Tag: Northern General

Northern General – Leyland Leopard PSU3/3 – CCN 718D – 2518

Northern General Leyland Leopard

The Northern General Transport Company
1966
Leyland Leopard PSU3/3R
Marshall DP49F

Photo taken at Wellington Street bus station Leeds. The X97 route was Liverpool to Newcastle via Leeds obviously.
Information for this photo was found on the “Bus Lists on the Web” website a very good site indeed can be seen here.

05/01/12 – 07:24

I think that the air intake below the windscreen of the Northern General Leopard indicates it was fitted with the UHV (underfloor heating & ventilation) system designed in conjunction with BET, supposedly a fully automatic system with temperature sensors and air operated valves and flaps opening and closing various air ducts through which fresh or recirculated air passed in theory. In practice it was a very different matter as the only automatic thing was both driver and passengers were very cold in winter and very very hot in summer there being few opening windows and two permanently open roof vents with plastic trays underneath to disperse the incoming air. The worst aspect from the drivers point of view was that there wasn’t a motor and fan in the demister the system relied on the forward motion of the vehicle you can imagine how well this worked on a local stopping service. I encountered this system when working for Southdown who also had it fitted to a batch of Plaxton bodied coaches, fitted with vinyl covered seats, there were of course no opening windows and only the two roof vents already mentioned plus two more under the driver or passenger control, no Jet Vent blowers were fitted and of course the same inadequate demister system which still did not work on long runs These vehicles were known as “sweat boxes” very inappropriate in winter and loathed by drivers and passengers alike.

Diesel Dave

07/01/12 – 08:52

How times have/haven’t changed. Fully automatic heating and ventilation systems are now commonplace, but they still don’t work!

Peter Williamson

07/01/12 – 10:15

…..problem is, passengers insist on breathing whatever the temperature or weather conditions.

David Oldfield

31/01/12 – 09:23

There was one automatic heating and ventilation system that worked very well and that was the one fitted to the A series Leyland National providing the filters were kept clear of the inevitable debris that collected it was very reliable. It appeared to defy the fact that hot air rises with the outlets in the roof coving,which had the added bonus of the demister clearing from the top of the screen first, much better for the driver, in fact the whole bus was comfortable. The B series was no better than any other vehicle with underseat box heaters. Although much maligned the National was not a bad bus to drive, personally I thought the Mk 2 with the 680 engine was one of the best buses I ever drove. That may stir up some controversy.

Diesel Dave

31/01/12 – 15:29

Because the National was integral it was considered as a whole. The 500 series engine, especially the 510, was abominable and overshadowed the fact that the body – admittedly very spartan – was very good. The National 2 was what it ought to have been from the start – and a worthy successor to the vehicle it killed off (or murdered?) the Bristol RE. I agree with you fully about the National 0680 – but what about the TL11 version, or for that matter the Gardner?

David Oldfield

31/01/12 – 16:35

There is a nice essay on the 500 and its problems on the AROnline site here: //www.aronline.co.uk/

Gary T

31/01/12 – 16:38

Are Leyland Nationals too late for this site? I never got too close to them for some reason, but they were certainly quirky – the Meccano body must have been the death-knell of “coachbuilding” -and they could also be used on the railways! Can any of our resident panel explain: -why they sounded like industrial food mixers (which engine was that)? -why they emitted clouds of diesel particulates which would put them off the road these days (ditto?) and -what that pretend (?) air conditioning unit/1930’s luggage box on the roof was?

Joe

01/02/12 – 07:56

Yes Joe, that’s the famous 510 engine you’re talking about – and they are strictly “too late”. The fixed head was novel, and extremely unreliable, smoky and sounded like a can of marbles. The roof box was an advanced, but expensive, heating unit.You could, however, get me really wound up about the LEZ (London’s low emission zone). You only need eyes to see the filth which can come out of modern “clean” vehicles and some TRC Tigers and Leopards (to name but two)would not “pass the test” and yet are possibly cleaner. [You certainly don’t choke in a smoke cloud behind them!]

David Oldfield

01/02/12 – 07:57

I have to take issue with Diesel Dave on the heating system defying normal laws of physics. Things may have been better in the cab but I recall many instances of getting on what I thought was a ‘warm’ National, passing under the warm air curtain at the door and sitting down. After a while your feet told you exactly where all the cold air had gone! There was a real temperature gradient. I would agree about the demisting effect though, even the saloon windows had less of a propensity to steam up.

David Beilby

01/02/12 – 07:58

I cant comment on the MK2 National as I’ve never driven one, but the early MK1’s were an abortion. When we first got them at Percy Main they were sometimes used on dual crew, and the conductors claimed that when they went round a corner they leaned over that much that they were almost walking on the windows. They soon became known as the ‘kick start buses’ as some of the myriad of sensors on the lower inspection panels were so touchy that a hefty boot had to be administered to ensure that contact was made and the vehicle would start, the steering was far too light and had no feel, they scrubbed off front tyres at an alarming rate, and on a wet road, if the vehicle went in the same direction that the wheels were pointing it was more by luck than judgment, as for the heating, on cold winter days you could be sitting with sinus trouble in you nose and frostbite in your feet, they must have had some good points but off hand I cant think of any.

Ronnie Hoye

01/02/12 – 08:00

Well I can’t answer Joe’s questions but I do remember very well the roof mounted air conditioning and heating system with outlets along the length of the interior, just above the cove panels, which quickly became blackened by the warm air, or should I say fumes of the heating. It’s astonishing that it never occurred to the designers that the heat (such as it was) would collect in the roof whilst your feet were like two blocks of ice on the floor!

