East Kent Road Car Co. Ltd. 1954 – 1957 Dennis Lancet UF – Guy Arab IV Duple C41C – Park Royal H33/28RD
East Kent’s first foray into underfloor engined vehicles occurred in 1951 when six Leyland Royal Tigers with ornate but rather uncertainly styled Park Royal coach bodies arrived in 1951. In 1953 came two more Royal Tigers, this time with well proportioned Duple C32C Ambassador bodies. Thirty more similar Duple coach bodies, the first six being C32C, the rest C41C, arrived in the following year, but this time mounted on Dennis Lancet UF LU2 chassis, East Kent having been an enthusiastic customer for the front engined Lancet in pre and early post war years. These coaches were registered HJG3 to 32 – East Kent did not use fleet numbers, but duplication of the number element of the registrations was always avoided. This Lancet UF order was the largest Dennis ever received, and the total production figure for the model was a mere 71. Factors influencing this outcome were the low driving position, the high pressure hydraulic braking system and the idiosyncratic Dennis ‘O’ type gearbox, a four speed crash unit with a preselective overdrive fifth. That gearbox had been a feature of the vertical engined Lancet and East Kent drivers were fully familiar with it, but, in the UF model, its remote location together with the engine halfway long the chassis made clean changes by ear difficult to achieve. Nevertheless, these Lancet UF coaches were very refined, fast and reliable, achieving a service life of up to 17 years. East Kent’s pre war standard double decker was the Leyland Titan TD4 and then the TD5. During the war East Kent was effectively in the front line, and the fleet suffered extensive damage through enemy action in the air and from artillery firing across the Channel from the French coast. Utility Guy Arabs were allocated to East Kent to meet vehicle losses and the rugged dependability of the marque so impressed the company that the Arab became the standard post war double deck chassis up to 1957. The BET preferred supplier system then oversaw the transfer of subsequent orders to the AEC Regent V, though three Bridgemasters were also bought, all with Park Royal bodywork. Thenceforward the melodious murmur of Gardner engine and Guy gearbox was supplemented by the atonal scream of the AEC transmission. MFN 896 was an example of the last batch of Guys, one of 20 Arab IVs of 1957 with Park Royal H33/28RD bodywork of outstandingly classic proportions. The first AEC Regent Vs that followed in 1959 were the PFN registered ‘Puffins’ which wore a full fronted version of the traditional Park Royal design, but thereafter the Regent body deliveries witnessed a decline from the sublime to the ridiculous by carrying the hideous Bridgemaster derived highbridge design that so offended Southampton Corporation that it quickly transferred its long standing patronage from Park Royal to East Lancashire. The ugliness of the design was accentuated later when these Regents were turned out in NBC poppy red. The picture was taken in Canterbury in 1967 when East Kent was still a BET company, and shows 1954 Lancet UF HJG 6, by then reseated to C41C, alongside 1957 Arab IV MFN 896, with another Arab of the same type to its right. These Arabs originally presented a full destination blind display, but by 1967 the aperture had been reduced to a single line. On the right hand edge of the photo are two of the ugly duckling Park Royal Regent Vs of 1961 onwards that eventually totalled 121 in the fleet.
I’m so pleased to see someone saying what I’ve long thought about the the later Regent Vs. I was a schoolboy in Folkestone in the early ’60s, and whereas the MFN Guys were my favourites and I quite liked the PFN Regents, I thought the later Regents were freaky and designed by somebody who would probably have done well in some other occupation. On the other hand I was pleased to see the back of the lowbridge PD1As; travelling upstairs on one of those could be a depressing experience.
Don
22/01/21 – 07:38
If it wasn’t for the Duple single decker I was all ready to say “Edinburgh Corporation”. What a similarity of livery colours, livery application, double decker bodywork, etc.
Bill
01/02/21 – 06:34
Just to say that this photo is taken at ‘The Garth’ in St Stephens Rd Canterbury.
This shot is from the Roger Cox gallery contribution titled “Smith’s Luxury Coaches Dennis Lancets” click on the title if you would like to view his Gallery and comments. The shot is shown here for indexing purposes but please feel free to make any comment regarding this vehicle either here or on the gallery.
25/01/12 – 16:59
In 1960/61 I worked on a farm at Farley Hill near Arborfield, Berkshire. Most term time afternoons I saw an elderly Dennis Lancet coach travelling to the local school to collect pupils to return them to the REME Depot at Arborfield. I think this was a Mark 2 model as it had either a Dennis O4 or Gardner 5LW engine. Could this have been a Smiths coach on contract or perhaps owned by the Depot? Incidentally there were other Dennis’s locally. Mr Gray from Finchampstead removed our pigs in a well kept mid 50s Pax and in a field several miles from the farm (I am not sure exactly where) was a complete but apparently abandoned mid 30s Flying Pig gulley emptier. Do any of your correspondents remember the Lancet or the Pig and can say what happened to them? I left the area in 1961. I have recently discovered your website and wish to say what a wonderful find it was. Congratulations.
This shot is from the Roger Cox gallery contribution titled “Smith’s Luxury Coaches Dennis Lancets” click on the title if you would like to view his Gallery and comments. The shot is shown here for indexing purposes but please feel free to make any comment regarding this vehicle either here or on the gallery.
This shot is from the Roger Cox gallery contribution titled “Smith’s Luxury Coaches Dennis Lancets” click on the title if you would like to view his Gallery and comments. The shot is shown here for indexing purposes but please feel free to make any comment regarding this vehicle either here or on the gallery.
26/10/11 – 15:33
It could possible be me in EDP 820 R C Shackleford or J Thorne back in 1960
R C Shackleford
27/10/11 – 07:43
In response to R C Shackleford, here is a (hopefully) more detailed picture of the driver of EDP 820. I also attach another view of EDP 819 which shows the driver, who Mr Shackleford may be able to identify, helping his passengers off his coach at Hampton Court. I remain convinced that the Dennis Lancet III was one of the best engineered vehicles of its time.
Roger Cox
27/10/11 – 12:05
99 per cent its me driving other driver could be Bill Riealy deceased.
I read with great interest Frank and Derrick’s notes on the Dennises run by Prestwells of Woodhouse Eaves. Unfortunately I’ve no info that might help, but here’s a Dennis Lancet J3 of about 1950 run by Smith’s of Reading until about 1964. The photo is by Graham Low, who incidentally contributed many of the illustrations to Paul Lacey’s book “Thames Valley 1946-1960”. Having always found buses more interesting than coaches I regrettably never noted the registrations of Smith’s Lancets, many of which had been bought in from other operators. By the mid sixties they were relegated to occasional contract duties, their place in the front shed having been usurped by nice AEC Reliances and horrible Super Vega-bodied Bedford SBs. For single-deck runs on the AWRE Aldermaston contract the office would say “Take one of the spare Bedfords” but I occasionally managed to persuade them to let me take a Lancet, and what a pleasure it always was!—though the other younger drivers didn’t agree. In Classic Bus Aug-Sept 1999 there’s an amusing account of the challenges posed by the Dennis Lancet. You don’t sit over the pedals, but more behind them as in a car. The bonnet is admittedly high, but visibility is still good. First and second gears are to the right, third and fourth to the left, and for fifth leave the lever in fourth position but push it left towards the engine against a stiffish spring and then forward. Ease off the throttle and as the revs die back fifth engages itself noiselessly, and to return to fourth release the throttle for a moment, give her 44% more revs and again the take-up is smooth and silent. In contrast to this luxury the rest of the box (sliding mesh for all except fourth) is fairly unforgiving. The Dennis O6 engine, direct-injection with 4 valves per cylinder, is quiet, practically vibration-less and very free-revving, but not a low-revs slogger, so hill-start clutch control can be tricky. The steering seems rather low-geared, but is light, extremely positive and—unlike that of some AEC Reliances—dead stable. The brakes are perfectly adequate. The whole vehicle inspires confidence in the driver, and I don’t think the passengers ever complained either. One Smith’s Lancet J3 registration KJH 900 was bought for trolleybus towing by the very active preservationist Tony Belton. I’ve heard it may survive somewhere. It has come to light whilst doing this posting that the above vehicle was in fact KXX 329 and came from Clarkes Luxury Coaches, London E16, in about 1951-2
Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Thompson
It’s interesting that Dennis were never mainstream but always managed to have a mainstream following – even in the ’50s. Considerable numbers of Lancet IIIs had full and productive lives with Yorkshire Traction and East Kent – let alone with their biggest fan, Aldershot and District. Was I dreaming – or did Smith’s eventually become Horseman Coaches of Reading?
