Browns Blue Bus Service 1950 AEC Regent III RT RT3/3 Saunders H56R originally now Weymann
I was interested to read about Victor’s visit to Leicester in 1958 to see the ex-LT Daimlers in service with Browns Blue. A good friend of mine, Mick Gamble, has just completed writing a comprehensive history of the Browns Blue Company. This is now at print and is due to be released in mid-October. Mick has worked on the project for over two years and has travelled many a mile in interviewing members of the Brown family along with form Browns Blue drivers, conductors and engineering staff. The book will be hard back containing 232 pages, over 200 photos and a complete fleet list. Mick has produced the book to coincide with the 50th anniversary of the take-over of the company by Midland Red in March 1963. Chris Barker noted that Browns Blue also operated nine ex-London Transport RTs and whilst all nine found new owners following withdrawal by Browns Blue, sadly none made it into preservation. So Mick has done the next best thing and has purchased KLB 596 transforming it into a replica of HLW 160 which was the only non-roof box RT that Browns Blue operated. Mick has had authentic adverts produced and a replica 19 metre long destination blind!
Photograph and Copy contributed by Mike Greenwood
21/10/12 – 10:41
Nice!!!
Pete Davies
22/10/12 – 17:04
This vehicle looks magnificent in Brown’s Blue livery, and would look even more so if parked next to the RTW preserved in Stevenson of Spath’s yellow and black colour scheme. Bring them both up to Manchester sometime please, my range is more limited these days! Well done to all involved in this project, independents are severely under-represented in the ranks of preserved vehicles.
Neville Mercer
27/01/13 – 07:59
We had this bus for our wedding transport in July 2006. It was in traditional London Transport red. Our wedding was in Winchester and the bus was hired for the day with a clippie from somewhere in Hampshire.
London Transport 1954 AEC Regent III RT – RT8/2 Weymann (Originally) Park Royal (Now) H56R
Here we have two views of the same vehicle in the two liveries of London Transport. The view of it in red is at Heathrow Bus Station on 21 January 1976, where she is on the 140 to Mill Hill East Station. The view in green shows her – as preserved – on Itchen Bridge in Southampton. It’s 6th May 1979, and she is addressed to Hemel Hempstead Bus Station on the 347 while taking part in the Southampton City Transport Centenary rally. According to BBF 12 London Transport book it was delivered new in the green livery.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
04/11/12 – 15:27
Evidence seems to say 1954, which I am inclined to take as date of entry into service. Are you sure it still has a Weymann body? It carried one when it was new, unquestionably, but it would have had at least one body swap while with LT and recent references quote Park Royal bodywork. Unfortunately the ultimate authority on this subject (Ian’s Bus Stop, on the net) currently has RT histories up to RT4199 only.
David Call
04/11/12 – 17:09
David, The 2012 PSV Circle listing of preserved buses gives her as having Park Royal body, and new date of 7/54. Thank you for clarifying.
Pete Davies
04/11/12 – 17:09
I have corrected the information above, I supplied the information under the photo I just put the original body not having any information to dispute it, I had to start somewhere.
Peter
05/11/12 – 13:07
Strangely enough, the sound of the AEC 9.6 litre with pre-selector gearbox – one of the most common, homely and comforting sounds of the 1950s bus scene, is one that we don’t have on the Old Bus Sounds page. There are one or two on YouTube, but I have yet to find a really good one. They all seem a bit “rasping” and you don’t get the full flavour of the contralto in first and second, and then the rich deep tenor in third. Any offers?
Stephen Ford
05/11/12 – 15:20
I wonder just how much money was wasted by LPTB/LTE continually painting vehicles red, then green, merely because it was wanted in the other half of the business. I never got the impression that there was anyone controlling spare green/red ones as a sensible alternative. I wonder if the vehicle in the top photo was ‘snapped’ because of the sloppy blind display – a side blind in the intermediate box – why? And, Stephen, I recall the different sound of the ‘pre-war’ RT’s engines, until they changed the cylinder heads and they all sounded the same then.
Chris Hebbron
05/11/12 – 15:34
Thank you Pete for posting the photos of this RT. I have happy memories of learning to handle this type on the LT skid pan at Chiswick (even though I was already holding a PSV licence from the Eastern Traffic Authority) and I had to retake my test to satisfy LT. Once posted to New Cross garage, I was put on route 192 Lewisham Odeon to Plumstead, and had to contend with Shooters Hill, often boiling at the top when heavily laden, then a very sharp left turn into Eglinton Rd/Hill, which necessitated difficult low speed gear selection.
Norman Long
05/11/12 – 16:01
In answer to the question from Chris, I ‘snapped’ this one because I was at Heathrow to get some photographs of the entry into service of Concorde. While there, I took photos of some of the activity around the bus station, the others being FAR too modern to appear on this site! Certainly, the arrangement of the blinds could be better, but that isn’t why I took the photo.
Pete Davies
05/11/12 – 16:02
Chris, it’s interesting that you should say that. I didn’t know the pre-war RTs. Being from Nottingham I was rarely in London, but NCT had lots of pre and post war Regents in the early 50s, and most of the pre-war survivors were pre-selector. It has long been my recollection that the sound of these pre-war buses was subtly “the-same-but-different” from the “new” (!) 1948 (Metro-Cammell)/49(Roberts)/53 (Park Royal) Regent IIIs. When we moved to Barton territory in 1954, they had a considerable number of pre-war ex-Leeds Regents, which also had the “old” sound.
Stephen Ford
05/11/12 – 17:16
The pre-war RT engines, Stephen, were greatly influenced by Leyland engines in the STD and TF classes. Although Ricardo had a hand in designing the cylinder heads, the direct-injection engines had pot-cavity piston tops (like flowerpots,)a Leyland design, produced under licence, although this fact was kept under wraps! So the AEC engines were, to some extent, hybrids.
If you’ve experienced ‘boiling up’, Norman, this photo will bring back memories, at the top of Annerley Hill, near Crystal Palace, blinds turned for the return journey. This route passed the end of my road, although the vehicle shown is on a short working, not going through to Raynes Park.
Chris Hebbron
06/11/12 – 13:22
Ah, the 157 route, Chris. This, together with the 154, was the replacement for the 654 trolleybus route which ran between Crystal Palace and Sutton Green, the last day of trolleybus operation being 3 March 1959. I went to school at Selhurst, and our playing fields were on the other side of Croydon at Waddon. We had to use the 654, and later the 154/7 to get there. Anerley Hill was at the other end of these routes, beyond Norwood Junction. Whereas the trolleys ascended Anerley Hill in a steady manner, the replacement RTs always struggled up this gradient. LT derated the engine of the RT to 115 bhp, about the same as a K version Gardner 6LW, but the AEC lacked the low speed torque characteristics of the Gardner. However, the RTL, with its similarly derated engine was decidedly worse on hills than the RT. Your point about the profligacy of the old LTE is very true. It was a huge, complacent, inward looking, arrogant organisation that steadfastly refused to acknowledge that it didn’t already know everything about bus operation and ancillary activities. Other participants in the bus industry – BET, BTC, municipals et al – were loftily referred to as “foreign operators”. Insulated from comparisons with practices elsewhere in the industry, LTE had no yardstick by which it could assess its woeful standard of efficiency. Certainly, trade union power was very strong, but much more could have been done to improve matters.
Roger Cox
06/11/12 – 14:04
Thanks Chris—a great picture…I can almost recall the smell of the steam. Those were the days..the best job I ever had!
Norman Long
07/11/12 – 06:52
Wimbledon Hill was the challenge for the ‘pre-war RT’s, on route 93, from Putney Bridge to Epsom (Dorking on Sundays). When I lived in Morden, Roger, it always seemed strange to me that no bus route went to Crystal Palace. The 157 went to Wallington (some cut short at Carshalton) and it was with some pleasure that I noticed that eventually one route, a least, ventured into South-East London. My abiding memory of pre-war RT’s, in their after-life, was seeing a couple of them with Smith’s of Reading, around 1960, looking impeccable, despite their 20-odd years in service by that time.
Chris Hebbron
07/11/12 – 16:50
Another testing route for the RT was the 234 between Hackbridge and Selsdon. The Hackbridge section as far as Purley was straightforward enough, but from Purley the route climbed up the side of the Caterham Valley, then dropped down again through Riddlesdown before ascending again to Sanderstead Church on its way to Selsdon. Later, from March 1971 to January 1973, this route (together with XA Atlanteans) became the province of the solitary FRM, and, as my mother then lived at Riddlesdown, I frequently rode on this splendid machine when visiting. The FRM proved a highly competent performer, taking the gradients in truly fine style. What might have been……!
Roger Cox
07/11/12 – 17:32
One of the favoured few, eh, Roger? Another tragedy, as you say. along with the TSR2 and the recent Nimrod debacle!
Chris Hebbron
13/11/12 – 06:55
When the red RTs were repainted green and transferred to country area garages (and vice versa), does anyone know if the rear axles were changed at the same time? As far as I am aware, central area RTs had rear axles with a lower diff ratio than the ones operated on country routes. This gave the red RTs a lower top speed, but improved acceleration between stops, whereas the green RTs benefitted from a higher top speed, as befitting their routes, but progress through the gears would have been more stately. If such vehicles were simply repainted, it must have caused some confusion and frustration among drivers as they tried to keep to schedule with the ‘wrong’ type of bus!
Brendan Smith
13/11/12 – 12:59
I am surmising, Brendan, but I assume that the repainting exercise formed part of the Aldenham overhaul system. As you know, buses going in had their bodies and chassis separated and sent down dedicated overhaul tracks. Such was the scale of the disassembly process, the vehicle emerging at the far end with the registration OLD 564 would almost certainly have had a different chassis and body to the one that went in. Thus, the “new” OLD 564 might well have had a chassis that entered Aldenham as a high geared Country Dept vehicle. Alternatively, the appropriate higher geared rear axle would have been fitted during the overhaul process, and the emerging chassis would have acquired a green painted body. I worked for the LTE Country Bus Dept in a clerical capacity at Reigate in the early 1960s when the psv speed limit was raised to 40 mph, and all buses had the back axles converted appropriately. I cannot recall any “maverick” low geared machines being used on Country Area services after the conversion program was completed, and, in an organisation so besotted with standardisation as the old LTE, I doubt that such an eventuality would have arisen. If one did slip through the net, it would have been sorted out pretty quickly. Had it not been so dealt with, a T&GWU Union Complaint would certainly have been despatched hot foot to the relevant management in-tray.
Roger Cox
13/11/12 – 14:33
From what you’re saying, Roger, I’m assuming that the bodies never actually changed colour, they just ended up on a different chassis. I don’t know about the RT’s, but as well as different gearing, the Routemasters ‘or the RMC versions anyway’ also had a much higher interior spec with better upholstery and coach style overhead luggage racks
Ronnie Hoye
14/11/12 – 07:14
That might well be true, Ronnie. It would surely be very much easier and less costly to repaint a body in the same colour as before, but, with London Transport’s penchant for profligacy, one cannot be certain that logic prevailed. The only way to ascertain the facts would be by obtaining a history of the relevant body numbers. Unfortunately, Ian’s Bus Stop website, so often a valuable source of detail, does not have the histories of the later examples of the RT class, but one appreciates the magnitude of such a task.
Roger Cox
14/11/12 – 07:14
Thanks for the info Roger. The RTs are certainly a more fascinating breed than their standardised image would have us believe. I admit to having a real soft spot for them, as being brought up as a child in Airedale, they were in abundance on shopping trips to Bradford with Mum and Dad. Samuel Ledgard had a sizeable fleet of RTs (and some RTLs) in their classic blue and light grey livery, and Bradford CT also had twenty-five, the attractive livery of blue with cream window surrounds suiting them very well. The original livery applied to the RTs by BCT was fortunately short-lived, this consisting of all over blue, relieved by a cream band above the lower deck windows – in effect a blue version of LT livery. What was the transport department thinking of? Presumably the General Manager was on holiday for a fortnight when someone came up with that wheeze! As a youngster, I found the huge rear window on each deck of the RT so handsomely modern, and was captivated by the sound effects. The gently ‘knocking’ tickover of that quietly powerful 9.6 litre engine, the melodic pre-selector transmission, and the ‘chiff’ of the air brakes. Even the air-operated gearchange pedal made a noise. Wonderful!
Brendan Smith
14/11/12 – 10:30
You certainly live and learn when you read this site. As Brendan has pointed out, there’s a lot more to RTs than initially meets the eye. However, the discussion about rear axles leads me to ask which ones were fitted to Ledgard’s RTs. On the face of it, it would seem the country higher axle would have been a more suitable choice. Is this correct?