Chris Barker

01/02/12 – 08:00

Thanks Gary: answers to my questions are in your quoted article (except the roofbox which was presumably the heating….)… and I thought it was just the cars (I had a Princess & lived- never to buy BL again). Let’s get back to the good old days…

Joe

01/02/12 – 08:01

As an apprentice working for West Yorkshire Road Car when they were still very much a Bristol – ECW – Gardner operator, I noted that anything built by Leyland was viewed with the deepest suspicion by the old guard. So when WY’s first Nationals arrived, and caused major headaches for the engineering staff, those deep suspicions seemed totally justified. (“We’re all doomed – aye doomed!” to quote a well-known Scotsman).
As Diesel Dave comments, the ‘A-Series’ heating and ventilation system worked very well, even in the depths of winter. The system also provided a ‘hot air curtain’ (Leyland parlance) over the entrance to reduce heat loss when the doors opened. The 510 engine was its Achilles heel as David states, and in the early days engines were covering less than 100,000 miles before the big end and main bearings disintegrated. However, following various Leyland modifications – large and small – WY examples were achieving well over 300,000 miles between overhauls in their later years. (Regarding your comment about the National killing off the RE David, three of WYs RELLs suffered the indignity of being fitted with 500 engines when new in 1970, as part of the National development programme. To add insult to injury, they still sported SRG 118-120 as their fleet numbers, even though they did not receive Gardner 6HLX transplants until a few years later, by which time they had become 1318-1320).
With regard to Joe’s queries, the ‘industrial food mixer’ sound may have been due to its engine design, being a ‘small’ unit developing 180 bhp in the National and capable of greater outputs in other applications. Cam lobes were very pointed in profile compared to a 680 or Gardner engine for example, meaning that the 510 valves snapped shut faster. Also, if memory serves correctly, the injector pressures were higher on the 510 too, adding to the cacophony. The engine was also of overhead camshaft layout, with a train of large, straight-cut gears supplying the drive from the crankshaft. The smoke problem certainly persisted, despite revised injectors, revised fuel pump settings and a different type of turbocharger. I personally wondered whether the air inlet manifold may have been the culprit, as this was simply a rectangular pressed steel box bolted onto the side of the engine. Gardner turbo engines in contrast had nicely shaped manifolds to aid the flow of air being forced into the engine, whereas the 510’s affair could not have provided anywhere near such a smooth airflow in comparison.
As for the ‘luggage box on the roof’ Joe, that housed the automatic heating and ventilation system mentioned by Diesel Dave. The system was generally pretty reliable, but I do recall one occasion sitting towards the rear of a Mk I National en route to Bradford, and being dripped on every time the bus came to a halt, or went down a gradient! Needless to say the beast had sprung a leak, and the driver had it signed off at the Interchange, but I did wonder what fellow passengers thought about the roof leaking…….

Brendan Smith

01/02/12 – 16:21

Gentlemen, as someone who was never employed in the bus industry, I am fascinated to read that the commercial vehicle side of “BL” was every bit as bad as the car division. In 1971 I bought a new Morris 1300GT and it rained the first day I had it. Next morning I found around a gallon of water in the boot so drove back to the dealers where I was told to “Drill ‘ole in the floor and it won’t fill up then”, Obviously a BL man to the core!
From memory, didn’t the Nationals also have a tendency to catch fire as I clearly recall one suffering a burnt out rear in Ashton Way, Keynsham and also reading of two or three others going the same way. I know I thought them very cheap and basic things so much so that I near enough gave up any interest in anything later than 1972 onwards!
I shall look out for any preserved examples and try to get a “sound effects” recording but from what you all say, finding one with a “510” engine still running seems unlikely!

Richard Leaman

01/02/12 – 16:22

Yes Brendan, and there were rather too many VRs with the 510 as well. Gary Ts link to aronline includes a query/comment about the New Zealand REs having the 510. This was yet another example of Leyland “choice” – you choose to take what Leyland “offered” or you choose to go elsewhere!

David Oldfield

02/02/12 – 07:10

The Leyland engine option in the VR was the naturally-aspirated 501 rather than the turbocharged 510. I expect operators had similar problems with them, but from a passenger point of view they were an absolute delight. They were very quiet, with none of the National’s clatter (which I believe came from a cooling fan coupling or something like that), and unlike the kick-you-in-the-back 6LXB, the power delivery was always ultra-smooth no matter how heavy the driver’s boot. And when coupled to the 5-speed gearbox they could motor too.

Peter Williamson

02/02/12 – 07:11

Richard, British Leyland shouldn’t be confused with Leyland Motors; the latter had stiff competition in the bus market from AEC Bristol Daimler and Guy, ‘Albion were already a subsidiary of Leyland’ and whist it’s fair to say they all had their share of lemons, it was a very competitive market and in the main they were all good vehicles, there were other manufacturers in the market but the companies I’ve mentioned all became part of BL. Before they eventually disappeared, ‘or to be more accurate were killed off’ most names became little more than badge engineered versions of the same BL know best product. BL had a guaranteed market as long as National Bus company was in existence, but as soon as deregulation came they found that their product was no longer in demand. An example of BL’s policy can be seen in the car market, pre BL, Rover’s were built up to a standard, then they became part of BL who in their wisdom or otherwise decided it would be a good idea to put a Rover badge on a Metro. Enough said

Ronnie Hoye

03/02/12 – 06:34

Just after West Yorkshire had converted its three experimental 500-engined RELLs (1318-20) to Gardner 6HLXs, in pursuit of standardisation and improved reliability, guess what came next? Yes, three VRT3s with ‘National’ engines fitted! Numbered 1971-73, these had the vertical 501 versions with turbochargers. (If memory serves correctly Peter I seem to recall that the naturally-aspirated versions were 500s in either vertical or horizontal form, but don’t ask me why as Leyland’s logic was a law unto itself in those days!). Reliability-wise they were marginally better than the 510s, but they suffered oil leaks, and engine vibrations caused problems with gearboxes, engine and gearbox mountings, and exhaust systems. Needless to say they too were converted to Gardner power (6LXB) a few years later. Viewed from the engine compartment, the 501 looked like a mass of pipework with an engine attached somewhere beneath. I think Leyland had tried to place everything on the accessible side of the engine for maintenance purposes, such as the injection pump, compressor, heat exchanger etc. More often than not however, it seemed that you couldn’t remove the faulty bit without first removing half a barrow load of other bits to get to it! As Peter states though, from a passenger viewpoint they did seem fairly smooth and quiet in the VRTs, but I’m afraid I’ll have to side with David that there were far too many VRTs with the ‘headless wonder’ fitted. Poor old East Yorkshire appeared to have lots, which seemed most unfair.

