Tag: Leyland

Manchester Corporation – Leyland Panther – GND 87E – 87

Manchester Corporation Leyland Panther

Manchester City Transport
1967
Leyland Panther PSUR1/1
MCW B40D

It may seem barely credible now, but in the early 1960s Manchester Corporation was planning a future without double-deckers. They had realised (possibly before anyone else) that the days of the bus conductor were numbered, but at that time only a single-decker could be operated legally without one. As a preliminary step towards total conversion to single deck one-man operation (as it then was), the Corporation carried out strategic experiments in new methods of fare collection, initially using 20 Park Royal-bodied Panther Cubs, a model created by Leyland at Manchester’s request. These were to have been followed by 30 full-grown Panthers with MCW bodies, but in the event only 29 of these were delivered. The missing Panther had been destroyed by fire at the body builders and was not replaced, because by then it was 1967 and the world had changed significantly. Conductorless operation of double-deckers was now imminent, and the plan for an all single-deck fleet was consigned to oblivion.
Although the Panthers rapidly faded from prominence, and were never very well known to enthusiasts, I was personally very fond of them. They were among the first Manchester buses to revert to red interiors after a dozen years of drab and incongruous green, and for me they produced some of the most pure and thrilling Leyland sound effects of all time.
In this April 1968 photo, Panther no. 87 (GND 87E) waits at the Brookdale Park (Newton Heath) terminus of route 7, a rather rambling inter-suburban service on the north side of the city, which in earlier years had taken me to school by Leyland PD2.

Photograph and copy contributed by Peter Williamson

Thanks for showing the photo above, it is becoming more impossible as time goes by to get bus photos, in service of Manchester corporation transport, mainly in the 1950/1960s periods, ie such buses as Crossley, Leyland Titan TD5s etc. Also for many years I have failed in obtaining copies, or even photocopies of Manchester fleet list/allocation lists for years 1946 to 1959, 1952 to 1953 and 1961, makes me wonder if I will ever get them as I am getting on in years now.
Can anyone help please.

Michael Cregeen

Answer for Michael Cregeen, regarding Manchester Corporation fleet list.
Try this link and scroll down to item 88, which lists the Manchester tram, trolleybus and bus fleets, the latter divided into (1) 1906-35, (2) 1936-50, (3) 1951-69. Sorry, can’t help with the photographs. Finally, I don’t want to be personal, but Cregeen sounds like a Manx name. I remember a school holiday to the IOM in 1960, and we were transported around the island on a pair of Bedford coaches from Cregeens of Port Erin (an OB and an SB I think).
Any relation?

Stephen Ford

My thanks to Stephen for his very helpful answer but the type of Manchester fleet lists I am trying to get, or photocopies will do show the bus fleet and depot allocations rather than just fleet. These where published by Manchester Corporation Transport themselves. The years I cannot get are 1946 to 1950, 1952 to 1953 and 1961. Also selnec similar lists from 1971 to 1975.
Thanks in hope.

Michael Cregeen.

Michael, if you don’t mind black and white, Jaspers has 115 images with prints for sale, buses ranging from 2029 to 4644, at this link.

Peter Williamson

Something has confused me for many years. When 4490, 4500, 4509 were transferred from Birchfields Road to Northenden, this was odd in itself, but as far as I am aware they where never used by Northenden on all day service, they were used only on part day and works duty. This despite the rest at Birchfields being out all day. Also similar when 4550-4559 went from Birchfields to Northenden, they where used on part day also, and yet the rest of the batch including a few which went to Princes Road where out all day on the Flixton services. Never got to the bottom of this does anyone know anything?

Also after over 30 years of trying I still cannot get my hands on MCTD fleetlist/allocation lists for the years 1946-1950, 1953 and 1961, even photocopies would do. As regarding selnec/gmt ones from 1971 onwards I give up can anyone help please?

I have not got a computer, I use a library internet connection so not always available.

Michael Cregeen

Michael, I am interested in your question about the transferred Daimlers, but you do not say when the transfers took place. If it was well into the Fleetline era, then it may have been for capacity reasons. A few other facts that may be relevant:
1.  Only about one-third of the Manchester fleet, mainly the newest third, was used on all-day duties, and the exact proportion would be different at different depots.
2.  The five-cylinder Daimlers, which included 4490-4509, couldn’t keep up with the traffic on Princess Road/Parkway, which was Northenden’s main radial thoroughfare.
3.  Industrial relations were handled separately at each depot, and Northenden was known as the most militant.

Peter Williamson

I have received an email from The Museum of Transport Greater Manchester giving contact details and inviting Michael to get in touch with their Archives department and they feel sure they can help him with his search for MCTD fleet lists. Hopefully Michael will let us know how he goes on.

Peter

Still cannot obtain the Manchester Corporation fleet/allocation lists for years 1946-1950,1952,1953,1961, nobody at The Museum of Transport Greater Manchester ever replies to my correspondence, but living in hope someone can send these, or photocopies one day.

Michael Cregeen 09/10

Please read Michaels comment above first

I do wish people would not promise to do something that they have no intention of doing. I know that the people behind the scenes at the museum are volunteers but the Director who wrote to me 04/03/2010 – 23:27 (name withheld) promised that it would be no problem, six months is a long time to wait for an acknowledgement to a request for information and I do not think for one moment that it is the only request they have had from Michael.

Peter 

Monday September 5th 1966 when Sunderland Corporation Transport bought 33 Leyland Panther Buses accepting tokens for 2d-9d every 10 journeys.
The Bus Driver for selling bus tokens on FBR 53D is the late Norman Burlison from day one.
Types of buses including Daimler Roadliners, AEC Swifts, Bristol RE’s and Daimler Fleetlines from the sixties.
I will never forget the Leyland Panther Buses from the Sunderland Corporation Transport.

Terry Christie

In 1971 3 ex Selnec Panthers came to Ireland, one of those being GND 87E a few years later they were sold back to Cranes & Commercials in Southampton and then exported to Australia.

Sean

I just came across these articles whilst looking round the net. I remember the Daimler vehicles in use. I started at Queens Road depot in 64 as a guard then becoming a driver in 69. The comments about the Daimlers lack of pace was certainly true. If we were working the 53, (the banana route). It be good to have a Princess Road vehicle in front, every 3 Min’s on the timetable. We would have caught up with their Daimler by the time we got to Bradford Cemetery. We occasionally had Daimlers with a pre-selector gearbox at Queens Road. They had the habit of the selector pedal jumping out. It took a lot of effort to get it back in again. One driver, who was an ex jockey, was unable to get moving again, no matter how his 8 stone tried. Withy Grove at the junction of High Street was gridlocked till another driver came to his aid. We also had some modern, then, Daimlers with crash gears, they had nice comfortable interiors; but slow. We used them on the 4 service, this was the nearest thing we had to a rural bus service, Cannon St. to Bamford via Heaton Park and Heywood. They were suited to the steadier pace required. I never drove one, they had gone before I became a driver but those old pre-selectors, it took some thinking about to plan which gear you wanted next.
The pictures of the single deckers on the 7 service also stirs memories. They tried a system on the no. 7 and 123 services; Minimax. The fare was 6d for any distance, 3d half. The passenger had to put his sixpence in to operate a turnstile to travel; the left hand turnstile allowed the driver to let children or passes to use their threepence to get on. People didn’t have the correct coins, it was bound to fail, that and the centre exit.

Peter Furnival

04/05/2012 07:34

I found this site quite by accident and really find it very interesting. I previously wrote that I was a conductor and driver at Birchfields road from 1959 to 1978, and that I found the Leyland 3400’s a pleasure to drive. Does anyone know what happened to 3427? If it possibly made preservation, or went the same final route of so many more golden oldies. She had a real ‘throaty’ rumble from her exhaust, and made the hair on the back of my neck tingle and I always drove with the small window in the driver’s door open!

Bill Parkinson

05/09/12 – 06:57

I remember being quite excited by these Manchester Panthers when new, they looked so modern at the time in their cream and red livery. The turnstile arrangement inside them was less popular though. Among other things it had an unfortunate habit of catching and lifting the then fashionable miniskirts, to the serious embarrassment of the wearer. I particularly remember them on the 123, and on the 67X which ran (I think Saturdays Only) from Belle Vue to Clayton Bridge or Newton Heath. They also sometimes popped up on the 73, Ryder Brow Circular, traditionally a route that threw up interesting buses.

Brian Wainwright

15/10/12 – 07:51

Re the interiors of the Panthers, the first vehicles to revert to red interiors were the 1965 batch of Atlanteans. The following batches of Atlanteans and Fleetlines had red and black interiors.
The green and beige scheme adopted from 1953 was based on the RT scheme of London Transport. When the cost and weight of the wood and paint interiors on the post war Standards had to be replaced on what were bodybuilders’ designs, rather than specific Manchester designs, Albert Neal decided that he could both save cost and offer his passengers a brighter interior.

Phil Blinkhorn

15/10/12 – 10:55

The Panthers also turned up on the 201 service from Woodhouse Lane to Sale Moor soon after the introduction of the route, replacing Panther Cubs. This service was technically “joint” with North Western (due to the area agreement which made everywhere to the west of the A56 in Sale the territory of NWRCC), but as far as I know the single vehicle required was always supplied by MCTD.