Roy Burke
14/11/12 – 14:05
I share every aspect of Brendan’s delight in having “known” the wonderful RTs, not only in this area but in their home territory as I had many relations in London and visited often. I must tell here a very sad but unfortunately true anecdote reflecting the total lack of interest and knowledge in the job by a huge proportion of drivers and conductors – mind you, understandable I suppose as most likely very few mill or factory workers spent their leisure hour drooling over a certain loom or lathe !! Now then back to Otley and Samuel Ledgard in 1963, and of course the last of the famous Sutton Depot “HGF” Daimler CWA6s (another fabulous family) had only just gone. I can remember making my way to the depot to start a late turn when, outside Woolworth’s in Kirkgate, I encountered one of our more cynical and constantly grumpy colleagues and was informed “Wait till you get to the garage – some more London garbage (polite word after editing) just arrived.” Well, its a wonder I wasn’t knocked down as I sped to the depot knowing full well what to expect, although there had been no announcements or rumours about such an acquisition. There on the forecourt, gurgling away contentedly, was RT 4611 NXP 864, still advertising all the delights of the West End. It was the first RT to enter service from Otley depot and was fairly promptly prepared in what was to become the standard treatment for the 34 RTs and 5 RTLs we were to enjoy eventually. The roof route number box was very professionally removed and the front destination display repanelled to show only our new standard (by then) rolls, and over the platform the glass was neatly masked to leave only the right area for the same version. the rear destination displays were totally removed, and professionally panelled so that no trace remained. Preparation for painting was to the usual incredibly high standard of which Arthur and Benny were very justifiably proud. Moving on now to a Saturday afternoon, late turn again, and “864” was parked in the garage, taxed all ready for the fray but probably not until Monday morning. My conductor was Eddy Busfield, who had been a University student on Summer part time employment but had “caught the enthusiast bug” and had stayed full time. We couldn’t resist after tea and approached the amenable shift garage man with “Can we PLEASE take the RT out ??” Being himself an Ex Pat Londoner he agreed at once, and so off we went like a couple of delighted infants :- 2010 Otley – Leeds 2055 Leeds – Otley 2150 Otley – Leeds 2235 Leeds – Otley Refuel of course on the “wrong” side but who cared – a bit of awkward manipulation was a small price to pay for a wonderful evening. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as the saying goes, and as more RTs arrived there were rarely if ever any more derogatory comments from those who “open their mouths before they put their brains in gear.” The RTs were rightly legendary and I also loved the RTLs with their different characteristics – wonderful tick over “wobbling” and Leyland “gargling.”
Chris Youhill
14/11/12 – 14:14
Elsewhere on this site, under an item dealing with the Ledgard RTs, Chris Youhill states that one of these machines LYR 915, is now preserved in its original Country Bus Dept livery. Let us know, Chris – were the others green on arrival at Ledgard’s?
Roger Cox
14/11/12 – 15:32
I can remember six operators in the area who had RT’s. Service coaches and Bedlington District, both based in Ashington, had them for miners services and as a result they tended not to be of the best of condition appearance wise. Moor Dale who used them for contract and school runs, they stayed in LT red, but the mudguards and cream centre band were painted blue, Armstrongs of Westerhope ‘who were taken over by T&W PTE and became Armstrong Galley’ they were a pale green colour, Lockeys of West Auckland. they were black and white, but best of all were OK of Bishop Auckland, the RT’s looked wonderful in their livery.
Ronnie Hoye
14/11/12 – 16:30
In another of his evocative posts, above Chris Y briefly mentions the ‘HGF’ Daimler CWA’s at Sutton Garage. I’ve mentioned LTE’s profligate ways before, but when time came for the ‘D’s to go, Merton’s were replace by RT’s, but Sutton’s were replaced by RTL’s. This, of course, required driver and fitter re-training and new workshop material. tooling, manuals etc. Just five months later, the RTL’s were replaced by RT’s! Unbelievable! My experience of the removal of the roof routebox on the generic RT class, was that it was usually done very badly, with pop rivets to the fore etc. SL did do a professional job, as Chris Y says.
Chris Hebbron
15/11/12 – 11:21
Roger, I’m not sure if any records were kept by enthusiasts as to what colour each RT was on arrival here, but certainly there was a mixture with plenty of both red and green. RT 4611, NXP 864, was definitely red as I saw in my delighted, nay rapturous, initial sighting mentioned above. Chris H, I’m astonished, well not really I suppose, to read your fascinating account of the Sutton RTL/RT farce. Although I was always a very great admirer of London Transport it has to be said that they were far too rigid in practices and habits in many ways.
Photograph by “unknown”if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.
This picture shows an immaculate newly prepared LYR 867 leaving the roof top park of Armley depot in a manner which could have seen the driver at the Labour Exchange (Job Centre to our younger friends) as a notice on the inner wall warned “ANY DRIVER LEAVING THE ROOF IN ONE SWEEP WILL BE DEALT WITH.” Unusually the rear wheels are visible and painted blue – the normal practice was for the wheel discs to be fitted. The high standard of painting and preparation can be seen, as can the almost imperceptible removal of the roof route number box.
Chris Youhill
15/11/12 – 17:01
I presume, Ronnie, that when you refer to ‘RTs’ you mean any of the RT ‘family’, i.e. RT/RTL/RTW. I’m pretty sure that OK didn’t have any RTs as such, they acquired eight RTLs (I think) when the first batch were released c1958, inherited a further two with the business of Anderson (Blue Belle) of Evenwood, and bought a single RTW in the mid-1960s. Lockey’s (one of my favourite operators) had one RT and two RTLs.
David Call
15/11/12 – 17:45
Stephenson’s of High Etherley certainly had an RTW and possibly an RTL.
John Stringer
16/11/12 – 07:28
That really is a superb photo, Chris Y and does the RT proud. SL’s livery well-suited these vehicles. I like the thought of the driver cocking a snoot at authority and to heck with the consequences! Maybe the RT’s had a better steering lock than other vehicles. Is that true?
Chris Hebbron
16/11/12 – 07:29
Stephenson’s had at least two RTLs, these were replaced by two RTWs in the mid-1960s, these then remained with Stephenson’s until its shares in a couple of stage services were sold to OK (c1970?) – the RTWs were not included in the deal, these were sold by Stephenson’s. I can’t remember what happened to the single-deck service bus – an AEC Reliance, I think.
David Call
16/11/12 – 11:14
One of Stephenson’s RTWs has been preserved in Stephenson’s livery and condition. During 2006 it spent some time at Ensigns – I think they might have been doing some work on it for the owner – and having a Class VI ticket was used on that year’s heritage services in Essex, seen here in Old Harlow on route 622.
Michael Wadman
16/11/12 – 14:42
Yes, David, RT type rather than RT. As a youngster I seldom ventured South of the Tyne, so the only time I actually saw any of OK’s buses was when they were used on the Bishop Auckland/Newcastle service, or, as often happened during the summer, they descended on mass to the coast at Whitley Bay carrying hoards of Children on working mens club outings, but that’s no excuse for poor research on my part. In my defence, I can remember that some of the Bedlington District RT’s were MXX registrations and had roof box indicators, and the Moor Dale pair had Leyland radiators and were KGU 60 and LUC 355 – presumably RTL’s, sorry but I don’t know how many or what type were used by Armstrong’s of Westerhope, but they did have at least one of the breed.
Ronnie Hoye
17/11/12 – 07:01
I think a bit of confusion has crept in here. The Stephenson Brothers which John Stringer refers to was the operator in the Bishop Auckland area who sold their services to OK in 1970. They had a couple of RTL’s and an RTW and used a blue livery. The yellow and black RTW was owned by STEVENSONS of Uttoxeter, Staffs. They ultimately sold out to Arriva and curiously, many Arriva Midlands vehicles still carry legal lettering which states; Stevensons of Uttoxeter t/a Arriva!
Chris Barker
17/11/12 – 07:02
Stevenson’s (with the yellow livery) were based at Spath, just outside Uttoxeter – a very old-established operator running services mainly in the Uttoxeter/Burton area. They eventually sold out to Arriva (or, perhaps, one of its predecessors, I’m not sure now), c1992. One notable event in its history was the takeover (in the run-up to bus deregulation) of the services of East Staffordshire District Council (previously Burton-on-Trent Corporation). Like Stephenson’s, they ran both RTLs and RTWs (more of the former, I think). There is a page on Stevenson’s on this very website.
David Call
18/11/12 – 12:16
In reply to Chris H’s question about steering lock on the RTs I’m afraid I’ve really no idea. I suppose it is indeed possible but on balance I wouldn’t have thought too likely – so probably another thing we shall never know. Likewise, I never got to the bottom of the thinking behind that sinister notice inside the Armley Depot rooftop wall. I never worked from there, other than one morning taking my PSV test from within the main premises, as I was always at Otley garage and its nearby Ilkley “sub depot.” I can only imagine that if a bus was parked in the front corner near the gateway an exit in “one sweep” would put the vehicle right up to the far pavement in the residential street outside, as in this picture. The Depot has long since disappeared under a major new road most reverently named “LEDGARD WAY” but the houses still remain, sadly in a most reprehensible state due to resident neglect, but that’s a social matter not for further comment here.
Chris Youhill
24/11/12 – 14:21
Oh, dear, sorry about that: getting my Stephenson’s and Stevenson’s mixed up. I really ought to know better than to venture into that strange land north of Watford of which I know little!!
Michael Wadman
02/12/12 – 14:10
Here is Stephenson’s of High Etherley, Co. Durham KLB 948. New to London Transport as their RTW 218 in 1/50 and withdrawn by them in 4/65, it passed to Stephenson’s via the dealer Bird’s of Stratford upon Avon. I photographed it on a tour of Co. Durham independents in late Summer, 1969. Note the mis-spelled advert !
John Stringer
03/12/12 – 14:04
It’s amazing how obvious that extra six inches on RTW’s was, compared with 7′ 6″ wide RTL’s. Internally, it gave an extra 4″ in the aisle and they put a 1″ spacer between seat end and bus side for extra shoulder room. You seem, John, to be cursed in the same way as me, the ability to spot a spelling error, instantly, at 100yds (almost literally in this case!).
Chris Hebbron
01/04/13 – 12:51
Just as a matter of interest; the reason the top pic on route 140 has an old blind at the front is because by 1976 the writing was on the wall for RTs and LT stopped making specific blinds for them. So garages started using any thing RT to hand then RM blinds if available. If you look at pics from the seventies you see them starting to creep in. Standards were starting to drop by then.
Danny Robins
01/04/13 – 16:28
The 140 blind is not necessarily an old one. It is actually one from the rear blind box/the nearside rear above the platform. These had the numeral above the via points and were able to fit in the front via blind box of RTs. As you say, such scenes would never have been countenanced during the heyday of RTs, when almost everything was correct. But towards the end, a wrongly sized blind showing the right information, was better than, No blind at all.
Petras409
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
07/01/15 – 09:40
The caption/text to this bus gives 1954 as entry into service. According Ken Blacker’s book RT – Story Of A London Bus, this vehicle did not enter service until June 1959, when it was delivered in green livery to Epping (EP) bus garage, some 5 years later.
Paddy John
08/01/15 – 15:24
A significant number of later RTs delivered in 1954 were not needed for service immediately, and were put into store. This was in spite of LT selling off many non-standard types and utilities in this period, such as the 65 post-war STDs to Yugoslavia, amongst others. Presumably increased traffic needs or other withdrawals of older stock (pre-war RTs to the training school?) allowed their preparation for licensing and service. There are probably lists somewhere of the RT’s which were stored for this five-year period.
London Transport 1948 AEC Regent III RT Weymann H56R
Here is a view of JXN 46, RT1081 1018 (see below) in full London Country NBC livery. She’s on parade in the Weymouth rally on 1 July 1979. She dates from 1948 and has a Weymann H56R body. At the time of the photograph, she was still in service – mainly on training duties – but is now preserved.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
17/02/14 – 07:57
I have been privileged to drive for a number of years for Peter Cartwright and Amersham & District on their running days. The Watford – Hemel section of the 302 has featured regularly for the annual August Hemel Running Day. March 30 sees the first Watford event. I’m hoping to be driving in the afternoon. Say hello if you’re there.
David Oldfield
23/02/14 – 15:24
Think you’ll find that JXN 46 is RT1018 not 1081. Used to drive it when I worked out of Tring in the early ’70s. It used to belong to Mike Lloyd of Wigan. Not sure if he’s still got it.
Keith Williams
24/02/14 – 07:46
It is indeed RT 1018, not 1081. I bought it in September 1981, and yes, I do indeed still have it. That photo was taken at Weymouth Bus Rally 1st July 1979. This was the bus’s first-ever rally and it was still owned by LCBS at the time. We rallied it from Hemel Hempstead Garage for a couple of years, then when it was withdrawn, I bought it. Of course, I didn’t live in Wigan in those days. It is currently having a bit of re-restoration, which it is entitled to after 32 years in preservation.
Mike Lloyd
25/02/14 – 06:54
Hi Mike. Pleased to know you’ve still got 1018. Can you tell me if you’re going to rally her again after her re-restoration. If so ,where? Love to see her again after all these years. Seems we’ve all moved north as I’m in Crewe now.
Keith Williams
26/02/14 – 12:08
Appologizz for the triping eeroar! I must check more carefully in future.
Pete Davies
15/09/14 – 06:57
I was just doing a bit of research on this bus, my late father Barry Neave was pictured with it sometime back in the 80’s I believe. Was just really interested in where it was and what it was doing, is it still being restored?
Celina Neave
18/09/14 – 07:50
I don’t visit this page often, so sorry for delayed reply to Keith. When she is back on the road I shall certainly take her to rallies now and then; however, restoration is proving long-drawn-out because of time constraints so I can’t say when it will be. The bus is kept at the North West Museum of Road Transport at St Helens these days but is not on display, obviously, because it’s in the workshops.
Celina – very sorry to hear that Barry is now “the late.” He was a part-time driving instructor at Hemel Hempstead and RT 1018 was “his” bus for that purpose. He was a great help, visiting other bus garages and scrounging spare parts for the bus, some of which I still have. I have loads of pics of the bus working as a trainer, but not sure if Barry is in any of them because normally he would be sitting in the saloon giving advice and instruction to the driver, so you couldn’t see him in photos. I may possibly have one of him at a rally somewhere, although he didn’t always accompany us. See above for where the bus is now, and yes, it is still under restoration – mainly things I had not restored previously, of course. Rest assured, she’s in good hands. I wouldn’t part with her for anything, having known her since 1959.