Brendan Smith

01/11/13 – 08:07

One Leopard I remember fondly is MRU 551W, a PSU5C/4R with Plaxton Supreme IV C57F bodywork new to Marchwood of Totton. I used to drive for Country Lion of Northampton. They operated it from May 1986 until July 1987. Most of the drivers could not master the Pneumocyclic Gearbox, which was why it went in PX for a Volvo B10M Duple 320 C57F in July 1987. Shame, as it was a lovely motor to drive.

Stemax1960

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

01/11/13 – 13:54

I loved the National. For three years in the 1970s the breed provided me with a great deal of commission as BL sought to master the monster it had created. I was supplying the BL spares operation in Chorley and the Workington factory with tags, tickets, labels and plastic ties and almost from first entry into service of the production models those products relating to the National showed a marked increase in demand.
It has to be said that “real” Leyland employees at Chorley hated the National for whilst it provided a constant stream of work, it also provided a constant stream of problems as sometimes the production of spares, many from outside suppliers, lagged behind the demand and the yard and workshops at Chorley always seemed to have more Nationals than any other Leyland product awaiting investigation.
Peter Williamson is quite correct in blaming the cooling fan coupling for much of the clatter.

Phil Blinkhorn

Samuel Ledgard – Guy LUF – DCN 838


All three shots from the Stephen Howarth collection

Samuel Ledgard
1954
Guy Arab LUF
Picktree C35F

DCN 838 was new to Samuel Ledgard in 1963, it was one of 35 second hand vehicles added to the fleet in an attempt at some sort of standardisation, in order to reduce stocking a wide range of spare parts.
It was new to Northern General Transport in 1954 as their 1538. A Guy Arab LUF – Chassis No LUF 72189 it had a Picktree C35F body.
It passed to West Yorkshire Road Car Company on 14th October 1967, upon the takeover of Ledgards by that company. It was never operated by WYRCC.

Samuel Ledgard - Guy LUF - DCN 838

The three pictures show it in a sorry state in July 1968 being used as a Site Office with William Press at Leathley, not far from its home ground.

Photographs and Copy contributed by Stephen Howarth

19/08/12 – 12:05

If my records are correct, Northern had 13 of these, they were fitted with Gardner 6HLW engines, and you’ve said they were built by Picktree coachworks, which was more or less next door to Northern’s Chester Le Street depot. They were designed by Doug Pargeter who had previously been with Northern Coachbuilders. I don’t know of any others of this type, so they may well have been unique to Northern General. Unlike most of the coach fleet which were predominantly cream, these were all red, but looked very smart and were always well turned out. They were built mainly for continental work, and the off side emergency door was designed to allow easy access to to vehicle whilst it was being used in Europe. I’m not aware of any survivors

Ronnie Hoye

20/08/12 – 07:53

It seems that Picktree Coachworks was founded on 6th September 1947. The coach building side of the business tailed off in the mid 1950s – possibly these Guys were the last Picktree bodies of all – and its latter day activities consisted of the sale of motor vehicles. It closed down in November 1996, being fully wound up in April 1998. As far as I can gather, the bulk of Picktree’s output went to Northern General, who also had some curious Picktree bodied AEC Regals known as “kipper boxes” whose chassis incorporated components from older machines. It is certainly probable that the Guy LUF coaches carried over much of the design expertise from Northern Coachbuilders, and they were generally considered to be high quality vehicles. We certainly need Chris Y to give us his valuable insight into their life with Samuel Ledgard.

Roger Cox

20/08/12 – 07:54

What a sad end for a fine coach These were my favourite Ledgard coaches. They had well appointed interiors complete with aircraft style drop down tables in the seat backs. I had a number of trips on various members of the batch and they were a very smooth riding machine with a very melodious transmission.

Chris Hough

20/08/12 – 07:55

Just as a footnote to my previous comments. I don’t know when it closed, but Northern had a booking office in Pilgrim Street Newcastle which was just round the corner from Worswick St Bus Station. As a youngster I remember that in the centre of the window they had a model of one of these on display in a glass case. I don’t have a clue what scale it was, but to a boy of about 8 or 10 it looked huge, I wonder what happened to it?

Ronnie Hoye

20/08/12 – 11:46

What very sad but inevitable pictures Stephen, and so close to the operating area of these fine vehicles too. I am somewhat puzzled though by the theory that they were purchased with “standardisation” in mind, and with respect I don’t think that this was the case. Rather, I think they will have been snapped up as an absolute bargain in mid life highly luxurious coaches on well proven and reliable chassis, and from an operator with high maintenance standards too. There is no doubt at all that they were in superb order when they arrived, and they gave impeccable service. I was a devotee of the old Ledgard original livery of dark blue, cream and black for coaches, and the “DCN”s looked majestic and dignified so painted. The final ivory and pale blue colours were just “not them” and didn’t suit their traditional and individual styling at all I’m afraid.
We had eight of them, DCN 831/4/5/6/7/8/9/40, and DCN 832 was bought from Wood’s of Pollington for spares only. DCN 831 was at Otley from Day One and was a joy to drive – Chris Hough so rightly says that they were smooth riding (exceptionally so) and the transmission was quietly melodious – in fact these coaches simply oozed refined quality. I was once sent to the Morley Street stand in Bradford to work a half day excursion to Bridlington (such outings were legion in those happy days) where the manager, Mr. Tom Kent, was supervising the loading. Any prospective passengers viewing the chrome and glitter of the opposition companies were quietly informed with a gesture to 831 and “Nice seats here.” By departure time the Guy was full and off we went – all without exception commented on what a lovely vehicle to travel in, and were very impressed by the Gardner’s competent and swift ascent of the notorious Garrowby Hill twixt York and Bridlington.
Returning briefly to the “standardisation” theory, I wonder if this perhaps arose from the purchase in 1963 -5 of the thirty four London RTs and five RTLs – certainly standardisation was the aim there, and they formed by far the largest class of identical vehicles in the Company’s history – sadly our “swan song” in view of the impending doom of October 14th 1967.

Chris Youhill

20/08/12 – 11:47

DCN 831_lr

I have been having another look through a box of pictures and came across this one. It is of similar coach DCN 831, again in a state of disrepair, hope it does not upset you too much seeing it this way Chris.