David Oldfield
Yes, David; Smith’s did become Horseman. The old blue and orange livery gave way to white. I’m hoping to get more details of the takeover soon. The Lancet J3 was so well made that I’m sure many of them would have had even fuller lives had one-man operation not demanded front entrance and so the disappearance of the halfcab. Interesting that the underfloor Lancet attracted so few customers and that A&D in particular turned their backs on it. I’ve never driven one, but 3 possible explanations come to mind: a) Did the 8-litre version of the Dennis O6 engine work less well lying down than standing up? Piston wear problems? Only a guess… b) Was the sound of the mid-mounted engine too subdued for the driver to judge revs accurately enough for clean gear changing? c) Were the mechanical losses incurred by the double-reduction rear axle reflected in noticeably higher fuel consumption?
Ian Thompson
Getting very technical here, Ian, but everything you say makes sense. The AH590 was not the AV590 and the vertical and horizontal 0.600 were not strictly the same engine. Dennis were always small and probably didn’t have the money to throw at solving problems of turning an engine on its side. [Even Volvo had to use government money. They piggy-backed development of B58 with horizontal engine on a government contract for military vehicles with similar layout. Otherwise Volvo may have been in with horizontal engines later than they were.] I’m no expert on early Dennises, but it was reported that the 06 was very smooth. As for the fuel consumption, if all else were right, people would perhaps have persevered. I heard that K4 Lances suffered twisted chassis at A&D, but I don’t know whether this was universal. At least they gave the general populous a Lodekker.
David Oldfield
Only very few horizontal O6 Dennis engines were 8 litres and with this engine there were reported problems of bearing failures from Glentons. The engine power was increased from the vertical engine by increasing the allowable revs and I am thinking that Glentons (on tour work) probably used this to advantage for long periods. The 7.6 litre horizontal engine does not seem to carry this stigma. All the horizontal engines differed from the vertical models – an oil way was drilled up the connecting rod to supply extra oil to the piston bores. I have often wondered if this was excessive and it robbed the bearing supply.
Nick Webster
18/03/11 – 16:13
I was based at RAF White Waltham, 1963 – 1967, and regularly used Smiths of Reading for Wednesday afternoon football fixtures. More importantly, Smiths had a daily contract to ferry our lovely WRAF personnel from RAF Shinfield Park where they were billeted, to RAF White Waltham, where they worked. The usual driver for this daily run was a veritable Mr Banks, who was 70 at the time, drove like a mad thing, and read my wife’s (to be) newspaper whilst driving if she sat near the front. Rumour has it that other, younger drivers were terrified of standing in for Mr Banks if he was away, as he would seek feedback on their behaviour and driving on his return. Sorry, this isn’t a technical item, but it might add a bit of whimsical history. Now, if anyone has a photograph of Mr Banks, with or without coach and WRAF beauties, that would be worth seeing.
Doug Adams
26/04/11 – 07:19
I left school in 1955, and started work at Smith Coaches in the engine shop with Bill Collins, and after coming out of the Army in 1964 I returned, passed my PSV and worked with them until 1970. Having driven all types of buses “AEC/Leyland and ex London RT’s”, working in the garage with Nobby Early, Coaches on Contract duties, and Coastal Services, Continental Tours with Eric Mills, I now find it hard to believe that the largest one man operator, with a fleet of approx 120 vehicles I now find little trace that they ever existed. Mr Alf Smith was once Mayor of Reading
Pete Brant
27/04/11 – 07:13
Good to read Pete Brant’s comment. I’m glad to say, Pete, that some of the old hands are still around. Sadly, it was Charlie Heath’s recent funeral that brought some of us together: I met Bunny Austin, Pete Smyth, Ron Shackleford (still working part-time for Horseman, Jim Foster and (though I didn’t get a chance to talk to him) Bert Newman. I think we ought to have annual reunions! Very few Smith’s buses have survived: Ron S.’s Reliance, under cover at a museum east of Reading, is the only one I know of. I heard the other day that Dennis Lancet KJH 900, used for years as a towing wagon for preserved trolleybuses, hasn’t made it. So the vehicles have all but gone and Rose Kiln Lane depot is built over, but–thank Heaven–some familiar faces are still around and Graham Low of Wokingham has plenty of photographs that he very foresightfully took in the 50s and 60s. Bunny Austin too has a collection of on-tour photos and apparently Jim Foster even has some cine-film.
Ian Thompson
27/04/11 – 07:19
Hi Ian I also remembered the Rhonda Regents,the only vehicle you could bring up Southampton Street in top gear, due to low ratio gearbox, also was fitted with exhaust brake. Do you remember the old “ex Leeds Leyland JUG” we used on the Crowthorn Road Reserch contract during the construction.
Pete Brant
01/05/11 – 09:25
A couple of photos in connection with Pete Brant’s comment on Smith’s of Reading. JUG 624 (1946 Leeds PD1 but with 1945 chassis number) stands in St Mary’s Butts and JDP 519 (new to Smiths in 1953) which I used a lot when not on double-deck contracts, is in the yard, with one of the prewar London RTs in the background. Two JUGs (the numbers escape me) were always used on the “Paddy Run” to Crowthorne and were white with dust inside from the clothes of the always good-humoured Irish labourers, who’d regale each other with wonderful tales in the tradition of the roving story-tellers of rural Ireland. There was a stop on the way back at the Jack of Both Sides at Cemetery Junction, but in the n/s mirror you could always see a handful of thirsty chaps leaping off the platform well before you reached the pub. I worked this enjoyable run quite a lot, mostly with the late Mike Dare, who co-founded the Sandtoft Trolleybus Museum. You mention the good hill-climbing of the Rhondda Regent IIIs, Pete. I wonder whether that was also because of the 9.6-litre engine and lightweight bodywork? Len Ledger was the driver and guardian of London RT FXT 229, and you had to be on your best behaviour to be allowed to drive it!
Ian Thompson
04/05/11 – 07:10
So many wonderful memories Ian, on many occasions I was privileged to drive Lens RT with the coconut matting on the cab floor for those dirty people that didn’t remove their shoes before entering the cab. I was so sorry to hear of Charlie Heaths passing, glad to hear Ron Shack is still doing a bit, Tell him “Herman the German was asking after him. Do you know if Mick Smith “the Govenor’s Son” is still with us,? I last saw Keith Aplin at Horsemans a few days before he retired.
Pete Brant
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
17/05/11 – 11:18
It was wonderful to read your comments about Smith Coaches. My father is Jim Avenell who is still with us at 80yrs young. I spent my childhood either down the yard or out in the coach with my father during the early to mid sixties and in the social club between runs lol, I was always there. Saturday mornings would be spent emptying the ash trays and polishing them with Duraglit while dad was on the wash in his wellies doing the outside, we’d then go up to the canteen for a cuppa and I would sit in ore listening to all the guys talking and joking around, the room full of smoke from woodbines and parkdrive, plenty of tea. Then back down to the wash and polish the body trims, oh I loved it. We used to keep a pony on the grass behind the social club and people would feed it beer and crisps through the window, never forgetting the Christmas parties for us kids, Happy days sitting up front going to Harwell sitting in the shed on site, or going to Abingdon cattle market. One day we bought a dozen chicken and brought them back to Reading in the boot lol Oh so many stories. I have amassed a couple of hundred photos over the years and always looking for more or any thing related. Some of the guys I remember were great, guys like Robby Curtis, Ron Shack of course, Dave doe, Jack Pit, Reggy Summerfield,Grover,Steel,Kenny Haywood,Punchy Parsons,Chris Denton,Mick Goslin, Pete Fisher, Morri Hood, Ceral Gollop, Ropper, Dave Reed, Gorge Forman, Alf, Michal and Jacky Smith. Im sure I could think of more. So many good memories and all that’s left is the row of conifers that lined the wash. I myself later drove for Horsemans briefly before getting my class one HGV, Later to become an HGV driving assessor, so I guess you could say its in the blood and the seeds where sown down at Smiths Luxury Coaches.