Mike Lloyd
22/09/14 – 07:12
Thank you so much for the reply Mike it meant a lot to hear some more information about dad and the busses, it was his life. If you did have any pictures of dad with the bus they would be more than gratefully received, my mum Gloria had the picture we have as I think she accompanied dad on the rally? I’d love to come and see the bus, or maybe when it’s on rally again. Thank you so much again.
Celina
04/11/14 – 17:21
Looking at this posting of RT 1018 sent me scurrying to an old photo album where I found this photo taken in the yard beside Victoria Garage [GM] round about 1950/51 when this RT had worked a relief Green Line in from St.Albans. I cannot swear to it being 1018, it could be 1013 as the writing on the back has faded plus I am standing in front of the number plate but thought it might be of interest.
Graham Crockett
26/11/14 – 06:18
This is the picture I have of dad with the bus.
Celina
16/01/15 – 09:03
Here is a photo I took of RT1018 possibly at a Cobham rally in the 90’s.
G Crockett
19/01/15 – 12:11
Re the photo taken of the RT at Victoria (GM) Garage Yard around 1950/51. 04/11/14 at 17:21 posted above by Graham Crockett. It would be RT 1013 as the batch RT 1005-RT 1014 were allocated from new to St Albans (SA) RT 1005-RT 1011 had roof route boxes whereas RT 1012-RT 1014 had the route number box in the lower down position. I was living in Albans at that time.
M Horan
21/01/15 – 15:17
Picture taken of RT 1018 in 1980 at possibly Southend Rally.
G Crockett
29/03/15 – 18:01
Celine Neave Your dad was a well respected by all. When I first started at Two Waters he was helpful to me and I have never forgotten that.
David Jenkins
07/06/15 – 06:27
I also remember 1018 from it`s days at Tring in the 70`s. I was there until it closed in `77, then went to Amersham. I may be wrong, but I seem to remember we had an RT that had an RF type steering wheel, and I think it was 1018. I also remember David Jenkins, especially when he was made up to inspector.
Brian Keating
08/07/15 – 05:39
If there was an RT with an RF steering wheel it certainly wasn’t 1018. 1018 returned to Hemel as a training bus and had an RT wheel, which of course she still does. I do not think you could actually fit an RF steering wheel to an RT as the columns are different. I remember David Jenkins, too. Sorry to say I have not so far found any pics of Barry Neave with the bus, although it was his regular vehicle. I’ll keep looking.
Mike Lloyd
06/02/17 – 10:27
Was it not one of the 34 that were sold onto LT and ended up in Norbiton Garage for the 65 till RT’s ended on 16th Oct 1975? Maybe I am confused with the passage of time.
George Chmielewski
16/03/17 – 06:24
No, it most certainly did not pass to LT. It was the first LCBS RT to be overhauled and painted into NBC green, at which time it worked from Chelsham. There were four others, two training buses (subsequently scrapped) and RTs 604 and 3461, also now preserved. 1018 was also the only one to receive a repaint into NBC green, but now it is back in its proper livery – Lincoln green.
Mike Lloyd
27/03/18 – 06:50
Happy memories of RT 1018 at rallies in the 80’s Woburn showbus etc. I hope all of the Lloyds and 1018 keeping well? Might have to pay a visit if at St Helens as mentioned in previous comments.
Mark Richardson
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
06/12/18 – 12:22
Hello Mark, didn’t see your comment until just now as I don’t visit this page very often. Yes thanks, we are all well, although the RT is in need of skilled surgery to her nearside lower deck after 37 years in preservation. I am getting on with this as time permits and she is getting better slowly. She is still in the museum at St Helens, but not on display as she is in the workshop which is not open to the public for reasons of safety. If you do come, check first that we are open (we close after Christmas until February for cleaning, maintenance and the like. If you visit on a Sunday I shall be there and I can take you up to see the workshop and the bus. It’s a long time since she was at Woburn or anywhere else for that matter, having been stored now for many years.
London Transport 1949 AEC Regent III RT Craven H30/26R
After operational trials with the revolutionary new chassis during 1938, initially equipped with a 1932 vintage open staircase ST body, the RT prototype re-appeared in August 1939 with an advanced all metal body of very graceful appearance built by Chiswick. An order was placed for 150 of the modern double decker, which was almost immediately raised to 338, with production of 527 each year from 1940 onwards being intended, though the ultimate envisaged total is not recorded. Then came WW2 and the sudden curtailment of bus production, though the order for the first 150 was completed. These, however, had Chiswick built composite bodies, presumably to conserve metal consumption during the hostilities, and the the last example entered service in 1942. With the end of the war, the RT programme was reactivated by AEC in 1946, by which time the chassis design had undergone several improvements, notably in the engine which now had toroidal cavity pistons increasing the maximum output from 100 bhp to 125 bhp, though LT derated this to 115 bhp in the interests of economy and extended life. The jig built metal framed bodywork programme for the RT took a while to establish, and the first postwar RT chassis from 1946 went to provincial operators who equipped them with standard contemporary bodies from their own suppliers. The LT RTs began appearing from 1947 with bodywork by Park Royal and Weymann, but chassis deliveries began seriously to outpace those of the bodywork manufacturers. In 1948, anxious to update its tired pre war fleet, LT turned to other bodywork constructors, selecting Saunders-Roe and Craven to make up the deficit. The Saunders body was metal framed using the firm’s own cruciform pillar design, but the end result outwardly resembled the standard Park Royal/Weymann product very closely. Indeed, the Saunders body was held by LT engineers to be of superior constructional quality, and, although Saunders received a second order for 50, making 300 in total, the unforeseen sharp decline in bus travel from the early 1950s meant that no others were built. The 120 Craven bodies were very different, being simply that manufacturer’s standard design married up to the RT cab and bonnet. The bespoke mountings meant that these bodies were not interchangeable with other RT chassis and this entire batch had to be overhauled separately at Aldenham. They were delivered between September 1948 and April 1950, the first twenty seven being painted green for the Country Bus & Coach department, and allocated to Watford and Windsor depots. The rest were red for Central Bus operation, and their allocation was spread about in seemingly random fashion. Ironically, from 1949, the supply situation went into reverse. RT chassis production could not keep up with the increased bodywork deliveries, and London Transport embarked upon the futile and very costly course of modifying some late STL chassis to accept standard RT bodies. Thus was born the SRT class which proved to be pitifully under powered with the 7.7 engine and dangerously under braked. After a service life of about four years they were all withdrawn, the chassis being scrapped, and the bodies transferred to new RT chassis. As bus patronage declined during the 1950s LT found itself with a significant fleet surplus of vehicles, large numbers of brand new RT and RTL deliveries going straight into store. (This, however, did not deter LT from investing heavily in its new Routemaster for which, at the time, there was no operational necessity.) With large numbers of new RTs and RTLs waiting to take to the road, the non standard Craven RT fleet was earmarked for early withdrawal and most went into store during 1955/6, only for twenty red examples to be repainted green for Country Area service in March/April/May 1956. They did not last long, being withdrawn again between one and four months later, the expensive repainting exercise being yet another example of LT profligacy. At merely six to eight years old, the Craven RTs, became bargain purchases on the secondhand market, going on to serve their new owners for up to a further thirteen years, proof, indeed, that the Craven body design was entirely sound. RT 1431 was delivered to LT in May 1949 and sold out of stock on 30 April 1956 to the dealer, Bird’s of Stratford upon Avon, being very quickly bought by a member of the Ardrossan A1 Service, who ran it for ten years. Early in 1966 this bus was secured for preservation, and the picture shows it at Brighton during the 1970 HCVC Rally. The destination display has been reduced to represent the situation that prevailed in the early 1950s when linen for bus blinds was in short supply. Since 2004, RT 1431 has been a member of the Ensignbus fleet.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
06/07/21 – 05:59
I always found the flatter and less rounded sides of the Craven RTs front to be more attractive than the standard RT body, but the rear was pure Cravens, with its curved upper deck, lower window and number plate positions. RT 1 was initially given the Christopher Dodson body of ex-City Leyland Titan TD111, dating from 1931. It then became ST1140; all very confusing!
Here are two photos of ST1140, which are quite rare
Chris Hebbron
07/07/21 – 05:58
I just like them as buses – but equally like the “standard” RT design. The Cravens were my favourites of the 100 9612Es delivered to Sheffield Transport between 1947 and 1950. They were among the last in 1949/50. Good looking buses with a long life. Excellent though they were, the Weymanns had a permanent scowl which detracted from their appearance. Strangely enough, the lowbridge version (eg RLHs) had a more balanced and appealing appearance – not a thing said very often of lowbridge buses.
David Paul Oldfield
25/07/21 – 07:18
I believe that fitting the old body onto the new RT1 and disguising it as ST1140 was with the intention of fooling competitors into thinking that it was just another old London type. But as the body came from a TD class, which was filled with various acquired Leyland TD1s [and some TD2s?], I wonder how much modification was needed to make it fit? The wheelbase would surely have been different, yet the image above of ST1140 as fitted does not look out of proportion, or crude in any way. This must have been rather an expensive refit for such a short time before the modern body was fitted.
Michael Hampton
26/07/21 – 07:09
Good points, Michael. The Leyland TD1/TD2 was the largest class taken over from the independents by London Transport, not far short of 200. The almost new ones from 1931/33 had modern bodies by Christopher Dodson/Birch Bros. Many of the class finished up with Liverpool Corporation, painted grey and used for ferrying employees to/from sensitive sites. Incidentally, I’ve found another, poor, but mystery, photo of ST1140, posing as some sort of mobile unit, with spats on rear wheels, plus front side lights with reduced lighting area: wartime mode. Yet RT1 was in service with its new body, pre-war, in mid 1939!!
Chris Hebbron
27/07/21 – 06:37
Several interesting comments here, and thanks, Chris, for those pictures of AEC/LPTB’s ‘Q ship’, ST1140, surely devised to fool the competition (Leyland) whilst the new chassis was being tested in service. As Michael has hinted, the disguise of an old open staircase body from a TD1 might well have been decided by the wheelbase. The early Regents of the ST class had a wheelbase of 15ft. 6.5 ins, which was slightly curious because Rackham had only just left Leyland where his new TD1 Titan had been designed with a wheelbase nearly a foot longer at 16ft. 6ins. From 1932 the Regent had a wheelbase of 16ft. 3ins, but none of the later LPTB examples had such elderly looking bodywork that must surely have been deliberately chosen to camouflage the new beast. The new RT chassis – certainly not yet known as the Regent III – had a wheelbase of 16ft. 4ins, for which the old Dodson body must have been adaptable. Chris’s latest picture is a bit of a puzzle because RT1 was fitted with its new Chiswick built body in April 1939, so what is it up to in that photo? The threat of war had been hanging over Britain certainly since 1938 when huge production of war material such as Hurricanes, Spitfires and bombers was initiated, so perhaps ST1140 was used in its final days as a test bed for wartime specifications.
Roger Cox
27/07/21 – 06:39
Actually, now that all three photos are together, and comparison of the first two with the bottom one is possible, it is quite clear that the body on bottom photo is quite different, bearing all the hallmarks of a Tilling/Dodson body from an ex-Tilling ST, some of which started to be withdrawn in the immediate pre-war period. Although body sag might not have been apparent on these frail bodies in 1939, there is no trace of it, nevertheless. What’s all this about???
Chris Hebbron
29/07/21 – 06:25
Thank you Roger for your note on the wheelbase dimensions of the related chassis here. I can quite see how the two inches difference between a TD1 and the RT prototype would be quite easily dealt with in LT’s workshop without showing any obvious crudity. No doubt it was written up as a “research and development” expense, along with everything else that was involved. I had thought that there would have been a very different wheelbase dimension between a TD1 and an RT – but my assumptions have been proved wrong! I was surprised by the difference between the first Regents and the TD1, as they were more or less contemporary in design and production. That seems even more puzzling, but no doubt it’s another story to be told on another occasion.
Michael Hampton
11/08/21 – 05:45
It’s worth noting that RT1’s new Chiswick body had a seating capacity of H29/26R suggesting that it would have breeched the gross vehicle weight limit in force at that time if the standard H39/26R capacity was used. The gross vehicle weight limit was relaxed during the war and again after the war.
Michael Elliott
17/08/21 – 06:30
I had not thought of it before, but some years ago it was pointed out to me that timber/composite rames were heavier than metal. The “Prewar” RT1-150 were of composite construction, unlike the post war bodies. It is likely that they might be heavier and that certification require fewer seats.
David Oldfield
18/08/21 – 05:52
You are probably generally right about the weight of timber frames versus metal frames. But I have a feeling that in the case of the RT family, the “pre-war” ones, [RT2-151] were actually lighter than the post-war version. I have a memory that some of the pre-war machines were kept in service for a longer period than most of the batch due to their allocation for a route over a weight-limited bridge or similar structure. The post-war ones deemed as too heavy. I cannot now remember what route it was, but think it was the outer London suburbs, north of the Thames. I assume that the offending structure was rebuilt or the route diverted when the time came to withdraw these last few pre-war RTs.
Michael Hampton
21/08/21 – 06:15
It was Country Area route 327 that used them.
Ian Mason
22/08/21 – 06:22
Yes, Ian is correct. The Hertford garage based 327 route between Nazeing and Broxbourne crossed a weak bridge over the railway. This service was one of the last strongholds of the postwar STL class until they were displaced in May 1955 by seven wartime RTs, with engineering backup from a couple of others, one in red livery, that served as trainers but still had full psv certification. The Chiswick composite constructed body of the wartime RT had an unladen weight of 6 tons 15 cwt, significantly less than the 7 tons 10 cwt of the Park Royal or Weymann bodied standard RT. When the bridge was suitably reinforced, these RTs were withdrawn in August 1957. I acknowledge Ian’s Bus Stop for padding out my memory with accurate dates.