Neville Mercer

16/10/12 – 05:25

It is recorded in “The Manchester Bus” (Eyre and Heaps) that the whole of the 1965 batch of Atlanteans (3721-3792) had red interiors, but it was not so. The early ones had grey interiors with the usual green seats downstairs and tan upstairs. This scheme can be seen on the preserved Panther Cub. Round about 3760 there were a couple of experimental schemes (including some nasty black and yellow moquette as I recall) and the red started after that.

Peter Williamson

16/10/12 – 11:48

As I recall, MCTD had very few single deckers during the 50’s and 60’s….The only ones I can remember seeing in the southern parts of the city were those which operated the 22 route from Levenshulme, opposite the McVities biscuit factory, to (was it?) Eccles, a fairly long route of maybe 10 to 15 miles but with a low bridge just a couple of hundred yards from the Levenshulme terminus, hence the single deckers….In hindsight, it now seems a bit odd to have had a separate fleet for the sake of a few hundred yards of road, so maybe they were used elsewhere on the network although I don’t remember seeing them anywhere else….I can’t remember exactly what make/type these were, I think that they were Leylands, but I have in my memory that they were fairly odd looking with a rear entrance….Or maybe after so many years I’m confusing them with the rear entrance Albions (or was it, even, Atkinsons ?) that NWRCC used to operate – and if I had a photo of one of those grotesque NWRCC single deckers which I could upload, I’d certainly nominate these for the Ugly Bus Ball.
But I digress….Does anyone have any more info, background, photo or links to these MCTD single deckers, please ?

Stuart C

16/10/12 – 13:10

Glory Days: Manchester and Salford – Eyre/Heaps (Ian Allan) might help. Lots of good photos and a comprehensive fleet list for both authorities up to the formation of SELNEC.

David Oldfield

16/10/12 – 16:49

A number of points. Re the 1965 Atlanteans, Peter is right, I’d forgotten about the grey scheme. I’m guessing but the change over – and the other “experiments” – may have been due to Ralph Bennett’s arrival.
Stuart asks about the single deckers.
The 22 ran from Levenshulme Lloyd Rd just the Manchester side of the Stockport boundary opposite McVities to Eccles. The route was shared with North Western and at one time they used their Atkinsons with a similar rear entrance layout to the MCTD Royal Tigers. As with other routes shared with MCTD, NWRCC’s appearances could be patchy.
There were in fact two bridges on the route. The one at Levenshulme was eventually dealt with as part of the electrification scheme from Manchester to London. The other was the Bridgewater Canal bridge at Eccles and this still exists. Once the railway bridge had been dealt with a decision was taken to alternate double and single deck working, the double deckers avoiding the canal bridge by continuing parallel to the canal and gaining Eccles by a tight turn onto the Eccles-Irlam Rd. Drivers found themselves one day in charge of singles, on other days Parrs Wood’s PD2s. This led to grief.
Burlingham bodied PD2 3494 was piloted under the canal bridge and was pretty much destroyed. The chassis was fine however so the body from 1953 PD2 3363 was placed on the chassis of 3494 and that number was retained. //www.flickr.com/photos/dg11061959/5603990371/
The 22 wasn’t the only route. North Western’s 31A ran from Bramhall to Manchester via Cheadle and Withington. Virtually taken over by Manchester apart from legions of NWRCC duplicates during the morning rush hour and far fewer in the evening (due to the morning rush hour coinciding with school travel) the route was under the London line at Cheadle Hulme and this also had restricted headroom.
There were many other short feeder routes around the system in Wythenshawe, Middleton, Clayton, Belle Vue, Failsworth and Denton as well as the shortest of them all, the 129 from Millgate Lane to Didsbury village. None of these required double deckers.
In addition Manchester had a private hire requirement as well as needing to supplement the half deckers on the airport service.
A few more observations.
In 1953 Manchester received 18 Royal Tigers with rear entrances, 4 with front entrances and 2 with centre entrances.
In 1957 Albert Neal wanted to buy new front entrance Tiger Cubs but was thwarted by his Committee. Eventually he had to make do with 6 Seddon bodied Albion Aberdonians which he used as little as possible and they were withdrawn in 1968 having spent much of their time in the shadows at the rear of Parrs Wood depot.
He got his Cubs in 1961, 5 bodied by Park Royal followed by 10 in 1962 in a very attractive airport livery of two tone blue divided by a silver band. These were split between front entrance and dual door versions, both appearing in all day service on stage carriage routes.
1964 saw the arrival of the Park Royal Panther Cubs followed in 1967 by the Panthers.

Phil Blinkhorn

16/10/12 – 17:30

In 1972/73 I worked at the SELNEC Central’s North West Area Schedules Department at Frederick Road Depot, Salford, which compiled the schedules and rotas for the two ex-Salford Depots at Frederick Road and Weaste, and for the ex-MCTD Depot at Queens Road.
Queens Road had some of these Panthers to work the 147 Cannon Street to Hollinwood via Higher Blackley, due to a low bridge just before the terminus at Hollinwood.
Weaste had some to work the 3 and 5 services from Salford (Greengates) to Weaste Lane and Peel Green respectively – the 5 having to pass under a very low bridge under the Bridgewater Canal.
Frederick Road also used them on the 4 Prestwich to Simister, which was infrequent and therefore probably interworked with other routes, but I can’t now remember which.

GND 101E_lr

I took this photo of GND 101E in the yard at Frederick Road Depot at the time. I remember that whilst not as bad as the Panther Cubs – which had all gone by this time – these were still notoriously unreliable with a strong propensity towards catching fire.

John Stringer

17/10/12 – 08:10

David, Phil & John….Many Thanks for the tips and the information….I’d forgotten about the bridge at the other end of the route, but don’t remember if this was also just few hundred yards from the terminus.
I also received an e-mail from a friend a few minutes ago which adds on to Phil’s notes above – that the memory isn’t as bad as I feared and that the MCTD Leylands did, indeed, have a rear entrance….Strange for an underfloor engined single decker, no ??
And as I don’t know too much about copyright law, I won’t post here a picture of the famous NWRCC Atkinsons (yes, it wasn’t Albions) that he has sent to me, but here’s a link www.sct61.org.uk. They say that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so I suppose ugliness is as well, and I can only say that my own eyes have these Atkinsons right up there as candidates….Thanks again.

Stuart C

17/10/12 – 08:15

Stuart, there’s a photo of a Manchester Royal Tiger on the 22 here: www.flickr.com

Peter Williamson

17/10/12 – 17:46

Rear entrance underfloor engined singles weren’t uncommon. Don’t forget OMO was still years away when these vehicles were ordered and the problems of driver distraction, union doubts about the driver controlling passenger access and egress existed in many urban areas where frequent stops were common. Also there was the problem of siting of stops relative to junctions where a rear entrance single worked fine and a front entrance would have caused an obstruction.
In London LT had plenty of red bus RFs but the Police wouldn’t allow them to have doors for years as it placed a burden on the driver and the door design at the time was deemed to limit visibility.
In the cases of MCTD and NWRCC, there was also a case of tradition and a slight reluctance to embrace a relatively untried idea.

Phil Blinkhorn

25/10/12 – 15:59

Re MCTD single deckers in the ’50’s. I seem to remember that the 97 to Platt Lane also was operated by Leyland single deckers for many years ….. presumably out of Princes Rd.
As for those Aberdonians, the damn things wound up on the rush hour express 130 from East Didsbury to Piccadilly once the Crossley’s had been withdrawn.

Orla Nutting

26/10/12 – 06:56

Orla, I seem to remember they used to leak as well as rattling a great deal

Phil Blinkhorn

16/12/12 – 07:25

Three, or possibly four, of the Aberdonians were transferred to Queens Road shortly before the end of their (Manchester) lives in order to work the 56 service which had been re-converted back to single-deck operation after a lengthy period of double-deck (PD1) service.
I liked them and remember them with affection and nostalgia and if they rattled they were by no means unique in the Manchester fleet on that account.
I always thought that they seemed far more at home on the 56 than in the exclusive, rarefied territory of Bramhall on the 31.

Johnny MacBrown

17/12/12 – 07:54

Manchester’s Aberdonians suffered from substandard bodywork (necessitated by time constraints following the Transport Committee’s rejection of the bid for Tiger Cubs), but I’ve always had a soft spot for the Aberdonian as a chassis. It was mechanically similar to the Tiger Cub but both quieter and livelier (the latter due to lower weight). Its main problem was that it was marketed, and often purchased, as a cheaper alternative to the Tiger Cub, but was nowhere near as rugged. It certainly wasn’t up to intensive city operation, but I’m pleased to hear that some of Manchester’s finally found a niche. I would imagine them to be in their element pottering around Higher Blackley on the 56.

Peter Williamson

24/05/15 – 07:37

Regarding rear entrance underfloor buses. The standard North Western joke was that if someone fell off the step of a rear entrance bus, the following vehicle ran them over, not the rear wheels of your own bus!

Bob Bracegirdle

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

12/05/20 – 06:43

At the time these Panthers were delivered the PSV Circle used to hold monthly meetings at the Britons Protection Hotel at Lower Moseley Street – does anyone else remember them? One evening they hired a new Panther for a run around the City, can’t recall anything about it-on another occasion they hired a new Bedford VAM for a similar trip but I don’t know the operator.
They were good meetings, the late John Cockshott was always there, I usually bought a photo or two from him all of which I still have.