Paul Avenell
17/06/11 – 09:00
Response to Paul Avenell. Paul does your great collection of photographs contain any of the veritable Mr Banks? When your Dad was approx. 30, Mr B. was 70 (but still driving for Smiths), perhaps he might remember him. In any case, very best wishes,
East Kent Road Car Co Ltd 1954 Dennis Lancet UF Duple C41C
This picture of East Kent HJG 18, a Dennis Lancet UF with Duple C41C body, was taken in Rye in 1967. East Kent, like fellow BET operator Aldershot & District, was a great fan of the pre war and post war vertical engined Dennis Lancet, and, in 1954, took delivery of 30 of the underfloor engined Lancet UF. This was the largest single order for this model, of which only 71 examples were built between 1953 and 1961. Aldershot and District tried out the Strachan bodied Lancet UF demonstrator, but bought none, though it continued to run the unique Dennis Dominant for fifteen years. One can now only speculate as to the reasons for the commercial non acceptance of the Lancet UF. Certainly reliability could not have been a problem. East Kent kept their UFs for 14 to 17 years. The low driving position was received with suspicion in certain quarters back in 1953, yet now it is a standard feature on touring coaches. The power plant was a horizontal version of the advanced, smooth running 24 valve 7.58 litre O6 engine fitted in the Lancet III, though the maximum engine speed was raised to 2000 rpm to give 110 bhp. Some later examples for Glenton Tours had the 120 bhp 8 litre version of this engine. The gearbox was the standard Dennis five speed constant mesh unit with preselective overdrive, but revised to operate in the conventional sequence with lowest gears to the left and highest to the right – the vertical engined Lancet gearbox worked the “wrong way round” from right to left. Possibly a major factor in the low uptake of the Lancet UF was the employment of a fully hydraulic braking system, which has never been popular with engineers outside of London Transport and Midland Red. Hydraulic fluid is costly, whereas air for air pressure or vacuum brakes is free. It is noteworthy that the initial version of the AEC Reliance that came to reign supreme with both East Kent and Aldershot & District had a straightforward, direct top (not overdrive) five speed synchromesh gearbox and vacuum brakes, though their wet liner engines were certainly not trouble free.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
03/07/11 – 19:59
I’m ambivalent about Dennis. I don’t have much time for modern Dennis Dust-carts – although there are some great might have beens that never followed through their promise with reliable service (especially the Falcon V and R Series). The R Series is actually one of the best coaches I’ve ever driven – including Setras, ZF Reliances and REs. Having said that, the Loline (albeit a Lodekka clone) was a superb bus. East Kent and A & D weren’t the only operators to take to Dennis Lancets in a big way – so did Tracky – and Glenton gave theirs a full service life. None of these would have willingly run rubbish. Dennis always seem, even with their current dominance, to fall short of the quality of the late lamented AEC, Bristol and Leyland.
David Oldfield
06/07/11 – 07:24
The Dennis UF was tried on A&D as you say and it was used on a number of routes however it was not “hitting the spot” with A&D who were already looking at AEC Reliance and being lighter and more cost effective. The UF was a much heavier vehicle. As we see from history, they went the AEC route in the end. There was also a problem with the UF overheating on hilly routes. Hope this adds a bit of an update for you.
Doug Sneddon
06/07/11 – 13:50
The Lancet UF was a bit heavier than the early vacuum braked AEC Reliance, but not by much. The chassis weight of the Dennis was 3ton 17cwt, against 3ton 14cwt for the AEC. I hadn’t before heard of overheating problems with the Lancet, but the type was pretty rare and information about its performance in service is similarly scarce. I suspect, also, that operators were suspicious of the low driving position, especially for bus work, and also put off by the full hydraulic braking system and the double reduction rear axle. The AEC, with its single reduction rear axle, vacuum brakes and direct top synchromesh gearbox would have suggested a simpler vehicle to maintain, as well as being easier to drive. I am not a great AEC fan (the Regent V with conventional transmission was a somewhat primitive and noisy vehicle to drive, and not a patch on the Regent III), but the AEC five speed gearbox in the Reliance was a delight to use. The AEC wet liner engines were certainly not trouble free, though.
Roger Cox
08/07/11 – 06:16
I have to amend my comment under the picture at the top of this entry. The Dennis five speed gearbox, as Ian Thompson has correctly pointed out elsewhere, was a sliding pinion (i.e.”crash”) gearbox, not a constant mesh unit. With the engine and gearbox remote from the driver, smooth gear changing would not have been easy to accomplish, and the Reliance would have scored over the Dennis on this point also.
Roger Cox
09/07/11 – 07:07
With East Kent they were always referred to as ‘Spaceships’ for fairly obvious reasons. I must be one of the few who has conducted on one – an urgent relief to a Dover-Ramsgate journey with nothing else available (1966, I think). It caused a bit of confusion but was welcomed by passengers left behind by the service car, especially as it had started raining.
Lew Finnis
10/07/11 – 07:39
I cannot claim a great pedigree of Lancet UF driving (but so rare; who can?) However the one I have driven was a “Chinese” gearbox with low gears on the right hand side of the gate. I wonder if the reference to a normalised change is confused with the optional Meadows gearbox, particularly found in some of the later Glenton fleet. To continue and hopefully elaborate on the gearbox. It is very true to say the large and heavy box was very old fashioned compared with the AEC 5 speed. Yes, the lower gears were sliding mesh (4th of course being direct so strictly speaking no gears involved). But 5th was constant mesh engaged by preselected dog clutches – but here’s the thing, even though constant mesh, the gears were straight cut and therefore tended to be noisy (or according to taste, musical) even at cruising speed.
Nick Webster
10/07/11 – 07:41
An interesting experience, Lew, especially when trying to get the fares from the passengers sitting in the front nearside seats low down beside the driver. What was the opinion among the East Kent driving staff of these Lancet UF “Spaceships”? The East Kent fleet of 30 was the largest order ever placed for the type.
Roger Cox
11/07/11 – 07:41
Thanks for your comments, Nick, which give us a valuable insight into the characteristics of the Lancet UF. The vertical engined Lancet and the Lance double deckers certainly had “right to left” upward selection of the gears – why on earth did Dennis persevere with this arrangement so long after the rest of the industry, including Guy (GS type excepted), had standardised on “left to right”? – but my understanding that the Lancet UF gearbox worked in the logical pattern comes from the “Modern Transport” magazine road test of the type in March 1954, which refers to the selection of overdrive being accomplished “by moving the main gear lever from the direct drive position to the right against a spring and then forward”. I certainly wasn’t aware that the later Glenton coaches, presumably the 8 litre version, had Meadows gearboxes. I recall from somewhere that the Meadows gearbox had a “Chinese” gear selection layout as well. Whilst on that subject, David Brown gearboxes also had strange selector layouts, as anyone who has driven a Bristol SC4LK will know.The Clark/Turner gearbox in the Bedford VAL was another strange creature. No doubt there were others. Dennis appeared to lose its way somewhat in the immediate post war period. The Lancet III was a quite successful type, and the lighter goods vehicles also sold well until undercut and overtaken by the cheaper lightweights from Bedford and Ford. In part, the firm suffered from the sudden loss of both of the Dennis brothers within three months in 1938 – Raymond Dennis was only 59 years of age, and John was 67 – and the post war heavy lorry business was dominated by British Road Services which placed the bulk of its orders with Leyland, AEC and Bristol. The advanced O6 engine soon proved to be too small at 7.58 litres, and later 8 litres, for the heavier demands of the late 1940s onwards. Had the firm upgraded the earlier O4 from four to six cylinders it would have had a 9.8 litre engine of some 125 bhp to take on AEC and Leyland. Instead, Dennis developed six cylinder engines of 5.0 and 5.5 litre sizes, that must have barely recovered their development costs as the mass producers increasingly captured the lighter end of the market. The survival and success of Dennis today, albeit in a decidedly different guise, is one of the surprises of our time.
Roger Cox
11/07/11 – 10:35
Although various Gardner, Leyland and Rolls Royce power plants were used, British Road Services was BTC and therefore was a (new) BRISTOL operator. [The only period when Bristol was a serious HGV manufacturer.] It is true that they operated other makes, including AEC, but for the most part these were vehicles taken over from the small independents who were nationalised. Those of you who have read the excellent Barber/Davies Wallace Arnold books will know that the associated Barr Haulage business was nationalised and became part of BRS.
David Oldfield
12/07/11 – 05:44
Strange gearboxes I have known. I once had a ride on one of Brown’s (Donington Wood) Sentinels. The driver said it had a Meadows box. The arrangement was not only switched right-to-left but also top to bottom. This probably meant that the gearbox was of standard layout internally but there was an extra fulcrum in the linkage. This was after all one of the very first underfloor-engined vehicles. F & H Dean of Newton Heath was a subsidiary of Maynes (Manchester) and ran a fleet of Bedford coaches. As a teenager I travelled on two of the SBs, one with a Bedford 4-speed box and one with the weird Clark/Turner 5-speed unit mentioned by Roger. But both were switched round right-to-left, with the low gears on the right and the high on the left. Finally I was involved in the failed attempt to preserve a Foden PVD6 of Garelochhead Coaches. When we went to collect it we found it had an unmistakeable Foden gearbox – i.e. with super-low and super-reverse – but again switched around right to left. We wrote to Foden, who said they had never built a gearbox like that and it must have been rebuilt by the operator. We wrote to the operator, who said it had been like that from new. All sorts of stuff goes on that nobody knows about!
Peter Williamson
13/07/11 – 07:24
Early utility Guys delivered to London Transport (and no doubt other operators), had the left and right gates reversed. Guy later changed the gate to the conventional one. To avoid driver confusion, LPTB cut a couple of inches off the top of the (I think) non-conventional gear levers. It seemed to work, although you’d soon learn that pulling away in third was silly!
