An earlier Sheffield posting showed sister bus 462 when brand new outside the Roe factory. Here is 461 towards the end of its life on 13th July 1974 passing the Three Merry Lads pub returning from an occasional extension of the 51 service to Wyming Brook. By now it has the standard three blue band livery and the final version of the fleetname used prior to the formation of South Yorkshire PTE. It still looks smart and elegant despite its fifteen years in service.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild
09/02/12 – 05:59
Only possible improvement would be for it to be a successor 1325 – 1349 Regent V. I came across the 901… batch rather than these, but it is strange how memory plays tricks. I had a Grandmother, an uncle, aunt and cousins living at Lodge Moor and never remember riding on any of these to visit them. Christmas was always spent with said Grandmother (a superb cook) and the men (Dad and uncles) would all repair to the Three Merry Lads until time to return for Christmas Dinner! Even before the 1974 Government reorganisation which expanded Sheffield greatly, this was part of the City of Sheffield but well out in the countryside. “Oh my beloved homeland!” Despite this, it is obviously an “A” fleet route – otherwise it would read “Sheffield” rather than “City”.
Just realised that 13 July 1974 would put it under SYPTE ownership (from April 1974).
David Oldfield
17/02/12 – 08:03
You probably don’t remember travelling to Lodge Moor on a PD3 because only the two daily journeys which extended to Wyming Brook (for a few schoolchildren, I think) were crew-operated, because of the reversal needed there. The regular service was operated by AEC Swifts from OMO conversion in 1969, and later by Atlanteans. The extension was finally withdrawn around 18 months ago.
Phil Drake
21/02/12 – 16:51
I seem to remember similar buses in the 900 number series replacing the trams on Abbey Lane. I travelled from there to Pitsmoor to school at De La Salle college. If memory serves routes 61/63 were Shirecliffe – Beauchief/Woodseats Circular, I can’t remember which was which. It meant a walk from Burngreave to Scott Rd where school was but it meant that I Passed Burngreave Convent school which was full of girls so there is always a silver lining! These buses seemed to be a great improvement over the trams that they replaced and of course the bus service was very reliable. As the route crossed the city centre it was possible to get off on the way home and sample the delights on offer! We had passes which allowed free travel to and from school which had to be shown to the conductor on the way in and out of the city, even if the crew didn’t change. Happy days!
South Yorkshire Motors 1960 Leyland Titan PD3/1 Roe L31/32RD
In the late 1970’s I purchased South Yorkshire Motors Leyland PD3 2600WW at the urging of a number of people who offered help in preserving this vehicle. The bus was running in service the day before I took it to where I was keeping it. I was a little naive as I thought straight out of service it must be roadworthy. How wrong could I be? I took it for a MOT a month later and it failed on 5 items rendering the vehicle dangerous to use on the road. I managed to get the bus painted in the original South Yorkshire Motors colours, by this time a year had passed and so had all the willing helpers who soon disappeared when they found out there was some hard graft to do. I think all they were interested in was going to Rally’s! However I progressed with as much as I could manage by myself, until one day in the early 1980’s I was offered a sum of cash for it and away it went. It caused a bit of a topic when it was seen in a local scrap yard, I think it caused more interest as to why I had sold it than any of the time I had been struggling to get jobs done on it. I am sure I am not they only one who has been led into the false sense of believing all the promises of help and then they do not materialise.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Brian Lunn
09/05/12 – 07:53
Such a sad story, Brian, but so common. A friend bought a Grey Cars Reliance/Willowbrook Viscount about thirty years ago and spent much in time and money. In the end, it was too much for one man on his own and again the scrap yard won. Makes you admire even more the chaps who manage to succeed and share their charges with us at rallies and on running days.
David Oldfield
09/05/12 – 07:56
I think we all know about “fair weather friends”, Brian! At least you tried. Thanks for posting what looks to be in interesting bus with an unusual livery, albeit one I’m not that keen on.
Chris Hebbron
09/05/12 – 09:22
They looked good round Pontefract! There’s a clip of one of their Albions on the “sounds” page here, if I recall.
Joe
09/05/12 – 09:22
What a very sad, but by no means rare, saga Brian. Its also a great pity because 83 and its twin 82 were, as far as I’m aware, the very last 30 foot long lowbridge double deckers ever produced, and were like all SYRT vehicles above average in internal appointments. I shall have to relay your story to my one time workmate Mrs. Gladys Banks of Pontefract – I still see her and many more of my former colleagues quite regularly. Gladys passed her PSV test on 83 and was a driver, a very competent one indeed, for many years before becoming an inspector. Right up to her retirement she would abandon her ticket checking at a second’s notice and would operate any busy journey, OPO of course in latter days, without a whimper and with impressive and enviable punctuality !!
Chris Youhill
09/05/12 – 19:22
After the 1325-49 Regent Vs the 901 and 464 PD3s were among my STD favourites – the PD3s being highbridge but otherwise like the South Yorkshire motors (only a year older).
David Oldfield
09/05/12 – 19:24
Thank you Brian for being open about a saga that some would keep quiet. Unfortunately when your resources are stretched to the limit and you decide you need to let go of a bus, you will never find a suitable buyer. Let’s face it, realistically how many people would want buy a South Yorkshire PD3? Unrealistically, I would, as I thought they were superb machines. In hindsight I would have picked one of the Bond-bodied PD2s which were also very appealing as well as being unusual. They were by no means the last lowbridge PD3s as several entered service in South Wales later, notably the last lowbridge bus of all, Bedwas and Machen UDC 6 (PAX 466F) in 1967. Caerphilly UDC also bought a few, before turning to the PD2 for their later purchases.
David Beilby
09/05/12 – 19:26
Thanks to every one for their comments I thought that I had not tried enough, to make it work, but it makes me feel a little better to know I was not the only one who was left to graft alone. I think that you are right Chris regarding the last 30 foot low bridge to be built. As for Gladys she used to conduct on my local service coming home from school, in the mid 50’s as Gladys Illingworth as she was then, I still see Fred Bellamy and Nelly Edwards around town. One thing that was good about SYM all the garage staff with licenced drivers and conductors, I know the duplicate on the Doncaster-Leeds route which ran from Thorp Audlin to Whitwood Tech, often had a member of the garage conducting.
Brian Lunn
10/05/12 – 11:13
Thanks David B for that correction – I think I was confused regarding the last thirty foot lowbridge bodies, and SYRT 82/3 were simply the last such built by Roe. Brian, I’m fascinated to learn that you are local to Pontefract, where I spent almost fifteen very happy years with SYRT/Caldaire/British Bus/Arriva before retiring on my 65th birthday. I was once involved in the preservation of a Portsmouth Corporation Bedford OWB in the open air in a muddy yard off the A61 at Robin Hood. While we toiled away under awful conditions, hoping to reach a point where we could attend rallies “part preserved”, there were plenty of “visiting dignitaries” with much verbal advice and that’s all !! I nearly blew my top one day as the season approached and a notorious pair rolled up one Saturday and, casting a deprecatory glance at CTP 200, remarked “Huh, only three weeks to the Rally – THEY’RE going to have to get out and get under then !!” “THEY’RE” consisted of me and my pal up to hilt in grease etc and we were not amused. The state visit lasted only a few minutes before the smartly clad “enthusiasts” departed.
Chris Youhill
11/05/12 – 08:05
Alas, the Albion clip has gone- “taken down” from you-tube. It was shot in Dewsbury, with a trip up the “cutting”. Could it be tracked down? I think I now see your livery problem, Chris H: the pic here makes the lower “Oxford Blue” look black. Chris Y & I register it in the proper colour!
Joe
12/05/12 – 07:42
Although I do have colour-blindness problems, Joe, even my wife, not so afflicted, thought it was black at first sight. We both noticed the subtle difference between the black mudguard and lower bodywork. A look at the SY Albion on Flikr, showed the true colours. And you would both be familiar with the livery, whereas I’d never seen it in the flesh, so to speak! Freshly painted, it looks handsome!
Chris Hebbron
12/05/12 – 17:23
In answer to the colour, I did use the official SYM paint which was mixed by Masons of Wakefield, I agree that in the photograph it does look dark, but I think that there is some evening shadows on the vehicle as the photograph was taken quite late in the day. I have looked at No 81 and the lower blue seem much lighter than I remember and looking at my collection of SYM photos a number tend to differ in different light conditions.
Brian Lunn
13/05/12 – 08:37
Brian, I’ve had lunch in Pontefract today with Gladys, who was quite amazed and pleased to hear that she was so well remembered.
Chris Youhill
04/09/16 – 13:33
Yesterday I returned to Leeds after 25 years away. (only in Staffordshire but not my beloved Yorkshire!) I went to look at the old…now new…Leeds bus station and was so disappointed not to see a South Yorkshire pulling in on the 1/2 hour, complete with a ‘duplicate’ following shortly behind, much to the relief of the long queue waiting at the barrier. When did South Yorkshire stop running? My uncle Harold ‘Tom’ Westwood spent many of his retirement years reupholstering or mending the upholstery of these buses, well into his 80s
Sandy
05/09/16 – 06:26
Brian – I’m sorry to have to tell you that dear Gladys passed away in June after a short illness. Independent to the last she was 83 – – a coincidence considering that she passed her PSV test on 83 !! Freddy Bellamy is still around but I don’t know about Nellie – she’s certainly been ill in recent times. Sandy – SYRT sold out to Caldaire Holdings on July 8th 1994, but West Riding did run it as a separate unit until it finally closed in March 2003, by which time it had been owned by Caldaire, British Bus, Cowie Group, and Arriva. The vehicles and staff were transferred to Castleford Belle Isle and the depot sold for housing and was demolished.
Chris Youhill
25/06/21 – 06:23
I have just got a South Yorkshire timetable from the late 70’s I think. Company name is South Yorkshire Road Transport Ltd., not South Yorkshire Motors. Did they have a company name change, and if so, when.
Ken Holway
26/06/21 – 06:07
Re my post above, I am told the name change to South Yorkshire Rod Transport was 1973
Leeds City Transport 1958 Leyland Titan PD3/5 Roe H38/32R
This handsome Leyland Titan PD3/5 was the Roe exhibit at the 1958 Earls Court Show It was one of 70 bought by Leeds for tramway replacement The batch were used extensively on the Moortown – Middleton group of former tram routes and most of them lasted into the mid seventies. They were Leeds last exposed radiator Leylands and also the last Roe bodied Titans to enter service.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hough
18/05/12 – 07:46
I remember visiting the 1958 Earls Court Show and seeing the Leeds PD3 and admiring the Roe body a maker hardly known in the south of England where I lived at the time although by the time of the show, being in the RAF stationed near Lincoln I had become familiar with the City transport fleet of Leylands and Guys with handsome Roe bodies. One particular Roe bodied PD3 I took a few trips on belonged to Hudsons of Horncastle the journey between Lincoln and it’s home town was through very rural country the bus gave a very comfortable ride and was resplendent in a cream and blue livery. There was a tradition of having a Roe bodied Leeds City Transport bus at Earls Court when the show was held there every two years the last one I can remember was a 33ft panoramic windowed Fleetline, in 1966 I think, another very attractive bus, the Earls Court shows were enjoyable as you could get in or onto nearly all of the exhibits.
Diesel Dave
18/05/12 – 07:47
A true classic but in my opinion spoiled by the Leeds practice of having the unpainted engine cover. Anybody know why they did that? But on the other hand wasn’t it such features together with the illuminated ‘Limited’ sign, another Leeds feature, that made our hobby so interesting. We can all doubtless name little features that made our cherished operators just that bit special.
Philip Halstead
18/05/12 – 07:48
As well as the lining out this bus carried initially, like most show exhibits, I recall it having one other distinctive feature from the show. The kick plates on the staircase all had the Roe “toffee” emblem embossed on them. A neat touch.
David Beilby
18/05/12 – 10:25
The unpainted bonnets were to stop possible scratches whilst under going routine maintenance etc which would have made them look untidy.
Roger Broughton
18/05/12 – 12:17
Surprisingly Leeds’s last AEC Regent Vs with enclosed radiators dating from 1966 also carried polished bonnets although enclosed radiator Daimlers and Leylands did not.
Chris Hough
18/05/12 – 12:19
What can I do but agree about the beauty of the classic Roe design – although I feel the Leeds (non-standard) window pans didn’t do it justice.
David Oldfield
18/05/12 – 15:59
I see the Titan codes list of PD2 models omits the “Blackpool Special” PD2/5. I may be wrong, but I’ve always understood that the PD2/4 was supplied either only to Bolton or only to Bolton and Bury.