Ian Wild

Ribble – Leyland Panther – ACK 774B – 774

Ribble - Leyland Panther - ACK 774B - 774

Ribble Motor Services
1964
Leyland Panther PSUR1/2RT
Marshall DP49F

Odd man out in the Ribble fleet for over ten years was the first production Leyland Panther, which I photographed outside the September 1964 Earls Court Commercial Motor Show.
It is possible that it entered Ribble service for a spell before the show, and early on in its career it ran on the Blackpool to London service, presumably on hire to Standerwick. It operated from Preston garage for most of its life. Withdrawn from service in 9/75, no further owners are known to me.
Photographs of it actually in service are few and far between, the few I have seen are usually on private hire work.
Any recollections or in service photos would be of great interest!
It seems that Panther coaches were not too common.
From ‘Bus Lists On The Web’ and Doug Jack’s ‘Leyland’ book, I see that there were some other PSUR1/2 coaches for the home market, as follows:

15 for East Yorkshire in 1966, with Marshall bus bodies! B49F (why use a coach chassis you may ask!)
2 for East Yorkshire with Metro Cammell C44F bodies in 6/67
4 for East Yorkshire in 1/68 with Marshall DP49F bodies
5 for East Yorkshire in 1968 with Plaxton C44F bodies
1 for Soudley Valley Coaches, Glos in 11/66 with Plaxton C51F body
10 for Seamarks of Westoning, Beds with O.680 engines and Plaxton C51F bodies in 1968 (full air change ?)
6 for Seamarks with Plaxton C51F bodies in 1969
4 for Skills of Nottingham, two in 1969 and two PSUR1B/2R in
1971 all with Plaxton C51F bodies

Photos of any of these would be of interest.
Many more were exported, which was also the case with the bus version, which did well in Australia.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Peter G Greaves

This unique Panther was the reason that Ribble continued to buy large numbers of Leopards (bus, DP and coach versions) and ultimately why they became a major RE user. It was a disaster. Unreliable, it probably slept in the corner of Frenchwood for much of its life and was condemned to private hire to avoid the (bad) publicity of breakdown on high profile long distance express services. The sad fact was that the Leopard was reliable, the Panther not.
Some, including Preston Corporation and the Aussies, persisted with the Panther and seemed to make it work but most British operators – including Manchester – had similar experience. It put back the case for low(er) floor vehicles for some years – and certainly until the RE was made available on the open market later in the decade.
[I think that you will also find that Maidstone and District had similar numbers and types of Panther as East Yorkshire.]
This must also have been a fairly early Marshall body for both Ribble and BET – who became a major, and repeat, customer of this well built body. [Even stars have Achilles heels though and I gather in grand old age – i.e. in preservation – some Marshalls need quite a bit of tlc, otherwise their front platform can fall off!]
The East Yorkshire Met-Camms were full coaches of the Topaz design – although I seem to remember that that was the “Bedford” designation and that Leylands had a different name. After closure of Weymann at Addlestone, Metro-Cammell took on the mantle of coaches from the line of the Fanfare and Castillians. They were true coaches but they never realised a balanced design that pleased either generally or, indeed, as a coach.

David Oldfield

All the early rear-engined single deckers – Roadliner, Panther, Panther Cub and Swift/Merlin – were pretty disastrous, apart from the Bristol RE, which possibly benefited from having the radiator at the front and the engine mounted slightly further forward than the others.
As you say, some operators persevered, and Sunderland reckoned that by the time they got it right the Panther was a really good vehicle. Their experience included a comparison of bodies between MCW’s, which was attached to the chassis throughout, and a much more successful effort by Strachan which featured a separate cantilevered subframe supporting the rear end of the body, allowing the chassis to go its own way.
According to Stewart J Brown’s “Luxury Travel” book, the East Yorkshire MCW coaches were designated Topaz II.

Peter Williamson

03/09/11 – 05:41

This machine was used in the late 60s and early 70s at various times in addition to Private Hire on Stage Carriage and on two or three times to my knowledge on the X30 Preston to Glasgow, X11 Preston Edinburgh and the X20 Preston to Glasgow Night Service Express. As these services operated as a duplicate to the peak season service from Manchester and Liverpool any coach or DP could be used from Preston.

Brian Cowdall

04/09/11 – 07:54

I always disliked this type of incongruous sharp cornered radiator grille on otherwise handsome bodies. They gave the impression of having been assembled “in house” from spare material after possible accident repairs and never looked right to me.

Chris Youhill

12/01/14 – 09:15

I travelled on a Ribble bus tour in 1963 from London to Nairne and back to London. I still have the original ticket and bus itinerary. I also have a photo of the bus and the driver. I was 18 years old and as I was the youngest on the tour I was nominated to get married at Gretna Green to the bus driver. (who was married with children). They are happy memories.

Pam

12/01/14 – 11:10

Coach tours can be friendly like that, Pam, even today!
I re-read these posts, David O, and you made mention of the closure of Weymanns at Addlestone, just down the road from you. I wondered if there was the slightest trace left of their factory, or even the name applied to a business park, a plaque in the pavement, or……anything?

Chris Hebbron

12/01/14 – 17:11

Pam
Would there be any chance of having a copy of the picture you have of the Driver and Coach for my website.
This is at //www.psvbadges.org.uk
I have a page for Driver and Conductor pictures.
Thanks very much

Stephen Howarth

13/01/14 – 08:33

Chris. Sadly the answer is no, no, no and no. It is “covered” by speculative offices and the name Aviation Park – reflecting its use BEFORE Weymanns.

David Oldfield

14/01/14 – 08:13

I’ve just noticed the advertisement for the Ford Corsair – if people hadn’t taken photographs of buses how much of this incidental history would have been lost? Anyway, this has reminded me of something that bothered me a few years ago: the Corsair was presumably around at the same time as the Cortina MkI, but the Cortina lived on and the Corsair didn’t – can anybody slightly longer in the tooth than myself tell me whether the Corsair was positioned above or below the Cortina.
Anyway, back to the bus. Were all the problems with the chassis? or might some have been down to the bodybuilders failing to account for the stresses caused by the flexing of all that weight at the rear – Strachans’ bodies were cantilevered I think, allowing the rear-end to flex, and didn’t suffer the problems that led, I believe, to a batch of Willowbrook(?)-bodied single-deck Fleetlines in the Northern fleet almost cracking open. As the RE’s engine was situated further forward than on other types then that would have reduced the stresses on the bodywork.

Philip Rushworth

14/01/14 – 09:44

Re the Corsair, the first thing to understand is the Ford line up in the UK in the mid 1960s. The bottom of the range was the Anglia, next came the Cortina, then the Corsair, after which the Zephyr and Zodiac topped off the range. Each type had a range of factory options so each model was in effect a range within a range.
The Ford Consul had been produced until 1962 as the bottom tier of the Consul/Zephyr/Zodiac range. Ford then used the Consul name in a different way producing the Consul Classic 4 door and the Consul Capri two door until the end of 1963. The types were not to the public’s taste and disappeared at the end of 1963. The bottom tier of the Consul range became the Consul Cortina, generally known as the Cortina Mk1.
The Corsair first appeared at the 1963 Motor Show as the Consul Corsair as a replacement for the Consul Classic and went on sale in 1964. It was positioned above the Cortina and was offered in various versions. Originally powered by 1500cc Kent series in line engines, in 1965 the engine was replaced by a V-4 1600cc unit which contributed to the cars deteriorating sales from then on as it was noisy, rough and not as responsive as the 1600E Cortina Mk 2 which took many Corsair customers. Ford had introduced a 2000cc engine for the Corsair but its price point only worked in favour of the 1600E. The company also produced a Corsair 2000E aimed at competing, with of all things, the current Rover range but the cache off the Rover name meant more than price to most customers at that level.
When I worked for United Biscuits in 1967 we reps had Cortina 1300s and the area managers had 1600cc powered Corsairs.
In 1970 Ford re-jigged its range. The Escort, which had appeared in 1968, replaced the Anglia and also appealed to 1300cc basic Cortina Mk2 buyers so the Mk3 Cortina was a bigger car than the Mk2 and replaced the more expensive Mk2s and the Corsair. By 1972 the Zodiac/Zephyr had gone and were replaced by the Granada. With 310,000 Corsairs sold and a demand for a larger than Cortina but cheaper than Granada model appearing, Ford reintroduced the Consul name using the Granada body with a V-4 1996c engine and a V-6 giving 2495 cc. I had one of the former which was as horrible as the V-4 Corsair but I later had 2000cc Pinto engined Consul produced from 1974 and that was some car.

Phil Blinkhorn

14/01/14 – 10:09

Phil, there’s a lot of anecdotal evidence about bodywork on the first generation rear engined single deckers of the 1960’s, but I’ve never seen any formal article produced about the subject. I’m sure many of us can trace articles or even books which cover the faults and failings (and good points?) of Leyland Panthers, AEC Swifts, Daimler Roadliners, and Seddon Pennine RUs. (I’m omitting the very first of all – the Bristol RE – both Bristol and ECW got that right!). But I have yet to discover anything formal about the merits of the bodybuilders, such as Marshall, MCCW, Strachans, Park Royal, Alexander, etc. The most that appears are hints such as those related on this site, or similar letters in magazines such as Classic Bus. It would be great if “someone out there” with the knowledge and/or the contacts to research this topic could thoroughly explore the topic and produce a definitive paper on it. Chassis manufacturers have had a fair share of material written about both their successes and failures – so why not the body builders?