Roger Cox
22/08/21 – 06:23
There were seven of them, RTs 36, 62, 79, 93, 114, 128 and 137, nicknamed “The Magnificent Seven!”. They were all re-painted into green and based at Hertford Garage from 1955 to 1957. Some had full blinds, even the route number box, but some had one-piece ex-STL blinds. All, bar one, lasted until 1963, some finishing as learner vehicles or as Aldenham hacks. Postwar RTs weighed in at 7.5 tons if memory serves, but the wartime ones were definitely lighter.
Chris Hebbron
25/08/21 – 05:52
Here’s a photo of Green RT 128, fully blinded, on route 327.
Chris Hebbron
03/10/21 – 17:23
The vehicle shown in Chris Hebbron’s picture of 26 July is not RT1 (aka ST1140) with its Dodson body. It is an early postwar 3RT chassis, 0961079, new in 1947 which was used as a training chassis for, I believe, the depot engineers. Because chassis production at the time was outstripping body production, it was evidently decided to use a secondhand body, and the Tilling body from ST977 was fitted. The vehicle was known by its chassis number and never had a Service Vehicle number. It lasted in this role until 1953 when the body was scrapped and the chassis emerged with a new Weymann body in 1954 as RT4761. However it was stored until 1958 and the chassis was eleven years old when it finally entered passenger service.
Basil Hancock
05/10/21 – 06:12
Thanks, Basil, for clearing up the mystery of my 26th July posting. What an extraordinary history of the chassis, taking 11 years before it finally appeared in revenue-earning service as RT4761 And a Tilling ST body fitted here without any sag!!
Chris Hebbron
06/10/21 – 06:19
RM8 took even longer, not entering passenger service until 1976 when it was 18 years old. This made it the last rear entrance and the last half-cab double decker to enter service in the UK, although it was not exactly new at the time. And just to add to the statistics, Chiswick Experimental RT3995 only operated in passenger service for three months before becoming Chiswick’s new toy. Even Merlins and Fleetlines lasted longer than that.
Here are two photos of the former Chiswick Experimental RT3995 in service with Spencers in High Wycombe on 3 November 1969. I am not sure who did the rear end modification, but it looks quite professional so it might have been LT themselves.
Basil Hancock
07/10/21 – 06:27
Interesting about RM8, Basil. RT3995 looks very well turned-out, but looks a little odd with that style of enclosed platform. Thx again for letting us know about these sorts of oddities, otherwise lost over the years.
Chris Hebbron
10/10/21 – 19:27
RT1431 was strutting her stuff between Dorking and Putney Heath on the 93 running day yesterday (9 October) – along with RT1 and sundry other members of the RT and RM class. RTs predominated and most of the buses were “showroom” condition – a testament to the hard work and care lavished on them by their owners. I’ve said it before but, Three cheers to the preservationists who continue to make these events possible.
David Oldfield
11/10/21 – 20:26
Wish I could’ve gone, David. Living at Morden until 1956, the 93 was our long-distance through-route, initially served exclusively by 1RT1s, but Sutton’s D’s would later put in an appearance and Merton’s STL’s and D’s would appear on the Summer Sunday extension from Morden to Dorking, when I’d persuade my mum to splash out for a ride into the country and green buses! In those days, that whole journey was in Surrey!
London Transport 1952 AEC Regent III 9613E Weymann L53R
Just a short contribution but I thought you may be interested in the above shots of ex London Transport RLH 32 which looked a real treat at the Oxford bus rally last Sunday 16th October. As you can see it is still in the Samuel Ledgard livery which it received in 2007 for the 40th Anniversary of the Samuel Ledgard Society Re-enactment running day on Sunday 14th October of that year. The vehicle has been owned by Time Bus Travel of St. Albans since 1997 fortunately it narrowly escaped being converted into a mobile home in 1975
Ah, the RLH, one of my favourites! Looking forward to seeing RLH 48 later today at Cobham/Brooklands Museum’s first major event at the new museum site. RLH 32 will gladden the heart of Chris Y.
David Oldfield
23/10/11 – 11:27
……and it gladdens my heart to see one, too, David, since I recall them, in my three years spent in London, running on the South Wimbledon circular 127 route. The strange thing is, that although they were originally bound for Midland General, I have never actually seen a photo of one in that company’s livery. It certainly looks smart in SL’s livery, though. Nice post!
Chris Hebbron
23/10/11 – 11:30
I had the honour, and I mean that most seriously, of conducting RLH 32 all day and evening on the day of the Samuel Ledgard commemoration – the beautifully restored vehicle represented the four RLHs which Samuel Ledgard operated (RLH2/4/6/8). Free public journeys, massively supported, were operated on Ledgard routes. I wore my genuine uniform which I’ve kept all these years, and used Setright machine SL 40 (I bought it some years ago) and real SL tickets. The day was even more memorable for me, as it was fifty years almost to the day since I started work as an eager young conductor in October 1957. SL 40 was also at our Otley and Ilkley depots throughout its existence. Just to add the final touch of nostalgia to the day preserved ex Bristol Leyland PD1/ECW LAE 13 was present – my first Ledgard bus in passenger service when I started driving in 1961 was LAE 12 !! Its scarcely possible to express sufficiently our gratitude to the gentlemen Messrs Pring for their expensive and superb restoration of MXX 232 and for bringing it all the way north to star in the Day’s events. You can see me in my smart conductors uniform and a shot of RLH 32 whilst way up north at this link.
Chris Youhill
24/10/11 – 07:44
Brooklands was the “very best of London Buses” – and it certainly was. Everything seemed to be in showroom shine condition and there was an excellent cross section of vehicles with a good route network. …..and yes, RL48 was in excellent condition and on top form out on the road. Chris H – I’m not sure any of them actually got to Midland General. They, along with Notts & Derbys, got some rather splendid KSW6G/ECW instead in 1953. They weren’t AEC/Weymann but they rather fine nonetheless.
David Oldfield
24/10/11 – 07:45
Lovely photos. The Weymann bodied Regent III was certainly a classic and an all time favourite of mine. I travelled home from school daily on Rochdale’s highbridge versions in the early 60’s. Just also noticed the Ford 100E behind in both views was exactly like my first car, a 1956 model acquired in 1965 – ah nostalgia!
Philip Halstead
24/10/11 – 13:44
Here is a picture of RLH 32 taken in 1970 at Woking early in London Country days. It was then allocated to Addlestone Garage, but it didn’t last much longer with LCBS as it was withdrawn in July 1970. The Ledgard RLHs were Nos 2,4,6 and 8, KYY 502/4/6/8, which arrived at Armley between December 1964 and February 1965.
Roger Cox
25/10/11 – 06:55
Nice to see the bus in Woking, Roger C, a place I had and still have connexions with. They were based not just at Addlestone, but also Guildford Garage, but many of the routes didn’t need lowbridge vehicles at all. always felt that the red livery suited them best. My understanding, David O, was that Midland General ordered thirty, but only took ten in the end, the other twenty going to LTE.
Chris Hebbron
25/10/11 – 06:59
RLH 2/4/6/8/ were purchased by Ledgard specifically for the Horsforth to Otley services, operated from Yeadon Depot, which required lowbridge vehicles. Funny though how “needs must”, and on Saturday nights Otley depot operated three dance specials from Ilkley Town Hall, one of which was to Yeadon. Allocation of drivers for these appeared on the typewritten weekly master sheet at Otley and Ilkley Depots and in red block letters was shown as :-
DOUBLE DECK – KEEP TO CENTRE OF ROAD UNDER HENSHAW BRIDGE !!
Chris Youhill
25/10/11 – 07:01
I’m afraid this subject always arouses a little hostility in me because I never seem to see these vehicles ascribed correctly. In 1948, Midland General ordered thirty of these vehicles but it was decreed by the British Transport Commission that ten would have to suffice and when they were delivered in 1950, being registered ONU 630-639, the remaining twenty were diverted to London Transport. Midland General received payment from LT for them. The correct description should therefore be (in my opinion!) ‘London Transport’s Midland General type Regents’ Alas, I don’t hold out much hope of this but I’m as nostalgic about one sadly missed blue operator as Chris Y is about another!
Chris Barker
25/10/11 – 07:02
Before being taken over by the BTC, Midland General ordered 30 Regent/Weymann lowbridge buses when they only needed 10, in the hope of staving off the Bristol invasion for as long as possible. BTC was having none of this, and diverted 20 to London Transport, where they became the first 20 RLHs. That left 10 at Midland General, one of which is seen here //www.sct61.org.uk/mg426.htm
Peter Williamson
25/10/11 – 11:34
I believe there were one or two routes in the Chesterfield/Alfreton area that required lowbridge buses. In addition the B8, Nottingham – Mansfield (by a peculiar circuitous route) also required them on account of a railway bridge near Bestwood Colliery. Despite being deprived of the remaining 20 lowbridge Regents, I think I am right in saying that no Bristols reached Midland General until the Lodekkas in 1954. The 15 KSW6Gs delivered in 1953 were actually designated Notts & Derby Traction, to replace trolleybuses on the A1 Nottingham – Ripley service. Actually, when the trolleybuses were withdrawn, the A1 (via Basford) ceased to be the main Riply service, and the KSWs operated on the parallel B1 (via Bobbersmill), displacing, in the main, highbridge preselector Regent IIIs of around 1949 vintage.
Stephen Ford
25/10/11 – 11:35
One of my not very good shots I’m afraid the original is very very dark but it is in colour.
Peter
26/10/11 – 05:50
Thx, folks, for the full story (with link and colour photo) of these interesting buses. How different the MG ones look from their LTE cousins, with different destination display, upstairs roof ventilators and square number plate below windscreen. LTE did not change the side windows from the sliding version, though. I only saw MG vehicles when visiting relatives in Chesterfield and don’t recall seeing these at all. MG buses seemed to lurk in this town. Maybe, from the brief glimpses of their vehicles, I didn’t recognise them for what they were.
Chris Hebbron
26/10/11 – 15:51
It occurs to me that although Midland General became a constituent part of BTC in 1948 (and failed in its ploy to stave off Bristols for as long as possible!) it managed to keep its livery for many years. What other BTC companies, if any, retained their individual liveries? I exclude London Transport.
Chris Hebbron
26/10/11 – 16:53
MG was part of Balfour Beattie – who of course still exist in transport infrastructure (i.e. railways). They generated their own electricity for Notts and Derby and were thereby nationalised under the nationalisation of the power industry. It has not occurred to me until this recent post that MG had deliberately over ordered so that they could have as many of their beloved AEC/Weymanns as possible. [Pity they were rumbled.] Red and White and Cheltenham and District were also Balfour Beattie and retained their own distinctive liveries until NBC days – just that reds and whites didn’t stick out so much. Even so, there was still a greater element of freedom of liveries with BTC/Tilling than with NBC. [United and Crosville coach liveries not to mention Brighton and Hove.]
David Oldfield
26/10/11 – 17:48
With respect, I don’t think that the Red and White group of companies was associated with Balfour Beatty. Balfour Beatty certainly owned Notts and Derby, Midland General and Mansfield and District, but Red and White United Transport was a separate group which included, apart from Red and White’s own services, those of Cheltenham District, Newbury and District, South Midland, United Welsh and Venture of Basingstoke. The group sold out its British bus operations to the BTC in 1950, but retained its overseas interests under the name United Transport Company, until it disposed of these to the BET group in 1971.
Roger Cox
26/10/11 – 18:20
Glad my photos of RLH32 have given pleasure. I was particularly interested in Roger’s photo of RLH32 working out of Addlestone Garage (WY). In the late’60s, I was working at Plessey Radar in Addlestone and spent many a happy lunch hour around the garage. I am sure I must have seen her then, but regrettably have no photos.
Allan Machon
27/10/11 – 07:23
I have a feeling that the Red & White Group were always independent until voluntarily selling out to the BTC – how they must have cursed, because they were (to the best of my knowledge) the last company to succumb (at least voluntarily) before the Labour Government fell. Cheltenham District were owned by Balfour Beatty until Red & White bought them out a short time before the outbreak of war. It was stupid of me to have forgotten about C & D, which were on my doorstep. As you say, David O, they didn’t stick out so much (and I’m colour-blind)!
Chris Hebbron
27/10/11 – 07:24
Cheltenham District had been a Balfour Beatty company but was sold to the Red & White group in 1939. Another BB company was Llanelli & District which was absorbed by South Wales in 1952. Interesting comments about the ordering of these vehicles, Midland General had some very lucrative services and also some very hilly routes. Perhaps the thought of fully loaded buses going up steep hills led them to conclude that the 9.6 litre Regent was a better prospect than what they were destined to receive from Bristol!
Chris Barker
27/10/11 – 12:08
Yes, Midland General can’t have been over-impressed by their first experience of Bristols – in my earlier posting I had forgotten that in 1953 they received three second hand lowbridge K5Gs from Hants & Dorset (two 1939 and one 1940 vintage). Thrashing one of them up the hill from Langley Mill to Heanor market place would have been a slow and noisy experience! About 1963, the 7.7 litre crash gearbox Regent IIs only came out on Saturdays on the Nottingham – Alfreton run (B3/C5). Yet I recall hearing a driver express his strong preference even for these over the everyday Lodekkas. His comment was, “Put one of these [Regents] in first and it’ll climb up the side of a house.”
Stephen Ford
30/10/11 – 06:26
I was always told that Red and White was started by the Watts family who I believe are still in business as tyre fitters.
Philip Carlton
30/10/11 – 17:35
Correct: Watts of Lydney, Glos., are a very large tyre company with a global presence,including aircraft, fork lift truck and industrial tyres.