Pete Davies
18/05/12 – 16:57
I always thought the idea of the unpainted hatch was to help show/clean off all the oil and fluids that spray off the engine…
Joe
18/05/12 – 16:57
Chris, I think the PD3a’s and Daimlers bonnets would be painted because they were fibreglass the Regent V still being metal.
Eric Bawden
19/05/12 – 07:41
Were the pan-glazed windows unique to Leeds? All other Roe bodies of this style that I’ve seen had rubber gasket mounted windows
Chris Barker
19/05/12 – 07:42
A large batch of PD2s sold to CIE were unofficially known as Boltons by Irish enthusiasts as they were identical to the Bolton examples. One Bolton example survives as a tow car in the Manchester Museum of Transport.
Chris Hough
21/05/12 – 08:04
The Leyland PD2/4 was the air braked version of the more common PD2/3 which had vacuum brakes. It was only supplied to Bolton (with Leyland bodies) and Bury (with Weymann bodies). The Blackpool only PD2/5 also had air brakes and I think must have had some special features in the chassis design to suit Blackpool’s full-fronted centre-entrance Burlingham bodies to render it having a separate designation to the PD2/4.
Philip Halstead
21/05/12 – 17:16
Buses Annual 1964 – the very first one – gives Leyland Home Market Passenger Models 1945-date: It lists the difference between PD2/4 with a drop rear frame extension (for the platform) and PD2/5 without a drop rear frame extension (for Blackpool’s centre entrance). Otherwise the two chassis are identical.
Ian Wild
02/07/12 – 18:03
I always felt these tram replacements vehicles were the proverbial ship spoiled for the sake of an ha’porth of tar, the single skinned roof domes, the abolition of the staircase window and the lack of bodywork over the mud guard all of which are so prominent on earlier vehicles.
Ken Greaves
03/07/12 – 07:24
These PD3s like their stablemates the CVG6LX/30s were originally 71 seaters but they were blacked by the unions and so a single seat was placed at the top of the stairs. The single skin domes etc were an attempt at weight reduction as all previous deliveries of buses since 1954 had been lightweight apart from the 15 Roe bodied PD2s delivered in 1955.
Chris Hough
21/01/13 – 17:25
I was a guard at the time of introduction of the 30ft PD3s and an active member of the TGW at TRG. I always understood that the removal of the seat on the top deck was due to some local by-law re buses with 70 plus seats not being allowed to carry standing passengers. As half of one of the 150 regular crews on Dewsbury Rd. – Moortown – Middleton (for which these buses were originally bought as tram replacements) I certainly never blacked it and I don’t know of anyone who did. We welcomed them with open arms because of the sheer space available on them and the lovely steady ride they gave to both crew & passengers.
Bill Midgley
22/01/13 – 06:48
A rather fascinating piece of “trivial pursuit” here, considering the matter of the 70/71 seats which these vehicles created. While the seating was soon reduced from 71 to 70, the widely held belief that the batch comprised 70 vehicles (a logical number to order one would have thought), but it was actually 71, numbers 221 – 291.
Chris Youhill
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
25/07/16 – 09:51
I wonder if there’s a lot of rose-coloured spectacles being worn in these reminiscences. Like most Roe-bodied buses of the period, the PD3s were good looking and nicely proportioned on the outside, but in the incessant quest for economy, light weight etc, they were almost unbelievably austere on the inside, with thin seating squabs, bare bulbs etc. However, one massive step forward was the provision of a heater for the passengers, which sometimes did take the edge off a cold day. Smooth and steady ride? I must have been riding a different batch of buses than other people; even on March 28 1959 when most went into service, they shook and banged about on the poor road surfaces. This march day was the last day of the Moortown/Roundhay trams-and those to Middleton and Belle Isle. Even they, run-down as they were, and traversing their hopelessly neglected tracks, gave a better ride than the new buses. Not that there was much else wrong with them. They took a hammering in their 15-plus years of Leeds service and many went on to have a few extra years in second-hand service elsewhere.
David A. Young
25/07/16 – 15:13
I’m sorry David that you experienced such rough rides on the PD3s and, to be fair, I’m sure that they were quite OK on decent roads. They were certainly most comfortable indeed to drive with very well designed and proportioned cabs. Their big drawback however was their very poor brakes, especially on very busy routes with heavy loads. Brake fade was prevalent and was something you had to be very aware of and “ready for.” My old friend Keith Peacock (sadly deceased at a very young age) had his own patent way of dealing with this when he was on the former tram “figure of eight” ex tram routes that you mention. On approaching every stop he would change down into third perfectly and imperceptibly but with maximum revs – this of course took much of the work off the brakes, and due to his skill caused no discomfort to anybody. I have to say that ALL those column type heaters with a little dash mounted outlet on the top deck were pretty useless regardless of the make of chassis. You couldn’t beat the good old Clayton Dewandre circular ones with large fans, or even better those KL box types beneath the seats – the latter being fitted retrospectively to nearly all Samuel Ledgard buses. In fact on a couple of the former Exeter Daimler CVD6s (JFJ 52/55) at Otley depot I’ve known passengers plead for them to be turned off even in Winter as their powerful fans distributed the enormous heat from the hot running Daimler engines.
Chris Youhill
28/07/16 – 08:48
Chris, I was never privileged enough to drive any bus, but in the summer of 1964 I was one of 25 students taken on for the summer by LCT and did a lot of conducting on the PD3s. They may well have been comfortable for the driver, but for the conductor, they were anything but, stuck out as he normally was on the unstable, thumping back platform. As a passenger the extra width was appreciated, but they were overall not nearly as comfortable to ride in or conduct (just like their slightly younger Daimler equivalents), nor as nicely trimmed as the earlier 8′ wide Regent 3s. But they were a rugged vehicle, externally good looking and capable of some very hard work.
David A. Young
29/07/16 – 08:50
Chris will know that cars of the same era had drum brakes and you did not rely on them alone: the gearbox and downward changes provided more braking. Even preselector gearboxes were used in this way and stopping for passengers was quite a long exercise: that’s why you didn’t need any flashing stopping lights- passengers just knew by the noise from the brakes. On the other hand you were not sent flying down the aisle by this more sedate process and could dare stand up before the stop: you had to stand up because the stop button was the conductor’s. If you were late doing this you would be carried beyond your stop: best, to make a noisy descent of the stairs. These posts recall a bit of transport or social history. In 1950 neglected trams could be replaced by well upholstered flexible diesel buses running at a very few bob a gallon: then came Suez and costs spiralled: so then the drive for economy- cut down weight with spartan fittings- back to trams- and sometimes underpowered buses. Now buses are gridlocked and away from Boris land we have austerity: Leeds has spent fortunes proposing guided buses, trams, trolleybuses… all rejected: but in 1950 it had many miles of segregated tram tracks. Hey ho.
Joe
29/07/16 – 16:26
Times change Chris, when I passed my PSV test in 1967, as you quite rightly point out, brakes were not as efficient as they are now and brake fade was common. In order to try and avoid this, even in a car you were taught to use the gearbox as a brake. This is a practice that seems to have fallen out of favour, and would be impossible in most buses as most of them seem to be automatics.
Ronnie Hoye
30/07/16 – 08:39
This subject of using the engine as a brake has turned up on OBP before. A one time regular contributor maintained that the engine was for propulsion only and never for braking, overlooking the fact that every time you take your foot off the accelerator the engine then acts as a brake. Anyone who has driven a PD3 in service will know that the use of the gearbox to assist the stopping power with engine braking was absolutely essential. The model had truly appalling brakes.
Roger Cox
31/07/16 – 07:08
Quite right Ronnie and Roger, the PD3s had wickedly inadequate brakes when faced with heavy work, and the PD2s weren’t much better. Very strangely though the PD1s, which I would have thought had similar braking components to the PD2s at least, never seemed to give the slightest cause for alarm, ever. Its quite remarkable that such a leading and highly respected manufacturer could fall down on such a vital issue. The Leopards, the 36 foot ones certainly, were similarly alarming. I have heard fitters commenting that the problem lay in inadequate brake lining area and ventilation. I believe also that some kind of “anti squeal” bands could be fitted to the drums to minimise or eliminate that infuriating noise which many Leylands were prone to emit. A more disturbing aspect is that, when cold and after servicing, satisfactory test meter readings were achieved, of little use when you were trying to stop a heavily laden vehicle at busy times.
Chris Youhill
01/08/16 – 07:01
In a way, the blame equally lies with management of bus undertakings purchasing vehicles lacking in such an essential requirement. Driving Halifax’s huge PD3/4’s must have been a nightmare! Hill-climbing seemed variable, too. I recall reading of Southdown’s Queen Mary’s having variable ability to climb hills, too, with conductors wondering at times if they would be called upon by the driver to help push from behind!
Chris Hebbron
01/08/16 – 07:03
I know that at some point in the past on a different thread the subject of PD3 brakes has been discussed before before, but since it’s cropped up again….. I drove both PD2’s and PD3’s at Halifax on an almost daily basis throughout the 1970’s, frequently on heavily loaded journeys on arduous, steeply graded routes. It was certainly second nature to me to change down into appropriately lower gears when descending hills – it was the way I was taught and for the period was considered to be correct driving practice in all types of vehicle. As far as Halifax’s ‘own’ Titans were concerned, though they may not have been as good as a Regent V or CVG6LX/30 brakewise, I don’t ever recall having any particularly anxious moments in the braking department – and believe me at times they were driven quite vigorously! However, when in the early days of the WYPTE we received twelve pneumocyclic PD3A/2’s from Huddersfield, they were different altogether. Their brakes squealed excruciatingly and even when using lower gears to descend even the slightest gradient they would fade away to nothing and cause some heart stopping experiences. Despite their ‘easy’ gearchanges – compared with the often heavy, clumsy and cantankerous manual boxes of the Halifax examples – our drivers hated them at first and rang them in at every opportunity. Over time the Halifax engineers seemed to cure the squealing, but their fading tendencies persisted as long as we had them. So in my experience the braking inadequacies were confined to those with Pneumocyclic gearboxes. In more recent times I have partaken of a few rides on the free bus service connected with the former Heart of the Pennines Rally – usually up and down the long, steep gradient to the Sportsman at Ploughcroft. I have been amazed, and on certain occasions deeply worried, at the driving methods and standards employed by some of the drivers in some of the older vehicles. Maybe it’s just because so many hail from more level regions that the concept of engine braking on descents is an alien one, or also that so many of the younger drivers have been brought up on modern automatics with huge brakes and powerful integral retarders. So many of them however would race down the long, steep descent into the heavily built up area of Boothtown with a full load of oblivious enthusiasts, in top gear braking all the way. In many cases the brake linings would be seriously overheating and emitting that dreadful stink, but their drivers never seemed to appreciate the danger. Recently I was talking with a well known local enthusiast who operates a ‘heritage’ fleet of older buses for hire. He is perhaps not surprisingly finding it increasingly difficult to recruit suitable drivers with experience (and the appropriate licence) of older buses. One of the problems that the ‘newer lads’ – or those who are primarily car drivers – all seem to have is that they want to change up through the gears and into top at the earliest opportunity and end up flogging the poor vehicle to death to the point where one can almost hear each individual cylinder firing. Climbing hills they then leave it so late to change down that by the time they do so they almost come to a stop and then replicate the same flogging all over again. Similarly then staying in top down hills and relying on the brakes. We both came to the conclusion that in either case the drivers were simply frightened of the noise of the engine working at higher revs in the confined space of the half cab, beleiving that they were going to do it damage, whereas in fact the engines (if properly maintained) were designed to work at those revs, and that they were doing far more damage to the rest of the vehicle by driving that manner. Back to Leylands though. My general feeling about them – PD2’s, PD3’s and earlier Leopards – was that they were capable, but rather unremarkable and characterless models that tended to be heavy, awkward, rather clumsy and usually hard work. In deference to Chris Youhill, I did drive both a PD1 and PS1 in preservation on a number of occasions years ago and found them to be a far more pleasant and characterful vehicle, despite being very much an AEC man myself.
John Stringer
01/08/16 – 16:17
John, I’m able to be brief here and say simply that I agree with every word you’ve written above, and I most certainly share your alarms about inexperienced drivers unwittingly taking huge safety risks. Once some years ago I was at a well known bus rally in Surrey and had a long ride on the top deck of a full laden preserved London AEC RT. The driver drove like a lunatic and, from the constant pronounced “list to port” it was patently obvious that it had either a broken nearside rear spring, or two very soft tyres. On one right hand bend we were, perversely, only spared from going in the ditch by the speed which carried it through to a more level stretch of road – its the truth to say that during that few yards some of us were thrown off the seats into the gangway. On alighting we mentioned in no uncertain terms to the conductor our serious concerns – he appeared quite unaffected. This is not to detract from the good and much appreciated work done by competent volunteers in helping us to enjoy delightful vintage vehicles, but its an extremely worrying situation. I’m so glad that you found the “Swiss watch” appeal of the PD1s/PS1s as appealing as I did over many happy years “for real.”