Michael Hampton

15/01/14 – 05:51

The Plaxton Derwent bodied Roadliners at PMT survived quite well whereas the Marshall bodied ones simply broke their backs. The Derwent was timber framed where the Marshall was steel framed. I’m not sure it’s necessarily quite as simple as that. The Seddon RUs with Pennine dual doorway bodies at Huddersfield were a disaster, probably even worse than the Marshall Roadliners. Only they were given a major rebuild by Pennine including removal of the centre doorway did they become acceptable. My total experience of Swifts was the two Huddersfield Roe bodied ones which I remember more for AH505 engine problems than ones associated with the bodies. Perhaps the nadir was reached with the pair of Halifax Pennine bodied Fleetline SDs – now there was a pile of junk!

Ian Wild

15/01/14 – 05:56

Phil, thanks for all that – it answered my question, and then some. What are you like on Rootes-group offerings of the same period?
Michael, I suppose with coachwork the interest is in the aesthetic of the product, rather than what lies underneath. Two of the least-robust bodies of all time seem to have been semi-coaches produced for NBC towards the end of its existence . . . ECW’s B51(?) – its re-working of its early 1970s design; and Willowbrook’s offering of a couple of years earlier. Although I understand that some of these steel-framed BET standards suffered later in life, which seemingly accounted for the eagerness with which some BET companies snapped-up ECWs aluminium-framed offerings once they became available on the open-market.

Philip Rushworth

15/01/14 – 08:29

Ask away Philip.

Phil Blinkhorn

15/01/14 – 08:55

It depends on the extent of design cooperation and integrity. The B51 failed because the original was designed AROUND the RELH. When put on a mid-engined Leopard, the boot fell off into the road – for SELNEC/GMT, even before the B51 version. Strachans built the most successful Swifts with a floating rear, that is NOT tied to the chassis and therefore not prone to breaking the back of the chassis. The Willowbrooks were simply cheaply flung together with even less rust protection than the dreadful contemporary Duples. [Down to a price for NBC.] Most bodies were good but rear underfloor engined buses were new and most people had not even imagined the potential problem which became a major disaster. I read recently that the Weymann BETs were the best – and they were not by any means the most numerous. Likewise, apart from the nadir of the dreadful early ’60s (metal framed) bodies, Roe and Park Royal were among the very best.

David Oldfield

31/08/14 – 06:10

I was an inspector at Bolton depot 1969.
Reading all these comments brings back happy memories.

Vincent Fitzpatrick

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

20/10/15 – 06:59

Although an engineer, I never fully understood body construction! However, a few comments from my own career experiences:
I am interested to see comments that Strachans bodied Panthers survived better than Willowbrook bodied versions in the north. This was not my experience at Maidstone where the Strachans bodies moved amidships sufficient to cause aluminium dust to appear between all internal trim panels. Indeed Vin Owen, CE, got Willowbrook in (about 1971) to decide how to strengthen up the Strachans bodies, because the Willowbrook Panthers were sound! From what I recall, one feature of the strengthening was external curved steel angles fitted at the roof panel joints. I cannot recall the Panthers being much trouble otherwise although they were then at the back end of their lives. They were prone to engine fires, but that was a period when AEC 590 Reliances were also in similar trouble. I suspect that the single deck Fleetlines were introduced in Medway towns to replace Panthers. My only other memory is that the driving position seemed remarkably low and not very OMO friendly.
With regard to the ECW B51 body, I recall when at UCOC complaining to the seat manufacturer that the seat frame was cracking in the seat near the emergency door. I had the dubious pleasure of telling him a few days after he had visited to see, that I had discovered the reason for the cracking – the seat frame was holding the back of the body together! A huge modification programme was swiftly instituted by ECW.

Geoff Pullin

Lancaster City Transport – Leyland Panther – LTC 109F – 109

Lancaster Corporation - Leyland Panther - LTC 109F - 109

Lancaster City Transport
1968
Leyland Panther PSUR1/1R
East Lancs B53F

LTC 109F fleet number 109 is a Leyland Panther PSUR1/1R with East Lancs B53F body, new to Lancaster in 1968. The batch was in maroon and cream livery then, but we see it in ‘post merger’ livery of blue and white, on the sunny evening of 20 May 1975. The scene is Lancaster’s Damside Street Bus Station. 389 JTD a 1959 Tiger Cub is behind, still in the old livery but with the Tilling style of fleetname adopted as an interim measure for Lancaster and Morecambe & Heysham vehicles, together with what looks like another Panther on the extreme left of the view.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

24/04/16 – 09:09

In late 1979 LTC 109F came to Derbyshire when, in company with Morecambe and Heysham AEC Swift UTJ 908H, it joined Woolliscroft Silver Service fleet at Darley Dale. Initially they were on loan from Lancaster City but were purchased outright soon after arrival. The Panther bore a strong family resemblance to a batch of Neepsend bodied Panthers at nearby Chesterfield, these Neepsend bodies being built under license from East Lancs. LTC 109F lasted a couple of years but was eventually stripped for spares and the remains had been scrapped by 1982. The Swift lasted a little longer going to North at Sherburn in 1983.

David Hargraves

24/04/16 – 10:43

My original slide includes the Ribble PD3 with Metropolitan Cammell body which some members may have spotted on the extreme right It is from the PCK series. Lancaster had six of these Panthers, in two trios: GTC 104-106F from 1967 and 107-109F from 1968.
David comments on a number of supposed ‘East Lancs’ products being bodied by Neepsend. Some of Southampton’s later Regent V fleet were products of this arrangement and I think I’ve read somewhere that many think Neepsend was a subsidiary of East Lancs, but they were in fact part of the same group. Wrong again, Davies?

Pete Davies

24/04/16 – 12:42

Just a clarification re. Pete’s comment, the registrations of the second batch of three Panthers were LTC-F.
Lancaster reverted to Leopards for its next deliveries.

Dave Towers

24/04/16 – 18:33

Thanks, Dave. I must fire my proof reader!

Pete Davies

26/04/16 – 14:57

East Lancs were owned at the time by John Brown engineering who were based originally in Sheffield They re activated bus building in Sheffield at a factory on Neepsend Lane using East Lancs designs.
So really Neepsend were never an East Lancs subsidiary but both were part of the John Brown empire.
Sheffield took some rear engine chassis from them in 1964/65 The firm (I think) built one more body on a Bedford VAS chassis for Sheffield but by this time it was called Cravens Homalloy.

Chris Hough

27/04/16 – 05:54

Thanks, Chris. I’m glad that the old grey cells have not failed me this time.

Pete Davies

Maidstone & District – Leyland Panther – LKT 132F – 3132

Maidstone & District - Leyland Panther - LKT 132F - 3132

Maidstone & District
1968
Leyland Panther PSUR1/1R
Strachans B48F

LKT 132F is a Leyland Panther PSUR1/1R new to Maidstone & District in 1968. It has a Strachan B48F body, somewhat unusual for a BET firm, and we see it in the Netley rally on 14 July 1996 so the body at least is more or less ‘home’ as Strachans later products were built just along the road in Hamble. The Parish Council calls it Hamble Le Rice now, and it’s nothing to do with puddings. In this sense, it means ‘rich’.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

20/11/16 – 15:48

Yes its a standard BET front, but the livery does a great deal to hide the uneven window and panel spacing layout. Just by example if you were to look at Liverpool 1097 currently in the heading on the ‘other’ bus blog page, it shows how neat this one really is. Its a pity we don’t have sound on here as Panther exhausts were in a class of their own.

Mike Norris

21/11/16 – 07:54

Mike there is a section on here for bus noises. To be found at the ‘More pages’ tab top right in the menu, then select “Old Bus Sounds”.

Stephen Howarth

05/11/17 – 07:30

With reference to 3251 (ex SO251) as I knew it when I drove it. This was always a delightful vehicle to drive and was usually requested by our depot engineer – Ernie Marks – at Gravesend. I remember using it on many runs to High Halstow, Cliffe and also Meopham & Harvel. I have a photo slide of it taken when I used it.
With reference to S1-S5 or 3701-5, again when I drove all of them, these would often tread there way onto the 122 London to Brighton run and I had the pleasure of driving them between Gravesend and Tunbridge Wells. The only problem I found was the bodywork rattle caused by over-inflated tyres, something which Tunbridge Wells was usually in favour of. Hence, all vehicles from both garages had bodies that were shaken to pieces – sometimes almost literally!

Freddy Weston

09/11/17 – 07:14

Although my memory is not so good nowadays, I have to hand a fleet allocation list for 1st October 1971. From that it looks as if Freddy’s and Ernie Marks’ favourite Reliance 3251 had left the fleet by then. 3701-6 are shown as allocated to Tonbridge and 3125 was allocated to Maidstone. With regard to comments about high tyre pressures, it is relevant that M&D had three tyre mileage contractors in 1970. I think Gravesend and possibly Borough Green were covered by Michelin who would only have used radial ply tyres which have more flexible walls. The Tunbridge Wells district (inc Tonbridge, Hawkhurst and Edenbridge) was covered by Firestone with cross ply tyres which may have felt harder. Dunlop was the third contractor. This made it a bit difficult when vehicles were re-allocated across contracts! Around 1971, Dunlop were contracted to cover the whole fleet using a new centralised tyre workshop for fitting new and re-grooving tyres. Mobile inspectors examined the fleet regularly for pressure and tread depth. Each depot had a supply of wheel assemblies with fit tyres for failures in service. An interesting aspect of this was that quite a few vehicles were found to be fitted with wheels of the incorrect offset, so a supply of new wheels had to be bought to facilitate a sorting out!