Chris Hebbron
23/03/12 – 06:46
Reading Chris’s story about drivers of double deckers being strongly advised to keep to the centre of the road under a certain bridge reminded me of at least one other notice. When much younger I liked to sit in the seat behind the driver, I was fascinated by a notice in the cab of Maidstone & District double deckers which read ” This a highbridge double decker not to be driven into Bexhill, Sittingbourne or Tenterden garages”. As none of the local companies operated lowbridge buses in the area I was at that time unsure of the difference between the two types this being around 65 years ago. I know that at a later date an extension was built onto Bexhill garage to allow highbridge buses into that part only, I only drove coaches into Tenterden garage so I am sure if any alterations were made there and never even saw Sittingbourne garage
Diesel Dave
23/03/12 – 16:38
London Transport had to pick their bus garages carefully when they received their austerity buses during the war, as they were taller than the usual LT spec. Their garages were inherited from a motley collection of past companies and fortunately some had high-enough entrances to cater for them. Most Guys finished up in East London and most Daimlers in Merton/Sutton Garages.
Chris Hebbron
26/05/12 – 07:01
This might be one for Chris Youhill (who’s postings I’ve followed on other sites): why work for Ledgard’s, as opposed to LCT, BCT or WYRCC? I suppose location might be a factor: only Ledgard had a depot in Otley or Yeadon, but in Bradford surely BCT offered better working conditions? Similarly in Ilkley wouldn’t WYRCC have offered better conditions than Ledgard? And couldn’t Armley-based staff have travelled on the frequent LCT services to LCT’s Bramley depot? WYRCC/BCT/LCC all ran more modern fleets . . . What was it that tied staff to Ledgard’s? And, for that matter, why did staff in any town with both a company and “corpo” depot (Halifax for example) choose the former over the latter – location of depots? or what??
Philip Rushworth
26/05/12 – 09:30
Well there’s another cat put among the pigeons, Philip!
David Oldfield
26/05/12 – 16:48
While Chris Y is getting steam up (for which I am waiting with baited breath!), I’ll throw in my pennyworth. All sorts of reasons. Leaving aside the political “labour/public versus conservative/private” debate, different operators created different impressions and reputations for themselves. “Xyz is a lousy company and I wouldn’t work for them if they were the last employer on earth” etc. You will know from my comments elsewhere that I was a fan of Nottingham City Transport – it always seemed efficient and competent, and its buses were usually well-kept – even the older ones. BUT NCT had a reputation – they waited for nobody. With the conductor on the platform, they would ring off with you no more than three paces away, and a pre-selector Regent , second gear engaged and held only on the footbrake would take off like a greyhound. You stood no chance! Barton’s on the other hand, and South Notts too, would wait for any runners, and their conductors were generally more considerate, helping with pushchairs, luggage etc. Obviously there is more scope to re-coup time on longer interurban journeys, so in a way this is understandable. On the other hand, Barton as an employer had a reputation for being high-handed. The company belonged to the family, and any driver who damaged a bus got his marching orders. Obviously staff who were also enthusiasts might have their own reasons for wanting to work for this, rather than that operator – especially those that ran varied and interesting fleets. And don’t forget that in the 1950s and 60s there was a degree of government control over pay through the Ministry of Labour’s Wages Inspectorate – so it was not necessarily a case of small private operators paying significantly lower wages.
Stephen Ford
26/05/12 – 20:33
Many full-time employees of smaller, private companies started as part-timers, something not countenanced by most of the larger companies – except in Scotland.
Alan Hall
26/05/12 – 20:41
In the Halifax case, Philip, and very probably in other Corporation v Company scenarios, the influencing factors were the higher standards of wages and conditions on the municipalities.
Roger Cox
27/05/12 – 06:38
Stephen mentions the high handed attitude to staff from the Barton management the same autocratic attitude was practised by Samuel Ledgard prior to his death in 1952. There are many apocryphal stories about his attitude to staff. One is of a guard being sacked after Mr Ledgard saw him riding a motor bike and told he was not paid enough to have such a machine and he was sacked! Another is when an elderly passenger told a crew they were running early. The guard told the passenger it was”nowt to do with thee” The next day the man was summoned to see Mr Ledgard aka the old man. Leeds Corporation were also strict although higher pay was the norm with numerous stringent fines and restrictions for transgressors.
Chris Hough
30/05/12 – 07:25
I was most amused by Stephen’s accurate expectation that I shall be “getting steam up” and he won’t be disappointed !! However I’m going on holiday for ten days or so and therefore I’ll write it when I get back. The matter of staff loyalty to independent operators is a complex one and I should be able to outline many aspects which will, I think, surprise Philip.
Chris Youhill
12/06/12 – 07:09
In answer to Philip’s query of the 26th Ultimo (as “last month” used to be referred to in the days of quills and ink) I think that, to avoid writing a complex book here on OBP, I can sum up the subject in two simple words – “JOB SATISFACTION.” In the case of the Samuel Ledgard undertaking it was of course not the usual small independent operator but was a large concern with five depots, or to be strictly accurate four depots and one “running shed.” The Firm was a very good employer indeed and paid wage rates well above what was necessary, but quite reasonably in return insisted rigidly that “the job was done properly” – as a minority who thought otherwise soon found out as they queued at the Labour Exchange !! The network of busy tightly timed services was an interesting one, varying between well patronised interurban routes through local town facilities to medium length outer district forays. Comprehensive rotas were in force at all depots and all staff worked interestingly on all routes operated from those premises. The Contract, Private Hire, Express Service and Excursion functions were thriving and varied. The fleet was quite magnificent in its variety of chassis and bodywork makes and models – new and, after the demise of the Founder Samuel, second hand. A duty could easily involve a new synchromesh AEC, followed by a new or second hand manual Leyland PD and, later in the day a preselector Daimler (new or “previously owned”) – and perhaps an Albion Valkrie or a 1930 ex Birmingham Regent 1 very successfully posing as a Burlingham veteran luxury coach/maid of all work thirty years “new.” Well, enough of the nostalgia which really made the job so very enjoyable and varied. It must be stressed that the Firm’s services were so totally reliable, and greatly appreciated by the Public, that such a level has never been seen in the area since and is still greatly missed. The vehicles, regardless of pedigree, were superbly maintained by very proud craftsmen staff and well treated by drivers with a pride, and ANY lost mileage (which was so rare as to be a sensation followed by a searching enquiry) was regarded as a very serious matter indeed and was virtually never caused by a breakdown. Yes, the Municipal and Group operators may have appeared to offer better conditions and in some ways did, but some of their modes of operation were the road to boredom and insanity. I have also worked for Leeds City Transport where OPO drivers or crews lived on the same route year in year out and, in the case of the crews, with the same “mate” day in day out. This system encouraged widespread work dodging as a science by those so inclined of whom there were plenty (classed conceitedly by themselves as “fast men” which in reality meant gearbox, flywheel and diff wreckers) and double the work for those who wouldn’t lower their standards. I also worked for West Yorkshire at Ilkley which was better, as you did all the routes and had a different colleague every week. I finished my career for the last fourteen years with the Pontefract family owned firm of South Yorkshire – in effect a miniature version of Samuel Ledgard’s – where good wages were paid and the vehicles were also superbly maintained, and everyone worked all the routes long and local. By the way Philip, just a small point, but West Yorkshire did in fact have a depot in Yeadon High Street. So, there you have it, I’ve tried to explain as briefly as possible “Why work for Ledgard’s” – believe me I wish I could turn back the clock to October 1957 and start all over again – as Mr. Sinatra famously sang “I did it my way.”
Chris Youhill
12/06/12 – 18:47
Nice to see you on the platform of D213/HGF 690, which Sam’l Ledgard had from 1954 to 1960. I’d like to have seen them in SL’s excellent livery. Did you start as a conductor and work up to driver? I think your reply was very appropriate. Within reason, pay is less important than job satisfaction and a good employer encourages a loyal and stable workforce. And you were lucky to have lived in an era of buses of various ages, makes and technical differences. It needed skill and empathy to drive a vehicle with a crash, then synchromesh gearbox, then a pre-selective gearbox, and make a good job of it.
Chris Hebbron
13/06/12 – 09:30
Sorry, I meant HGF890. My abiding memory of these buses was how imposing they looked from the outside, being very tall at 14′ 6″, and spacious inside, due, I suppose, to their high roofs. they sported LT’s three-piece indicators, which was unattractive at the rear, seemingly stuck on with glue! Looks as if SL unstuck them from the above photo!
Chris Hebbron
13/06/12 – 09:33
Chris Y s comments on LCT are interesting when my dad was a guard from 1953-1984 he had a total of three drivers in that time For much of the period different garages worked allocated routes although this changed as OMO spread and crews moved to the remaining 2 man routes and the use of universal rostering meant that all depots eventually worked all routes. There also existed a “senior rota” for long serving crews whereby they did not have extremes of starting and finishing times Like many bus operators LCT had to take what it could get in terms of recruits when people were reluctant to work unsocial hours in a time of full employment this did not in many cases lend itself to good customer relations and the service and the publics perception of the service suffered As a result a whole phalanx of potential passengers were lost for good
Chris Hough
13/06/12 – 09:34
Thanks Chris Hebbron – yes the London Sutton depot “HGFs” were a fine model full of real character. One hundred of them were delivered between May and November 1946 – Daimler CWA6/Park Royal. In 1953/4 we acquired no less than twenty two of them at a time when the prewar fleet had to be replaced – they performed heroically and handled heavily loaded services punctually and reliably on very harsh roads. They retained a lovely London feature in the cabs above the windscreens, in Gill Sans lettering, “DOUBLE DECK- HEIGHT 14’6” To my utter amazement they were apparently the first London buses to feature a continuous cord bell in the lower saloon – I was always under the impression that this had been a London feature !! The sound emitted by the cab roof buzzer to indicate that the upper saloon bell push was being used was sheer joy, and bestowed a most beneficial free foot massage on the front seat passengers up there. The picture was taken at Ilkley in December 1957 in my second month as a conductor. The Firm did not teach people to drive, and so I obtained my PSV licence elsewhere before eagerly returning to where my heart lay, and my first duty as a driver was a late turn on a Friday on the very busy Leeds – Guiseley – Ilkley service. The bus was ex Bristol Leyland PD1/ECW LAE 12 which behaved like a dream and performed like a trooper.
Chris Youhill
13/05/13 – 07:34
Chris et al, sorry! I’ve only just stumbled on your replies to my question: the answers were, quite frankly, staring me in the face.
Philip Rushworth
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
09/03/19 – 06:01
Thank you all for all these wonderful postings … and a special thank you to the delivery driver of one ex LT RT, who stopped and rescued me and other hitch-hikers from freezing to death at the side of the A1 back in November 1963. He dropped me at the baths on Kirkstall Road having turned left on his way to the Armley Depot. It was a slow ride in thick fog.
London Transport 1946 AEC Regent II Weymann H30/26R
HGC 225 is an AEC Regent II with Weymann H56R body, and it dates from 1946. It wears Country Area green in this view, and the fleet number STL2692. Allowing for the London method of bus overhauls, how many chassis and bodies have worn this fleet number over the years? It is on Itchen Bridge, while taking part in the Southampton city transport centenary rally on 6 May 1979.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
19/03/17 – 10:49
“How many chassis and bodies have worn this fleet number over the years?” The answer is, just this one. These post war STL Regents didn’t last long enough with LT to pass through the Aldenham works, which only became fully operational in 1956. These buses were sold off by LT in 1955 as deliveries of the RT type became an embarrassment to the point where many new ones, together with others of the RTL class, were put straight into store upon receipt from the manufacturers. Some of these light STLs were used in 1954 on the 327 route at Hertford which traversed a weak bridge, but they were replaced in the following year by “pre war” (actually wartime) RTs which were less heavy than their post war cousins. This allowed the entire class of post war STLs to be sold to the dealer North of Leeds in July/August 1955. They soon found new owners with Dundee, Grimsby and Widnes corporations where they gave sterling service for upwards of six more years. STL 2692 went to Grimsby who got twelve years out of it before withdrawing it early in 1968.
Roger Cox
21/03/17 – 06:19
Thanks, Roger!
Pete Davies
21/03/17 – 06:20
Roger, do you happen to know if one of the municipalities you mention, perhaps Grimsby, changed the gearboxes in their examples from crash to pre-select? I’m sure I’ve read it somewhere!
Chris Barker
21/03/17 – 08:45
Chris B – I hadn’t heard of this procedure, but if it did take place in Grimsby you have to wonder why go to such expense in a town which I assume is “as flat as a pancake” and driving a bus with a traditional transmission should surely present no problems.
Chris Youhill
21/03/17 – 15:55
Chris and Chris – I can find no record of any of these former LT STLs undergoing a gearbox change from crash to preselector, but, if true, the most likely candidate amongst the subsequent owners must surely be Dundee which had a fleet of Daimlers and AEC Regent III at that time. Do we have a Dundee expert on OBP? The Grimsby situation should be easily determined by an examination of HGC 225 itself.
Roger Cox
22/03/17 – 06:08
One of my wife’s friends lives in Grimsby. I’ll check and find out in respect of the pancakes . . .
Wife’s friend has been consulted. Grimsby is largely flat with bumps, but Cleethorpes is generally hilly with flat bits.
Pete Davies
22/03/17 – 06:10
I think I travelled on all of Grimsby’s ex-STLs (nos. 42-47 of which HGC225 was 47. 43 was HGC222 and 46 HGC219 – don’t know the others). I am sure that none were changed to pre-selectors. However there were four (I think) ex-Sheffield Regents – nos. 41 and 48-50 (?) with registrations in the KWE250 series. These had more or less identical Weymann bodies, and were pre-selectors from new. They were visually identifiable by the deeper windscreen. I’m away from home at the moment, so this is all from memory plus one or two snippets I have filed on here!