Chris Youhill
02/08/16 – 06:51
John, it’s over half a century since I drove a PD2 on the Queensbury route, which was something I chose to do quite frequently on my Traffic Clerk extra curricular overtime stints. As both we and, indeed, our webmaster Peter know, the route is fundamentally on a significant falling gradient all the way down from Queensbury through Boothtown into Halifax. Even at this distance in time, the notion of a bus driver descending the steepest parts in top gear and relying wholly upon the brakes chills my blood. It is a reflection upon an utter ignorance of and lack of sympathy for the mechanical workings of the vehicle. Sadly this attitude of isolation from mechanical understanding and roadway conditions is blatantly apparent as normal driving behaviour nowadays. To many, a car has two pedals, one for go and another for stop, and one or the other has always to be firmly pressed down throughout a journey. Following behind such people is akin to witnessing a display of Christmas lights – the brake lights flash on and off constantly. Unfortunately also, this style of driving is all too apparent in the present day bus industry. I cannot recall when I last experienced a smooth stop as a passenger in a bus. The art of feathering the brakes to bring the vehicle to a jerk free halt seems to have vanished for ever.
Roger Cox
02/08/16 – 17:19
Glasgow Vintage Vehicle Trust run as many as four pneumocylcic Titans in contemporary traffic on a number of days during the year and I can not recall any problems with the brakes, although SGD65 did have a re-line a couple of years ago and does occasionally squeal. I was grateful of its air brakes whilst conducting this year’s West End Festival as a driver of a modern private car cut across in front of my driver and an emergency stop was required. Granted that Glasgow has no hills to match the Pennines and as all GCT Titans were pneumocyclic they all had air brakes. I would also point out that all our drivers get a half-day assessment on L446 before they are passed to drive of our Glasgow City owned buses. A question for any fellow contributor to OBP who might know, were the later Titans (PD3/11 etc) with dual-circuit brakes any better?
My second of three Stratford Blue pictures this one is of 537 EUE, an exposed radiator Leyland Titan PD3/4 of 1963 with a Northern Counties H41/32F body. The fleet list at this site :- www.petergould.co.uk/ gives the fleet number of this bus as No.37, but the picture shows the number 25 clearly displayed. The close up also shows that the vehicle has also suffered some accident inspired remodelling of the offside front wing. This bus was withdrawn in 1971, after a short life with Stratford Blue of only 8 years.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
20/07/12 – 07:43
A smart, (offside mudguard excepted), and purposeful looking vehicle, so much more attractive than it would have been with a tin front. Any idea, Roger, why it was withdrawn at so young an age, and what happened to it thereafter?
Roy Burke
20/07/12 – 07:46
It is also listed as 37 in my BBF 7 Midlands something strange.
Peter
20/07/12 – 09:27
Not quite the pristine condition we’d normally expect of Stratford Blue. I’m guessing that the early withdrawal was either after another (serious) mishap or that its outline didn’t match the criteria of the parent company on take-over. After all, Midland Red are known to have kept very few of the vehicles of acquired fleets – those in the Leicester/Loughborough area being something of an exception – although I have seen views of SB vehicles in red.
Pete Davies
20/07/12 – 09:28
Agree with you, Roy. Amazing how many late (E, F, G registered) PD2s and PD3s were exposed radiator.
David Oldfield
20/07/12 – 09:30
Apparently this Bus is still in existence in Galway in Ireland. Owned by an open top tour operator (Lally’s) under the reg. no ZV 1466. It also spent some time on the Isle of Man.
David
20/07/12 – 12:24
It wasn’t ‘withdrawn’ in 1971 as such- that was the date of Midland Red’s takeover of SB.The PD3s were totally non-standard for BMMO and the whole PD3 fleet was sold to Isle of Man Road Services, the EUE batch changing hands at the start of 1972. IOMRS withdrew it in 1982. The SB renumbering took place in 1969. (Info from R. L. Telfer (2003), Stratford Blue. (Tempus).
Phil Drake
20/07/12 – 12:26
Midland Red sold as number of Stratford Blue buses to Isle of Man Road Services for further service all of which were Titans many with Willowbrook bodywork. Perhaps the most interesting disposal was a trio of Marshall Camair bodied Leyland Panthers that never turned a wheel for either Stratford Blue or Midland Red these ended up in Preston for a full life span.
Chris Hough
20/07/12 – 12:27
Interesting comment about late exposed radiator Leylands. Atkinson trucks also came like that then (any others?): it was a sort of macho quality look and possibly a sign that the fleet was engineer led! That leads in a sort of way to BMMO buses, which seem to go too far the other way: the SOS FEDD recently featured is one of the most hideous buses I’ve ever seen (or not seen) – like an illustration in a children’s book…. to sit the driver on the fuel tank (!) and then have to put in a “peep” window over the filler…. and the proportions… words fail me. It fits with the all-red, easy maintenance but so boring look. This leads in a sort of way to this bus! I’m not sure it is so smart. Why was it sent out without a quick splash of paint to disguise the damage- and is that diesel slop under the filler?… and then the blind doesn’t fit the destination window… What I intended to say was that the numbers on Peter Gould’s list are all over the place (the fleet, not his list) and appear almost random: here they may have thought of a number & then followed the registration instead. Soon after, it seems, they started again. As the bus would say…. Then happy I, that love and am beloved, Where I may not remove nor be removed. Sonnet 25
It is nice to see that this bus has survived, albeit in a “trepanned” state. I cannot understand why the full takeover of Stratford Blue by BMMO should have rendered the Stratford Leyland fleet suddenly “non standard”. BMMO had full management responsibilities for Stratford Blue from 1935, and the fleet content was entirely a BMMO decision. If the Stratford unit could operate efficiently for so long, why should the replacement of blue and white paint by overall red suddenly rewrite the economics. BMMO in house bus manufacture had made decidedly dubious economic sense for some considerable time before the sale of the BET group to NBC in 1968, so the withdrawal of tried and trusted Leyland designs in Stratford in favour of BMMO standard types seems to have arisen from the increasing NBC fascination with the god of “standardisation” (corporate liveries and Leyland Nationals lurking just round the corner) than with operating logic.
Roger Cox
21/07/12 – 12:15
I suppose it was inevitable, if BMMO took over direct management of the concern instead of the arms-length approach, Roger
Chris Hebbron
21/07/12 – 12:16
Standardisation for it’s own sake is not always a good idea, I cant see the point of wholesale changes just for the sake of it, however, in the case of the Routemaster for example, it can work very well, but even they weren’t all bog standard and had several variants. Most Tilling group companies ‘take overs apart’ had standard fleets, where as BET companies managed very well with ‘off the peg’ vehicles, then came the curse of NBC who seemed to go out of their way to prove that Oscar Wilde was right when he said “consistency is the last refuge of the unimaginative” end result? the MK1 Leyland National, how can you spend so much time and money on R&D and get it so wrong? I suppose they must have had some good points, but off hand I cant think of any.
Ronnie Hoye
21/07/12 – 17:07
And the Leyland National body had an Italian designer, although we all recall the Mk II Morris Ital had one, too! In Gloucester, they had an all-Bristol fleet, of which the urban services were allocated RELL6L’s. But then Leyland Nationals started to arrive. Never a great Bristol lover, it was nevertheless obvious that the Nationals were inferior and a great disappointment.
Chris Hebbron
21/07/12 – 17:08
I just have to say that I enjoyed driving Leyland Nationals both for Eastern Counties, and East Kent Road Car Co. Admittedly the handling characteristics were very different, and I’ve known one driver getting caught out by forgetting to build up gearbox air pressure in neutral. The bus shot off and embedded itself into the adjacent building in Ashford by a good 6 feet injuring the female driver who was working ‘spare’ moving the buses. My favourites to drive were the Bristol RE’s and RL’s
Norman Long
21/07/12 – 17:08
Strong structure, Ronnie. certainly wasn’t the engine!
David Oldfield
22/07/12 – 08:11
As ever we seem to have strayed from the original subject, nothing new there. The PD3’s the Northern General Group had were different ‘body wise’ to these, but I always loved driving them. Harking back to Leyland Nationals, I’m lead to believe that the MK2 was a far superior beast to the MK1, but never having driven one I cant comment. On Normans point about gearbox pressure, one of Tynemouth’s MK1’s had a similar incident in North Shields, it shot forward demolishing part of a stone boundary wall that surrounds Northumberland Square and ended up in the middle of the flower beds, whereupon it sank up to its axles and had to be lifted out by a crane
Ronnie Hoye
22/07/12 – 09:01
My experience of the Nationals is just the opposite of Ronnie’s – I never drove a Mk 1 but plenty of the Mk 2 variety. As a frequent passenger, and nearby pedestrian, I found the originals to be totally unacceptable – how on Earth they were allowed to make that horrendous screaming row from the large menacingly visible fan I shall never know, and I’m sure that ANY other model, new or ancient, which threw out such enormous amounts of acrid black smoke would have rightly received an immediate prohibition notice. On the other hand, however, I really liked the Mk 2 very much indeed. Weight distribution had been greatly improved, the dreadful 500 series engine banished, and the 600 series and Gardner power units were both powerful and positively “dulcet” in tone. The finest of the 600 type which I drove was one which had been bought from South Wales by West Riding – it was one of four which South Wales had fitted when new with comfortable luxury coach seats in fawn moquette and had an “open” exhaust system. Its power and sporty but pleasant bellowing became legendary in our operating area – its number, for those familiar, was CCY 817V and I wish I could do a few miles in it right now. I apologise for deviating from the Stratford Blue topic but, as we used to say as guilty schoolboys, “It weren’t me what started it Sir.”
Chris Youhill
23/07/12 – 08:05
You’ve described, Chris Y, to a ‘T’, my memories of the early Nationals. And the vehicles were so angular inside, especially the part above the top of the windows. The inside roofs soon became dirty, too, as if they were single-skinned. I think I preferred austerity bodies, on reflection! An altogether unpleasant vehicle that should never, in ‘Mk I’ form, have been put on the road.
Here’s a clip of some LN Mk I’s being cold-started – I think they might be South Riding’s vehicles. SEE: www.youtube.com/
Chris Hebbron
23/07/12 – 08:08
As ever, I’m in full accord with Chris Y.
David Oldfield
23/07/12 – 08:09
BMMO did seem to have a strange attitude towards Stratford Blue: although Stratford Blue vehicles worked on X50 (Birmingham-Stratford) for many, many years the service was never jointly licenced and Stratford Blue always worked on-hire to BMMO; and, so I’ve read, Stratford Blue vehicles were never welcome at Carlyle works. Somewhat “distant” relationships between parent companies and subsidiaries don’t seem all that uncommon: Frank Briggs managed to maintain a degree of autonomy for Standerwick from Ribble; and until the GM of Northern assumed management responsibility for Sunderland District and Gateshead the managers of the smaller companies ordered their own vehicles etc . . . but the relationship between BMMO and Stratford Blue seems particularly strange. Did it perhaps date back to the Power/Shire era? Power was reported as having looked at Stratford Blue with “admiring eyes” – did Power keep Stratford Blue separate/”independent” and so out of Shire’s engineering remit? (the two are known not to have got on), and did that translate into the appointment of a Traffic Department oriented board of Directors which persisted through the company’s subsequent history? Stratford Blue itself had a strange approach to route numbering – when route numbers were introduced they weren’t applied to all services, and they were applied in leaps-and-bounds where they were. I’ve got a handful of Stratford Blue Setright tickets in my collection: some on pink paper, some on white – its my understanding that Stratford-upon-Avon depot used white ticket rolls and Kineton depot used pink rolls. And those Leyland Panthers that never turned a wheel . . . were they really a sound choice for a such a small company? – I can’t see that the traffic on Stratford-upon-Avon local services really justified dual-door buses. And weren’t those centre doors the cause of their “delayed” entry into service? I think that they had outwardly-sliding centre doors (now common, but then rare [Ribble specified them on some of its RELLs . . . anybody know of any others?]), and it was problems with these that caused the Deputy Manager to reject delivery from Marshalls as he didn’t feel able to accept delivery in the absence of the Manager (who was absent on leave) – and then the company was wrapped-up before they could enter service. They were subsequently painted into “Midland Red” livery but were “blacked” by BMMO staff (and then spent the rest of their time with BMMO parked out-of-use at Digbeth Depot’s Adderley Street over-spill parking area): which raises two questions – why did BMMO apparently intend on keeping these non-standard vehicles when the rest of the Stratford Blue fleet (including some quite new Atlanteans) was disposed of PDQ (although, given, they did repaint some Titans that didn’t stay long)? and why did BMMO crews refuse to work with the Panthers? (was it because they were dual door? – but then BMMO had its own dual-door DD11/12 Fleetlines).