Geoff Pullin

PS – I meant to add that Panthers 3131 and 3135 were delicensed for repair of fire damage and 3127 for major body repairs! Engine compartment fires were a bit endemic for Panthers and also Reliances at the time. As I have said elsewhere, M&D found that the Willowbrook bodied Panthers were better than the Strachans bodies which suffered a lot of panel movement and aluminium dust permeating the insides. They were strengthened by a scheme devised by Willowbrook!

Maidstone & District – Leyland Panther – JKK 199E – S99

JKE 199E

Maidstone & District
1967
Leyland Panther PSUR1/1R
Willowbrook B45F

This photo of Maidstone & District Leyland Panther No S99 reg JKK 199E with Willowbrook B45F bodywork was new in April 1967 prior to the renumbering to 3099 so was probably taken in the summer of that year outside Southdown’s Pevensey Road bus station. M&D had I believe ninety five Panthers the first sixty had Willowbrook B45F bodies (S26-S40 and S61-S110) and the remainder had Strachans bodies of either B45D (3111-3120) or B48F (3121-3140) layout. The 190 route was part of the joint Southdown/M&D Heathfield cycle a complicated but effective group of six interworked services, a thorough explanation of this working can be found in the Southdown Enthusiasts Club book called “Working Together”.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Diesel Dave

12/07/17 – 07:27

Hants & Dorset/Wilts & Dorset had some of these wished upon them during the reshuffling of fleets under the early years of NBC, DKE.C and JKK.E batches. JKK 203E even managed to gain Tilling red! I have a bought view of her thus at Basingstoke.

Pete Davies

13/07/17 – 07:58

Further to Pete’s comment they were more of a curse than a wish. A nightmare to keep on the road mechanically, hated by most of the crews. Give me an RE or Leopard any day. The ex King Alfred trio on H&D benefited from having the 680 engine but were still not the most reliable buses.

Steve Barnett

14/07/17 – 07:37

Steve, I think it’s probably true to say that, if H&D/W&D had been BET operators, they would have stayed well away, as I belief Southdown did. Incidentally, does anyone know why some fleets suffered this ‘asset stripping’ by having vehicles transferred out? Was it that the recipients were deemed to be short of suitable vehicles?

Pete Davies

14/07/17 – 07:38

Hants & Dorset’s problem (one of them, at least) in the early 1970s was that they had not purchased enough single deck buses in the late 1950s and early ’60s. Such vehicles would have been suitable for OPO, but H&D had purchased mainly Lodekkas plus 6 coaches per year. Result: when costs started rising, and finding staff became more difficult, conversion to OPO was the logical move, but H&D were constricted by the lack of suitable buses.
Thus the 33 Panthers were an attempt to resolve this problem, but, as Steve says, they were notoriously unreliable. Hearsay claimed that, of the 33 buses, there were always at least 10 off the road. One could, of course, ask why Maidstone & District could release such a large number of buses, most of which were only around 4 years old, but preferred to retain older, underfloor engined, types with similar capacity. For H&D, the answer must have become obvious quite quickly!
It is interesting to speculate what the real problems were – the Panther was not universally hated. Sunderland apparently found them satisfactory, and Brisbane had a large fleet, some of which were rebodied at some stage in their lives. Perhaps when you have a large fleet, you have to find a way of making them work.
The vehicle in this photo was one of those that went to Wilts & Dorset – as far as I recall the vehicles concerned were S38-40 and S81-110. The first 17 were for Hants & Dorset, and the rest for W&D, but some didn’t enter service with their new owners until after the advent of NBC corporate liveries and the disappearance of the W&D name. A few did receive Tilling red or green (H&D’s version of it), and some ran with H&D or W&D fleetnames on the M&D dark green. There was more than just the one that Pete mentions in Tilling red – JKK 207E ran in Southampton for a while in that condition. I guess it must have been the spring/summer of 1972, and I have an idea that it was quite often used on the evening 47B service to Hursley – usually a crew working!

Nigel Frampton

15/07/17 – 06:56

At Winchester our three Metro Scanias were replaced by three of these Panthers, the three London Country Nationals for which the Scanias were swapped were allocated originally to Southampton. So the Panthers had a hard act to follow although I accept the Metro Scanias were not to everyone’s taste. Altogether we had 8 panthers allocated in the mid seventies, including the three ex King Alfred ones. It was rare that more than six were on the road at any one time. The three ex London Country buses finally arrived at Winchester when most of Southamptons allocation of Nationals were swapped with REs from around the Hants and Wilts depots. Southampton was desperately short of fitters and the Nationals were proving to be almost as challenging as the Panthers were so the powers that be decided to share the problem around!

Steve Barnett

16/07/17 – 16:42

JKK 190E

The attached may be of interest. In Hants and Dorset colours JKK190E is leaving Winchester Bus Station in December 1975. Although I have slides of the Panthers taken in Wilts and Dorset colours on routes around Basingstoke, these are at present in store following our recent move. One was often on the 76 to Andover which might explain an evening ride I enjoyed on Basingstoke’s last LL5G !

Keith Newton

17/07/17 – 06:00

Keith’s picture shows 1695 which was one of the replacements for the Metro Scanias, the 66 was their regular home mainly I think due to slow running time which meant the struggle on hills didn’t affect timekeeping too much. Incidentally the view shown is about to change significantly, the bus station closed a week ago. The garage in the background is being demolished and stands are being built on the left hand side to facilitate running in the other direction. This finally takes buses out of the pedestrian area of the city. (Ex King Alfred leopard in the background)

Steve Barnett

20/07/17 – 07:17

My misty memory recalls that the 30 Fleetline / Marshall two-door single decks were arriving when I landed at M&D in 1970. They all went to Medway towns. GM Arthur White had a history of buying large batches of new types of vehicles and I suspect that these were ordered to replace Panthers which could not perform adequately there and the need for single decks elsewhere was indeed a good way of moving vehicles out and keeping more reliable machines, especially after new CE Vin Owen had prevailed with Leopard orders rather than AEC or Panthers. I can recall investigating a few engine fires in those days and Panthers were not quite as bad as 590 Reliances from what I recall! Of course the 1970 SD Fleetlines did not last long as a new Traffic Manager wanted more capacity, so they were swopped for similar age DD Fleetlines with Northern General, now that OMO operation of DD had been accepted in the company. See www.old-bus-photos.co.uk/

Geoff Pullin

19/11/20 – 06:47

The later Strachans Panthers were sent to Willowbrook circa 1974/5 and heavily rebuilt, to maintain the integrity of the body structures. At one point they were considering complete new bodies, but ended up with a cheaper option.

Brian Roger Dicks

Bradford Corporation – Leyland Panther – NAK 512H – 512

NAK 512H

Bradford Corporation Transport
1969
Leyland Panther PSUR1A/1
Marshall B45D

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

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

11/09/17 – 06:38

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

Stuart Emmet

12/09/17 – 06:46

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

Geoff Kerr

12/09/17 – 06:47

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

David Oldfield

13/09/17 – 06:46

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

Sam Caunt

14/09/17 – 07:04

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

Chris Hough

15/09/17 – 06:45

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

Dave Towers

16/09/17 – 06:47

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

Nigel Frampton

17/09/17 – 06:55

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

Stuart Emmet

18/09/17 – 07:19

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

Kevin Hey

19/09/17 – 06:01

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

Stuart Emmet

19/09/17 – 06:02

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

Stephen Bloomfield

22/09/17 – 07:15

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

Kevin Hey

21/11/17 – 08:30

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

Ian Wild

22/11/17 – 07:22

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

John Stringer

24/11/17 – 07:23

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

Brendan Smith

29/12/17 – 07:47

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

Phil Drake

29/12/17 – 09:48

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

Stuart Emmett

30/12/17 – 08:46

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

Stuart Emmett

08/01/18 – 07:21

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

Ian Wild

East Yorkshire – Leyland Panther – JRH 323E – 823

East Yorkshire - Leyland Panther - JRH 323E - 823

East Yorkshire
1967
Leyland Panther PSUR1/2R
Weymann Topaz II

The Panther and Panther Cub were Leyland Motors’ rear underfloor-engined offerings during the mid- to late-1960’s. By this time AEC had been taken over and its Swift model shared the same chassis as the Panther, each using their own engines (O600/O680 and AH505/691 respectively), the Panther having a front mounted radiator, whilst the Swift’s was at the rear. Both bus (with a stepped chassis frame) and coach (with a high, straight frame) were offered, the Swift also being offered with a constant-mesh gearbox in place of the more usual semi-automatic. The shorter Panther Cub – originally introduced to meet the requirements of Manchester CT – had a shorter rear overhang and of necessity had to feature the smaller O400 engine. An equivalent shorter Swift was offered with the AH505 engine only.
Several operators – both municipal and company, and some overseas – bought the Panther and Panther Cub in their bus form, and operated them with varying degrees of success, many having relatively short lives mainly due to bodywork deficiencies. The coach version was relatively uncommon though, the largest operator probably being Seamark’s of Bedfordshire, along with Skill’s of Nottingham.
East Yorkshire took 24 Panthers and 17 Panther Cubs. The Panthers consisted 15 buses, 4 DP’s and 5 coaches – but all based on the PSUR1/2R coach chassis. The second batch of three coaches had Plaxton Panorama bodies, but the first pair (823/824) had very rare Weymann Topaz II C44F coachwork.
Here 823 is seen emerging from the company’s Anlaby Road, Hull premises in 1972.The pair were repainted into the NBC corporate white livery in 1973, but were to pass to the NBC’s vehicle cannibalisation centre at Bracebridge Heath, near Lincoln in 1976 to be stripped for spares, after which the remains were sold to Pickersgill & Laverick, the Carlton breakers.

