drove Aldershot & District Loline IIIs through there on the Aldershot – Petersfield – Steep route 6. One of the prominent figures in the Southampton based group of the Institute of Transport when I was a member in the 1960s and ’70s was Brigadier Nightingale of Longmoor Camp and its railway.

Roger Cox


31/01/17 – 07:25

I don’t think the reference to “South Midland Ltd (Witney)” is quite right. This was the organisation set up in the mid 1980’s when NBC split the Oxford-South Midland business into two parts.
In 1960 FMO 973 would be owned by South Midland Motor Services Ltd. This company had been part of the Red & White group and in 1950, on nationalisation, passed to the control of Thames Valley along with Venture and Newbury & District.
The head office became Thames Valley’s in Reading and South Midland ran out of depot premises in Oxford.

Mike Grant


01/02/17 – 07:31

Withdrawn by Creamline in 1963, presumably for scrap.

Philip Lamb


01/02/17 – 07:31

For about three years, from 1961 to 1964, I lived in Southsea, but worked in Guildford. Every morning, the 07.06 slow electric train from Fratton would stop at Liss Station and on the other side of the platform would be anything from a WD Black 5 to a modest saddle tank loco pulling just two coaches with army/civilian staff who were changing trains for Bordon.
What a comedown for such powerful locos as Black 5’s!

Chris Hebbron


22/04/22 – 06:53

Mike Grant is right about the South Midland company name in the 1960s. These Windover bodied L6B coaches were eleven in total, FMO 20 -26, FMO 934- 937, fleet nos. 545-555, and they were delivered to Thames Valley between March and July 1950. Two, nos. 548/53 went to South Midland in January 1955, but 548 was returned to Thames Valley in October 1958. Another six, nos. 545/50/51/52/54/55, were transferred to South Midland in June/July 1960, but six were sold out of service in October 1960, with just no. 551 FMO 26, lingering on until November 1961. These all went on with other operators to give further service for up to seven years. FMO 937 no. 555 was sold by Creamline in November 1963, and it was last recorded with a Macclesfield dealer in April 1965. However, four of these Windover coaches, FMO 21 – 24 were retained by Thames Valley, who scrapped the bodies, lengthened the chassis in house and replaced the Bristol AVW engines with Gardner 5LWs, thereby transforming them into the LL5G type. These were fitted with new ECW FB39F bodies carrying the garish radiator of the time and re-entered service in February 1959 as nos. 817 – 820. Their extended lives with Thames Valley came to an end between March and July 1968. FMO 21 went briefly to Elm Park Coaches of Romford before passing to Continental Pioneer in August 1968, being finally withdrawn in March 1973. FMO 22 passed to Rossmore Bus Company of Sandbanks who kept it until September 1972. FMO 23 was bought by R Hughes-Jones of Rhostryfan, but, in October 1970, it passed to E W Thomas of Upper Llandwrog who kept it until March 1975. FMO 24 was sold to F G Wilder of Feltham who disposed of it to Norths the dealer in December 1971. It then went to a Leeds contractor, H O Andrews who returned it to Norths in March 1975. Thus some of these machines, albeit in modified form, gave a creditable service life of up to 25 years. I acknowledge the remarkable Thames Valley history by Paul Lacey, the South Midland book by David Flitton and the bristolsu website as the sources of this detail.

Roger Cox