Philip Rushworth
08/05/13 – 08:32
It was nothing to do with being ‘blacked’ by Midland Red drivers. The Panthers were parked up at Adderley Street in Birmingham to await disposal after the West Midlands Traffic Commissioners refused approval of the plug in doors on safety grounds. Other area commissioners did not have a problem with them. As a matter of interest the dual door Fleetlines were soon operated as single door buses with the centre doors fixed shut. This was due to even moderate nearside crosswinds opening the centre doors and disengaging the gearbox whilst bus was in in motion. The doors were controlled through the semi automatic gear stick and set up so that the bus could not be driven with the centre doors open.
Mike Holloway
09/05/13 – 07:41
If anyone misses the noise from Mk1 Nationals come to Leeds and follow one of the ftrs they are noisy!
Chris Hough
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
18/05/17 – 14:53
Sister bus 539 EUE seen at the Red Lion bus station, Stratford. The young gentleman seems to have his attention elsewhere!
Stratford-upon-Avon Blue Motors Ltd 1963 Leyland Titan PD3A/1 Willowbrook H41/32F
This the third and last shot in my series of Stratford Blue vehicles it is fleet number 2 registration 669 HNX. A Leyland Titan PD3A/1 with a Willowbrook highbridge body dating from 1963. Interestingly as my second posting of the exposed radiator Stratford Blue Titan No.25 which had frontal damage this vehicle also has frontal damage a large chunk of its glass fibre front radiator grill is missing.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
24/07/12 – 18:23
Is it accident damage or a modification as I looks rather neatly cut? It was quite common at Yorkshire Traction for all three lower bars to be removed and replaced by wire mesh, as an aid to cooling, perhaps?
Eric Bawden
25/07/12 – 07:14
The reason for the mod at Tracky was for a reason a little less technical!, the slats kept getting broken by ham fisted (footed?)conductors standing on them whilst trying to reach up and change the destination blind.
Andrew Charles
25/07/12 – 07:15
More likely that it was stood on and broken when someone was changing the destination blind.
Ronnie Hoye
25/07/12 – 07:15
This type of damage was often caused by the feet of crews as they changed the destination indicator. Salford a fleet with very high standards used extra long destination gear to prevent this type of damage.
Chris Hough
25/07/12 – 11:21
Yes Andrew, that less technical reason dawned on me just after I sent my original message!
Eric Bawden
25/07/12 – 16:53
From about 1955 onwards, on all Tynemouth’s vehicles ‘Northern General Group’ the destination blinds were changed to the inside upstairs, access was gained by lowering a flap to get at the handles However, the flaps weren’t lockable, and especially on school runs you would usually complete the run displaying some very strange destinations. WORKMAN BAD or PRIVATE SEX were quite common along with SCHOOLARS ABC
Ronnie Hoye
26/07/12 – 07:45
I can’t decide whether the “St Helens” glass-fibre front is a masterpiece of raw industrial design or just plain ugly. Similarly the LAD goods vehicle cab front, with which it – perhaps understandably – bears some affinity. Ah! but the livery: I’d allow anything in that – way better than the striped lilac shockers that now run my way. To pick up on Chris’s post of the 25th: it does look as though Stratford Blue had extended the destination gear . . . although not to the extent that Salford did, and with the consequences evident in the photograph.
Philip Rushworth
26/07/12 – 14:00
Ronnie’s comment reminds me that Trent also had interior access to the destination blind. I seem to remember the whole assembly was mounted on a panel that was hinged at the bottom edge and secured by a couple of budget locks. About age 8 I guess, I was with my parents heading into Nottingham one Saturday evening on a 61, front seat upstairs. The conductor came up after Bulwell to change the blind (not misleading as no one else could be picked up inside NCT territory). After unlocking the panel he saw me watching with interest and said, “’Ere – you can do this for me – wind it on ter Mansfield!” It made my day (I know, I know – little things please little minds!)
Stephen Ford
27/07/12 – 08:27
What was it about destination blinds that fascinated little boys? I remember being taken to an exhibition in 1956 to mark the centenary of my home town Rochdale becoming a County Borough. There was a mock-up of Rochdale Corporation’s bus destination gear in a big box on a stand and anyone was invited to play with the handles and set the blinds. Oh what bliss! I don’t remember anything else about the exhibition. I spent all day setting up the proper displays with number, destination and via details only for other kids to keep interfering and just winding for fun. Philistines!
Philip Halstead
27/07/12 – 08:35
The diversion into the merits or otherwise of having blinds changed on the upper deck reminds me of the days when Southampton had a balloon festival, served by a special bus service, and I was usually the conductor on a Regent V – it meant a welcome change from driving my desk! At each end of the route, the blind had to be changed and, though it was a free service, tickets were issued, so there was plenty of running up and down the stairs. It’s an incredibly pleasant way of burning off the excess blubber!
Pete Davies
27/07/12 – 15:30
Some front destination blinds were changed by the driver inside the cab. It must have been in either Leyland or Weymann bodies, but I can’t remember which, (information, anybody?). A Maidstone & District PD2 was involved in what was then the worst ever accident involving a PSV, (it may still be), when it was driven into a column of naval cadets in Chatham. The driver claimed to have blacked out; M&D staff – I was told the story by a Gillingham dispatcher – suspected that the driver was distracted changing the screen as he approached the terminus.
Roy Burke
27/07/12 – 15:31
Philip, it’s a relief to know I’m not the only sad person on here! One reason for the fascination – and why I, for one, would always stop and watch mesmerised when a blind was being changed, was to catch a fleeting glimpse of rarely used destinations – including some that had fallen out of use because of route changes. But I think the other thing was the ability to fiddle around with a mechanical contrivance that worked better than anything you could build in Meccano. For the same reason, bells of all shapes and descriptions also fascinated me – and ticket machines.
Stephen Ford
28/07/12 – 08:31
I remember that one, Roy, at the time. I seem to recall that he drove into the bus queue waiting at the stop. And there are no sad folk on this website, Stephen, only happy but eccentric ones!
Chris Hebbron
28/07/12 – 11:03
The story as I heard it, Chris, was that the cadets were marching in formation to Chatham Dockyard in the same direction as the bus, so weren’t looking out for it, and the combination of the badly lit road and their dark uniforms, (and, allegedly, changing the blind as he was driving), led to the driver not seeing them. BTW, while writing, thanks for your information about AFR Carling, (the recent WY posting). I met him once or twice – not always in the happiest of circumstances – and he had a lovely house right in the middle of my patch when I worked for Southdown.
Roy Burke
28/07/12 – 16:00
Okay, Roy you’re right – I’ve just looked it up, 1951 and 24 youngsters died. Sad business, doubly so if the driver did take his eye off the road. Glad you found my Southdown comments useful, he certainly had a memorable war, along with many others!
Chris Hebbron
29/07/12 – 08:55
Sorry to go off on another old-bus-photos tangent, but your remarks about AFR Carling, Chris, revived many long dormant memories. You’ve said he was Area Manager, Portsmouth, during WWII, and became General Manager in 1947. What about the intermediate post of Traffic Manager? How long was Mr Carling GM of Southdown before going to Stratton House, and who followed him? George Duckworth was GM in my time.
Roy Burke
02/01/13 – 07:34
Just a slight correction, Roy, the bus involved in the Chatham disaster was apparently Chatham & District 875 (GKE 69), a 1939 Weymann-bodied Bristol K5G. Chatham & District were absorbed into Maidstone & District c1955 and of the batch of 37 (870-906) the 25 surviving at the time became M & D DH293-317. One of the batch, C & D 874, has been owned by the Friends of Chatham Traction for many years – I believe it is currently undergoing extensive restoration.
Leicester City Transport 1958 Leyland Titan PD3/1 Willowbrook H41/33R
LCT bought an eclectic mix of chassis and bodywork for its fleet over the decades, but settled on just three (164-166) tin-fronted Leyland Titan PD3/1’s, with attractive Willowbrook bodywork, in 1958. 165 and 166 were withdrawn in 1972 and 1975 respectively, with 164 being withdrawn in 1974. It’s seen here, looking remarkably chipper, aged 19, at the Bristol Bus Show, in 1977.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron
29/09/12 – 07:43
And would the gent who looks as if he’s volunteering to become lunch be Mr Hebbron, by any chance?
Pete Davies
29/09/12 – 07:44
This bus is currently under restoration on a farm outside Leicester.
Philip Lamb
29/09/12 – 12:15
I thought it was at Snibston Discovery Park in Coalville, fully restored ages ago, along with a 6 wheel Renown and the 1911 Leicester City Transport Leyland tower wagon used up to the end of LCT Tramways in 1949. The latter is the oldest preserved Leyland lorry.
If the photo is 1974, Chris, and the figure looking in is not you, then it would be Clive; (sorry Clive, but I cannot remember your second name!). He was the regular Leicester Museums staff member who drove the exhibits to various shows when they were stationed at the Corporation Road Pumping Station Museum in Leicester. Probably still does, from Snibston. Other LCT buses are restored, or under restoration, by the Leicester Transport heritage Trust, including tram 36.
John Whitaker
29/09/12 – 18:03
Handsome bus, dignified livery. By the time I went up to university in 1984 the bus fleet had been standardised on MCW Metropolitans and Dennis Domintors with a few Metro-Scanias thrown in: but the fleet still sported the dignified cream and maroon-banded livery, some services were conductor-worked, and tickets dispensed from Ultimates and Solomatics . . . not for long though, the red/white/grey Leicester CityBus identity was adopted as part of the Leicester CityCouncil corporate identity (that’s right chaps, paint your buses the same colour as your refuse waggons so that passengers get the message), and Wayfarer machines came in. Most LCT services (except those worked jointly with Midland Red/Fox?) were cross-city and, I think until a route revision round about the time I went up, used different numbers depending on direction of travel. Leicester, like Trent, used to place front number plates at ‘tween decks level – any suggestions as to why? was this just a midlands foible, or did any other operators adopt this practice? Willowbrook seemed to have a respectable business amongst major operators for both single and double-deck business around this time, but then in the 1970s seemed to concentrate on the lightweight market: I suppose the introduction of the Leyland National killed-off the BET standard business, but why didn’t it continue to chase the double-deck market? And why did Duple buy Willowbrook and then divest itself of the business? Why did it keep the Willowbrook identity when Burlingham and Nudd Brothers & Lockyer became Duple (Northern) and Duple (Midland) – in fact, why wasn’t Willowbrook amalgamated with Duple (Midland)? Anyway, back to the bus: did Leicester pay extra for the Leyland badge? which would explain why not all tin-fronts sported this feature, but not why Leyland didn’t think it worth advertising itself on its products; and why, when the tin-front was adopted for wider use, did Leyland not modify the grill to eliminate the space for the BMMO badge? – surely the costs of re-tooling would have been miniscule when compared to production volumes. So many questions! Hopefully some answers will be forthcoming, in the meantime I’m going to scroll up and drool over the bus a bit more . . .
Philip Rushworth
30/09/12 – 07:57
Number plates between decks was not just a midlands foible Philip as Southdown did up until I think the late fifties when they moved them to below the cab windscreen for some reason although for obvious reasons the double deck coach No 700 with full front Northern Counties body always had it’s plate below the radiator grill. I think the livery on the PD3 in the photo was far better than the later predominately cream version and the red/white/grey is best forgotten and the Midland Red front although not very stylish was infinitely superior to the St Helens front which was such an ugly brute which never suited any bodywork.
Diesel Dave
30/09/12 – 07:58
Philip Willowbrook did build some VRs and Atlanteans in the seventies principally for the Northern General companies sadly they were not a patch on this example Leicester’s last rear entrance bus an East Lancs bodied PD3 ran in 1982. Why Leyland kept the tin front design until the early sixties without getting rid of the space for the BMMO badge I cannot say but Edinburgh fitted a version of it to all its Titans finally building a fibre glass version themselves. The bodies built by Willowbrook were somewhat ersatz copies of ECW (the VR) and MCW products.