Stephen Howarth

20/08/12 – 14:05

Well Stephen, the entire saga of the demise of Samuel Ledgard upsets me but we just have to put up with it I suppose. The almost unreal proceedings in the week leading up to Saturday 14th October 1967 are still a sore point with enthusiasts and passengers, the latter never having had a truly satisfactory and reliable service since that date. DCN 831, in your latest picture of the near deserted roof of Armley Depot, was of course the vehicle which was always allocated to Otley Depot and, yes, I suppose I am still sad but there we are – the whole nature of the bus industry has altered out of all recognition and that’s that isn’t it ??

Chris Youhill

20/08/12 – 14:09

Sad to see this view of DCN 831, Stephen, as it captures its early demise on the Armley depot roof in June 1967, just a few months after it received a full repaint. This premature scrapping was because of badly decayed body pillars discovered during the repair of two accident-damage off-side panels (one of them seen missing in this picture?). I was fortunate enough to photograph it at Otley when freshly repainted two months earlier – see this link www.sct61.org.uk/

Paul Haywood

Samuel Ledgard – Guy Arab LUF – DCN 834


Copyright John Boylett

Samuel Ledgard
1954
Guy Arab LUF
Picktree C35F

DCN 834 was a Guy Arab LUF (chassis number 72143) with a Gardner 6HLW engine, bodied with a Picktree Continental C35F body.
Picktree were based at Bensham in Gateshead, near the Northern General headquarters, who had a financial stake in Picktree, these coaches being the last PSVs built by this concern before they turned over to the construction of commercial vehicles.
834 was part of a batch of 13 new to the Northern General Transport Company on 1st June 1954, and had fleet number 1534.
These vehicles had bold styling and had all the refinements required to undertake their principle duties of carrying 35 passengers in comfort on Continental Tours.
During their final days with Northern they undertook local tours to seaside resorts and on local Church and Club Private Hires, before being withdrawn in September 1962 and sold to W. North of Sherburn, who took all 13.
A total of 8* were bought by Ledgards, and taken in to stock in January 1963, these being DCN 831/ 834 – 840.
North’s put them through the MoT Certificate of Fitness test, before delivery to Ledgards, and obtained ‘tickets’ for 5 years for them.
They were painted by Ledgards at Armley Depot and all had entered service from there by April 1963.
The coach livery at that time consisted of black roof, cream window surrounds, black wings, and blue panel work, with cream wheels.
The final coach livery introduced by February 1964, was sky blue for the wings and window surrounds, with ivory panels, 834, along with 839 were the first to be released in these new colours, as shown in the picture.
The picture is taken on the roof of the Armley garage, where so many of Ledgard’s vehicles ended their lives.
Does anybody know the name of the Driver?
834 was withdrawn in April 1968 and went back to W. North (Dealer) at Sherburn, from where it was sold, along with 835/6/7 to Minster Homes (Contractor) in May 1968 for use as site offices.
*DCN 832 was additionally bought for spares from North’s (via Woods Coaches of Pollington, near Goole), in March 1966, and was dismantled on Armley garage roof, the remains going to Jackson (Bradford) for scrap in August 1967.
A picture of Northern General 1532 can be seen at this link.
For anybody interested in wanting to find out more about the History and Fleet of Samuel Ledgard they should read the book Samuel Ledgard Beer and Blue Buses by Don Bate. ISBN 095288499.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Stephen Howarth

18/08/13 – 06:40

Is the driver really Chris Youhill?

Joe

18/08/13 – 12:08

No Joe – that’s not me. We only had DCN 831 at Otley depot. However, now you mention my good friend Don’s book, there is a picture of me as a young conductor at the bottom of the front cover – this was as a token of appreciation for my assistance with photo captions and information on aspects of the operations side of the Company.

Chris Youhill

20/08/13 – 18:57

In the 50’s and 60’s, Northern General had a booking Office in Pilgrim Street Newcastle, which was just around the corner from Worswick Street Bus Station. Anyway, I remember that in the window of the shop they had a model of one of these in a glass case. I don’t know what the scale was, but to a young boy of about eight or nine it looked enormous. From other makers models I’ve seen, I would guess it would have probably been an inch to the foot, so about 30ins long. I wonder what happened to it?

Ronnie Hoye

10/11/14 – 06:48

There are some pictures of Ledgard buses, including one of these Guys, on the following site of Marc Parry (with whom I once worked at LCBS); scroll down a little from the top of the first page:- www.flickr.com/photos/

Roger Cox

12/02/15 – 06:35

The driver of DCN 834 is me John Jackson, taken in August 1967.

John Jackson

12/02/15 – 12:15

Nice to see you “in print” JJ – if only the good old firm was still around – the happiest days of my PSV career without a doubt !!

Chris Youhill

13/02/15 – 06:18

Chris, what made Ledgard’s such a good place to work? Were the T&Cs better than WYRCC? – I know from my time in Cambridge that Premier apparently had better terms and conditions than ECOC. Geography may have played a part, but surely Armley-based drivers could have found better terms with LCT up the road at Bramley or in the City Centre at Sovereign Street? But then again why drive for Ribble out of Bolton or Hebble, full-stop, when corporation operations in the same town(s) offered better salaries . . .? Did variety of work, or the opportunity of “top-link” work (and associated tips) play a part?