Off-topic I know, but it’s good that mention’s been made that Bristol built HGV’s for British Road Services. Here is an excellent example of their product: at this link
Chris Hebbron
18/07/11 – 11:42
Most interesting to read Nick Webster and Roger Cox’s comments on Dennis Lancet UF gearbox variants. I certainly had no idea of the option of a Meadows box, which was perhaps chosen as being more manageable for new drivers than Dennis’s own excellent but unusual product. I’ve got a “Driver’s Handbook for Lancet U/F Diesel” publication 320c (surely they never offered a petrol version?!) which illustrates the gate with Reverse to the right and back and with Overdrive to the left and forward—exactly as on the halfcab Lancets. But the table of ratios shows 3rd as 1.55:1, whereas in the postwar Lance and most?/all? postwar Lancet half cabs 3rd was 1.66:1. I’ve also got a note, copied from a prewar magazine, that the 1936 O4-engined Lancet could be had with either of the following ratios: 0.69:1, 1.00:1, 1.55:1, 2.74:1, 4.54:1 and R 5.84:1. 0.69:1, 1.00:1, 1.55:1, 2.94:1, 5.18:1 and R 6.66:1. That second option gives a good wide spread, but the ratio gap between 3rd and 2nd looks a bit daunting! All this choice seems to fall in line with Dennis’s willingness to give customers what they wanted—not that such generosity always did the company all the good it should have done! Was the choice of a double-reduction rear axle for the U/F partly aimed at providing as low and uncluttered a floor as possible? The bevel crown-wheel/pinion ratio is less than 1.5:1, with a further reduction of over 4:1 in the hub. This way the diff housing is much smaller than with the usual CW/P ratio of about 5:1. The drawing does not show the housing as being offset to one side. Again, a bewildering variety of alternative overall ratios is given. Stuck onto page FRA1 of the “Lancet U/F Instruction Book” publication 373c is a note saying: “The axle described in this section is the F.101-2 fire engine type used with the all indirect drive gearbox. If a conventional gearbox is fitted to a chassis such as the Lancet U.F. then the spiral bevel wheel is mounted on the other side of the differential unit case so that the difference in input shaft rotation is accommodated. In other respects the axles are the same.” Visions of a bus with 5 reverse gears and only a crawler for forward motion…
Ian Thompson
18/07/11 – 22:59
Ian, that second gearbox option on the O4 Lancet would have given it Alpine hill climbing ability, albeit in reverse. I have to admit a soft spot for Dennis (had anyone noticed?). It was always a relatively small firm, but its engineering was of a very high order. The Lancet III with its advanced 24 valve engine proved to be an outstandingly reliable power plant, and numerous small, and some not so small, coach companies held this model in high esteem. According to the book “Dennis-100 Years of Innovation” by Stewart J. Brown, Dennis’s best year for sales before the Hestair takeover was in 1949 when it sold 1096 buses and lorries, and it is probable that the Lancet III formed a major part of that total. It was sad that the UF version didn’t win the same level of support, and the company could surely have amended the specification to accord with the clearly emerging engineering preferences of the bus industry. The pointer was the outstanding success of the AEC Reliance, and one can only wonder why Dennis did not try to emulate as many features as possible of that top selling model. By 1958, Dennis had a new five speed constant mesh gearbox in the Loline, which also had air brakes. Why wasn’t the Lancet UF re-engineered to accept these features? Similarly. a single reduction rear axle option and a revised chassis front end without the “drop” could surely have been offered at modest cost. Instead, Dennis pursued several lines of development that ultimately led nowhere, the Jaguar engined low floor front wheel drive ambulance being the extreme example. One should be grateful that the company is still with us, though it is now a very different creature from the Dennis of fond memory.
Roger Cox
19/07/11 – 06:56
After about 1950 the market for new buses and coaches contracted suddenly, making it impossible for all of the manufacturers who had been successful during the shortages of the early postwar years to continue to thrive in the same way. There just wasn’t room for them all in the marketplace. The major market for the Lancet UF would have been the BET operators, who would have been instructed not to buy it. Little point in investing in further development of a product which could only be sold to independents. Therefore I don’t believe the apparent decline of Dennis in the PSV market in the 1950s should be seen as a failure. Dennis were doing what they wanted to do, and what they did best, which was niche marketing. For years they didn’t waste any effort on the PSV market unless there was a niche to fill. Even the Dart would have been seen as a niche product when it was launched, but changes in the marketplace turned it, and Dennis, into something else.
Peter Williamson
23/07/11 – 08:38
Dennis had several BET company customers for the J3/J10 Lancet in the early post war period, and East Kent did initially buy the UF version. Aldershot and District, North Western and City of Oxford all bought the Loline, so that, whilst it is true that the BET group were AEC/Leyland orientated, there is no evidence that Dennis could not have sold a re-engineered Lancet UF to companies that wanted it. Before the advent of the Fleetline, Daimler was almost exclusively a supplier to municipal fleets, but the Fleetline soon found a place in the BET order books. Dennis’s emergence in niche marketing didn’t really happen until the Hestair takeover and the abandonment by the company of hgv production (dustcarts excepted). Much of this was a means of testing the psv market to find a new place for the company in a market then dominated almost exclusively by Leyland, whose arrogant “take or leave it” attitude under Donald Stokes generated a groundswell of resentment in the bus operating industry (including NBC!). With the development of the Javelin and the Dart, Dennis found mass markets, and the small production runs of almost bespoke models ceased.
Roger Cox
25/07/11 – 08:57
Sorry, what I meant by niche marketing (which may not be quite the right term) was not small-volume as opposed to large, but addressing a gap in the market as opposed to competing head-on with similar products.
Peter Williamson
26/07/11 – 07:33
Regarding the BET Group, something I’ve just remembered, and which I’m sure Dennis would have been well aware of, is that Atkinson developed the Alpha single-decker at the specific request of North Western, who were then ordered to buy Leylands instead. The NWRC Chief Engineer, who had overseen the development, resigned as a result. I don’t think this BET policy was due to engineering preference so much as the availability of bulk discounts for group purchases.
Peter Williamson
04/08/11 – 21:35
As far as I can recall, the drivers had no great gripes about them, other than the low driving position. From what I remember, they had a good turn of speed. They certainly soldiered on for a long time on the Port shuttles for Sealink and Seaspeed foot passengers after they had been taken out of front-line service.
Lew Finnis
28/10/11 – 14:12
My uncle worked as a driver at East Kent’s Herne Bay garage in the 1940’s – 1950’s, driving Leyland Tigers (TS8) and he said that he was not fond of the Lancet UF’s due mostly to the gearbox, and it’s remote location. He reckoned there was only one driver at Herne Bay that could actually drive them properly on tours work. He was also quite scathing about the Morris Commercial Imperial deckers based at Herne Bay – but that’s another story.
Mike
17/12/11 – 16:33
I was looking at your web site re bus tickets and buses as I am writing a small piece for our village news round. As a boy I remember a coach similar to to the one described above. It had a double seat adjacent to the driver at the front and the door was situated along the side in the middle. I remember the reg as being HAY 111 and was owned I believe by Birchers or Ridgeway and Windridge and operated under the name of Victory Coaches in Ibstock Leicestershire approx late 50s any use or can you confirm anything. I do remember other firms in the area described in the web site Brown Blue and Gibsons, others in our area were Rudins, Blockleys
Peter Stirland
18/12/11 – 07:33
HAY 111 was an AEC Regal IV which had Gurney Nutting C41C bodywork. It was new in 1951 to Windridge, Sons & Riley t/a Victory of Ibstock. When they sold out to Browns Blue in 1958, this vehicle was included in the sale and served with BB until the end of their operations in 1963. As Midland Red didn’t keep any of the vehicles, it passed to Yuille of West Hartlepool but I’m afraid I know nothing of Yuille.
Chris Barker
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
10/09/12 – 07:15
Mention has been made about the turn of speed attributed to the East Kent Dennis Lancet UF. Based on examination of what is believed to be the last remaining example (just about!) I can reveal that this one at least is fitted with a higher ratio back axle than standard and the later and larger 8 litre engine. The axle appears original and the engine has tags indicating that it was fitted by East Kent, rather than some subsequent owner.
Nick Webster
11/09/12 – 07:27
Here is another of these fine East Kent Lancet UFs. HJG 29 is seen pictured in Canterbury Bus Station in 1961. Another vehicle of this class is parked behind it. This handsome 1954 style of Duple body compares very favourably with the bulbous abomination fitted to 1961 Black and White Reliance 8222 AD. It was somewhere about 1960 that Duple began to lose its way in my opinion.