Chris Hough
30/09/12 – 10:40
If you go to your web page and type in AFT53 you’ll find a picture of Tynemouth 223 being used as a training bus, it was one of 5 Willowbrook bodied PD2/12’s delivered to Percy Main in 1957. AFT 49/53 – 219/223. The original livery layout was mostly red with cream center band and roof, later on the roof became red ‘I thought they looked best in that livery’ and about 1968 this updated version of the first post war layout was adopted. As far as I know these were the only ones of this type in the NGT group. Northern were never fans of tin fronts, in fact I think the Routemasters were the only ones that came close to that description
Ronnie Hoye
30/09/12 – 12:04
The tin front design question is an interesting one, as the Leyland grille design changed slightly over the years and I see nothing sacrosanct about the part with the space for the BMMO badge. This photograph also makes clear why Orion bodies (in particular) on tin-front chassis, tapered in so much at the front. This was to match the width of the standard tin-front which was clearly to suit 7′-6″ chassis. Willowbrook opted to maintain more body width to the front resulting in a mini dash panel to the offside of the tin front.
David Beilby
02/10/12 – 14:46
Diesel Dave comments on the ugliness of the St Helens front. I’m making the rash assumption here that St Helens Corporation thought it rather pretty!
Pete Davies
02/10/12 – 14:54
The figure is not me, Pete/John and the photo was taken in 1977, so may or may not be Clive. I was worried, myself, about the wisdom of examining the mechanicals in the bowels of the monster, so I kept well clear. One can never be too careful!
Chris Hebbron
03/10/12 – 06:00
Thanks for clarifying! It looks as if that lid could stand duty as a guillotine.
Pete Davies
03/10/12 – 06:01
The later Leyland concealed radiator design was known as the St Helens front, because St Helens was the first operator to take delivery. The design was pure Leyland – a reverse of the situation re the original Leyland tin front, which was developed to match contemporary Midland Red styling.
Philip Lamb
03/10/12 – 06:02
David, the tin front wasn’t designed to suit a 7ft 6in chassis. The original design, as we all know, was for BMMO and the order was for 100 8ft wide PD2s with Leyland bodies. Again, as we know, the standard Leyland 8ft wide body was a widening of the original 7ft 6in wide body. For some reason Leyland widened all but the the front of the 8ft body. This didn’t cause any design problem with the traditional layout of radiator and front scuttle panel and, as the BMMO requirement for a tin front was expected to be only for them, the tin front was designed to blend with the body. Whilst the tin front was eventually offered on both 7ft 6in and 8ft chassis, the BMMO order was the only one, in either width, to specify Leyland body work. Liverpool adopted the tin front and its 1954 delivery of PD2/20s (8ft wide with bodies by Alexander) did not have the narrowing and the tin front on these vehicles was the full width of the bus – as were tin fronts on bodies by other builders for a range of operators using the 8ft wide chassis. Doug Jack’s “The Leyland Bus” has a range of pictures showing a variety of 8 ft wide tin front PD2s without any narrowing of the body, some with full width tin fronts, some with the 7ft 6in version on 8ft wide bodies. The question is why 8ft wide Orion bodies narrowed as they did to use the 7ft 6in version of the tin front. The Edinburgh Holmes designed tin front replacement was unutterably ugly. As for the St Helens front, it was designed to give better visibility and Leyland saw it as being akin to the design on the current Vista lorry cab (which they shared with Dodge), thus giving a form of “house style”.
Phil Blinkhorn
03/10/12 – 10:12
One of the attractions of this site is the wide scope of observations from correspondents with differing interests. With my ‘operational’ background, my reaction at the illustration was, as others have commented, of a smart vehicle in attractive livery, but I wondered about the destination display. The route numbers are large and very readable, which was fine for locals who knew where they were going, but the actual destination box itself isn’t too helpful for passengers who needed to check their intended destination, and is out of proportion with the numerical display. The positioning of the number plates is distracting, and doesn’t make things easier for them.
Roy Burke
04/10/12 – 07:22
Philip, A reference in “Local Transport in St Helens 1879-1974” by TB Maund and MJ Ashton says “St Helens commissioned an unusual asymmetrical front which was subsequently used elsewhere and known as the ‘St Helens front’ “. As a passenger on St Helens Corporation and Crosville to school from 1961-68, I always assumed that St Helens Titans had fibreglass fronts because Fibreglass Ltd (a subsidiary of Pilkington Brothers) were based in St Helens. Thus, some Corporation spending was kept within the boundary and kept some local people in employment. This is something long-lost in our economy, much to the delight of Volvo, Scania etc.
Dave Farrier
04/10/12 – 13:35
On the subject of highly placed registration plates it may have been a geographical thing as both Trent and Barton also place them over the cab on double deckers.
Chris Hough
11/02/14 – 07:00
I worked for LCT for 5 years, and my understanding of the positioning of the number plates was that the body fitters were sick to death of having to refit them after minor shunts. So the chief engineer of the day, early 1960s, decreed that the damned things be removed to a higher place of safety. Presumably, other operators took the same view and for the same reason. A minor shunt, that maybe just dented the bottom of the grille, could be ignored until the next repaint, whereas damaged or missing number plates had to be attended to immediately or the vehicle was out of service until fixed.
Rob Haywood
11/08/14 – 07:16
The man looking at 164 is NOT Clive. It’s not me either but I did drive this to rallies when working for Leicester Museums and Clive Stevens worked for me. He still volunteers at Abbey Pumping Station Museum. We also drove the 1939 Renown, once all the way to Brighton.
Bob Bracegirdle
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
02/11/14 – 15:24
As an ex. LCT employee, 1956-61, I can confirm that the positioning of the front number plate between decks came about long before tin fronts – pre WW.II in fact. It was positioned there so that reconditioned radiators could be swapped between buses without the necessity to swap number plates.
BCK 367C started life as FRN 740 a 1954 PD2/10 with a Leyland H32/29R body which has been rebuilt to a PD3 format. She now resides in the North West Museum of Road Transport in St Helens, but was in need of some attention when I saw her during the summer. She has retained the Leyland outline to her bodywork, though some of the panels may have been relocated in the conversion and others have been added in order to lengthen her. Some visitors to the site may be thinking, “This isn’t in Preston!” Correct. She’s a long way from home, on Itchen Bridge in Southampton. The occasion was a rally to celebrate Southampton Corporation Transport Centenary, and the date was 6 May 1979. The ‘Union Flag on wheels’ following her is an Ipswich Fleetline in overall advertising livery.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
09/10/12 – 18:02
There were three distinctive types of conversions carried out by Preston between 1959 and 1967. Eight 7’6″ PD2/10s were converted and all bore the Preston devised chassis designation of PD3/6 – a designation that Leyland Motors accepted. All eight vehicles received new PD3 chassis frames, Forward entrances replaced rear platforms and much of the original outline and coachwork was retained. Between 1959 and 1963 four lowbridge bodies were converted. “The Leyland Bus” suggests that they were converted to highbridge layout at the same time as the road under the railway bridge that had necessitated their purchase had been lowered. In 1963 two highbridge vehicles were converted followed by two more, one in 1965 as illustrated above and a final conversion in 1967. The last two were widened to 8′. The classic Colin Bailey body outline is unmistakable – the only jarring note being the insertion of the short bay immediately behind the first window on the top deck rather than amidships. The original bodies had the more attractive version of Leyland’s final double deck design with recessed window pans and radiused corners top and bottom which were retained and which make the bus look as modern as anything else produced in the 1960s. Preston thus ended up with the only 7’6″ PD3s, the only forward entrance Leyland double deck bodies and the only 30′ Leyland double deck bodies.
Phil Blinkhorn
09/10/12 – 18:05
I submitted a view of DRN 308 in “more or less” original form, as a companion to this, seen while on training duties in Fleetwood in 1975. Unfortunately, Peter found it too dark to be used.
Pete Davies
10/10/12 – 09:40
I believe that Dreadnought Coaches of Alnwick has one. I once saw it in the dark returning from Wedding duties.
Philip Carlton
10/10/12 – 09:41
I wonder what one of the 7’6″ PD3s would have looked like with a St. Helens style PD3A front on as these were 7’6″ wide and most body builders had to taper the front of their 8ft wide bodies to accommodate them.
Eric Bawden
10/10/12 – 12:08
An interesting prospect, Eric, which would have qualified this class for an additional “unique” feature over those Phil B mentions above!
Pete Davies
10/10/12 – 12:09
Eric, A quick look through “The Leyland Bus” photos of St Helens front vehicles shows that some, rather than most, bodybuilders tapered their front to fit. The more traditional builders (such as Massey) only offered a taper but with other builders the width was at the discretion of the operator.
Phil Blinkhorn
11/10/12 – 07:31
I remember the Southampton Centenary Weekend in May 1979 very well. I was working at Derby City Transport at the time and myself and the late Gerald Truran, the Chief Engineer, (and Author of ‘Brown Bombers’ the History of Neath and Cardiff Luxury Coaches) entered Derby’s Foden Double Decker Fleet No. 101 in the event. Sorry but the Foden does not qualify for this site. The drive down was slow but uneventful until just before Winchester when she started giving cause for concern. Don’t ask me what, it is a long time ago and I am no mechanic. So a detour was made off the A34 in to Sutton Scotney where a visit was made to the long gone Taylor’s Coaches premises. The staff and management were most accommodating as is usually the case when Bus men need help from other Bus men, and a repair was made (NO charge) and we were soon on our way. One thing I remember about the visit was an old Bedford lurking in one of the many buildings. I made inquiries and was told it was a Bedford with a Plaxton Consort body and had come from Comfy Coaches of Farnham. Unfortunately, and much to my regret, I never took a photograph but I have found an image of it at this link. By the way, we did not win anything at the Rally but it was a great weekend, and the trip back was uneventful.
Stephen Howarth
11/10/12 – 08:58
With regard to Stephen’s visit to Sutton Scotney, Taylor’s had their Bedford OB HAA 874 in this same rally. It must have been a rare outing for her, as she was using the company’s trade plate.
Pete Davies
14/10/12 – 08:00
This is the ex Preston 2 (PRN 761) rebuild currently with Dreadnaught Coaches of Alnwick, referred to by Philip Carlton. It is seen at their depot in June of this year, on a typical (!) summer’s day.
Bob Gell
21/05/14 – 12:29
The PD2 version of No.61 was H30/28R when new. It was reseated to H32/29R in 11/1958 as part of a rolling programme to increase the seating capacity on all the PD2/10s. All four highbridge conversions were done to the same width of 8ft. There were no 7ft 6ins wide conversions. The four lowbridge buses were increased in height fom 13ft 6ins to 14ft 2ins. As previously said they were used alongside the lowbridge PD1s on the Ashton A service which passed under the height/width restricted railway bridge on Fylde Road. The road surface was lowered in 1957 thereafter permitting highbridge buses to pass underneath in the centre of the road.
Mike Rhodes
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
05/09/14 – 07:30
I was the owner and driver of 61 on the Southampton Centenary event, having driven it down from Somerset through Dorset and via zig-zag hill ! Lovely to see this picture, and it shows what good condition the bus was in at that time. Unfortunately it now languishes in the N W Transport Museum in St’Helens, looking rather unloved – no-one seems interested in it anymore, despite my offers to help fund its restoration. Any other Preston fans out there who would be keen to see it restored ? If so, leave a name and e-mail address, please.
Nick Sommer
Your email address will not be posted on site to avoid spammers, but I will pass it on to Nick.
The posting a little while ago of the Bradford Daimler CVG6 was a reminder that although both they and Leyland were then manufacturing rear-engined double decker chassis in large numbers, not all operators were yet willing to make the change to them. Southdown’s later Queen Marys are examples of some of Leyland’s last traditional front-engined vehicles. Judging by the number of them that have been preserved, (many of them went on to have second lives with independents, of course), and by comments I’ve read, Queen Marys have a great number of fans. Not everyone liked them, however, and I’ve also heard some unflattering remarks about their appearance. Prior experience makes me reluctant to express my own views just yet! Queen Marys, which Southdown bought in very large numbers, were pretty well standard fare when I joined as Traffic Superintendent, Brighton, but I never really got to drive them. A Maidstone & District District Superintendent who I respected and admired made a point of becoming familiar with all vehicles allocated to him, which struck me as an eminently sensible idea. It was quickly made clear to me, however, that at Southdown such a practice was regarded as ‘inappropriate’, so a trip to Devil’s Dyke and back was all I ever managed at the wheel. The photo is of the final ‘Panoramic’ version of the Northern Counties bodywork, in which the cream paint is taken straight across the front rather than curving round the windscreen as it did in the more numerous earlier Queen Marys. Three years later, Southdown followed their eastern neighbour by changing to Fleetlines.