Philip Rushworth

22/02/15 – 16:26

Well Philip, any answer to your question is bound to be complex and to vary between individual employees of every grade. So perhaps its best put as a “list.”
T & Cs – very favourable indeed, and the wage rates were good and generous. When I started there were no sick pay or pension schemes but many other advantages.
Duties – comprehensive and interesting with none of the soul destroying “one road and the same mate for ever” system of many of the municipalised and group concerns.
We had five depots, each with its own rota and route systems derived from its origin – built by SL or acquired. Well to be exact four depots, as Ilkley was a “running shed” administered totally from the larger Otley one – a seven week rota of local folks from nearby, while Otley had a twenty week rota – with a little twist !! All twenty drivers moved forward week by week while seventeen of the conductors moved “up the sheet” – the other three conductors were to all intents and purposes always on the Otley local cross town service from Bradford Road (Golf House) to Newall Estate – they all liked it and it suited them with their Ultimate ticket machines !!
Variety of work – plenty as most duties involved working on more than one route daily – not all, but most – and the mix of routes was considerable, varying widely between very very busy town services and almost always hectic longer interurban ones. Running times were generally pretty tight, especially with traditional live transmission vehicles and much hilly terrain with frequent stops and, despite the oft heard modern saying “Ah but there wasn’t the traffic around then” there was more than enough to contend with.
Rolling stock – now here was the real appeal, especially to anyone with even a trace of interest and enthusiasm. The mix was incredible, with representatives new and previously owned, of a wide array of chassis and body makes, ages and origins – and mainly distributed seemingly “willy nilly” around the depots. Larger concerns might view this as unsatisfactory and often had rigid allocation policies – fair enough if it suited them. Despite this way of working at Ledgard’s maintenance by skilled and dedicated staff was extremely good indeed – most of the heavy work being carried out at Otley and the huge Armley Leeds premises – resulting in the virtually 100% reliable service at all times and in all conditions which the Public have never enjoyed since and a “straw poll” on the streets would certainly confirm this. The local press after the October 1967 SL demise was full of justifiable venom against the new regime(s).
Its often forgotten, or perhaps not even known by younger people, that until Samuel himself died in April 1952 all vehicle purchases since 1912 had been brand new, other than those acquired with taken over Firms. When the necessity then arose for multiple reasons, Death duties chiefly, to buy second hand the Executors chose carefully and wisely and only rarely bought a lame duck or, as is the amusing term oft used in the motor trade, a “dog.”

Chris Youhill

23/02/15 – 07:30

Chris, thanks for that reply. So was Yeadon a “full” depot then? I’d always assumed it was an Otley dormy shed, like Ilkley.
Samuel Ledgard is always presented as the archetypical shrewd Yorkshire businessman . . . but he wasn’t so shrewd as to take the necessary steps to protect his main business interests in the event of his death. That being said he did die at a relatively young age and might not have thought it necessary at that time – and I suppose there are disadvantages in forming limited liability companies.

Philip Rushworth

23/02/15 – 07:31

Chris Y – You certainly have a nice and relaxed writing style, which is easy to read, informative, and easy to understand.
I must admit (and I am sure others will agree) that I read every one of your contributions to this site because they are so full of knowledge and interest, not just on Samuel Ledgard, as above, but on all aspects of PSV (none of that PCV stuff on here) operations, and history.
Long may you continue to contribute and keep me, at least, educated and informed with your wealth of knowledge.
For those on here who want to know more about the History of Samuel Ledgard then I would recommend the book, BEER AND BLUE BUSES – by DON BATE (ISBN: 9780952388494), if you are able to find one for sale. Mr Y has contributed, and, (not for the faint hearted) there is even a picture of him on the front cover.

Stephen Howarth

23/02/15 – 08:45

Indeed Philip, Yeadon was to all intents and purposes a full independent depot, and was referred to right up to the end in 1967 as “The Moorfield” – officially and among the staff and passengers. The name was of course that of the Moorfield Bus Company taken over by SL in 1934. All essential maintenance and quite heavy intermediate work was carried out there, but major overhauls and recertification were done at Otley. or Armley. The crews at Yeadon, about fourteen if I recall correctly, were a lively set of loveable individual characters – no one more so than “the Reverend Candler” who very sadly passed away en route for a late turn aged only in his early forties. Only very occasionally did Yeadon have to exchange staff with Otley in extreme circumstances – like my Siberian Monday rest day on a split turn with the aforementioned Reverend. Otherwise on Summer Sundays it was routine for Moorfield staff and buses, if available, to be sent on standby to Otley, where literally huge crowds of Leeds (mainly) and Bradford city dwellers needed taking home after a nice day out – sometimes the queues were still large at nine and ten on Sunday evenings, and all were cleared without fail – such was the reliable SL service.

Stephen – thank you indeed for your kind remarks which leave me blushing here. I do find it easy to write about the subject, and I enjoy keeping the fading history of the old Firm, and the earlier industry in general, alive where I can. I had to chuckle at your warning to the unwary that my picture (late 1957) on the cover of Don’s book is not for the fainthearted – I’m afraid that a current view if published would have the A & E Departments on overtime !! Don was only saying last evening that its around ten years since the book was published – time flies.

Chris Youhill

23/02/15 – 14:28

There are currently 3 copies available on ABE Books website (other book searches are available) they range between £30 and £40 +p&p

John Lomas

24/02/15 – 06:14

I’m surprised no one has picked up on Philip Rushworth’s comment that Samuel Ledgard died relatively young.
Born in 1874 and dying in 1952 that made him 78 years of age.
I would have thought that a “good innings” for that era.

Eric Bawden

24/02/15 – 06:15

Six in total John, from the three outlets

Chris Youhill

27/02/15 – 06:59

Eric, you are right: I didn’t check my facts – in my defence, my books are currently packed away – and I’d confused the date at which he became licensee of The Nelson . . . which would have made him about ?14 when he put his first char-a-banc on the road! But, it just serves to underline my point: he’d have been 72 when Clement Atlee’s Labour government took power – over the next few years he’d have had plenty time to see which way the wind was blowing on Capital Transfer Tax . . . and yet he did nothing to protect his businesses, despite his age.

Philip Rushworth

London Transport – AEC Routemaster – 254 CLT – RMF 1254


Photographer unknown – if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

London Transport
1962
AEC-Park Royal Routemaster
Park Royal H38/31F

Whilst on loan to Halifax Corporation this was London Transports first front entrance Routemaster, it also had a tow bar fitted so it could tow a luggage trailer when doing airport duty. I think there was a connection with “British European Airways” somehow but not over sure of exact detail If you know, let me know, please leave a comment.
There wasn’t many front entrance Routemasters compared to rear entrance even the Green Line coaches were rear entrance although they did have platform doors, nice seats and fluorescent lighting. The Routemaster really was built for town work having 9.6 or 11.3 litre AEC engines or a 9.8 litre Leyland Engine with a gearbox that gave the driver the choice of semi-automatic or fully automatic. Put all that power and the automatic gearbox together in a light chassis less body And you have a very nippy bus.
In one of my reference books on buses which I use for information I came across the following sentence.
London introduced front entrance Routemasters (FRM) in 1967 with a rear mounted A.E.C 11.3 litre engines and Park Royal bodies seating 41 on the upper deck and 31 on the lower deck, and a laden weight of 13.55 tonnes.
A Rear engined Routemaster! now that’s a new one on me can not find any photos on line or any information anywhere. The book was published by the Blandford Press so I would of thought the content would of been carefully checked. So all you Routemaster followers out there let me know if you know something about this mystery rear engined AEC, please leave a comment.