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer

29/11/17 – 08:24

A Willowbrook DP-bodied PSU3 of 1962 also in view.

Mark Evans

30/11/17 – 08:14

Not a bad looking coach but a bit let down by the rather oversized front grille.

Philip Halstead

01/12/17 – 06:53

Good point, Philip. One expects something better from Weymann.This is a touch vulgar.

David Wragg

02/12/17 – 07:30

I think it’s unlikely that the Topaz II was designed by Weymann, and even more unlikely that it was built by them, since the factory had been closed for 18 months by the time it was delivered. Blame MCW.

Peter Williamson

02/12/17 – 07:31

Can you see that the outline of the grille is basically Duple 1963-1965 (Bella Vega/Vega Major)? By this time, of course, Weymann no longer existed. It is strictly speaking a MCW body.

David Oldfield

13/12/17 – 08:00

Maybe a bit of a BET Group thread here; EYMS with Panther buses and a few coaches, similar to PMT with Roadliners. I wonder how reliable the Panthers were? Would they be used on extended tours? The zig zag flash on the body side forward of the rear wheel arch looks strange and as already commented the front is rather bland with its unappealing grille.

Ian Wild

13/12/17 – 09:48

I took a photo of another coach in Ilfracombe whilst on holiday in 1969 and there is one of these Panthers parked up in the background, so it seems likely they were used on extended tours. I’m very surprised now that I didn’t photograph the Panther also. //www.sct61.org.uk/zzrdf880g

John Stringer

15/12/17 – 07:24

The entire design looks rather untidy to my eye. Not just the bizarre zig zag on the side and the “parts bins” frontal appearance, but also the fractionally deeper first side window, all conspire to give an insipid, rather than an ugly effect. Wasn’t the original Topaz of circa 1962 redesigned around 1965, which would make the example above a very rare Topaz II?

Roger Cox

15/12/17 – 11:03

About 6 on Bedford VAL14, I believe, and the East Yorkshire Panthers. That was it.

David Oldfield

16/12/17 – 09:20

I have to confess to liking this design: it is all the things the 50’s juke box styles were not- simple, easy on the eye- very 60’s, perhaps Farina. Shortcomings in appearance are surely down to an unsympathetic livery: the white roof dropped down the front, giving too much emphasis to the darker grille- no attempt to use a colour or shade that would draw the necessary elements- lights, vents, displays- together: imagine the dark East Yorks blue overall here and generally replacing the insipid lighter blue : similarly the windows, where the smaller front group would provide the point at which the flash could (if anywhere) begin.
I now digress: purely on livery, has anyone seen a Borismaster in adverlivery? Window dividers on examples I have seen are not then camouflaged to give the impression of a single glazed area, and one I saw had white dividers: the result just emphasises the bizarre design.

Joe

17/12/17 – 07:22

I must point out that the ‘white roof dropped down at the front’ actually, erm…doesn’t. The original slide was a bit on the pale overexposed side and in editing the scan I boosted the colour saturation but it couldn’t bring out the primrose at the front without overdoing the rest of it. In fact I don’t think the roof was white either! I normally wouldn’t submit such a print but it just seemed a bit of a rarity and there wasn’t one on the site.

John Stringer

17/12/17 – 09:19

FWW 809C

This Bedford VAL was parked at Gosforth Park races sometime in the late 1960s, my only ever sighting of a Weymann Topaz body.

Richard Slater

17/12/17 – 10:22

This was operated by Billies coaches of Mexborough, The previous VAL purchased having been a much more traditional Duple bodied item meant this one seemed quite exotic at the time. I assume being a bit of an oddball just meant that they got it for an attractive price.

Andrew Charles

22/12/17 – 07:04

I feel that this coach has a stylish charm of its own. In my humble opinion, the chief problem is that the zigzag flash at the back goes DOWN. If the flash went UP at the same point, it would give a ‘Get up and Go’ impression, rather than its unfortunate ‘Down at Heel’ look.
But I do accept that these things are subjective and our personal tastes will all differ.

Petras409

23/12/17 – 07:57

Interesting to look at other EYMS bus liveries using the dark blue- under EY on this site. Dark blue worked well for the late lamented GNER trains too.

Joe

23/12/17 – 07:58

Petras409, I can’t help but agree with you that the overall design did have a charm of its own, let down by the zigzag flash. A simple straight moulding front to rear would have improved things I feel, especially if positioned to ‘kiss’ the top of each wheelarch. Alternatively, the ‘new’ horizontal moulding could have been stepped down to subtly match the window line at the first bay. In either case the moulding could then have terminated at the centre line of the upper headlamp, which would have made more of a feature of the radiator grille.
With respect to Joe’s comment re the livery, East Yorkshire’s coaches looked splendid in primrose and blue and were always very smartly turned out. Use of the dark blue, primrose and white livery on 823/4 would have meant that they had been demoted for bus work, although it has to be admitted they would still probably have looked just as smart. Now is my memory playing tricks, or am I right in thinking that for some reason the Topaz-bodied Panthers did not carry the usual EYMS ‘xxxxxx Star’ names on their sides?

Brendan Smith

03/04/18 – 07:00

I remember the Topaz bodied Bedford VAL FWW 609C of Billies Coaches very well & in later years it passed to Howards Coaches of Whitby who named it “Concorde”. Even though the VAL has always been one of my favourite types of PSV,the driver would have his work cut out winding one up to 65 MPH on the motorway so they were not Supersonic in any way!.

Andrew Spriggs

05/05/18 – 06:43

Weymann did all the Topaz II bodies on VAL14. The two on Panther were built by MCW.

Stephen Allcroft

07/05/18 – 07:11

Phillip and David W – I couldn’t have described the radiator grille any better – “a touch vulgar” indeed.

Chris Youhill

J Fishwick & Sons – Leyland Olympic – NTC 232 – 13

J Fishwick & Sons - Leyland Olympic - NTC 232 - 13

J Fishwick & Sons
1951
Leyland Olympic
Metro Cammell Weymann B44F

I took this photo as I have previously said on a trip to the Fishwick depot at Leyland in Lancashire considering there location it is hardly surprising what vehicles they favoured. There livery was and probably still is a Moss Green and Dark Green which was different but quite nice. Practically all there service routes are local and either start, finish or go through Leyland I think the longer distance routes in the area will be handled by Stagecoach Ribble.
I have read somewhere that the Leyland Olympic and the Royal Tiger more or less began the end of the vertical front engine single decker bus, as the AEC Reliance came along three years later then the article could have a point. The Olympic was built in conjunction with the body builder Metro Cammell Weymann and I think most of them went overseas rather than the home market.
I actually e-mailed J Fishwick & Sons for any information of the above bus, as the company is one of a very few original operators still in existence, and they would have information going back to year dot. They did not even acknowledge receipt of my mail never mind supply information, shame really. The days must have gone when you could write and ask an operator for a fleet list and by return of post it arrived along with a sample set of bus tickets an the odd photo of there latest arrival. The credit crunch must be squeezing quite tight up in Leyland.

Hi, came across this picture searching around for Fishwick bus photos, I am from the Leyland area and although I can’t shed any light on this bus, I do have a picture of an almost identical Fishwicks bus taken last week at a bus rally in Leyland. As for the company, I am quite surprised you received no response from your email, Fishwicks seem to be quite keen on the history and tradition and always send a number of buses to local rallies and have a downloadable fleet list on their website. Anyway thanks for the picture.

Graham Rutherford

When I was a lad of 16 years, I was an apprentice to the Jamaica Omnibus Company in Kingston Jamaica. This was in 1968 and the outgoing buses on the fleet at the time were the Leyland Olympic A, B, and C the “C” being the long chassis version. They were replaced with the “G” Busses. These were clutchless with pneumatic shift levers. This photo certainly brings back memories.

Albert Walker

I have tried to email J Fishwick & Sons with regard to the single decker Leyland Olympian twice. I have been ignored by the company on both occasions. Apart from being amazingly ignorant or perhaps not very good at email can anybody tell me anything about them and especially the single decker Leyland Olympian 521 CTF. Do they still have the bus, is it still running? What do you know?

Edward Cambridge

J Fishwicks 521 CTF

Edward, this is a video of the actual Leyland Olympian 521 CTF.

Terry Malloy

You may be able to get more info from:-
Leyland Commercial Vehicle Museum.
King Street
Leyland
Nr Preston
Lancashire
PR25 2LE

Keith

I went to school on Fishwick’s buses 1959-1961, usually coming home on the 4.30PM Preston Fox Street to “Seven Stars via Croston Rosd” (actually service 115 but Fishwicks had no number displays in them days. It was regularly no.13, NTC 232 on the 4.30, usually full especially on market days, with a standing load, and people left behind. Passengers for Croston Road were rightly annoyed when Penwortham passengers were on, as they had the frequent “Earnshaw Bridge” bus (111). All other Croston Road buses were double deckers, but never this one.
Fishwicks had 8 Olympics, and 6 Olympians at this time, mostly for the Chorley routes under Pack Saddle Bridge, and the Bamber Bridge route along Shady Lane.
I could go on….

Bernard Parkinson

Apologies for digressing slightly but where did Bamber Bridge Motor Services fit into this picture? Was their route from Preston to Bamber Bridge exactly same as Fishwicks and if so was there a co-ordinated timetable? Did BBMS operate one route only?