Photograph by Diesel Dave Copy contributed by Roy Burke
I have never understood the Queen Mary name for these. Only Southdown versions seem to have been given this name, while the PD3/MCW combination with Ribble was given the name Tank. Even ex-Southdown drivers of my acquaintance don’t seem to know the reasoning. Is it just an enthusiast nickname, like certain railway locomotives have unofficial names (Class 40 Whistler, Class 50 Hoover, etc)? Of the bodies, I liked the “Panoramic” style the least, whether it was the Northern Counties on a PD3 or an Alexander on an Atlantean. Some Ribble Atlanteans, of similar vintage to this, had Northern Counties bodies with the same front dome. To me, it just doesn’t look right. Put “Panoramic” windows on a coach, however, and it’s a different story!
Pete Davies
12/10/12 – 15:32
I tend to agree with you on that point, Pete, I like the original version of these, and whilst I would say that the Alexander ‘Y’s look far better as a Panoramic, the double decker’s with the same front as the MCW clone just looked wrong, however, I quite liked the later Alexander D/D’s with the larger windows.
Ronnie Hoye
12/10/12 – 18:06
At the risk of making myself unpopular with all of this website’s southern readers, I never understood the popularity of this design – or for that matter the popularity of Southdown’s (to me rather “yucky”) livery. Ribble’s PD3/MCCW FH72Fs were clearly better looking and the colour scheme suited them down to the ground. And this comes from a man who can barely look at a standard MCW Orion body without shaking his head. I never felt a similar affection for the PD3/Burlingham variant with the full-front, much preferring the Burlingham design as a half cab with the BMMO front as supplied to Scout. As for the later “panoramic” version of the Southdown PD3/NCME (as shown above), perhaps it should be transferred to the Ugly Bus page before it gives us all nightmares. Some very unfortunate designs came out of Northern Counties in the latter half of the 1960s, making one wonder if personnel from Massey Bros had taken over the design team after the take-over of that company by NCME. Massey were renowned for their aesthetically challenged body styling – their lowbridge vehicles had a (thankfully) unique “stepped on by a giant” look while their single-deckers were hideous without fail. I look forward to opposing viewpoints!
Neville Mercer
12/10/12 – 18:14
I much preferred the earlier versions with single headlamps and the ‘conventional’ upper deck front dome. I thought the opening vent in the nearside front windscreen spoiled the design which was otherwise very well balanced. And of course the livery helped. Simple but very classy and also timeless. It would still look good on many of today’s modern buses.
Philip Halstead
13/10/12 – 07:00
Neville, you’re not upsetting me! My ancestry is Lancastrian, and my schooldays were spent in Lancaster itself and British West Bradford, though I was born in London. I’ve lived in and around Southampton for over 40 years now, and many of the contributions I’m planning reflect this. So far as the livery is concerned, I have encountered a number of operators with what might best be described as pseudo-Southdown arrangements, Southern National before they succumbed to the “Barbie Doll” being the biggest example. Perhaps a darker green might have helped (but not NBC “LEAF”!)
Pete Davies
13/10/12 – 07:01
Calm down, calm down, Neville, it’s only a bus! To condemn the above bus to the Ugly Bus page, is extreme. And I feel that ones taste in buses, like anything else is hardly a North-South Divide’ thing. I’ll stand with Philip on my view on this vehicle. I certainly don’t feel that the Ribble version looked better, the Orion body was, as many Orion bodies were; less attractive and the livery blander, but not deserving of being condemned to the Ugly Bus page! (Of course, am I toning my real thoughts down, in the interest of your blood pressure!). We do agree about Massey bodywork, however, especially those with outrageously curved upper deck fronts.
Chris Hebbron
13/10/12 – 07:01
A piece of local folklore? The Southdown terminus in Southsea was at South Parade Pier. Drivers and conductors would gather to chat and smoke prior to their next departure on the promenade. Looking out to sea, one observed the Queen Mary (the liner!) passing through the Solent one day. ‘My that’s a big ship – big just like our new buses – they must be the “Queen Mary”s of the bus world,’ – or something like that. PS: I don’t believe a word of it!! However, opinion amongst ex-staff here in Portsmouth as to whether or not the term originated with employees, or is pure enthusiast is divided – so take your pick!
Philip Lamb
13/10/12 – 07:02
I feel that I must take issue with some of your contributors. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that, but, to me, this is a pleasing design with a timeless, attractive livery. I don’t think that the Queen Marys were universally popular with the staff. The drivers had a hot and noisy engine in the cab with them. The conductors had nowhere to stand, when passengers were boarding and alighting, as they funnelled past him (or her). Without a recess, he was simply ‘in their way’. And, I would have thought that the fitters would probably have preferred the easier access offered by an opening bonnet. But for the passenger – heaven! Over the downs to Newhaven, Seaford, Beachy Head and Eastbourne. Those lovely big windows and sunny aspect through the Perspex roof panels. Along the coast road to Worthing, Chichester and beyond. Looking out to sea from their own personal observatory. Or up through the Wealden countryside, over Crowborough Beacon to Royal Tunbridge Wells. Bus travel at its best. Things were going to go downhill after this. Single deckers, then Leyland Nationals, harsh Bristol VRs with a thin skin and small windows. No thanks, a panoramic Queen Mary for me any day, thanks !
Peter Murnaghan
13/10/12 – 07:03
The problem with this design in my view (and I suspect in Southdown’s view at the time) is that it is a hybrid of two aesthetics. What they really wanted to do was to put a BET windscreen on it. They tried a couple of times, but it meant moving the radiator and that didn’t work too well. As long as the rad filler was in that position they had to use the throwback windscreens, which looked silly beneath the modern upper deck window. No doubt the change of livery was a failed attempt to disguise the fact. As for Northern Counties post-Massey, there was definitely some Massey influence (and almost certainly some Massey parts) in certain designs, but not this one. Northern Counties’ idea of using the rear window of a BET single decker at the front of the upper deck was a straight copy of what Alexander had done using the Y type rear window. Unfortunately it didn’t fit so well, although it seemed to fit better on Southdown vehicles than anyone else’s – possibly because of deeper side windows.
Peter Williamson
13/10/12 – 10:38
OK. Gloves off. As Neville’s biggest fan: Don’t agree about Southdown livery but agree about Tanks. As a Roe man, I still think an Orion can look good in the appropriate livery, though. Suppose I do agree, as a Burlingham man, with the comments on full-frontal Ribbles. Have to defend Neville on the ugliness of Panoramic QMs – back to balance of design or lack of it – and certainly of Masseys. [See also Peter W’s comments.] …..but Peter M, you don’t need to take issue. As you say, beauty in the eye of the beholder. Friendly banter and tongue in cheek digs help liven us up here on OBP. Sometimes a knee jerk reaction needs further contemplation – even in a forum like this. So often we challenge comments and then on reflection see how true they are and that we probably actually agree with them.
David Oldfield
14/10/12 – 07:22
Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. I never liked the Queen Marys or the Ribble equivalents. Disguising what was a chassis designed for half cabs was never a good idea and the blame goes back pre WW2 to Blackpool and others. Even some of the full front front engined singles looked poor. An honest half cab can’t be beaten. But what do I know – I liked the Park Royal Renown. Big, brutish without the vices of the Park Royal Bridgemaster it plainly stated I’m a BUS. It looked good in North Western and King Alfred colours and when Crosville inherited theirs, the large amounts of solid green set off with black wheels looked very smart – possibly the best scheme ever applied until some idiot applied NBC logos and horrible grey wheels. See www.sct61.org.uk/nw964
Phil Blinkhorn
14/10/12 – 08:02
Phil, I’m with you all the way – especially re Renown.
David Oldfield
14/10/12 – 08:03
I, too, found the appearance of the “panoramic” version of the Southdown Queen Mary PD3/4s to be a curious hotchpotch of clashing features. The earlier style of Northern Counties FH39/30F bodies on these buses possessed classic lines, which, in my view anyway, were more aesthetically appealing than their Ribble MCW equivalents, but then I have never been a fan of the Orion body and its derivatives. To me, the Burlingham bodied version of the Ribble PD3 was much superior in appearance. London Country obtained examples of both the Southdown and Ribble PD3/Burlingham for training purposes, but the Southdown Queen Marys were subsequently used in service from Godstone garage on the long 409 route between Croydon and Forest Row, and on the interworked 411 between Croydon and Reigate. These ex Southdown machines were of the semi automatic PD3/5 type, of which Southdown bought a batch of 40 in 1961/62. They were not very successful, having particularly poor hill climbing ability, and they were soon relegated to the flatter services. Unfortunately, though I rode very often as a passenger on the Southdown Queen Marys, I never got to sample the performance of the three LCBS examples. Though they must have struggled on the stiff gradients around the Caterham Valley, and Redstone Hill, Redhill, they gave a year of faithful service on those routes. After the unsuccessful flirtation with the semi automatic PD3, Southdown reverted to the PD3/4 with clutch and synchromesh gearbox, but the Northern Counties bodies took different forms. In addition to the initial classic style, some were built with convertible open tops, and then came the somewhat odd “panoramic” version. The variations did not end there, because one of the earlier examples was rebuilt with a repositioned radiator as part of a prototype saloon heating system. The absence of a front mounted radiator allowed the fitment of a panoramic style windscreen, which looked decidedly incongruous on the otherwise standard body. This bus, No. 257, can be seen here:- www.sct61.org.uk
Here are some more pictures of Queen Marys.
BUF 428C of 1965 is an example of the convertible open topper, distinguished by the slightly greater depth of panelling between decks – unlike its permanently roofed fellows, the front route number box is not located directly under the base of the windows. It is seen at Old Steine, Brighton, in winter garb, and again at Beachy Head in its summer form.
FCD 296D is a 1966 bus, and is seen in Haywards Heath.
HCD 362E, also at Old Steine, is one of the panoramic buses delivered in 1967.
Roger Cox
14/10/12 – 10:33
The panoramic windowed body on these Titans was in many ways a front engined version of the panoramic bodywork supplied on rear engined chassis to Yorkshire Traction among others an example of which appears in the YTC section on this web site The bus with the curved windscreen looks to me for all the world like a Southdown NCME Leopard with an upper deck dumped on top! When one of the Southdowns appeared at the 1966 Earls Court show the only other front engined bus was an AEC Regent V for South Wales with a very traditional Willowbrook body A design that to my mind that has not dated as much as the Southdown one However as a totally biased member of the Roe fan club to me the acme of traditional bus design was the 30 foot AEC Regent Vs bought by my beloved Leeds City Transport from 1962 to 1966!
Chris Hough
14/10/12 – 10:34
Thank you, gentlemen, for your comments, which I’ve read with much pleasure. When I joined Southdown, which I did with immense enthusiasm, I was very keen to compare their modern ‘traditional’ Leyland fleet with M&D, whose PD2s were all at least 14 years old, and whose Atlanteans were very expensive to buy, run and maintain. I was also interested to see what improvements Leyland had made to their front-engined chassis. However, since Southdown didn’t think it necessary to give the likes of me access to management accounts, (or to any management or operational information for that matter), I was never able to make an operational evaluation. My very short driving experience was rather disappointing. As Peter M points out, these PD3s were pretty noisy in the cab, the full front reduced nearside visibility slightly, and they were not noticeably improved from the PD2s I already knew. With your eyes closed, travelling in a Queen Mary was no different either, except that occasionally they could give out a kind of rattle or clatter inside at certain low engine speeds. Moreover, the Engineering Department’s control was such that the Traffic Department’s involvement with the fleet consisted solely of providing crews – full stop. Eventually, I simply lost interest in any of the fleet; at Southdown, unlike either M&D or West Yorkshire, people just did their own thing in isolation. Pete D has reminded me that I never heard the term ‘Queen Mary’ while I was at Southdown, but I can see how their appearance could have been likened to an old ocean liner, as Philip L suggests. Livery is a very personal thing; for me, Southdown’s was O.K. although the capital letter version of the name was undeniably old-fashioned, which didn’t project a progressive image, and it made replacing damaged panels more expensive than it need have been. (None of my business!). I’m afraid I can’t agree with Neville, however, about Ribble’s full-fronted vehicles, which always seemed to me to look at best severe, and even drab when the paintwork aged. As several correspondents have pointed out, the original full-fronted design hardly lent itself to attempts at modernisation, which left the ‘Panoramic’ looking awkward and ungainly. At that time, there was a fashion amongst some motor manufacturers to make alterations to their older models by adding an extra chrome strip here and there, or to enlarge the rear window – Rover’s P4s got that treatment – and the Panoramic seemed like the bus equivalent of the fashion. One small thing about the full front that always irritated me slightly was that the nearside interior of the cab, which intending passengers could clearly see, often became dirty or stained, and sometimes littered with drivers’ detritus such as chocolate or crisp wrappers, and even, once, an empty cigarette packet. That, of course, was an Engineering Department responsibility: Traffic keep out of things that aren’t your concern!