An interesting article regarding the front entrance Routemasters is here.

FRM1 (there was only 1 built) it is still around, it is part of the London Transport museum collection and I think it is kept at Acton. This link should reveal all! //www.countrybus.org/FRM/FRM.html

If that does not work search for IAN’S BUS STOP and click on the FRM in the list of London bus classes. Hope that helps.

Michael

The rear engined Routemaster FRM 1 was unique, as was the above pictured RMF 1254. It was used by British European Airways prior to the purchase of their front entrance Routemasters.
In addition to Halifax, RMF 1254 was also loaned to Liverpool Corporation and East Kent, whilst in London Transport ownership.
It was fitted with a Leyland engine before being sold to Northern General in November 1966, where it lasted until October 1980 and is also now in preservation.

Pete Cook

RMF1254 was exhibited at the 1962 Earl’s Court Commercial Motor Show, and was later involved in service trials with BEA. It did indeed tow a luggage trailer whilst with them, and the experiment proved successful enough for BEA to place an order for 65 short forward entrance models. These too towed luggage trailers. They were powered by AEC AV690 engines developing 175bhp for use on the M4 motorway. RMF 1254 (Routemaster Forward entrance) was later sold to Northern General, where it joined their fleet of 50 similar vehicles. The rear engined Routemaster FRM1 (Front entrance Routemaster) used approximately 60% of standard Routemaster body parts. It had independent coil suspension at the front with air suspension at the rear. It was powered by an AEC AV691 11.3 litre engine developing 150bhp @ 1800rpm. A shame it was never allowed to enter production, as no doubt Northern General would have taken delivery of some. They were certainly impressed with the high standards set by the originals, which did not suffer the effects of corrosion encountered with their Atlanteans of a similar age.

Brendan Smith

With reference to London Transport’s tie-up with BEA, as an airline BEA didn’t want the overhead of operating passenger road vehicles and space to house them. So, while the vehicles were owned by BEA, they were operated by London Transport using LT drivers and were accommodated at the former Chiswick Tram Depot (later to become Stamford Brook bus garage). The service started initially with half-decker Commer Commandos; and continued into the early 1950s with a dedicated fleet of RFs (AEC Regal IVs with special Park Royal deck-and-a-half bodies).
Replacements were needed in the 1960s – larger aircraft now required larger vehicles. LT had conducted trials with double-deckers, one an AEC Regent V with a large rear luggage compartment and the other, RMF 1254, with a trailer.
The RMF trials having been successful, BEA ordered a fleet of 65, together with 88 luggage trailers (by Marshall). These RMAs differed from RMF1254 in various ways:
1. They were of the standard Routemaster length, 27ft 8in.
2. They had the standard engine but were geared for 70mph motorway operation.
3. They were equipped with paraffin heaters to keep the interior warm during the sometimes lengthy waits at terminals.
4. The destination displays were eliminated (as passengers knew where they were going)
5. An illuminated panel above the front entrance advertised the airline, as did a matching panel on the offside.
6. The drivers front window was of the single pane non-opening variety.
They went into service between the West London Air Terminal at Cromwell Road and Heathrow Airport from October 1966 after a brief trial period.

(Information adapted from Ian’s Bus Stop website.)

Trevor Haynes

25/09/11 – 18:02

When London Transport and Green line started to run down the Routemaster fleet they became scattered far and wide, but if I’m not mistaken Northern General were the only other operator who had Routemasters of any type from new. They were bought for the routes between Newcastle and Darlington, Hartlepool, Stockton and Middlesbrough. The Sunderland/Bishop Auckland route run by Sunderland & District (Northern General) used Burlingham bodied PD3’s fitted with rear doors.

Ronnie Hoye

08/10/14 – 06:58

I joined London Transport at 19 as a conductor on the trolleys at Stonebridge park garage, when we took over the Routemaster they were in a new world like a dream. I conducted then passed out as a driver, these buses were still in the experimental stages, some had Dunlopillow suspension that made the poor conductor feel sick. We had one that I reported for break problems RM1144 it frightened the life out of me one day, when I took it over the driver said watch the brakes, well as I was pulling up at a bus stop the brakes suddenly went off I put more pressure on the pedal and was thrown over the steering wheel, with a bit of practice I found if that if you left your foot where it was the brakes came back on. They were the most wonderful vehicle that was ever designed, we were told to drive our ones in auto all the time, Cricklewood were told to drive theirs in manual as it saved so many litres of fuel. As one of you comments about the sound of the engines, ours were AEC.

Brendan, you are right about the roar of that Leyland engine, wonderful a few more bits about the Routemaster, most of the Routemasters were governed at 44 mph, they were numbered in SLT, VLT, WLT, RM1000 was the odd one out with 100 BXL if I remember. I think it came from Brighton, then they went on to CLT and so on, some were fitted with moving advertising boards on the lower deck. I asked an instructor at Chiswick about taking one on the skidpan, and was told that at that time if it went into a skid it went into neutral gear but if it hit something it went back into gear, I was told on my test to pull up the dip in Chiswick put it in second gear and pull away, I found that was the only gear that it wont pull away in when the bus suddenly ran back down the slope. I have got great memories of my days on London Transport, my colleagues and the public, the old char ladies on the night bus from Edgware to London Bridge were great to chat to and we did not have much trouble at all.

Bix Curtis

17/11/14 – 08:36

254 CLT_2

Here is an updated picture of this vehicle. The preserved vehicle is seen at the LVVS running day.

Ken Jones

07/01/16 – 17:03

If you read this, Bix, I’d love to hear more recollections of RMs and also of trolleybuses. The trolleys must have been quite difficult to drive, especially when compared to a fully automatic RM.

Ernie Jupp

04/07/20 – 07:35

Short bodied RMs were designated 5RM5 and longer RMLs designated 7RM7. Does anyone know what the RMFs were designated. I believe the shorter BEA Routemasters were 9RM9, but what about RMF 1254 and the Northern vehicles?