Chris Barker

Fishwick’s Bamber Bridge route was today’s service 117, but ran every 90 minutes then, all day incl evenings and Sundays, but went via Shady Lane before Clayton Brook village was expanded by Central Lancs New Town. As today it ran via Brownedge Road, so did not compete with BBMS. This service always displayed simply “Bamber Bridge” whichever way it was going, despite its destination being Preston or Leyland (Earnshaw Bridge).
BBMS just ran one service direct Preston (Starch House Square)-Bamber Bridge (Hob Inn), plus works services to Leyland and Lostock Hall, In its latter years one service deviated via Duddle Lane (service D), while the direct route became service P (via Pear Tree).

Bernard Parkinson

Olympian 521 CTF is preserved and appears at rallies, not sure who owns it.
Spent most of its life working 109 and 119 routes, but also worked regularly the Sunday morning Croston Road service, (115), 10.12 and 11.12 from Moss Side (Black Bull) to Preston (Fox Street), 10.43 and 11.43 return (Seven Stars via Croston Road), which service actually went beyond Seven Stars up Slater Lane terminating at the Black Bull, then back along Dunkirk Lane to Preston. There was no 12.12 service on a Sunday, but the 1.12PM service resumed with the regular Croston Road bus no.23, LTD 445, a PD2/1, and worked this run every hour until 11.0pm.
The last Olympic to survive was no 17, NTC 234, which was 21 years old when withdrawn, its regular job in its last days was the Vernons Mill to Earnshaw Bridge service, which needed a single decker to get through Factory Lane tunnel under the railway. In earlier days two Olympics together worked this job, such was demand, one just to Lostock Hall,the other working through to Earnshaw Bridge, as shown in the 111 timetable of the day.

Bernard Parkinson

29/01/12 – 11:14

521 CTF Leyland Olympian Single Decker was sold by Fishwick to a man called M.Hayes, Mark Hayes I believe.
He apparently has a private bus collection and does exhibit the bus. Does anybody know anything about him?

E. Cambridge

29/01/12 – 16:30

Yorkshire Woollen had a number of these buses. My wife was a clippie at Frost Hill at Liversedge and remembers these buses being on service 36 between Leeds and Elland. On one occasion a driver drove through very deep flood water quite fast and the water came up through the inspection floor boards.

Philip Carlton

06/03/12 – 12:10

I Found the 521 CTF Bus. It is in the British Commercial Vehicle Museum. I shall visit it this Spring. Thank You All.

Edward Cambridge

25/10/15 – 06:23

It has been reported in the local media that the company went into administration Tuesday and the last service on the 111 route will be today.
A sad ending to a company that had high standards and delighted many of us over the years with the one off and unusual Buses that they operated.
The end of an era and a sad day for the Town of Leyland.

Cyril Aston

26/10/15 – 06:49

Very sad news about Fishwick & Sons. Another old-established and well-respected operator ceases to trade. Is there any indication about what happens to their services, most of which were run in conjunction with Ribble?

Pete Davies

26/10/15 – 06:50

Philip – how interesting to read that your good lady was on the 36 route – in the early 1950s I used to travel on the nearly new Olympics from Leeds to the top of Wide Lane at Morley to visit a friend. That they were of “semi integral” or “chassisless” construction was obvious from the moment the driver pressed the starter as everything from floors to luggage racks and windows began to rattle and thud and the journeys were very uncomfortable – a great shame because they were handsome and lively vehicles, but there we are.

Cyril – what an awful piece of news you’ve had to break to us. Being a traditionalist myself, but fully accepting changes in the Industry, I have always held Fishwick’s in the very highest esteem. Their colours, criticised by many as “dour”, “drab” etc, are a tribute to unashamed dignity and smartness and the demise of the Company is a very sad loss indeed. Presumably and hopefully any staff so wishing will be accommodated by other operators in the area, while those sadly wanting to call it a day will be able to do so voluntarily.

Chris Youhill

26/10/15 – 16:14

I understand from the “Lancashire Evening Post” that Stagecoach are taking over the 111 service, but that the others will be subject to the tendering process.

Pete Davies

27/10/15 – 06:38

Just picking up on a couple of points above.
Bernard P – it may have been that Fishwick’s were not authorised to carry through passengers on the 117 service. Such restrictions were rife in the decades following Road Service Licensing (1930) and only began to be seriously eliminated with the so-called County Council ‘agency agreements’ of the late 1970s. Or Fishwicks may have found that it caused less confusion to passengers to do things the way they did.
Are you sure there didn’t come a point on the route where the destination was changed to ‘Earnshaw Bridge’ or ‘Preston’?

Pete D – I think you’ll find that in recent decades the only route which was operated by both Fishwicks and Ribble (to a co-ordinated timetable) was the 109. The fact that most of the other routes were numbered in the Ribble series was a leftover from pre-deregulation days when services were technically ‘joint’ with Ribble (i.e. operated under a joint licence) even though Ribble may have never actually operated on particular routes.
This is how Pennine’s Skipton to Malham service was service 211, in pre-deregulation days the services was ‘joint’ with Ribble, even though I don’t think Ribble ever provided any vehicles. Funny thing is, I don’t think Pennine vehicles carried route numbers until well after deregulation anyway!
There were lots and lots of services where Ribble had a stake, but didn’t provide any vehicles, e.g. the 39 from ‘Manchester’ (actually Salford) to Liverpool, which was mainly (perhaps entirely) operated by LUT.
The converse applied too, the 130 (Bolton-Morecambe) was joint Ribble/Bolton Corporation, but Bolton didn’t operate, instead they did the 122 (Bolton-Southport).

David Call

28/10/15 – 13:25

Further to the above, further reflection seems to say that the Malham service was 210, rather than 211.

David Call

29/10/15 – 16:40

A real shame to hear that Fishwick has gone under. There will be no question of Stagecoach maintaining the brand name, unlike the situation in Nottingham where the South Notts and Pathfinder brands continue in use as a positive marketing feature.

Alan Murray-Rust

22/10/18 – 06:12

Birmingham City Transport also ran 5 Leyland Olympics. 4 where based at Selly Oak Depot, and one JOJ 261 was used on the Hall of Memory/Birmingham Airport service. This one was based near the city centre.
They were Leylands first under floor engined chassisless single deckers. I believe only 23 were built.
I remember being amazed at seeing a engine on its side apparently suspended in mid air as the lack of a conventional chassis gave the impression the engine/gearbox were not attached to anything,
They where very high floored not easy to board for the elderly or disabled.
They where known to as Geeps by the staff at Selly Oak. I loved them, they were very lively and my first speeding caution was in one of them.

John Hipkins

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

09/04/21 – 07:25

The bus in question is a integrated body with a Leyland engine fitted to a Albion box it is in a private collection cause my mates owns it.

Aidy Burrows

Sheffield Corporation – Leyland Olympic – RPA 771 – 211


Copyright Ian Wild

Sheffield Corporation
1952
Leyland Olympic HR44 
Weymann B44F

Sheffield bought three early Leyland Olympics in 1951 and followed up two years later by the acquisition of this former Demonstrator. It put in a good service life lasting until 1968 when it was sold to Dodd, (Dealer) in Dromera, Ireland. I wonder if it found a buyer or whether it was scrapped? The bus was originally fleet number 211 being renumbered as shown in the 1967 scheme. This photo was taken on 10th June 1967 at the Hillsborough terminus of the 31 Lower Walkley service which was characterised by narrow streets and steep hills.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

25/04/12 – 05:16

I think I remember these in Sheffield: were they the “integral” versions? Some had an Olympic torch badge on the front, I think. They always seemed high-floored (the opposite to what you could expect) and a bit awkward, but presumably suited the route.

Joe

25/04/12 – 05:17

From 1952 until 1956 I lived on the 31 and travelled on these and the back loader Royal Tigers. This is now a terminus for Stagecoach 52 and is also close to where the Malin Bridge branch leaves the main Supertram line to Middlewood.

David Oldfield

25/04/12 – 08:36

Can anyone tell me what size engine were in these Olympics please. I believe the King Alfred Olympic that is currently being restored and nearing completion was rescued from Ireland. I always thought it was a great shame that one of the Halifax Corporation Worldmasters were not saved for preservation especially fleet No1 – KCP 1 what a great registration number! Two of these vehicles ended up in Ireland with Keneallys coaches.

Richard McAllister

25/04/12 – 09:20

The Olympic was the integral predecessor of the Royal Tiger and shared all the same mechanical units – including the 9.8 litre 0.600. They were high floored and probably awkward – but what else would you expect of an early underfloor vehicle? [The open backed Royal Tigers 222/223 were even more awkward.] As for suiting the route, they only suited it for the operator (dimensions and power for a hilly route) certainly not passenger friendly – especially the aged and infirm. Passenger comfort only became a priority from about ten years later when technology and new designs allowed it.

David Oldfield

25/04/12 – 15:27

Yes- they looked like the ugly sisters in the sixties- especially as you say, the Tiger rear loaders. My point is that I assume in an integral bus you are not fixing a body to a one-size-fits-all chassis and could therefore make some allowance for the passengers… or what’s the point (I think that was the problem- there wasn’t one…?… or was weight reduced?) What were the advantages? You were presumably stuck with the basics of the original body for good?