East Kent Road Car Co Ltd 1954 Dennis Lancet UF Duple C41C
This photo taken on Margate seafront in about 1966 shows HJG 3 numerically the first of a batch of 30 Dennis Lancet UF’s fitted with Duple Ambassador C41C bodies delivered to East Kent in 1954 these made up the largest fleet of Lancet UF’s in the country. Looking at this photo again recently I thought how the elegant simplicity of both the coachwork and the superb East Kent livery set one another off beautifully, on the Lancet the windscreens were set lower than on the contemporary Royal Tiger’s and Regal IV’s due to the Lancet’s lower driving position which also made the skylights above the screens more upright also the cab windows and the pillar behind the cab was a different shape. I feel that the Lancet UF deserved more success than it achieved but obviously it did not appeal to those then all powerful figures the Fleet Engineers who didn’t like some aspects of the specification.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Diesel Dave
31/10/13 – 07:31
Rather like Leyland in the dark, dark days of British Leyland you feel in your guts that you ought to, that you want to like/support Dennis. Many the reputable operator ran Lances, Lancet(tte)s and, of course, Lolines. Glenton ran the last “batch” of Lancet UFs with Plaxton Panorama bodywork – another class act. Often, specifications were good – just quirky and unproven (not necessarily bad and unreliable). Fodens had this problem. I’m no great lover of the Javelin – I prefer heavyweights – but it was a solid workhorse in the style of Bedford and Ford. I did, however, take a Dennis R420 to the South of France one summer. With its ZF AStronic gearbox (and a bit of imagination!) you could call it a cheap GB Setra. Being very much a Setra man, I can say that the R420 was one of the best/nicest coaches I have ever driven. It never took off because it didn’t have Volvo Assist to back it up if it broke down. [My experience of Volvo Assist is that it wasn’t missing much.] So I can support Roger to the hilt. The R series should have been a success, it wasn’t Dennis’s fault it wasn’t – and I’m sure the same was true of the Lancet UF.
David Oldfield
31/10/13 – 15:52
Newport Corporation ran some Lancet UFs but most were bodied as coaches, weren’t they?
Geoff Kerr
01/11/13 – 08:18
Newport Corporation took 12 Lancet UF in two batches. In his book “Dennis Buses in Camera” Robin Hannay says that the first 4 had bus bodies but makes no comment about the second batch although in the picture it appears that they have bus seating. All bodies were built by D J Davies a local coach operator and Dennis agent.
Paragon
01/11/13 – 08:20
I have always admired these East Kent Lancet UF coaches. East Kent took a total of thirty of these machines, the biggest single order that Dennis received for the Lancet UF. Registered HGF 2 to 32, they all had the stylish Duple Ambassador IV bodywork, the first six being C32C and the remainder C41C. The low driving position of the Lancet UF was incorporated very successfully into the design, and the result was a classic to my eye. East Kent were dedicated Dennis users in the pre and early post WW2 period, and my very first experience as a small boy of the Guildford marque came about in 1947-49 with rides on the Lancet II buses, with their distinctive O4 engines, between Faversham and Herne Bay. Until the advent of the Dart and its derivatives, the vertical engined Lancet was Dennis’s most successful passenger type, and the firm must have hoped that the underfloor engined model would have captured at least some of the market. In fact, the total production of the Lancet UF came to 71, the last being delivered to Glenton Tours in 1961. Several reasons may be offered for this, but reliability was certainly not a factor. East Kent, for example, kept their Lancet UFs for around 17 years. Some of the problems lay with the Dennis design which included features that some bus company engineers viewed with caution. These included the low driving position (the ultimate industry acceptance of which Dennis anticipated by about twenty years) and the high pressure hydraulic braking system that, London Transport’s Routemaster excepted, never became popular. The Dennis ‘O’ type gearbox was an idiosyncratic affair that had sliding mesh (i.e true crash rather than constant mesh) engagement of the four lower gears, fourth being direct drive. To add to the fun, the gearstick operated the “wrong way round”, upwards from right to left. Fifth gear was an overdrive with preselective engagement/disengagement using Maybach design principles. To engage fifth, the gear lever was pushed at any time from fourth position to the left and forward, but nothing happened until the accelerator and clutch were released to allow the revs to die. Then, releasing the clutch and applying the throttle would find the overdrive engaged. To disengage fifth, the stick would be moved back into fourth position at any time, and to actuate the system, the clutch had to be dipped and the engine blipped to raise the revs. Releasing the clutch pedal again would find fourth gear engaged. In the front engined Lancet, the proximity of the engine and gearbox to the driver allowed clean gear changes to be made by ear. In the UF, the remote location of the gearbox halfway down the chassis made this rather more difficult. Later models of the Lancet UF had the 8 litre rather than the 7.58 litre version of the O6 engine and a Meadows gearbox. When UF production finally finished, so did the manufacture of the O6, the last engine in the Dennis range to be offered. Thereafter, the firm used proprietary units. In the mid 1950s the BET group concentrated its purchasing upon AEC and Leyland products, and most other manufacturers of entirely acceptable machinery, including Dennis, were excluded from the ‘approved list’. Dennis tried again to enter the underfloor bus/coach market with the Pelican in 1956, which had the Dennis 92 bhp 5.5 litre engine and a conventional Meadows five speed constant mesh gearbox. The prototype made many demonstration tours, but the supremacy of AEC and Leyland in declining market conditions deterred the Guildford company from putting the Pelican into production. Yet again, however, the reliability of this unique machine was unquestionable. It ran for many years, first with Yellow Bus of Guildford, and finally with Chiltern Queens of Woodcote. More about the characteristics of the Lancet UF may be found on this site:- www.dennissociety.org.uk/nl/lancetuf.html
Roger Cox
01/11/13 – 14:02
Paragon – thanks, I meant to say “most others”, i.e. other than Newport’s. I know there’s a preserved Brutonian vehicle and Aldershot & District had at least one with a bus body.
Geoff Kerr
01/11/13 – 17:57
As has been stated elsewhere on this site, Dennis Lancet UF KOT 600 was never owned by Aldershot and District. The confusion arises because the vehicle was painted in A&D livery and given the fleet number 187, but it remained the property of the manufacturer. It was operated on hire from Dennis from 1st February to 30 November 1953, after which it was returned to the Guildford factory. It subsequently went to Simmonds of Great Gonerby, near Grantham, and then to Cullings of Norwich who eventually passed it on to Blue Bus of Slough. At some stage in its life its Strachans B41R body was rebuilt with a front entrance. Aldershot and District went over to the AEC Reliance for its single deck requirements.
Roger Cox
03/11/13 – 09:02
“Somerset’s Buses” by Laurie James (Tempus 2004) is the source of much useful information concerning the Lancet UFs belonging to Hutchings and Cornelius of which the Brutonian example mentioned above is one. H&C were Dennis users for many years and in 1957 took 3 UFs YYB 117/8/9.117 was DP40F and the other 2 were B42F. All had full service lives. 118 ended up with Brutonian but the interesting thing is that 119 is shown as passing to a Preservation Group in Guildford in September 1973. Where is it now?
Paragon
10/11/13 – 17:17
I had a close relationship with the East Kent UFs when they were used on contract services at Dover Eastern Docks providing a road link from ships and hovercraft to Dover Priory railway station in the 1969 -1971 period. I can vouch for what Roger Cox says about the potential difficulties posed by the remote gearbox, the long linkages and the unconventional gate. I can remember even experienced drivers stirring the long gear lever to find what they were looking for. In spite of being in their late teens at the end at the time they presented a modern image alongside the new hovercraft, and dare I say it they were more reliable than an SRN4! Just worth noting that the East Kent fleet was HJG 3 – HJG 32, slightly different from the numbers in Roger’s comment.
Mike Harvey
11/11/13 – 15:14
Roger – When I was young, about four times a year, I’d get an A&D Lance from Woking to St. Peter’s Hospital, near Chertsey and would try and sit in the nearside/offside downstairs front seat and observe the driver. It was quite some time before I worked out how that Dennis ‘O’ gearbox worked and the strange ‘U’ movement by the driver, with no change in engine note at that moment. I was quite used to preselective methods with the LTE Daimlers around Morden, but a crash gearbox with pre-selective overdrive; egad; that was quite another thing! That whole area was also interesting in that you would have London Country and A&D buses popping in and out of turnings all over. Interesting times.
Chris Hebbron
14/11/13 – 06:00
Paragon enquires what became of YYB 119 once listed as preserved? A previous owner of now preserved YYB 118 told me that circa 1984 he had located 119 laid up behind a pub in the Guildford area. Photographs show that it was in fairly poor order, blocked up with a missing front wheel and a large pile of scaffolding stacked against one side. Despite enquiries no one could be found who knew anything about it and when he returned at a later date it had gone. And as far as I am aware, it has never been seen since. Attemps to trace members of “The Guildford LU2 Group” have been equally negative.