Martyn H. Taylor

Northern General – AEC Routemaster – EUP 405B – 2105

Copyright Ronnie Hoye

The Northern General Transport Company
1964
AEC-Park Royal Routemaster
Park Royal H41/31F

Pictured at the Seaburn Bus Rally, this 1964 Routemaster has been beautifully restored to its original livery and is now part of the North East Bus Preservation Trust Ltd collection; it was one of the second batch to be delivered. I know the two batches differed slightly, but I’m not sure if it was only that the first ones had rear wheel spats. Prior to the Routmasters, the last front engine half cabs to carry the Northern name were the 1958 PD3’s with Orion bodies ‘Sunderland District’s were rear door Burlingham bodies’ before the Routemasters arrived on the scene their were then three or possibly four batches of PDR1 Atlanteans with both MCW and Roe bodies. Northern ran a lot of longer routes alongside United, when they introduced the front entrance Bristol Lodekkas Northern decided it was time to replace the rear door Park Royal bodied PD2’s on these routes with a more modern vehicle, but rather than use Atlanteans they bought the Routemasters specifically for the purpose. I think reliability may have been a factor as the early Atlanteans were ‘A tad temperamental’ Northern specified the Leyland O600 engine and the same gearing as the Green Line RMC’s, as far as I’m aware they gave excellent service and reliability was never a problem. Our depot didn’t have any so I must be one of the few drivers at Percy Main to have driven one on service, I was on the number 1 which ran between Whitley Bay and Lobbly Hill Gateshead, my bus ‘an Atlantean’ broke down at Team Valley and a replacement was sent out from Bensham depot, it turned out to be a Routemaster. I only drove it for a couple of hours but found it a very nice vehicle to drive.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye

13/05/12 – 08:41

…..and I spent many a happy hour driving AEC and Leyland engined ex LT RMs in Reading for Reading Mainline. I now have the occasional charge of a preserved green RML. Still nice to drive but unfortunately, like most RMLs, re-engined.

David Oldfield

13/05/12 – 18:49

What make was/were the replacement engine(s) and did the conversion entail any gearbox/transmission changes, David? In the back of my mind, Iveco comes to mind.

Chris Hebbron

14/05/12 – 07:43

There several experiments using Cummins C (Javelin 8.2), Scania (9.2), DAF (?) and IVECO (7) engines. DAF never got beyond the one experimental, the others went into “mass” production. I don’t know the numbers, nor how it was decided to allocate which engines to which (batches of) vehicles.
These vehicles tended to keep their AEC/LT (semi)automatic gear-change. The vehicle I regularly drive – and will be doing so next week in Slough – is a 1966 RML with IVECO engine with original gearbox which still operates in either semi or fully automatic modes.
From the cab it is very obviously a re-engine although, surprisingly, from the saloon it sounds more like a “proper” vehicle. I can only surmise that this is because it still has the original gearbox. It does not, however, have the performance of an AV590 or 0.600 – nor the real sound.
The last refurbishments, however, were also made to comply with “Euro…” regulations and have the Cummins B (5.9) engine and Allison fully automatic gearbox both found on the Dennis Dart. They are therefore cruelly, but aptly, known as “Dartmasters”. The latter have also totally changed the character of the cab.

David Oldfield

14/05/12 – 09:29

Thanks, David, for that interesting background information. It’s also interesting that the original engines performed better than their replacements. Maybe some of it is strapping the engines up with ‘save the world’ technology, understandable, but not conducive to performance or fuel consumption!

Chris Hebbron

14/05/12 – 14:57

As a P.S. to my comments above. It’s all speculation, but given the reputation for build quality and reliability that the Routemaster built up with Northern, I think it’s safe to assume that if the RML had gone into production AEC would have loaned a couple to Northern for evaluation purposes, then who knows?

Ronnie Hoye

14/05/12 – 18:30

Ronnie; do you mean RML or FRM? The Northerns were front entrance RMLs (or RMFs in London language). FRM1 was the rear-engined prototype which Leyland knocked on the head because it competed with its own new Atlantean.
There should have been three prototype FRMs – one of the other in Sheffield Transport colours. Alan Townsin said that both Yorkshire Traction and Northern General had already shown an interest in the new model “off the drawing board”. Having tested it for “Bus and Coach” in August 1967 he concluded that “…..the general impression was of a vehicle which made everything previous seem out of date, in much the same way as the RT in its day.”

David Oldfield

14/05/12 – 18:46

It’s an age thing David, I did mean the RMF

Ronnie Hoye

15/05/12 – 07:34

It’s an age thing for most of us who use this site! What day is it nurse?

David Oldfield

15/05/12 – 07:36

I wish I’d been issued with fingers instead of thumbs, FRM, the one that Leyland couldn’t wait to kill off, in much the same way that they did with the Fleetline, as the Americans say ‘if you can’t beat them, buy them’

Ronnie Hoye

15/05/12 – 07:38

Chris, can I just point out that David’s comment about the performance of replacement engines was specific to IVECO, which was the smallest of the units in the original experiment. I recently had a ride on an RM with a Scania engine and it went like a bat out of hell! It also made some nice traditional sounds which were entirely compatible with the RM’s transmission.
As regards FRM1, this still exists of course, and it is very special. I once had the pleasure of riding on it, and it felt like meeting the Queen!

Peter Williamson

15/05/12 – 13:31

Very interesting comments, David, on the FRM. I never saw the ‘Bus and Coach’ article, (yes, I ought to have seen it!), and have never seen any pictures of the prototypes, but it sounds as if it had great potential. Leyland, as Ronnie points out, were eager to kill off anything that competed with a Leyland product. Operationally, the Fleetline was a far better bet than early Atlanteans, being more economical and less expensive to maintain, and it would have been a boon to the industry to have had an AEC alternative, too. Leyland’s arrogance, which manifested itself in many ways at that time, was a tragedy for the whole of the British motor industry.