Joe

25/04/12 – 16:33

Modern integral buses are monocoque, just like cars (which also used to have separate bodies/chassis)and, I think, are almost universal nowadays. You’re right, though, Joe, you picks your body length, they bold on all the mechanicals and you’re stuck with it. London Transport’s tram/trolleybus department, separate from its bus department, created integral trolleybuses around 1937, using several companies to build them, including Brush and Leyland. Strange how long it took for this system to begin to become popular, around the time when Olympics were coming off the lines and said trolleybuses were starting to go to the scrapyard!

Chris Hebbron

25/04/12 – 16:37

Leeds single deck requirements were few in post war years indeed they only bought 10 saloons in the fifties but managed to have three chassis types! These were 5 AEC Reliances 3 Leyland Tiger Cub and a pair of Guy Arab LUFs. All had the same body layout which was B34C + 14 crush load standees in a central vestibule opposite the doors. Like Sheffield’s Royal Tigers the steps were vertiginous and deep most off putting for intending passengers. Getting a push chair aboard was a major logistical exercise! The overall body shape was common to all ten but the final pair of Reliances had a more upright profile. They were mainly confined to two routes one of which passed under a low bridge and another which crossed the canal on abridge with weight restrictions.

Chris Hough

25/04/12 – 17:39

Joe, the intention with all early integrals was to save weight – it was impossible to be passenger friendly until the dawn of the rear-engined bus. Unfortunately, all of the major manufacturers found that the weight saving margin was no where near enough and that, quite the opposite, there were major weaknesses – often around suspension mountings. This was certainly true of the Bristol LS which transformed after five years into the almost identical MW chassis. Similar problems beset the AEC Monocoach which died out in favour of the Reliance. The other problem was that British operators preferred, and still do, to choose their own bodywork – cf the Leyland National of later years. Ironically the change from LS to MW and Monocaoch to Reliance were not so evident as the separate body chosen for the separate chassis tended to be identical, in all other respects, with the earlier integral body. [Come to think of it, many moved over to the Royal Tiger with identical Weymann coachwork!]

David Oldfield

25/04/12 – 17:39

Just wait until someone discovers the advantages of “demountable” bus bodies: bodies can be changed or swapped on a “chassis”, giving greater flexibility, more opportunities for upgrading, and cutting service times. Why didn’t anyone think of that before?

Joe

26/04/12 – 06:14

1904 is beyond most people’s memories, Joe.

David Oldfield

26/04/12 – 11:39

There were demountable bodies in the early twenties, Joe, although they were usually in the form of exchangeable lorry/charabanc bodies. It never carried over, though into exchangeable bus bodies, to my knowledge, at least, not in a big way.

Chris Hebbron

26/04/12 – 11:40

Nice one, Joe. However, the idea of demountable bodies does actually go back a long way. Maidstone and District started in 1911 with three Gilford chassis; these had bus bodies during the day which were changed for lorry bodies at night. I believe the lorries were used to carry vegetables to and from Covent Garden. I’m sure there are plenty of other examples elsewhere, too.
No doubt David is right when he talks about weight saving being a factor in the development of integrals, but I rather suspect that other motives in early post-war attempts were to use parts from pre-war chassis, and to generate extra work for the maker. Beadle, of course, were prominent in this field; others included Harrington and Saunders-Roe.

Roy Burke

27/04/12 – 07:22

I remember this bus from my student days and wondered why there was an odd one with a Surrey registration.
It would have demonstrated for Weymann, who were based at Addlestone. Evidently it was never fitted with standard Sheffield blinds. I never rode on the 31 although I had “digs” near Crookes on the 52 route.
The open-platform Royal Tigers used on the same route looked odd and a bit reminiscent of Edinburgh; I think the local Inspectorate had something to say about the arrangement.

Geoff Kerr

27/04/12 – 08:39

Yes, Geoff, there were responsible for the fitting of the odd looking emergency door at the rear – NEXT to an open rear platform!
Roy, what said is true but Weymann and Park Royal never did a Beadle with second-hand parts.
I type this about my home town of Sheffield from two miles up the hill from Addlestone. Funny old world.

David Oldfield

27/04/12 – 09:34

And I, a Surrey-ite, who long ago moved away, still visit my brother in Ottershaw, just across the M25 from you, David. Incidentally, whatever happened to Weymann’s works? I assume it no longer exists.

Chris Hebbron

27/04/12 – 10:35

Well, for the initiated Chris, I’m typing IN Ottershaw itself! [Funny AND small world.] Until I retired a year or two back, I passed it on the way to school – St George’s College – but ever since the turn of the millennium it has been a deserted, speculative, office block awaiting tenants. All glass and security guards with nothing to do! You must know that Addlestone Garage is a gated development (yes, in Addlestone) and the Co-op long ago made way for Tescos.

David Oldfield

28/04/12 – 08:48

A remarkable coincidence, indeed, David!
Pardon my irony when I say that the changes you mention pass, nowadays, as progress. The supreme one, though, is the gated development!
My abiding memory of Ottershaw is the Aldershot & District Dennis Lances passing by to and from Woking and the occasional ride on them as part of my journey from Portsmouth by rail.
Lovely buses. The whole area was a hotchpotch between London Transport and A&D and you could never be sure what company’s bus would pop out from some side turning.
Also, Ottershaw was the last/first telephone exchange in the London Area and I would use a callbox there to make calls to my London relatives at local call rates. Some would say miserly, I call it ‘being careful’! Happy days.

Chris Hebbron

28/04/12 – 14:47

You could have been a Yorkshireman!!!

David Oldfield

20/07/12 – 15:48

One of the benefits of the open platforms was that passengers could “hop off” whilst the vehicle was approaching the stop, preventing the driver having to do steep hill starts. The conductor would be ready with his finger on the bell to let the driver know he did not have to stop. No H&S in those days, conductors encouraged it. I got very good at jumping off buses coming up Haymarket to turn right up high street on my way home from school. I believe that is why London kept the Routemasters so long, people could hop on & off where they liked, speeding journey times.

Andy Fisher

21/07/12 – 07:38

Is that Haymarket, Sheffield, Andy?

David Oldfield

21/07/12 – 12:10

While the subject of bell-ringing comes up (not campanology, silly!) I recall, post-war, the LT conductors giving three rings to signify to the driver that the bus was full up and he could ignore queues at future stops until some passengers got off. Standing was unlimited post-war, I seem to recall, or the limit was ignored, then became eight, and eventually five. Admittedly, buses engines/brakes are more powerful (the latter more vicious, too!) but it was amazing how much more fluid passenger movement was then. They moved around the vehicle, up and down stairs and got on/off the platform effortlessly ‘whilst the bus was in motion’, moved around the vehicle. Despite my advanced years, I’m still fit, yet wouldn’t do those things now, apart from moving to the exit before the bus stops and that with great care and a tight grip on stanchions!
I used to love travelling on worn-out LT/ST’s, overloaded beyond belief. Juddering clutches, slow acceleration in waves, the vehicle leaning alarmingly round any corner. Despite all that so-called gentleness, an aunt of mine failed to stop me, as a baby, from falling out of her arms when she was climbing the open staircase of an LT and being caught by a surprised man, unharmed, so they say! Some of you might regret this, boring you with such tales!

Chris Hebbron

23/09/17 – 07:02

Regarding the bells, I was a conductor in Sheffield, with a good driver you became a good team and could trust each other, so not just quick bells for passengers getting off but when the last passenger had one foot on the platform and one hand on the pole it was ding ding, if in doubt assist them on with their spare arm. Yes for us three bells was full up and a shower of bells was emergency stop. We didn’t like the passengers using the bell because it sometimes confused things, we preferred the request of next stop please verbally.

Pete

Royal Household – Leyland Lioness – YT 3738

Royal Household - Leyland Lioness - YT 3738
Royal Household - Leyland Lioness - YT 3738

Royal Household
1927
Leyland Lioness PLC1
Thurgood C26F (1938)

A view of a vehicle operated by the Royal Household has appeared in these columns already, in the form of PYY 28D, but YT 3738 appears to be a different animal altogether, being noted as bought new by King George V himself. A Leyland Lioness PLC1, with Leyland body, it dates from 1927. Originally a van, it was rebuilt by Thurgood in 1938, to the C26F layout we now see. It carried the Jersey registration J 8462 for a while. She has been resident in the museum at Leyland for a number of years, and we see it there on 19 August 2012. Was it, perhaps, a luggage van when new, and then converted for staff transport or for guests on hunting parties?

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

10/02/17 – 06:58

The Leyland Lioness name embraces two distinct models. The PLC1 was a normal control version of the PLSC Lion of 1925, designed by J. G. Parry Thomas before he was lured away to the world of motor racing. The PLC1 (the “S” for side driving position was naturally omitted) had the same 5.1 litre four cylinder ohv engine and four speed crash gearbox to meet the still significant demand for a bonneted bus and coach chassis. In 1926 G. J. Rackham became Chief Engineer of Leyland, the fruits of his thinking emerging in 1927 as the six cylinder Titan and Tiger designs. The Lion name continued for the updated LT four cylinder single deck range. A bonneted version of the Tiger was offered as the Tigress for a short time, but, around 1929 this model was discontinued in favour of a more powerful version of the Lioness, the LTB1 (‘B’ for bonnet – the “P” for pneumatic was by then redundant) which employed the six cylinder 6.8 litre engine and other components of the Titan/Tiger, including its four speed crash gearbox. Peter Stanier’s DM 6228 is a well known example of this later type. I believe that YT 3738 was originally bodied as a shooting brake for the Royal Household of King George V rather than a van, and served for some 10 years before being sold off to Jersey for PSV duties.

Roger Cox