Nick Webster
15/11/13 – 06:25
Chris, the Lance K3 was a remarkable machine, with its free running 7.58 litre 24 valve O6 engine, giving (unlike the optimistic claims of contemporary Crossley and Daimler engines, both of which had a litre greater capacity) a genuine 100 bhp, and this was coupled to the ‘O’ type gearbox with its preselective overdrive fifth gear. It was probably the fastest double decker of its time. In an age when the legal maximum speed for a psv was 30 mph, it always amused me to read the plate on the internal cab bonnet side of the Aldershot and District Lances and Lancets – “Do not engage fifth gear below 30 mph”. In my own experience, sadly only as a passenger, the drivers certainly complied, and these machines spent much of their time in overdrive. To the best of my knowledge, the A&D timetables of the 1960s did not differ greatly in terms of running time from those of the late 1950s. One had to drive a Loline pretty hard to get to Petersfield on time from Guildford or Aldershot, so the old 30mph limit must have been regularly observed in the breach.
Roger Cox
16/11/13 – 11:30
About,1963 I took a return journey from Portsmouth to Milford, swapping from Southdown to A&D at Petersfield. The Southdown, from memory, was one of the East Lancs PD2/12 registration RUF ###’s, but the A&D was a Loline; interesting, but not a Lance, to my eternal regret Roger, on that challenging route.
Chris Hebbron
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
28/07/18 – 06:29
It’s confession time – I was the “Guildford LU2 Group” After my initial attempt at vehicle preservation (OWB GCV 623) failed with the vehicle being vandalised on a farm in Elstead, I tried again with YYB 119 which I bought directly from H & C and drove home. Sadly, after securing a parking space next to a pub in Witley, I tried to get an MOT and needed to replace the kingpins, something which I was unable to do. Having run out of money and enthusiasm, I am ashamed to say that the bus was abandoned and I suspect that the kindly publican probably sold it for scrap. My next foray into bus ownership was the purchase of VCH 172 from Tillingbourne which I operated as KRC Coaches (Later to become Surreyways).
So far as I am aware, Entwhistle & Sons of Morecambe, trading as Prince of Wales tours, only ever had two vehicles. I offered a view of ETC 760B a while ago. Here are two views of their first, a 1933 Dennis Dart with Duple C20R body, with door. After thirty years of regular service, it was retired – ETC 760B being the replacement – and it has now returned to its birthplace, Guildford. It is now in the care of Alexander Dennis and we see it at Wisley on 5 April 2009. Quite why it has a White Heather illuminated rear panel I do not know. It carried it in her normal working life, too!
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
13/10/16 – 15:30
Sorry, Pete, I think you’ve got one or two things wrong, there. TJ 836 was new to Entwistle (no ‘h’) of Morecambe, but later operated for Jardine (t/a ‘White Heather’) also of Morecambe. I would imagine that the transfer took place in 1949/50 since that is the year in which Entwistle took delivery of a new Pearson-bodied Bedford OB – the registration was something like LTD 986, although that possibly isn’t quite right. It was this OB which was in turn replaced by ETC 760B in 1964. ‘LTD 986’ went for further service with Hay, of Kintore, Aberdeenshire. Frank Entwistle died in the late 1970s (I think) and ETC 760B passed to the partnership of Gerry Lamb and Neville Lacey (of Morecambe) who were already operating a coach of their own (a Bedford VAM, I think), under the name ‘Regent Travel’. IIRC correctly ETC 760B continued to be operated under the name ‘Prince of Wales’ for several years. ‘White Heather’ ceased operation when Mr Jardine died (I think this was the late 1950s). TJ 836 was sold shortly afterwards, but still stored in the Jardine depot at this time was TE 8318, a Chevrolet new to Jardine in 1929. I have read (on a Flickr caption) that TE 8318 and TJ 836 were operated by Jardine concurrently, but I didn’t think that that had been the case, although I don’t know for sure. In addition to TJ 836, TE 8318 and ETC 760B are, I think, still preserved. There is a nice shot of TJ 836 in service with Jardine on Flickr.
David Call
13/10/16 – 15:31
Can anyone explain, please, what the chimney-like protuberance is, at the nearside rear corner of the roof, above the fold-down steps? Such steps would normally lead to a roof-mounted luggage carrier of some sort (as found on, say, 50s Royal Blue coaches), but I can’t see any way you could keep luggage in place on this one.
Graham Woods
14/10/16 – 05:15
David, You are indeed correct as regards the spelling with or without the ‘H’. My schooldays were spent in Lancaster and Morecambe and I distinctly remember TJ running in the livery shown in the early 1960’s, and then ETC. I have no recollection of the OB. The Chevrolet has appeared on these pages in the past it can been here. I didn’t know that TJ had been with Jardine.
Pete Davies
14/10/16 – 05:16
With regards to the luggage rack, I think this would have been a recess in the roof with a waterproof cover that could be pulled back over the luggage (see attached pic) where you can see the cover rolled up on roof. I think the roof has since been panelled over. I don’t know what the square ‘chimney’ protrusion is, being in line with the steps it must have got in the way of the driver when putting cases up on roof. One thought would it have been a vent of some sort?
John Wakefield
14/10/16 – 05:17
It’s the smoke outlet from the boiler Graham. The fireman’s door is just next to it. The coal is stored just next to the number plate. The luggage locker is at the front.
Joe
14/10/16 – 08:47
Nearly right, Joe, the vehicle was actually powered by peat! That’s a lovely photo, John W, which made me wonder if the roofbox had a winding handle inside for the luggage cover, perhaps.
Chris Hebbron
13/12/16 – 14:10
Frank Entwistle was my second cousin and his father, Harry, my great uncle. TJ 836 originally had a roof box for luggage, see attached photo. The coach which followed the Dart was indeed a Pearson-bodied Bedford OB reg LTD 986. There were previous coaches to TJ 836 and before them horse-drawn Landaus.
Dave Shaw
13/12/16 – 14:10
The Bedford OB which followed the Dart was LTD 986, as shown in the attached photo.
Dave Shaw
10/02/17 – 06:53
If you look at You Tube – Coach Travel in the Fifties www.youtube.com/watch I think that you see a few frames of this bus, or one looking like it running right to left across the picture at about 19mins and 56secs in.
Roland Harmer
15/10/18 – 07:28
In this picture, taken at South Croydon in May 1972, the folding roof was still fitted.
Lytham St Annes Corporation 1943 Daimler CWA6 Duple H30/26
This shot is from the Roger Cox gallery contribution titled “The People’s League for the Defence of Freedom” click on the title if you would like to view his Gallery and comments. The shot is shown here for indexing purposes but please feel free to make any comment regarding this vehicle either here or on the gallery.
Daimler CWA6’s D1 to D6 were delivered to Merton Garage in April-May 1944. They had Duple lowbridge bodies which supplemented the austerity STL bodies which had been fitted onto spare STL chassis in 1942/43. There was still a shortage for the 127 route (Merton-South Wimbledon) hence the delivery of the Daimlers. They displaced some lowbridge ST’s from Watford and other lowbridge buses from Godstone which somehow had kept the service going. These, together with D’s 128-131 delivered in late 1945, plodded the same semi-circular 9 mile furrow to termini only 2 miles from each other! Sometimes, for a treat, they’d be allowed out on the long haul from Morden Station to Epsom for the races (a riding treat for me, too) and sometimes to historic Hampton Court on route 152. They all ended their short lives at the end of 1952, some going to Ceylon, along with some of their big brothers!. The photographs show front/back views and interior views. The lowbridge layout was conventional for the period, with rows of four seats, without staggering, and an offside sunken gangway, which intruded slightly into the driver’s cab. I mentioned a while ago the highly-varnished wooden slated seats and the tendency for upstairs passengers to suffer from ‘lateral instability’ around corners! Upholstered seats did not come until around 1948/49, from memory. The position of the rear number plate was unusual on these vehicles, for many austerity buses had them fitted above the window on the nearside rear bulkhead (above the used ticket box), making them invisible from the street! LT soon put them by the offside rear lights as per usual. It is nice to see photos of one of them in virgin condition, unspoiled by adverts, particularly on the rear upper panel. My thanks to London Transport Museum for the use of the above shots.
Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron
Thank you Chris for a most interesting account of this particular batch of “utility” vehicles. Dreadful though WW2 undeniably was, it necessitated the design and construction of some most characterful buses, many variations of which I was privileged to travel and to work on. These included Daimler CWA6/CWD6, Guy Arab and Bristol K6A – with bodies by Duple, Roe, Park Royal, Pickering to name but a few. Despite the poor materials which blighted many of these vehicles they performed a heroic service, many having long and distinguished careers even into the 1960s. My close associates often sigh, good naturedly I think and hope, at my hero worship of these historic buses – especially the one hundred “Sutton HGFs” D182 – 281, even though they were to relaxed specification and were delivered in 1946 they were still commendable and fascinating “utilities” as far as I’m concerned.