And then I realised…one of the Sheffield transfers featured in David Careless’s post in June 2013, and I responded at the time thus : “The transfers became Grimsby-Cleethorpes Transport numbers 41 (KWE 258), 48 (KWE 251), 49 (KWE 252) and 50 (KWE 254). The intervening numbers 42-47 were occupied by similarly Weymann-bodied Regent IIs ex London Transport (HGC 233, 222, 227, 228, 219 and 225 respectively).”
Stephen Ford
22/03/17 – 06:11
As a one-tome Grimbarian, I remember STL2692 as Grimsby No. 47, bought in 1955 with five other STLs to replace trolleybuses on the 10 route. Dundee was the only buyer of this batch of STLs to convert them to preselector gearboxes. HGC 225 served her initial Grimsby years in a crimson lake and cream livery, after the 1957 combination of the Grimsby and Cleethorpes operations, her colours were various permutations of blue and cream.
Mark Evans
12/01/19 – 08:25
As conjectured earlier, it was for the Dundee tram-replacement fleet that some of these London Transport Regent II were converted to pre-selector transmission. A Buses Extra article detailed the changes. I believe all the gearboxes were reconditioned, previously fitted to pre-war Dundee buses in process of withdrawal.
Stephen Allcroft
15/01/19 – 06:55
Thanks, Stephen A for the information, so it was Dundee who swapped the gearboxes for pre-selectors. I understand the post-war O661 Regent II was not offered with such a gearbox but the pre-war model (just Regent, not Regent I) was. I believe the gear selection was by means of a conventional type gear stick which rose from the floor rather than a steering column mounted unit although I’m not sure if this was universal. Stephen says the gearboxes were reconditioned units salvaged from pre-war buses. It would be interesting to know which method of selection was employed, whichever it was, it made Dundee’s conversions unique as Regent IIs.
Chris Barker
16/01/19 – 07:19
My recollection of all the London Transport pre-war pre-selective buses (I regard the first RT’s as being Wartime) I travelled on as having conventional floor-mounted gearlevers. I never came across a pre-war Daimler CO bus, but imagine that they would have had the simpler type of steering column lever which the CW types did in the war.
Chris Hebbron
18/01/19 – 06:34
My CO bus has the same lever set-up as CW
Roger Burdett
19/01/19 – 06:24
Thx, Roger B. “Why change something so simple?” might well have been Daimler’s attitude and it certainly continued with their CV’s. I had a neighbour when I lived at Morden, in Daimlerland, who’d worked both at both Putney and Merton Garages and felt that Daimler’s simple gearchange was preferable to the RT’s one.
Chris Hebbron
20/01/19 – 06:57
The later Daimler CVs (e.g. Derby Corporation’s fleet of CVG6s and no doubt many others) had an H-gate selector, similar to the AEC set-up, on the left side of the steering column (as opposed to the earlier quadrant type selector mounted on the right).
Stephen Ford
20/01/19 – 06:58
The quadrant type of gear selector used on Daimler’s CO, CW and early CV series was the same as on Daimler cars. The CV changed to the AEC type around 1953-5.
Peter Williamson
21/01/19 – 07:12
The preselector version of the Guy Arab had a floor mounted gear lever; Guy built its own preselector gearbox.
Roger Cox
24/08/22 – 06:36
I remember these 10 STLs arriving in Dundee country area green along with 30 Cravens-bodied RTs for tram replacement. The RTs with roofbox route number displays were instantly recognisable and were known locally as ‘London Buses’. Their moquette upholstery in place of the leather on the indigenous buses was also a recognition point once you were aboard. But the STLs looked so similar to the home-grown variety that none of my schoolmates would believe me that they were ex-LT. Their HGC series registrations made it obvious, but that convinced no-one! Very frustrating.
George
26/08/22 – 05:57
My only experience and sight of one was on Epsom Day in about 1950/51, when I took a ride back to Morden on one. It was the newest bus I saw that day, among all the other almost forgotten museum pieces raked out from dusty corners of garages. And a long way from its home garage in Hertfordshire! It was also the only AEC I travelled on with this Weymann’s bodywork: the others all being Leylands.
Chris Hebbron
29/08/22 – 06:30
A caption in ABC London Transport Buses either 1961 or 1962 (I’m not sure but it was at the time when only a few trolleybuses were still in service) stated that London Transport took delivery of provincial Regents and for convenience designated them as STL’s. Maybe a reader still has copy of the book and could give more information.
Andy Hemming
25/09/22 – 06:35
Here is a shot taken on an HCVC Brighton Rally in the early 1970s of HGC 225 as No.47 in the livery of Grimsby-Cleethorpes Joint Transport Committee.
Roger Cox
29/09/22 – 06:09
Thanks for that, Roger. I wonder if she’s still around. That’s a strange roof layout – anyone know the reason for it?
Chris Hebbron
30/09/22 – 05:43
I know NGT had some of these, three I think, and NGT’s depot at Percy Main had 29. That was out of a fleet of 105 vehicles, which included 12 coaches, and 6 single deckers, so over a third of the D/D fleet. They were all delivered between 1945 & 1948, and were withdrawn between 1958 & 1960. They all had 0661 engines, and all had crash boxes.
Ronnie Hoye
30/09/22 – 05:49
Chris H, I may be wrong but I believe the strange roof layout, not normally seen, was simply because the framework was on the outside of the single skin roof. I have vague recollections of riding on Midland General’s Weymann bodied Regent IIIs and remember seeing the exposed framework of the side panels from the interior. I’m not saying the bodies were meant to be lightweight at all but I’m pretty sure most of the panelling was single skinned.
Chris Barker
01/10/22 – 05:32
Sorry about the typo in my post chaps and chaperones. It should have been NCT (Newcastle) had three and not NGT written twice.
Re the unusual roof. The 29 in the Tynemouth & Wakefields fleet at Percy Main came in two batches. If memory serves, the first were the same as the one in the photo, with the frame on the outside, but the next batch (two years on) were double skinned. This was just after the war, and my feeling is that he exposed frame may have been due to material shortages rather than weight saving.
London Transport 1930 AEC Regent 1 Tilling or Dodson (H27/25RO)
“John Whitaker was interested in Christopher Dodson bus bodies built for operators outside London and I mentioned that Tilling had purchased 30 Dodson-bodied AEC Regents for their Brighton operation. I’ve now found out that they were identical to the 191 AEC Regents they operated in South London, some with Tilling and some with Dodson bodies. In London, they were in the range ST837-1027. I attach a photo of the sole remaining example (ST 922 – GJ 2098), albeit it a London example, although Tilling’s livery was not that different from this example. To me, It looks odd because I only recall them with terrible body sag and this one doesn’t have it, having being completely restored! Once in London Transport’s hands, they were greatly unloved, but that’s another story!”
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron
13/11/11 – 10:31
Many thanks Chris for the marvellous photo of GJ 2098. The 30 Tilling STs bodied by Dodson were built to Tilling design. Dodson design bodies were common in the “Pirate” fleets, and some Provincial municipal fleets too, notably Wolverhampton. The latter had many 6 wheel interpretations on Guy chassis and are worthy of an article in themselves! Many of these Tilling STs were transferred to other Tilling fleets during the war, and many were rebodied and/or re-engined. Of particular interest to me are the 3 vehicles lent to BCPT (Bradford) to enable the Stanningley tram route to be abandoned in 1942. These were GJ 2027, 2055, and GK 6242. These were accompanied by some Leeds “Regents” and 3 “General” STs. Pity I cannot remember them, but I was only 2! The body sag you refer to seems apparent on every photo I have seen, but they did “soldier on” in trying conditions. 3 more vehicles of this species are also close to my heart in the form of York-West Yorkshire ADG 1-3, which started life in the form depicted in your superb photograph. Incidentally, Wolverhampton 6 wheelers can be seen in the You Tube reference you gave on the recent post concerning the “White Heather” coach! Great Stuff!
John Whitaker
13/11/11 – 17:11
I’m sure that I’ve read somewhere that, of the later STL-type Tilling Regents which went to London Transport, still with three bay upstairs front windows, but inside staircases, a batch also also went to Brighton. Both deliveries had Tilling bodies, though. The above ST sub-class were due for withdrawal on the cusp of the war. They were all withdrawn by LT, along with all other petrol-engined vehicles, when war broke out. Several suffered from war damage and their chassis went to the Home Guard, either as armoured personnel carriers, others as complete vehicles, to become (Home) guard posts. Then they were spread around England/Wales to fill shortages. For example, ST844 spent time in Coventry, Walsall & Rhondda. ST851 went to Sunderland, then Bradford & Aberdare. The longest one away was ST1005, which left for Venture, Basingstoke in December 1941, not returning until January 1947. On return, it went into store for a few months, then was scrapped, a typical end for returnees. I’ve always had a soft spot for them, loyal, uncomplaining servants, past their sell-by date in 1939 and kept away from the limelight thereafter! Amazingly, some lasted until late 1949, nevertheless. They were strangers to Morden, Surrey, where I lived, but I can recall travelling on a couple of stalwarts seeing out their final, challenging, stint on the Epsom Races specials. I was a mere stripling aged 11, bunking off from school!
Chris Hebbron
25/11/11 – 13:28
I only ever saw one ST, and it was 922, mouldering in Rush Green Motors’ scrapyard somewhere out in the bundu between Hertford and Ware in 1952. Its roof gave it away over the dense scrub which rimmed the yard, for it could be just glimpsed from the top deck of a London Country RT. I made entry to the secure yard, somehow having persuaded the ruffians in their Nissen hut that I meant them no harm, (though I was quite tall for a nine-year old, and could have bruised their shins if it turned nasty). As I recall, the breakers had used ST 922 as a canteen. Its L.H. dumb-iron brass plate identified it as the very bus which Prince Marshall was to restore years later and put in to limited service in London. I kept a light bulb from its upper saloon for many years as a memento of that rare bus, the bulb, alas, now lost due to postwar parental determination to periodically cleanse bedrooms. There was a pre-war Leyland ‘decker there, too, ex-Chesterfield Corporation, from which I took a fine iron enamelled plate mounted forward of the driver, which admonished him to ‘Pull into the Curb at Stops’. I was even then taken by the cacography. In his obedience, our luckless chauffeur might have ‘Curbed his enthusiasm at stops’, or even ‘Stopped up on to the Kerb’! I wonder if his traffic manager was reduced to the ranks for a fine Solecism or merely scolded for Malapropism? But I digress. The info relating to the pilfering has been concealed until today, lest it had led to a period of infant incarceration, still then common, but I surmise that the Statute of Limitations now applies – and for that matter, all the other characters of the piece must now rejoice at The Great Terminus, their days of pointless litigation at an end.
Victor Brumby
28/05/12 – 08:11
In my post of 13/11/2011, I mentioned that I thought a batch of the later Tilling (LT STL type) also went to BH&D. I’ve since found that Thos. Tilling in Brighton had quite a few early vehicles, identical to those in the above photo. In the later 1930’s, a few of the STL type were also delivered, originally with the same three-window front upstairs configuration. See HERE: Post-war, BH&D modernised them, which included changing the three-window arrangement to the conventional two-window type.
Chris Hebbron
04/07/12 – 07:12
In my original comment, I mentioned that 30 of this type, with Dodson bodies, served in Brighton. Here is a photo of one. It is unusual in showing the upstairs air vent, normally unseen in photos.
Chris Hebbron
01/01/14 – 10:09
Several of these Brighton STs were later rebodied and eventually converted to open toppers. At least half a dozen later migrated to Westcliff (for the Southend seafront services) and Eastern National (for the Clacton services). I understand one eventually finished up as a tree lopper for Eastern National.
Brian Pask
17/09/14 – 15:24
Hi Chris.. Compliments on your photograph of 6201 and also your knowledge.
Sid
18/09/14 – 07:47
Thx, Sid, glad you enjoyed the posting.
Chris Hebbron
01/02/15 – 06:49
From September of 1951 to July of 1955 I commuted to school from Mill Hill to Kilburn. This was in the days of the trolley buses at least as far as Cricklewood Broadway. I cannot give the date but on the route 16 a green ST class bus suddenly appeared. It stayed around for a few weeks and then vanished again. Similarly on the route 79a a green STL appeared again for a short period. I don’t think either of the two buses made it to preservation but if anyone out there can confirm my sightings I would be very interested. The route 16 at the time was the preserve of the SRT Class and the 79a was all RTs. All something of a mystery
Ron Sargeant
01/02/15 – 11:00
There were plenty of Country Area green STL’s, both with front and rear entrances, and, by the period you mention, Ron, post-war RT’s were rendering plenty of the older vehicles spare. The last only went in 1955. The green ST is a mystery, since very few were ever painted green and spent their lives at Watford Garage. They were all disposed of by no later that 1950. However, LT was always short of lowbridge buses then and kept its lowbridge 1930 ST’s going until 1953, both at Watford and Godstone Garages, Some found their way to Morden at times, to keep the 127 red route going. It’s possible that it was one of them found its way around your way to fill a gap or be a learner in its final months. I believe that they were unique with LT in having a sunken gangway each side upstairs. Each one was also visually unique, having been ‘played about with’ in different ways at various overhauls!
Chris Hebbron
01/02/15 – 11:02
I have very happy memories indeed of a roundtrip on GJ 2098 when it was operating a vintage service starting in Trafalgar Square. I seem to recall that it was pretty spritely and comfortable – the seat cushions gave the impression of being a foot thick and were luxurious, and they seemed to accentuate delightfully the “up and down” movement of the suspension. the driver also handled the old bus very competently indeed – a very happy hour or so to recall.