Roy Burke
14/10/12 – 11:27
Lest anybody should think that I am prejudiced against Southdown in general, let me put the record straight. My comments on “yucky” livery didn’t apply to the coach version with two-tone green AND cream which I always thought was one of the more attractive liveries – particularly on the Weymann Fanfare and Harrington Cavalier designs. Once the cream was dropped they became rather drab and unimaginative – they might have benefited from a larger area of the darker green to counter-balance the relentless apple. As regards SMS double-deckers I never had any problems with the livery on Arabs and PD2s, but somehow on the PD3s it became a different livery altogether. Perhaps those ridiculous “D-shaped” windows on the lower decks tipped the scales from my viewpoint. And again (personal opinion!) I thought that all panoramic windowed deckers were ugly, including rear engined examples. The feature gave them all something of a mutton dressed as lamb pretentiousness. On the positive side I always found Southdown to be a well-run company and its route network was excellent – far better than that of my own beloved North Western which was painfully thin in rural areas (while resolutely blocking new entrants who could have improved things) and must have forced many rural commuters into car ownership as the only alternative. If you doubt my assertion of how pitiful NWRCC’s country network was I advise you to consult a timetable (say from the mid-60s), compare the population of the villages to the services on offer, and then conduct the same exercise with Southdown or another more imaginative operator. Not impressed with their livery (or their PD3s as icons) but very impressed with their levels of service! One final point. My memory might be failing me but it seems to me that the cream (or buttermilk or whatever you want to call it) was several shades lighter than the colour used on OOC PD3 models. At least one of the preserved examples (based in West Yorkshire) seems to use the OOC shade rather than the one I remember. Photographs vary according to the lighting or the type of film used but most seem to agree with my memory rather than the OOC variant. Has anybody else noticed this discrepancy and which shade is correct?
Neville Mercer
14/10/12 – 14:29
Neville the D shaped rear lower deck window was not confined to Southdown, Wigan Corporation PD3s from the same company also had the feature while similar bodied PD3s with Yorkshire Traction did not. So who specified it is difficult to say however the Wigan PD3s given a reasonable impression of what a half cab Southdown may have looked like shots of them are on www.sct61.org.uk
Chris Hough
14/10/12 – 14:31
Sorry to disagree with you again, Neville. I know nothing about North Western Road Car’s operations, although I met the General Manager, (Mr W. Leese, I think), once or twice, and so can’t comment on them. However, in my view Southdown was inefficient in a number of respects compared with the two other companies I knew reasonably well. Just two examples: as someone else has remarked elsewhere in these pages, the dominance of the Engineering Department could result in unnecessary delays in replacing vehicle failures; secondly, their staff rotas, (well, certainly those in Brighton in my time), were sloppy and, frankly, unprofessional – they’d never have been approved in Harrogate. There were quite a few aspects of Southdown, in fact, that would make me disagree with the idea of describing them as ‘a well-run company’.
Roy Burke
14/10/12 – 16:14
I have to point out that car No 257 mentioned by Roger Cox was most definitely not converted in any way but was built from new with the BET screen and the radiator under the stairs as part of what I think was a Clayton Dewandre “Compass” heating system, It spent most if not all of it’s life at Worthing depot on mainly flat terrain where it was still prone to overheating. A second similar system appeared on car No 315 at the 1966 Earls Court show but this one had a Panoramic style body with BET screens on both decks that is rear screen on the top deck and front on the lower. This spent some time at Brighton depot and made occasional journeys on the 12 route to Eastbourne where I drove it on one occasion on an early morning duty in late 1969, I found the visibility from the cab was much better than the standard version which had some very awkward blind spots to anyone above average height, the high noise level was I remember much the same. It would appear that this bus was not so prone to overheating as 257 judging from it’s appearances on the very hilly 12 road. Remarks about the Queen Marys not being universally popular among drivers due to high noise levels and the aforementioned blind spots are quite correct, thier propensity to brake fade in hot and hilly conditions when well loaded didn’t win them any friends either dropping down the hill into Eastbourne in the summer with a load on was a nervous expierience even in low gear you always hoped traffic lights would be green. To my prejudiced eye the livery looked good on just about any body style but I have to agree it did look uncomfortable on the Panoramics, regarding those D shaped windows at the rear on some models they were fitted with a hinged fan light as seen on cars of around that time, you know the ones car drivers flicked their fag ash out of.
Diesel Dave
15/10/12 – 07:30
Am I allowed to say I like the appearance of the Queen Mary’s?
Ken Jones
15/10/12 – 09:48
Ken…I’ll be brave and agree. Maybe we are not experts! Based purely upon looking at them as a design, I think the large panoramic windows upstairs are an inspired idea and reflect a time when people were trying to make things “futuristic” in appearance. It must have given a wonderful view when on the sea front etc. I doubt it was a very practical design though and fitters probably hated lugging such large glass panes into place. For me the worst bit is the front with that far too steeply dropped windscreen, those unmatched windows, the awkward beading and that it looks “wrong” however you paint the bands…straight across looks strange and following the curve makes it look miserable. However…think back to the day they were new and imagine being that young bus spotter on the pavement and I think they would have been thought wonderful! That glass, the full front, the colours and I know I and my old friend Clive would have loved them at the time.
Richard Leaman
15/10/12 – 17:00
Dave, thanks for that information about the panoramic windscreen versions of the Queen Marys. I always thought that they were operator modifications. Yet again the comments on this site expand our knowledge considerably. The PD3 would never have won any prizes in the brakes department, irrespective of the body fitted. In Halifax it was mandatory (i.e. a disciplinary matter if caught out) to descend hills in the same gear required to go up, and nobody in his/her right mind would have disregarded this rule in a PD3. Even then it paid to keep a prayer mat handy. I always liked the Southdown livery, which, until the advent of NBC, seemed to be quite well maintained. Traditionally in the bus industry, there was always mutual suspicion between Traffic and Engineering. The curious arrangement in some BET companies (Aldershot and District was another) under which conductors reported to the Traffic Manager, but drivers came under the Chief Engineer, seemed to be based upon the view that drivers were machine operatives, whereas conductors were revenue collection personnel. Did any BTC companies follow this pattern? This simplistic attitude evaporated with the extension and ultimate complete adoption of one person operation. All my Southdown experiences were gained as a frequent passenger, but it did appear that the company’s engineering department had some curious ideas. On a several occasions it was apparent that the engine fuel pumps had been “recalibrated” to improve economy. This was painfully evident enough on Leylands, but the effect upon the Gardner 6LWs in the Arab IVs was extreme. I recall a trip on one of these very fine buses on the 23 route from Crawley to Brighton, where the engine governor had been reset to cut out at around 1500 rpm. The bus wouldn’t exceed a level road speed of about 25 mph. making the steep ascents en route exceedingly slow, and the entire journey absurdly protracted.
Roger Cox
17/10/12 – 08:25
Interesting comment from Roger about which gear should be used on hills! When I was first learning to drive, my instructor gave me the same advice: “You’ll fail your test if you don’t, lad!”
Pete Davies
17/10/12 – 17:50
Like Pete, I thought that every vehicle has three types of brake, hand brake, foot brake and the gearbox. When I did my HGV instructors course, I was told to instruct pupils to engage the correct gear for leaving a roundabout etc, but not to use the gearbox as a brake. Obviously whoever thought up that pearl of wisdom had never driven a PD3 or a vehicle with an air over hydraulic system.
Ronnie Hoye
17/10/12 – 17:51
Having read Roy Burke’s comments on the demarcation that existed between the traffic and engineering departments which was not always obvious to the road staff. Clearly he had to deal with on a daily basis, no doubt frustrating at times, maybe his way would have had benefits all round but we’ll never know. I wonder if maybe the engineering side felt that they dealt with the real world on the ground and traffic dealt in paper and figures, just a thought. If however his office was in Southdown House he no doubt would have used the subsidised canteen there which he may or may not have been aware was barred to all road staff with very few exceptions even when they had reason to be in the Freshfield Road garage in the basement, another form of demarcation, then again Portslade Works was not much better but we were tolerated although looked upon with suspicion as someone who was likely to ruin their good work but despite all my moans I am still proud to say I worked for Southdown and enjoyed it especially before NBC exerted it’s stranglehold.
Diesel Dave
18/10/12 – 07:42
Yes, Ronnie. Both when I took my Advanced Test (IAM) and my PSV, I was told brakes to stop and gears to go.
David Oldfield
19/10/12 – 06:27
Except, of course, that every time you remove your foot from the accelerator pedal, the engine is acting as a brake, unless you knock the transmission into neutral.
Roger Cox
21/10/12 – 11:30
Thank you, Dave for your response, (as well as for providing the photo for the posting) – after all, you have far more experience of these vehicles than any of us. My office was in Steine Street. After induction, I never once went to Freshfield House and so didn’t use the canteen there. That its use was arbitrarily restricted, however, doesn’t surprise me at all. You’re absolutely entitled, Dave, to feel proud to have worked for Southdown; my grumbles don’t extend to the platform staff in any way, and I was lucky, (and grateful), enough to have the support of a really good Chief Inspector who helped me in many ways. I felt sympathy for him having traffic problems that wouldn’t have existed in the other operators I’d known, and for which now and again I had to write apology letters to passengers.
Roy Burke
30/10/2012 15:15:10
In my childhood I was a latch key kid but had the privilege of being brought up by Bob Mustchin who was the foreman at Bognor Garage in the late 50’s/60’s. I would hang around the bus station and curiosity got the better of me venturing into the garage which had recently been swopped with Hall & Co who preferred Southdowns original garage opposite the Goods Yard for oblivious reasons as there base was there. Bob finally succumbed to my intrusion into his work place and strictly told me not to stray from his side which opened up an exciting world of bus engineering and operation. In later years this relationship proved invaluable when I approached him as District Engineer to buy one of the post war PS1’s which had found a new lease of life at Bognor as a left luggage facility. In early years both vehicles would be utilised to go to the store at the old garage at Eastergate but they finally became static moving only at the beginning and end of the summer season. When the purchase had been completed Bob arranged for the AEC Matador based then at Chichester to tow HCD 449 (1249) latterly 689 to Dorking where I stored it at my work place at the back of Dorking Town Station. This started a career in bus preservation focusing on ex Southdown vehicles and adventures more apt in a book than on this comment. A later acquisition brought an ex Southdown breakdown tender 0181 (ex EUF 181) originally a TD1 Double Decker that later was rebuilt onto 181’s chassis and based at Edward Street garage in Brighton. My first tow was an ex Blackpool TS7 coach converted to a de-icing vehicle, accompanied by the famous DUF 179 (1179) an iconic example of Harrington/Leyland TS7 coach. It was Blackpool to storage in Kent an epic journey at 28 mph!! Later tows included recovering 0182 (ex EUF 182 from Brighton seafront after cylinder failure on the HCVS London to Brighton run. A range of ex Southdown vehicles passed through my hands to name a few Fleet Nos 649, 196 and a PD12 from a Shoreham Company which retired from staff transport. A working relationship grew with Tony Hepworth the manager of Portslade works who would go to great lengths to help restore an ex Southdown vehicle known to me. The highlight was a phone call I received one day during a meeting at work saying the last roll of Holdsworth moquette had been laid in the canteen as carpet!! I went immediately down to Portslade and struck a deal with Tony to take up the valuable material and replace it with commercial carpet which I paid for. This concludes an interaction with a company that I had grown to admire and was aware of their quality and service to the public. My story finally ends with a PD3 (Queen Mary) 422 on a reg AOR 137B) that was the beginning of my own bus company Leisurelink which is the subject of another story. This was the result of extensive cooperation with Richard Alexander, Chief Engineer at the Southdown management buyout days and survived into the Stagecoach era with basing the Leisurelink open toppers at Worthing depot. My happiest memories are of getting out of the office in Newhaven and driving 422 on a shift beginning with a run into Brighton on the 12 route with a standing load created as a school contract to run in service especially at the right turn at the Clock Tower traffic lights when any oncoming buses gave way to an old lady who was about to succumb to another snatch change from the standing position!! The nickname comes from the first PD3’s of the Queen Mary type were allocated to Hilsea depot who thought they were bigger than anything at the time. It was thought they were akin to a ship and of course HMS Queen Mary was at Southampton hence the nickname as a reflection of their size.
Clifford Jones
26/01/13 – 16:58
I’m a former Hilsea driver who cut his teeth driving PD3s and I can categorically state that they were NEVER referred to by Hilsea staff as ‘Queen Marys’. I honestly believe this was an anorak invention much towards the end of their lives. Julian Osbourne insists they had always been known thus. Rubbish!