Chris Youhill
I agree, Chris, that the vehicles had character and even simplicity, plainness if you like, has a certain attractiveness, if you understand my meaning. What always amazed me was, that in the situation of total war, each body builder was permitted to design its own style within the ‘utility’ specification laid down. Fascinating from a bus enthusiast’s point of view, but a wasteful duplication of manpower! As for the Sutton Daimlers, the one aesthetic let-down was the rear three-piece destination display, which looked as if it had been a last-minute pop-riveted afterthought and in perpetual risk of falling off! It probably was, and was! A further look at D1’s lean-back, but ramrod straight front, above, makes me recall the frontal look of the very rare 1932 Birch body. I have seen a photo of one somewhere and will try to find and upload it.
Chris Hebbron
As you rightly say, Chris, the variations in designs within the “utility” specification were fascinating. The first two Duples that we had at Samuel Ledgard’s, also in 1944, were the exact highbridge equivalent of D1. I think that the slightly later Duple bodies were possibly the most handsome and smoothest of line of the real “utilities”, and surely the Pickering offering from the North East must have been the most ghastly in appearance and poor construction. I quite agree that the ludicrous rear destination assembly on the 1946 “HGFs” was unforgiveable – and all to inform would be passengers in great detail which bus they had missed!! In all twenty two of the Ledgard vehicles these abominations were removed and immaculately panelled over before entering service. Seven of the batch were also fitted with platform doors and emergency exits of the most professional appearance. Stop me now before I go on for pages about a most intriguing series of buses !!
Chris Youhill
I suppose these are tram seats, but trams don’t roll! The question is indeed “why bother?” when there is a limit to what you can save. The interiors are still lined: but there are no headlamps & only one (two?) drain out of the upper deck needing a moulding to keep the contents off the platform: & it is fixed together a bit like a Leyland National (! for the same reasons?)- fair enough but not shattering: I suppose then it was a departure from traditional coach building….. but two questions: what is in the windows & is that just a void round the radiator? You presumably didn’t need to follow the old custom of leaving the engine access open in hot weather! I have never seen an “original” utility bus, so these photos are helpful.
Joe
Hi Joe. It’s true that wooden slatted seats were widely used on trams, but I guess their construction was cheaper, simpler and lent itself more to mass production than upholstered seats. I can certainly remember them on utility trolleybuses of Nottingham City Transport. Same goes for the rear dome construction which was produced from flat metal sections, so that formation of complex curves was not necessary. Many of the features were intended to reduce the production man-hours needed as well as the costs. Actually the bus does have headlights, but they are small and fitted with blackout cowels giving only a very feeble light beam ahead. You will notice that the interior lights are also dimmed with a blue cover. The windows (in London at least) were encased in a close weave netting to prevent splintering in case of bomb blasts nearby. This let the light in but made the windows opaque – hence the small diamonds of clear glass in the centre. The use of white handrails (also white tips to the mudguards and probably the white spot on the rear) were intended as an aid to sight during the blackout.
Stephen Ford
The slatted seats were new, made for these buses., but upstairs tram seats could be wooden, but were constructed to have reversible backs. Trams DO roll, Joe, or, in fact, corkscrew, especially if they ran only on four wheels and not trucks (on trains called bogies). The action was very strange and conducive to small children throwing up! It is not clear from the photos, but the design of austerity bus bodies ensured that they could be built with unskilled labour. The bodywork had no curves worth mentioning, obviating panel-beating (look at the rear of the roof, called lobster–style which was flat steel cut then curved round at the end and just welded). They only had single skins (so you could see the body ribs inside, and only single-skin roofs (sometimes the ribs were inside, sometimes outside), but, worst of all, they were generally built with steel sheeting and unseasoned wood of uncertain origin (ash was the usual pre-war wood used) ensuring rust problems and the wood framing literally turning to dust after around seven years. Even then, some bodybuilders had their pride and rejected some of the totally unsuitable wood they were given to work with! London Transport started a programme of re-building the bodies around 1948/9 and gave up halfway through, because of the time and expense. Although hard to see, the bus does have headlights, very tiny and black painted (the offside one is below the cab vent). There is no void around the radiator, there was a chicken-style wire grill inside the steel radiator framework. The engine had the usual side cover, which was usually in proper position on these buses and not leaning on the wing! The Daimler chassis were simplified versions of the pre-war model, but were quite robust and sophisticated. Most utility buses of the era had chassis which long outlasted the bodies. They went on until rendered obsolete more because of their out dated halfcab style and ponderous road performance in the 1960’s than for mechanical shortcomings. In their day, despite steel being used rather than aluminium, the stripped-out bodywork was usually the same weight as pre-war buses. From the above photos, you’ll see that the only touch of luxury was the patterned material covering the front downstairs bulkhead! Finally, you mention the windows and I assume you mean the diamond shapes. This was anti-blast netting attached to the inside of the non-opening windows and lower glass of the few opening ones – two each deck! The diamond section allowed passengers to see out. The netting was not not universal throughout the UK – much depending on the risk of bombing where the bus operated.
Chris Hebbron
The white spot on the rear, Stephen, is an interesting point. It seemed unique to London Transport and I’ve seen it mentioned that it was an aid to trolleybus drivers in that they knew they could overtake a bus with a spot: to do so on one without was to court disaster!! There’s a logic to this theory, but whether it’s true……!
Chris Hebbron
The “trolleybus assistance” theory is an interesting one Chris, and feasible too, but I think that the more likely answer is that the white spots were a general aid to visibility in the WW2 blackout. I’ve had a quick look at the prewar “STLs” and there isn’t a white spot to be seen when they were nearly new, but plenty in the chapter about the War period.
Chris Youhill
I think Chris Youhill is right about the spot – but I arrived over seven years after VE and VJ days, so what do I know?
David Oldfield
Duple really were a class act weren’t they? Even with the constraints of the utility specification they managed to make them look refined in an un-fussy “Puritanical” sort of way. Even the lobster-back canopy is tidily done. And not many manufacturers bothered to put radiused windows in the rear emergency door. This really softens what might otherwise be a rather savage design. The Barton’s specimens I used to ride on were similar, but must have come a bit later, since they had upholstered seats and “peacetime” rear canopies – although of course, Barton’s did have a penchant for rebuilding, modifying and generally tinkering with their rolling stock!
Stephen Ford
London Transport never actually ordered any Duple bodies for their chassis (most, pre-war, were built by them at Chiswick, anyway). But they had inherited 50 Duple-bodied Green Line coaches from LGOC, so had some experience and Duple was third on their preferred list of body suppliers in the war, maybe because they were a London company (Park Royal, I suspect, was first)! They had a good reputation, pre-war, too. When they required another three lowbridge Daimlers for the same 127 route above, delivered in November 1945, they’d managed to wangle Duple to be the bodybuilders again, even though Massey were the only firm making such bodies by then! Apart from the aforesaid 7 D’s, there were a further 104 highbridge ones, 20 B’s (Bristols) and a solitary G (Guy)! As an aside, Chris Youhill commented on the ugliness and flimsiness of Pickering austerity bodies – has anyone got a photo of one of them they could upload, assuming the bodies lasted long enough for a photo opportunity!
Chris Hebbron
Thanks for all the feedback. I’ve found the headlamps and realised that the top deck ceiling is the roof (like Midland Red?): the white circle is clearly the thing to aim your single ( ie dipped) headlamp at in the smog: and smog it would have been upstairs with one side window….. but I’m still baffled why the body doesn’t touch the radiator (?): and was the Leyland National the natural heir of this construction system?
Joe
In reply to Chris Hebbron’s latest message, could you please if possible include this picture of Samuel Ledgard Otley depot Pickering bodied JUA 763. Its a good illustration of how ghastly, inexcusable even under the Fheurer’s tyranny, the Pickering offerings were.
Chris Youhill
The discussion about wooden seats was interesting. I believe that Aberdare Corporation until quite modern times specified wooden seats because they carried a lot of coal miners who would have probably soiled moquette seating. Also the now defunct operator Jolly of South Hylton in County Durham had a batch of bus bodied Duple Dominants and they had a rear wooden seat to counteract vandalism.
Philip Carlton
I can answer the Daimler radiator mystery, Joe. As with many buses with radiators, the gap between radiator and body was filled by some sort of rubber composite material to keep damp and dirt out. When the D’s were re-painted and overhauled, the radiators and seals were changed from black to red, as my photo demonstrates. One oddity about this photo is that it is the only D I’ve ever seen with mansized headlamps and looking the better for it!.