Chris Youhill
02/02/15 – 06:43
Was the upholstery a sort of grey with black swirls on. I seem to recall that that was the LGOC colour scheme (if you can call grey a colour!). Or maybe it was the standard LT stripe patterning.
Chris Hebbron
02/02/15 – 06:47
The SRT class was an unequivocal disaster, comprising pre-war STLs expensively modified to accept heavier RT type bodywork for which RT chassis were still awaited. 300 were planned, but the nonsense finished after 160 had been constructed. With the 7.7 engine and vacuum brakes the SRT wouldn’t go and, more critically, it wouldn’t stop. The first of the class entered service in April 1949, and by mid 1954, the utter folly of the programme having finally been accepted, they were gone, apart from a handful retained as Chiswick toys. Perhaps the fleeting appearance of ST and STL vehicles was dictated by SRT mechanical failures.
Roger Cox
02/02/15 – 11:37
Chris H – Yes, I’m sure that you’re right about the seating upholstery, and that’s exactly the colour scheme I remember.
Roger – As a “distant” ardent admirer of the seemingly excellent “SRT” conversions I’m surprised to hear that they were as disastrous as seems widely claimed, although I have read of this elsewhere too. I thought that the plan was an ingenious one and sensible too but of course I had no experience of driving them and only a limited number of rides. I must say though that I’m amazed that their speed and more importantly presumably acceleration were so poor, but only to be expected by comparison with the magnificent 9.6 litre RTs. Braking, well the vast difference between vacuum brakes and air is no secret, and different driving techniques and “expectations” are essential. I would imagine though that some kind of semi rural and light operation would have found them quite satisfactory. From an enthusiast point of view though their acoustics were a delight and the different “era” instantly apparent – and the fascinating combination of older machinery with the beautiful RT bodies made the SRTs for me a very memorable version.
Chris Youhill
03/02/15 – 05:46
Chris, as you indicate, the theory behind the SRT class appeared, on the surface, to make sense, as RT type bodywork deliveries were outstripping RT/RTL chassis supplies. Although the life extended elderly pre war fleets of ST and LT machines were largely gone by 1948, LT wanted to clear out the utilities and remaining STLs as quickly as possible to project the high quality, post war LTE image to the capital’s travelling public. The SRT seemed to meet the bill. It looked the part, and the ordinary traveller surely wouldn’t suspect that the mechanical bits under the new, modern bodywork belonged to an earlier engineering era and were upwards of ten years old. Sadly, converting STL chassis to take the half ton heavier RT body proved to be far more complicated, and hence much more costly, than anticipated. The chassis had to be remodelled quite considerably, and major components, such as the fuel tank, had to be re-sited. The result was a bus that looked very good, but performed very poorly, particularly in the braking department. The AEC 7.7 was a perfectly sound engine, but it didn’t have the decisive low speed torque of the comparable 7 litre Gardner 5LW which was still the favoured power plant for many new Bristols in the Tilling companies’ fleets. I should think that the less than lively performance could have been tolerated; the real difficulty lay with the brakes, which proved barely adequate on downhill gradients when an SRT was well loaded. There must have been rather more to the braking problem than simply the vacuum system. We have both driven heavy, vacuum braked double deckers around the Yorkshire gradients without too many frights. The Halifax Daimler CVL6/Roe ‘deckers were pretty heavy beasts, 8 tons unladen, but they stopped equally as efficiently as the air braked PD3s – as you know, the hills round Halifax make most of urban London look like a billiard table. I can only assume, since I can’t find any figures to support this, that the lining areas of the old STL brakes were rather smaller than those of post war double deckers generally. In the event, the SRTs were taken off routes that included any suggestion of a slope and relegated to flat territory. The word got around, and the Country department apparently refused to have any involvement with the things. In the meantime, RT and RTL chassis production came on stream, and the SRT class quickly surrendered its RT bodywork to new chassis and the STL underparts to the scrapyard. Your comment about bus acoustics resonates, I’m sure, with many members of OBP. As a child up to the age of four I delighted in the contrasting sounds emitted by LT, STL and RT types in Selsdon and Croydon, and, from that age onwards, having by then moved to rural Kent, I became captivated by the marvellous melody emitted by the Maidstone and District Leyland TS8 Tigers as they climbed Chequers Hill out of Doddington. By contrast, the petrol Tigers running along the valley just purred along. In Faversham, one could find East Kent Dennis Lancets (pre war, four cylinder jobs I later discovered) with smooth running, drumming sound engines. From 1949, by now an eight year old resident in Alverstoke near Gosport, I couldn’t initially understand why the Provincial AEC Regents sounded so dramatically different from their London cousins, and became a fan instead of the stuttering new Guy Arabs on the Haslar route. Only later did I discover that these fine buses had peculiar five cylinder engines. I am rambling on a bit now. I’d better stop.
Roger Cox
04/02/15 – 05:41
There was another part of the jigsaw to add to Roger’s tale and which makes the STL/SRT saga slightly more logical. LT’s 1935-40 New Works Plan exceeded the legal limit that AEC/Chiswick could legally order/produce and so outside suppliers were used . A good example was the 100 all-Leyland STD class; pseudo-STL’s. Another case was 175 STL chassis, but with Park Royal metal-framed bodies, which were already failing in 1942, when the worst bodies were scrapped and replaced by new lowbridge STL bodies under special dispensation. The rest were all but held together with strapping, post-war, and the idea was that the 15STL16 1939 STL’s would have their bodies transferred to replace the PRV bodies and be re-bodied with the RT ones. The 1939 STL’s should have been RT’s, but production was not ready in time. Nevertheless, many RT features were incorporated into these chassis, including automatic chassis lubrication, but, crucially, not the 9.6 litre engine, not quite ready for service. Thus, of the 132 of STL’s finest, very few survived in their original form and they, if memory serves, were Country Area vehicles, no doubt held onto for dear life!
Chris Hebbron
04/02/15 – 09:59
Please Roger, don’t even think of pleading “rambling on” – that post was full of absorbing and informed comment and opinion and is fascinating to read. So, in summary and the famous hindsight, it seems that the SRT scheme was a brave and expectedly fraught. venture which ought to have succeeded but was beset with undeserved problems and expense. You are quite right about the mountains of West Yorkshire and the greater area and I suppose we drivers thought little of nothing of such terrain as most of the elderly and basic vehicles of the time did their commendable best. The only real braking worries with the old vacuum system that I recall were occasionally with certain Leyland PD2s (but not PD1s) of both 7’6″ and 8’00″ girth – and even, with later employers, air braked PD3s, but that’s obviously another discussion altogether. I hope my memory and imagination aren’t running riot, but I’m sure I recall that when the 34 RTs arrived at Samuel Ledgard and were being prepared for service there was an issue with the brake drums/shoes. Was it the case that the RTs, as opposed to Mark 3 Regents in general, had more robust brakes – hence the London drivers’ meaningful objection to the SRTs. I believe that Ledgard fitters mentioned to me that the drums (front at least) were of a slightly larger diameter than standard and that “shims” (possibly hardwood ??) had to be inserted between the new linings and the shoes to give satisfactory results. This was of course fifty two years ago and if I’m way off the mark I’ll gladly blush and hide for as long as necessary.
Chris Youhill
18/03/18 – 06:56
During the mid to late 1940s the 77A route, which I took from Wimbledon to Wimbledon Park (to school) or to Wimbledon Chase (to visit my grandmother) had several “odd” buses. As kids, we were thrilled when the occasional coach came along as this seemed to us to be travelling in luxury. However, the most exciting was when our bus had a staircase that was outside the bus. As young boys we, of course, always rode upstairs. Which reminds me – the conductors often referred to the upstairs as “outside”. I only remember being on an outside stair bus on two or three occasions, probably in 1948, 49 or possibly 1950.
David
19/03/18 – 06:26
Referring to David’s mention of “outside”, conductors in Ashton under Lyne and Manchester guards up until the late 1960s used to have phrases such as “on top” and “inside” when designating the upper and lower decks.
Phil Blinkhorn
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
21/04/19 – 07:29
As a schoolboy (1944-1950), I was fortunate enough to travel at 08:13 a.m. every week-day morning from Chandler’s Ford (between Southampton and Winchester in Hampshire) to Winchester on one of these marvellous ‘open staircase’ old ladies … it was one of, I think, 5, but possibly more, on ‘loan’ to Hants & Dorset … the actual vehicle I suspect was ST845 (GJ 2021), known to have been with Hants & Dorset from 1945 to 1947 … these buses were used by the Southampton Depot of Hants & Dorset, at least, as ‘relief’ buses on high density routes, as well as ‘works’ buses transporting workers to and from factories, such as Vickers Armstrong at Hursley
Doug Clews
23/04/19 – 07:28
These Tilling ST’s had rather weak bodies and were on the cusp of being withdrawn when the war broke out. Many of them were lent out all over the place during the war and many didn’t return to London Transport until 1947, usually to be scrapped straight away, such was their decrepitude by that stage. The Greater Portsmouth/Southampton area was one of several bus hotspots where buses were drafted in to cater for the increase in passengers, to supplement the shortage. In latter years, they were renowned for their very obvious waistline body sag, not evident in the two above photos, one rebuilt and the other still fairly new.!
London Transport 1936 AEC Regent I London Transport (Chiswick) H56R
A London furniture maker adopted an ex-London Regent for a mobile showroom. Going about its business on August 24th. 1957, DGX 212 – STL 1684 was brought to a halt by the overhanging awning of the Odeon cinema in Gold Street, Kettering, which broke its nearside rear window and the timber frame thereof. The black on yellow livery was that of W. Lusty and Son of Bromley-by-Bow, who doubtless had some choice invective awaiting the return of their luckless driver to their dockside domain. Personally, I’d have left the bus there and emigrated. My conveyance of the period, leaning casually alongside, was my hub-braked Triumph pride and joy. It would be two more years before my omnibological pursuit became mobilised by the acquisition of Austin Seven NV 834. Having said that, I think that a fleeing STL would have the drop on a 1931 Seven, even round bends.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Victor Brumby
18/11/11 – 17:18
Nice Photo, Victor, of my favourite style (roofbox) of STL. Considering the vehicle was bought by Lusty’s in October 1954, and went into service as their showroom in 1955, it already looks sad. I notice from website Ian’s Bus Stop that it survived until 1961, when forcibly scrapped after its argument with the Odeon awning! I agree with your Austin Seven comparison. I had a friend whose father owned an Austin Swallow, the sporty version with an aluminium body. Sporting it was not! An STL would have beaten it any day!
Chris Hebbron
19/11/11 – 14:52
The bodies on the batch of STLs that followed the Chiswick built version, of which STL 1684 above was an example, were produced by Park Royal in 1937. They were constructed on metal frames which quickly reacted with the internal finishing adhesives to give serious corrosion problems after less than five years service. One of these, STL 2093, which was fitted with a replacement body from STL 2570 in 1949, was bought in 1958 by Denis Cowing, a chemistry master at my secondary school in Selhurst, Croydon, and he rallied it for a few years before the deterioration became too much for him. It now resides at the Cobham bus museum, where it is undergoing complete restoration.
Roger Cox
19/04/13 – 07:15
This bus got about as this image was taken in Rochdale in 1958.
London Transport 1935 AEC Regent 1 London Transport (Chiswick) H56R
Below is the note I wrote on the back of the above photograph.
BXD 474, this yellow and blue STL (806) was seen in Kettering on March 10th. 1958. Driver Robert Carter advised that his company, Zenith Furniture, had this mobile showroom-converted AEC and two more ex-London STLs converted to pantechnicons.
I still have the 1954-7 tax discs for this bus….. I also saw a few pantechnicons, running for Albro Furniture, during this period, all ex-STLs.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Victor Brumby
14/12/11 – 18:05
Surplus STL’s certainly got around in their twilight years. Yellow and blue sounds more like ‘happy playbus’ colours for children! Like the cab door.
Chris Hebbron
16/12/11 – 13:03
What exactly went on around that first bay? Looks like a bit of “scrapheap” coachbuilding… was there another access to the cab from the saloon? You may get in that way, but you’ll never get out!
Joe
16/12/11 – 13:19
Strangely enough, I think (minus the door) that WAS the size of the cab entrance. As for the scrapheap coachbuilding, that may also be perilously close to the truth. These bodies, or at least some of them, were prone to terminal collapse – body “sag” – in common with many of those built by NCB. The first bay may have been due to repair of such “sagging” bulkhead damage.
David Oldfield
17/12/11 – 07:30
Mention of the improvised cab door brings me to a question. The Metropolitan Police over the years imposed a lot of restrictions on LT and it’s predecessors. As examples I quote their refusal to accept, pneumatic tyres, enclosed staircases, cab windscreens and cab doors then in the RT era 8 feet wide buses in general service. I am not aware of any other British Police Force in any other provincial town or city interfering so much in bus design. Does anyone know why the Met had such extensive powers when this sort of interference didn’t seem to apply to other forces?
Philip Halstead
Good question Philip
17/12/11 – 07:34
Although what I’m saying may be well-known to some, it will not be to all. The Metropolitan Police had a very conservative approach to vehicle design and one aspect of that was not allowing cab doors to be fitted. Hence when in use as a showroom it would need to be a little more secure and I suspect that was why it the door looks so out of place and is obviously home-made.