Mark Southgate
18/04/13 – 07:20
Arriving at Conway Street Garage, Hove, in 1976 as an escapee from Southern Vectis my first encounter of the Queen Marys was with training bus 2880 CD and Inspector Les Dawson, who required me to parallel park the thing between two cars. Having been used to the Isle of Wight’s Bristol Lodekkas with loads of Gardner torque, I was a bit disappointed to find that I had to start in first gear even on the level with those Leylands – on the Lodekkas it was very rare indeed to have to use first to pull away even on hills. Inspector Dawson had to demonstrate to me how to do a snatch change on a hill! But during the time I was at Conway Street I grew to love those Marys and often wish I could have another go!
Patrick Hall
18/04/13 – 16:35
Hi, they have Queen Marys at the Goodwood Revival in September. They also have 4 coaches to take the Marshalls onto the track then pick them up after. I will take pictures of these this year.
Andy Fisher
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
11/09/18 – 06:38
I remember the first time l saw one of the new Queen Marys at the Old Steine in the early 60s. They had only just come into service, it was a number 12 and it was the bus l was getting on. I always thought as a passenger that they were great. The last time l saw one was when l was in the U K on holiday in about 2008. My father had been a driver for Brighton Corp. on the old trolley busses, we had picked him up from London and were going towards Shoreham when he told us to turn right opposite the old cement works at Beeding. It took us to an old bus Mecca. He was delighted to catch up all the old buses he remembered.
This 1958 Metro-Cammell Orion bodied Leyland PD3/4 was one of 12 in the Tynemouth and Wakefields fleet. They were AFT 924/35 fleet numbers 224/35; the last two carried the Wakefields name. The Northern General Transport group had quite a number of these and although ‘livery apart’ they all looked much the same, the Percy Main vehicles had a much higher interior spec. 235 ‘seen here parked alongside one of the earlier Orion Guy Arabs’, is for some reason missing a front wheel trim, most unusual for the normally very high standards of the depot. I started at Percy Main in 1967 and by then these vehicles were nearly 9 years old, but by all accounts they had lost none of their original sparkle. They weren’t the most handsome half cab I’ve ever driven, my vote for that title would go to the 1956 Park Royal Guy Arab IV’s, the 1957 Willowbrook PD2/12’s with the same O.600 Leyland engine were livelier, but the heavier PD3 was, in my opinion a much better vehicle. But lets not kid ourselves they were not perfect, the brakes left a lot to be desired, by todays standards they would probably be considered underpowered, and they didn’t have power steering. However, they were well maintained and regular application of grease to the steering linkage meant that it was always light and positive, they were also very forgiving and treated with respect they were fun to drive. To a young lad of 21 the thing I loved about them was that wonderful raucous throaty sound they had, and once you got them wound up they could clip on a bit, conductors liked them as well because they stayed reasonably upright, so they never had the sensation that they were at times practically walking on the windows when you went round corners. All things considered, apart from an occasional reluctance to stop, they were a good honest reliable workhorse, and many drivers, myself included, preferred them to the Atlantean PDR1/1.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye
02/11/12 – 07:32
Excellent. I worked in the North-East in the 1970s but, by then, Wakefield’s and several other subsidiaries of Northern General had disappeared. I think only Sunderland District and Gateshead were left. Can you still shop at Binns?
Geoff Kerr
02/11/12 – 10:48
BINNS were part of the House Of Fraser group, and there is still a store in Gateshead. No doubt one of the “local” readers can tell us if it still has the same trading name, but the group’s branch in Skipton is still called RACKHAMS.
Pete Davies
02/11/12 – 15:22
The only proper MCW bodied NGT PD3 I ever saw was a late survivor in NBC “knicker pink” and white and it still looked good! My favourite Northern Group Titans were the Burlingham bodied ones of Sunderland poetry in motion.
Chris Hough
02/11/12 – 15:23
As Geoff says, by 1970 all vehicles based at Percy Main were ‘Tynemouth’ by 1975 that name along with all the other Northern General subsidiary names and their liveries had also disappeared to become Northern which by then was part of NBC. On the BINNS subject, they had outlets at most of the larger towns and cities throughout the North and into Scotland, ‘including one in Edinburgh’ but as Pete points out they became part of ‘The House of Fraser’ group, and as far as I’m aware the BINNS name has also gone.
Ronnie Hoye
02/11/12 – 15:24
When i was a youngster I went to stay with my sister and her husband who lived in Darlington. The Shop At Binns was on nearly every bus of the day, I have just googled Binns and all I got was The House Of Fraser.
David J Henighan
02/11/12 – 15:26
Rackhams, Skipton: I bet that was once Brown, Muffs of Bradford, the K5G of the retail world. Alas! Rackhams were originally a Birmingham store, and the name was later transferred to Walsh’s in Sheffield.
Joe
09/11/12 – 13:05
I worked at Percy Main as a conductor in 1971 and by that time the early Atlanteans had really lost their sparkle; they were very sluggish and the steering could be very stiff. The PD3s still gave a good account of themselves, though, even though they were older. PD3s were the end result of the long evolution of the front-engine half-cab, while early Atlanteans had hydraulics and other new features that were worn out after 10 years. I think that there were 6 PD3s at Percy Main in 1971 because the other 6 had been transferred to other parts of the Northern group in exchange for single-deckers used on service 15 when it became OPO in 1968. When other routes became OPO in 1971 and other single-deckers got drafted in, the vehicles that were transferred out were Atlanteans, some of them to scrap. The PD3s carried on and, while some went elsewhere in the group, other PD3s came in. They were stable and good for a conductor. They also did have a good turn of speed. There were a few duplicate trips on the New Coast Road that were often a PD3 and they could get up an impressive speed even with a full load. Fuel consumption was high though.
P Robson
26/06/13 – 06:00
Were the reds of Tynemouth, Wakefield and Northern during 1950/60s officially different. I was a regular user of all three then I have always been convinced they were. Certainly I remember seeing Tynemouths standing next to Wakefields at Northumberland Quay many times and they WERE different, all three of them. Or is this case like LNER Doncaster and Darlington Apple Green, the same – but different!
Don T
26/06/13 – 11:50
All NGT group vehicles came out of the same Paint shop, Don, so it may be a case of one batch of paint being a slightly different shade to the next. Percy Main vehicles, Tynemouth and Wakefields, were painted at three yearly intervals, and red is of course notorious for fading, add to that three years of going through the wash every night and that may be the answer.
Ronnie Hoye
29/06/13 – 07:34
I’m delighted to see Wakefield’s Motors getting their due recognition, thanks to Ronnie. As easily the most ‘obscure’ of the Northern Group subsidiaries, they are often forgotten. Tyneside was scarcely any bigger in terms of total fleet strength but Wakefield’s fleet included coaches – some of which have recently been discussed on here – and so their service buses were much rarer. As an avowed Orion aficionado, I think this photograph is quite magnificent and, to me, the epitome of what a ‘proper’ bus should look like. I know that Orions are not universally popular but I’m particularly interested in Mr Robson’s comments vindication of Tynemouth’s in view of his experience ‘on the back’.
Leicester City Transport 1966 Leyland Titan PD3A/1 MCW H41/33R
I became a bus driver in 1965 and was driving for PMT Stoke driving Regents, Guy, Daimler, Reliance and of course Leyland PD/3s. So as time went by I ended up working for Midland Red North. I was promoted to Driving Instructor in 1989 and to my delight was given a Leyland PD3 ex Leicester to do my training with. I would drive great distances with this vehicle for example Crewe to Oswestry to pick up trainee’s of course this was the best part of the day when I was driving. Happy days, Does anyone know if this vehicle was saved from the scrapman?
1966 would make it an early example of a genuine MCW – as opposed to Met Cam or Weymann. Not bad looking but it would be even better in its genuine Leicester guise.
David Oldfield
07/11/12 – 06:59
The registration looks to me like GRY50D – and checking it out has confirmed that is indeed the correct registration. I’m a bit intrigued as to what David defines as a ‘genuine’ MCW product. MCW as a joint venture existed for decades (I presume similarly to ‘BUT’ of AEC & Leyland) – for many years the place of build being established by reference to the maker’s plate, Weymann bodied vehicles showing ‘Metropolitan-Cammell-Weymann’, and Metro-Cammell bodied ones showing ‘Metropolitan-Cammell Carriage and Wagon’. This changed sometime in the mid-1960s, when Metro-Cammell bodied buses started appearing with MCW builders plates, as the Weymanns. I can’t now remember exactly when this happened, but I do recall it as being well before there was any question mark over the future of the Weymann factory. At some point I think Weymann and the bus-building side of Metro-Cammell merged as MCW, but, here again, I can’t remember exactly when this was, but I do recall it as being before the losing of the separate identities, as you might say. After a protracted strike the ex-Weymann works were closed and production concentrated at the former Metro-Cammell factory in Birmingham. I believe some bodies which were commenced at Addlestone (Weymanns) were completed in Birmingham. Having lost significant capacity MCW then found itself unable to complete orders within the required timescales, the result being that some were cancelled (I presume by mutual agreement) and the intended customers were required to take their custom elsewhere. I remember one affected batch being Bradford 301-15 (which finished up with Alexander bodies) but I believe there were others. So at what point did ‘genuine’ MCW bodies appear? In the example above, I notice that the lower deck seating capacity is given as 33 rather than the usual maximum of 32. Was there a rearward-facing seat for five behind the bulkhead?
David Call
07/11/12 – 06:59
Michael, nice views but she isn’t mentioned in the 2012 PSV Circle listing of preserved buses. Unless there’s a gap, I suspect the answer to your question has to be ‘no’.
Pete Davies
I have corrected the registration.
Peter
07/11/12 – 08:48
David. MCW was a joint marketing company. Weymann and Met-Camm had entirely different owners until 1966 when Weymann went under and Met-Camm (Cammell-Laird) bought what was left. MCW plates were put under the stairs of both manufacturers products certainly from the ’50s – leading to the ongoing confusion. MCW as a manufacturer is post 1966 – despite industrial relations problems leading to many Weymann orders post 1963 going to Met-Camm (either before or even during the production run).
David Oldfield
08/11/12 – 11:09
These MCW bodies always looked much better than the ones which tapered to the bonnet assembly which remained at 7ft 6ins wide, this gave the buses a severe look. The problem was overcome by adding around 6 inches to the front width of the bus on the offside as seen here.
Chris Hough
08/11/12 – 15:00
Chris, wasn’t it 3 inches either side? As far as MCW and its constituents are concerned MCW was formed in 1932 to produce bus bodies from the Elmdon works of Metro-Cammell Carriage and Wagon Company and the Addlestone works of Weymann. Both companies produced bodies to their own designs which they marketed separately and to joint designs where they saw markets which neither factory alone could supply in quantity, for instance BAT (later BET) which became a major customer. The Weymann name and the Metro Cammell names were dropped after the 1966 closure of Addlestone, MCW becoming the new name. Enthusiasts, (myself included), publications and the internet are sometimes guilty of calling pure Metro Cammell designs MCW as it became a short hand. I’ve done it on this site, referring to various Manchester bodies, supplied by Elmdon pre the arrival of the Orion bodies, as MCW when they (such as the post war Standard, the Phoenix and the unique 44xx batch of CRG6Ks) were pure Metro Cammell. Interestingly few pure Weymann bodies are wrongly referred to as MCW. For my own part, I’ve put myself on the naughty step for 15 minutes and have promised to be more careful in future!
Phil Blinkhorn
08/11/12 – 15:01
The prolonged strike at Weymann was responsible for Halifax ordering Roe bodies for the 1965 PD2s. The chassis were driven from Weymann to Halifax and then despatched to Cross Gates. Leeds ordered 10 Weymann bodied Atlanteans for 1965 Nine duly appeared while the last one 340 CUB 340C was finished by MCW and eventually arrived in 1966. It had dual headlights and wrap around windscreens on both decks neither feature was on the original 9. It also had green window pans for the interior instead of the more usual aluminium finish. It was in many ways a one off and remained unique in the Leeds fleet Later MCW bodied Atlanteans had wrap round windscreens but single headlamps and standard interiors.
Chris Hough
09/11/12 – 07:49
Whilst GRY 50D doesn’t seem to have survived to the present day, two of its sisters have. Identical twin GRY 48D has been restored by the Leicester Transport Heritage Trust. And Park Royal bodied GRY 60D is likewise saved for posterity at the Transport Museum, Wythall.
Peter Murnaghan
23/11/12 – 15:18
I’m Vice Chairman of Taybus Vintage Vehicle Society in Dundee and we had a request from a lady in France a couple of years ago for a clutch for an ex-Leicester PD3 which still carried its original registration. I actually e-mailed the Leicester preservation Group and told them about it. From memory, I think the bus was GRY 55D, so it still survives. We were also able to point her in the right direction for a clutch so I’m hoping the bus is still running.