Chris Hebbron
Thanks, Chris, for letting me and others see the Pickering offering. The product could have done little to lift morale and possibly even lowered it! Mind you, I’ve seen photos of the enemy’s efforts with Berlin’s double deckers in the inter-war years and they weren’t far removed from the style of the Karrier CL6 body I published here some months ago! I assume the Ledgard bus is a Guy Arab II, but it certainly hasn’t got Guy’s extended front wings, certainly not the nearside one, anyway. Intriguing.
Chris Hebbron
I know what you mean about the Pickering, but I guess in the war beggars couldn’t be choosers. And, as a colleague used to say, when you’re tired after work a third class ride beats a first class walk any day! For much of the duration the last buses in many cities ran at 9.00 (to save fuel and maybe let crews get home before the bombs started falling in earnest). Late workers in essential industries had passes allowing them to jump the (long) queues which didn’t stand a chance of all fitting on these last buses.
Stephen Ford
Not heard that saying before, Stephen, but my son used to say (in relation to the crude but successful Russian T34 tank in WWII) ‘Quantity has a quality of its own” which equally applies to these wartime saviours and stalwarts. And it the dark days of the war, 1942-43, there was an edict to save a further 25% on fuel and tyres. This is when bus companies ran buses into cities in the morning rush-hour, where they remained parked until returning to the suburbs in the evening. Drivers and conductors took the remaining buses home, then taking up duty again for the return journey. In London, there were rows and rows of them all over Central London, even in the Royal Parks.
Chris Hebbron
Chris H is quite right in assuming that the Guy JUA 763 was an Arab 11 and its missing outswept mudguard – from time to time – was a source of mystery. Of course we could have asked at the time I suppose but didn’t. Incredibly however the elusive elegant fitting suddenly appeared years later on ex United Bristol K GHN 840 – which made that vehicle look as odd so equipped as the Guy did having lost it !!
Chris Youhill
Thanks for the radiator pic, Chris- yes I now see the shrouding on the original: examples I have seen in the early 60’s were leather & looked very naff. The cleaned up painted version is very smart & neat- notice too the neat bracket added for the jumbo headlamp. What does the badge say? LT?
Joe
Chris Y – Thx for the ‘wing’ story – it’s amazing what engineers put away for a rainy day, just in case! And, in connexion with Pickering’s unattractiveness, I always felt that LT’s least attractive recipient was the Massey version. BTW – Where was Pickering’s factory?
Joe – The badge said ‘London Transport’ and was never that secure on these radiators, which weren’t designed to take anything; a fluted radiator top was considered enough for Daimler cars and buses! Interestingly, I notice that D1 above has not yet been fitted with the plate. I suspect it is still at Chiswick, where it would have been delivered to. The Green Line D’s never bore them and the Guys seemed to be 50/50. Amazing that time was wasted on such frills in a time of National Emergency!
Chris Hebbron
How fascinating to read about D1-6. They seem identical to the Bradford ones which I remember well, including the Upper Deck “lateral instability”. The photo brings it all back!! In Bradford, these buses were regarded with total disrespect, being nicknamed “pig troughs” or “Flat Harriets”, but they always appealed to me, being a utility admirer. Duple bodies were probably amongst the best, as far as I can see, and were probably helped by the “V” strip against the canopy on the n/s. There was something very distinctive about the “shell back” dome which worked with, rather than against the overall look of the body, and , when “normal” domes reappeared in 1945, the body lost some of its appeal for me. Duple utility bodies could keep me going for hours. I also well remember the Ledgard ones, although memories of the HGFs seem to predominate there!
John Whitaker
Chris H – I believe the Pickering factory was at Wishaw in Scotland and will check as soon as I have chance.
Chris Youhill
Pretty sure the Pickering factory was at Wishaw. Tram literature quotes Wishaw as the place where Pickering built the Aberdeen streamliners
John Whitaker
Yes, I’m sure that the Pickering factory was in Wishaw, Lanarkshire in Scotland, from what I’ve heard and read over the years. The Ministry of War Transport (I think that’s the correct title) was responsible for allocating both chassis and body builders to operator’s applications for new buses. The intention was that Pickerings would deliver their products to operators in Scotland and northern England. Apparently one Midlands municpallity (was it Derby?) had heard that Pickering bodies were “fragile” and refused them. As a result two Pickering-bodied Guy Arabs ended up with Brighton Hove & District on the south coast! As non-standard to that fleet, they were sold or transferred after the war (c.1948?) to Western / Southern National, where I think they operated out of Plymouth for a few years. I believe most of Pickerings bus work pre-war went to Glasgow Corporation, and I have a vague memory that their main occupation was as a builder of railway wagons. Were they more successful in that role than in bus work?
Michael Hampton
The question about the white disc on the back of vehicles is mentioned in “London Transport in the Blitz” by Michael H C Baker. I understand that motor buses had the disc painted on the rear panel but trolleybuses were distinguished by carrying LT’s trolleybus bulls eye motif there (which was the standard bar and circle device superimposed with a ‘T’ and with the word “Trolleybus” on the bar). In later years the trolleybus motif was moved to the rear window to permit the rear panel to be used for advertising.
Trevor Haynes
Thanks for your comment, Michael. What Michael Baker wrote is my understanding of the situation. I’ve never heard of or read the book, incidentally, but must try and get a copy now! The ‘T’ motif was not a war characteristic, unlike the white disc Strangely, however, overhauled buses were still leaving Chiswick with the disc painted, for some months after VE Day.
Chris Hebbron
22/10/11 – 17:36
I’ve just found your website/blog/W.H.Y. and of course find it fascinating. Some of you chaps have great depth of knowledge – and these forums can only increase it, I guess! I have a few pics taken as a spotterlad and if I can find a way to do it, I’ll attach a shot of ex-L.T. D74 working in Leicestershire for Brown’s Blue of Markfield, which firm I believe ferried coal miners of the region to their daily toil. BB had as I recall, D 19, 161, 165, 169, 179 and 74 and may have had at least one ex-East Kent Daimler, too. OK now I’ve found the advice on how to forward photos, so I’ll get on with it!
Victor Brumby
24/10/11 – 17:39
When my interest in `Bus Spotting` started, in the early 1950’s, our local service was route 151 that included Morden Station and Reynolds Close, Hackbridge. My lasting memory is the service used D models. At our local stop (we called it The Circle at Carshalton) we did however prefer to wait for the new RT to return from Reynolds Close to ride on the newer bus to Morden. In what I have read recently it seems the D’s did not run route 151 as my aging memory thinks. Is it possible the D’s were only `loaned` to route 151 at times? If not, can anyone tell me what type of bus was on route 151 before RT’s took over?
Derek Hanlon
25/10/11 – 07:14
Your memory is not at fault, Derek. The original 151 route started in 1949, running from Morden Stn to Hackbridge. Vehicles were supplied solely from Sutton Garage, which, at this time, had an entire allocation of 100 ‘relaxed’ style D’s in the D182-281 series. The last of the D’s went in 1954, replaced by RT’s. I lived in Morden until 1956 and only recall D’s on the route, although I remember seeing earlier D’s on there once or twice, presumably on loan from nearby Merton Garage.
Chris Hebbron
26/10/11 – 05:44
Thanks for that Chris. Its nice to have confirmation that the old memory still works. Having now found your (extremely good and worthwhile) site I expect I shall have a few more requests sometime. Thanks.
Derek Hanlon
01/08/13 – 06:46
I have only recently found this site and have Noticed that two of the people who use the site Chris Hebbron and Chris Youhill remember the Daimlers from Sutton and Merton Garages. Before I went into the R.A.F. in 1953 I was a Garage Youth at Sutton garage, basically a Junior Mechanic. At the time we not only had the Daimlers but also the single deck A.E.C Renown buses known as Scooters. On Saturdays we borrowed single deck vehicles from other garages, one of which was Sidcup to supplement our service 213 to Kingston. The Scooters were replaced by the R.F. Although we boys were not allowed to drive round the garage we were often asked by the mechanics to move buses, so we did and to get different types such as Qs and 10t10s was a bonus. Like other contributors I loved the Daimlers and disappointed that most went to Ceylon and none were preserved. With regards to the route 151. I later drove from Merton Garage and the 151 was one of my regular routes, but with an R.T. It is correct that Sutton, in the 1950s did run that route. I hope this is of some interest.
Brian Blackburn
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
31/01/14 – 13:10
The white spot controversy!
Definitely only motor buses carried it, both double deck and single deck. The theory about trolleybus drivers being able to understand that they could overtake a white spot motor bus is reinforced by the fact that the Trolleybus symbol was moved from the lower rear panel to the rear lower saloon window during the war (not afterwards) from its previous position. This had nothing to do with lower panel advertising as suggested, as pre-war the symbol was very low down on the left and there was plenty of room for advertising above it and many trolleys had such advertising pre war. The adverts that were missing pre war on trolleys were those either side of the destination blinds between decks but why this was so seems to be a complete mystery as they were fitted post war with no problem.