David Beilby
17/12/11 – 07:38
I’m fascinated with the date of this picture. Monday, March 10th, 1958 was the day that my mother and I flew from London Airport to Montreal, as we were emigrating to Canada. We stayed with some distant relatives in Tooting before flying out, and I spent a large part of that last day watching LT trolleybuses whizz back and forth on the 630, whilst Victor Brumby was apparently chasing this old STL around Kettering with his camera. Trust me, there was a lot more snow on the ground in Montreal than there was in Kettering that day!
Dave Careless
19/12/11 – 06:24
Other aspects of the “progressive thinking” of the Metropolitan Police were the initial refusal to accept four wheel brakes and passenger entrance doors.
Roger Cox
19/12/11 – 11:03
London Transport, when lending its ‘Godstone’ STL’s to Merton Garage to assist the red 127 lowbridge route buses, had to ensure that its sliding doors were left open all the time, even draughtier than the standard front-entrance ‘green’ STL’s which did, to some extent, cater for not having any doors at all. Philip does raise a good question and I must admit I’ve never heard of such a ‘controlling’ police force as the ‘Met’ anywhere else in the UK. After the initial batch, not more fully front-entrance ‘red’ Q’s were built, as it was considered dangerous as passengers boarding/alighting might fall under the front wheels. I always smiled at early rear-entrance single-deckers, which had offside longitudinal seats right to the back and could have projected unwary passengers out of the rear platform when cornering hard! No mention of this was made, but they were mainly converted to front entrance later.
Chris Hebbron
31/12/13 – 07:09
It’s interesting to see that this STL has a Brighton registration BXD
Bix Curtis
31/12/13 – 12:02
Sorry, Bix, but “BXD” is not a Brighton registration, at least not in the era when this bus was first registered. BXD was definitely a London registration of c.1934/35. In that era, Brighton were using CD and UF as their main letters, with the appropriate sequential prefix. ACD and AUF appeared in 1934, and the progress letters were issued at a quite similar pace to London’s before the war – although of course London had many letter sets allocated to them, compared to Brighton’s two! (What I mean is that London buses were receiving say, FXT registrations in 1938/39, and Brighton had FUF. In wartime, many utilities in London had “G” prefix to the various letters used, and Southdown’s Guy utilities had GCD and GUF plates).
Michael Hampton
01/01/14 – 09:19
Going back to the comments of 2011 on the Met Police, the City of Manchester Police Force was equally as interfering and restrictive, though with far less influence on design than on operation. The operation of buses along Market St Manchester was always a problem and, in their own right prior to the institution of Traffic Commissioners and then, once that august group had been set up in the North West, by using considerable influence on them, the constabulary vastly influenced the pattern of service and the vehicle types used for over half a century. Henry Mattinson’s excellent long distance express bus scheme being at first truncated then almost totally demolished – with a great deal of aiding and abetting from taxi operators and the railway companies, was the first major interference, though there had been minor ones for over a decade before. The inconvenient siting of the long distance service terminal at Lower Mosley St and the restriction of North Western’s medium distance services to this outpost far from shops and offices was down to the police. Other inconvenient termini were located at Stevenson’s Square and the rather enigmatic Royal Exchange which, apart from the airport coach stop, was not at the Royal Exchange at all. Until the appearance of the Atlantean, the only 30 foot long double deckers approaching the city centre were Mayne’s AECs which were kept away from the centre getting no nearer than Newton St., and the Crossley Dominion trolleybuses which reached Piccadilly but only on rush hour and Saturday service. Bus stop siting in the city centre, again under police influence, precluded use of forward entrance vehicles until Salford’s 27 ft PD2s appeared on the 95/96 and later the 57/77 in the early 1960s. The Atlanteans were restricted to services away from Market St for years and whilst the major reason for not ordering more and keeping the Fleetlines that followed to Wythenshawe routes was down mainly to conservatism at 55 Piccadilly and the need for crowd movers for Wythenshawe, there is strong evidence that the police made it plain for some years that 30ft rear engined vehicles were not welcome on Market St thus restricting the best use of the vehicles. Like the Met the constabulary eventually had to yield to the pressures and realities of the industry and the time.
Phil Blinkhorn
01/01/14 – 10:05
Mention was made earlier of some STLs being rebodied as pantechnicons. Several of these had their STL bodies removed by Southend Corporation Transport at their depot. A photo exists of one with the body in process of removal. The old bodies went to a Corporation dump at Shoebury, where withdrawn trolleybuses were also sent. Above is a shot of a couple of the discarded bodies.
Brian Pask
01/01/14 – 10:12
Is there any evidence, Phil, that the police in Manchester influenced the design of buses, as I earlier indicated that the Met certainly did?
Chris Hebbron
01/01/14 – 11:12
Hi Chris, Happy New Year. There is no evidence that the design of buses in terms of use or not of doors, tyres etc. for use in Manchester was directly influenced, or should we say interfered with, by the City of Manchester Police in the same way as the Met. On the other hand, as I have shown, the types of vehicles used in parts of the city centre and restrictions on operations had a very direct influence on the size and types of vehicles purchased not just by MCTD but on a number of operators in the areas surrounding the city and certainly the location of termini had a profound influence on the daily lives of shoppers and workers.
Phil Blinkhorn
01/01/14 – 12:37
I agree that initially as a student anxious to return home to Sheffield, and latterly as a Sale resident wanting to go almost anywhere, LMS was very inconvenient – and Chorton Street not a great deal better. Looking back with a historical perspective it makes some sense – but none as a passenger. [There were similarly strange termini in Sheffield with the small Bridge Street Bus Station and the Castlegate stands – which may have made operational sense but were not in the least bit helpful to passengers needing to cross the city centre to get there.]
David Oldfield
03/01/14 – 08:13
I can’t help thinking that one of the effects of the remoteness of bus termini is to reduce awareness of what services are available. MCTD did very well in including all North Western’s Manchester services in its timetable, but how many people bought timetables? My childhood experience was that most of my parents’ awareness of bus services outside our immediate locality came under the heading of “word gets about”. If people see buses showing certain destinations then they may enquire about them, but if they don’t, it may never occur to them that such a service exists. Chorlton Street was built as an overflow to Piccadilly, and for many years MCTD restricted it to the least-used services in order to inconvenience the minimum number of passengers. But of course that also reinforced its obscurity, meaning that most Mancunian bus users had never even heard of it. Then there was the problem of Salford. Most services heading west from Manchester didn’t go from Manchester at all, but from Salford. How many people knew about that, I wonder?
Peter Williamson
03/01/14 – 12:13
Peter, the Salford situation is interesting. Under Henry Mattinson’s Express Service scheme, Salford buses ran through the Manchester city centre to Stalybridge, Hyde, Guide Bridge and Stockport. Once the scheme was decimated, and with Deansgate being added to Market St as another thoroughfare of “concern” to the constabulary, most of those routes Salford served retreated to that city’s side of the Irwell to join the remainder of the services showing Manchester on their blinds. Due to an earlier tramway dispute Salford buses did not cross Deansgate on anything other than those on the scheme. Victoria became the major terminus (though the bus station was nearer Exchange station) and was shown on blinds for services wholly within Salford, Manchester being shown on services from elsewhere. King St West was also a terminus, handy for those shopping at Kendal Milnes but not much good for most passengers need ing to get into the city centre and the patrons of the Docks service which terminated there would hardly have been KM’s customers until well into the second half of the 20th century. (For non Mancunians, Kendal Milnes was the Manchester equivalent of Harrods and for many years had the same owners). The exceptions by the outbreak of World War 2 were the 15 from Worsley which ran through to Guide Bridge and the 35 from Bury, both of which were truncations of express services, the 35 logically should have run through to Piccadilly but was cut off at Cannon St. After the war there was a dispute about the termination of tram services where Salford used Manchester rails on Deansgate which exacerbated the much earlier dispute about the use of rails on Blackfriars Bridge and led to a great deal of bitterness between 55 Piccadilly and Frederick Rd. The 15 was cut back to run only from Worsley to Manchester but did reach Piccadilly and, until the new bus station was finished, terminated in view of Albert Neal’s office. Salford made sure its vehicles on the route were the most up to date and, when it needed no new vehicles for almost a decade, always turned out its smartest Daimlers to sit within Albert’s view. It was one of the first routes for Salford’s Atlanteans but by that time the terminus was within the new bus station. Some peace was restored in January 1951 when Salford’s services from Swinton and Pendlebury were joined to Manchester’s services from Reddish Thornley Park and Bulls Head to form the 57/77 services. This became possible as no trams now ran on Market St and congestion had eased. The experiment was a success and was followed in November 1955 by the joining of the East Didsbury to Piccadilly service to the Whitefield to Victoria service to form the 95/96 services. With a common terminus at either end, these routes differed in both Salford and South Manchester but shared the same route through the city centre. What is odd in all of this is that many long distance coaches both privately and group owned operating from outside the area to Blackpool, Southport and Morecambe ran along Market St., which formed part of the A6, without any intervention by the authorities and on summer Saturdays added to the chaos. for road users and pedestrians alike.
Phil Blinkhorn
06/06/16 – 06:45
Reference the police “interference” in London, what seems to be forgotten in the ensuing years is that the Police were also “the Commissioners for the Metropolis” thereby giving them direct control which the other cities did not have. this is why we were instantly harangued by constables for inventing short cuts on service! the famous one was forgetting to turn right at Marks and Spencer (?) at Marylebone Road on the “Z”! Next one! has anyone remembered “The Excursion Route” insisted on by North western Traffic Commissioners which involved a lengthy circumnavigation of Central Manchester?
Pete Bradshaw
06/06/16 – 10:53
Presumably the Excursion Route was meant to avoid coaches from particularly the East Midlands and Staffordshire en route to Blackpool clogging Market St on summer Saturdays. My recollection is that in the 1960s it was regularly ignored.
Progressive Coaches (Cambridge) 1935 AEC Regent 1 London Transport (Chiswick) H26/30R
I am coming to the end of my boyhood ex-London Transport (photographed) sightings now. I proffer this shot of ex-London Transports STL 2117 during the building of Stevenage New Town, when Mowlem Construction hired their workers’ transport from Progressive Motor Coaches of Cambridge. STL 2117 was seen in the company of STL 971 on April 8th 1958, awaiting its next muddy-booted cargo.
I also managed to get an old tax disc from STL 2117 for 1957 showing a yearly charge of 86 pounds 8 shillings.
Photographs and Copy contributed by Victor Brumby
12/01/12 – 05:43
As a kid, I always thought works buses looked drab and neglected. In retrospect, knowing how many fine vehicles were scrapped at the end of their PSV lives, I suppose this did extend their lives. How many subsequently survived into preservation, though?
David Oldfield
12/01/12 – 05:44
Not to mention those who survived as showmen’s vehicles in many guises and often ingeniously (sometimes very professionally) modified. It was more interesting for me to look at these than partake of the amusements/rides – how sad is that? At least these vehicles survived longer than worn-out, hard-worked, often-abused works buses.
Chris Hebbron
12/01/12 – 17:10
Progressive Motor Coaches was formed in 1934 by Albert Edward “Paddy” Harris who had previously worked for Lord Astor Coaches (which, despite its high sounding title, was run by a family named Brown). The Progressive livery was pale green and white. As Victor’s picture shows, this operator had two STLs, Nos. 971 with Chiswick H29/19F body (ex Country area) and 2117 with a later Chiswick H30/26R body (like the others in this batch, its original metal framed Park Royal body had proved to be a disaster). These two were bought in 1955, and were kept until at least 1958. Progressive also had a total of five so called “pre war” RTs (in fact, all except RT 1 entered LPTB service between 1940 and 1942). These were RTs 32/40/76/84/139 FXT207/215/251/259/314, all of which were bought between January and April 1956. RT 32 was sold on almost immediately, RTs 76 & 84 lasted beyond 1958, and RTs 40 and 139 were disposed of in 1959. I owe much of this information to Ian’s Bus Stop website, and to Paul Carter’s detailed books on Cambridge in the Prestige Series.
Roger Cox
12/01/12 – 17:18
Thanks for the information Roger guess what was on the same scan of the DLU 116 tax disc.
There is also BLH 828 if anyone knows more on that Regent 06613259 I will post it.
Peter
13/01/12 – 07:30
According to Ians Bus Stop, BLH 828 was STL971, mentioned above.
Bob Gell
13/01/12 – 07:31
Peter, BLH 828 was the registration of STL 971. This was one of the Country Area green STLs which had a Chiswick built body of the peculiar front entrance design which seated only 48 passengers, 29 upstairs and 19 downstairs. This design had no entrance door, it being supposed that the angled front bulkhead would prevent draughts from entering the saloon. Of course this theory was preposterous, and these buses were notoriously cold to travel in. (I can confirm this from my own childhood recollections of these things on the Chelsham operated routes across Croydon.) Progressive upseated BLH 828 to 52 by adding four seats downstairs over the wheel arches.
Roger Cox
13/01/12 – 09:14
Roger Cox beat me to it with details from Paul Carter’s excellent books so I will just add that my memories of International Progressive Coaches (as they became) are from the 1960s when their modern coaches (half a dozen brand new every year) passed my home. Sadly it all went pear shaped in the early 1970s and by 1974 the business was finished.
Nigel Turner
13/01/12 – 13:38
Nigel you say “International Progressive Coaches (as they became)” do you know when the name changed, I do have a good reason for asking.
Peter
13/01/12 – 14:24
Unfortunately Paul Carter’s book doesn’t say exactly when the name changed but it implies that it was between 1964 and 1969. However it seems that at least some of the coaches kept the old fleet name after this time. Continental trips had started soon after WWII.
Nigel Turner
13/01/12 – 15:34
Thanks for that Nigel that is near enough for me, you will see my reason for the question Friday 03/02.
Peter
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
11/11/16 – 06:34
I have every registration mark of the fleet from day one.