Roy Burke

15/05/12 – 18:00

There were other interesting possibilities which Leyland killed at birth. The only really decent and successful rear-engined single-decker was the Bristol RE. It eventually had the option of Leyland engines (which I approve of) but another option “on the books” which was neither promoted nor taken up was of the AH691 AEC engine. Ulsterbus (and all offshoots) had shown a great interest in the AEC option but were dissuaded by Leyland from taking it up – just as later, New Zealand were “persuaded” to take the Leyland 510.

David Oldfield

16/05/12 – 07:47

In some ways fitting a Scania engine into a Routemaster is the supreme irony. The Routemaster started life with AEC, they in turn became part of British Leyland ‘not to be confused with Leyland Motors’ At the time of the ‘merger’ AEC had designs for a new vehicle, but BL in their wisdom or otherwise decided not to go ahead with it, all the plans ‘including those for a new engine’ were sold to Saab and the result was the 80 and 100 series and every vehicle since, so I suppose you could argue that by using an AEC designed Scania engine in a Routemaster the wheel has in effect turned full circle

Ronnie Hoye

22/09/13 – 07:51

Regarding the allocation of re-engined Routemasters in London, the rough rule was by operating group: South London and London General got Iveco re-engines and everywhere else got Cummins. The reasoning was, the DMS buses also had Iveco engines at these garages.
I used to like the Routemasters on the 130 from Newcastle to Sunderland as a boy.

Mick

22/09/13 – 14:35

When were the last of these vehicles withdrawn and what happened to them afterwards?

Chris Hebbron

23/09/13 – 05:57

The answer to the first question is that Northern last used them in service on 16th December 1980. Someone else will have to answer the second bit!

Dave Towers

25/09/13 – 18:18

I have a Classic Bus magazine from 1994. The article must have been about the late 1950s, when they were in the process of creating the Atlantean. In it were clear, side by side pictures of the two prototype Leyland’s running on a route for evaluation by a bus company. One had the engine in front of the front axle, with a front wheel drive. It made the steering very heavy & would tilt up without the conductor on the rear platform. During tests they always made sure they had a conductor on. The other type had the engine on the rear platform & a full front. There is also a rear view picture of a top secret third type, which from memory only got to the test track at night, but was later broken up & the parts used on a conventional layout. If anyone would like further information I will read it again for more accuracy. If anyone would like the magazine, you can have it, for postage costs only.

Andy Fisher

26/09/13 – 06:30

I drove a Routemaster just once, at an LT Open Day – OK I paid a few circuits “on” so had a few laps. Compared to the PD3 on which I did my PSV training the Routemaster felt like a real driver’s bus – everything light to the touch and set up just right, although the horizontal gear-selection gate felt odd to start with. However, I’d take a PD2/3 over a Lodekka anytime – for me the Lodekka’s driving position, with that raked steering-wheel, was just uncomfortable/awful.

Philip Rushworth

26/09/13 – 14:53

Philip, don’t forget that the horizontal gear-selection gate was probably specified to replicate the pre-selector used on the many thousands of RTs with which all LT drivers would have been familiar (to say nothing of the many municipalities who operated pre-selector Regents).

Stephen Ford

26/09/13 – 14:53

The disposal details of all 50 Northern General Routemasters (2085-2134) are to be found at www.countrybus.org/RMF/RMFa.html  
This site, Ian’s Bus Stop, has full life histories for most London Tansport classes and closely related classes, e.g. London Country Leyland Nationals. Well worth a visit.

Dave Farrier

28/09/13 – 16:14

Thx, Dave F.

Chris Hebbron

01/10/13 – 06:30

mrm

Whilst on the subject of the Routemaster, has anyone seen a photo of the Chinese Youtong-built vehicle destined for Macedonia, designed with more than a nod at London’s Transport’s ubiquitous product!
(Copyright unknown).

Chris Hebbron

01/10/13 – 10:45

Oh – if only Colin Curtis could see this!!!!!

Michael Hampton

01/10/13 – 17:46

The Youtong vehicles were ordered as an up to date version of the buses that Skopje took second hand from LT in the early 1960s. Those of course were RTs but they have always been regarded as something special in the minds of the citizens and, obviously, the authorities. As they didn’t buy any second hand Routemasters at the time LT were withdrawing them, the new vehicles can probably be regarded as competing with the Borisbus in terms of using old shapes and ideas in a modern format. Neither would win a beauty contest but both are at least interesting and controversial. Just a pity that no British manufacturer could cater for Skopje’s needs.

Phil Blinkhorn

01/10/13 – 17:47

Yes, he only missed out on the news by a few months.

Chris Hebbron

01/10/13 – 17:48

Is this going straight into the Uglibus section?

Joe

26/10/13 – 17:11

I was very interested in your section on Routemasters, particularly in the Tyne and Wear, County Durham areas 1970’s. One of your correspondents notes the 130 route, Newcastle to Sunderland. I can remember this being route 40 prior to 13O and continuing to Hartlepool or Middlesbrough. I am interested in obtaining any further info on this. I am also keen to bring back some more memories of routes south of the Tyne from this period and can recall a lot of them but would like to see a list. Do you have any idea where I can access such detail?

Dave Alcock

27/10/13 – 16:12

The 40 was a rather hybrid route, dating historically to the owners of various parts of it before ‘grouping’. From the thirties until NBC days it was really two overlapping routes; United’s 40 ran from Middlesbrough to Sunderland via West Hartlepool, and that of Northern / SDO ran from West Hartlepoool to Newcastle via Sunderland. The overlapping section was a joint operation, with all of the companies running journeys from West Hartlepool to Sunderland to give a more frequent headway.
The United / Northern territorial boundary was at Easington Village, where passengers had to rebook, and United would run further short workings within their section, as well as frequent duplicates to fit in with mining shift times. In the same way Northern had short workings between Newcastle and Sunderland.
The United timetable only showed the Newcastle journeys as brief details, and the Northern timetable ignored the Middlesbrough section altogether (indeed anyone travelling from Sunderland to Middlesbrough would have found the Durham District routes D1 / D2 to be quicker.

David Todd

31/12/13 – 07:20

It’s great reading all your comments,I was a conductor on the trollybusses in NW London 1958-1961 then went onto the RMs we changed overnight. The RM was a wonderful bus but in those early days some of them were experimental. We had RM 1134 at Stonebridge Park and the first time I took it out as a driver I pulled into a bus stop applied the brakes which came on then went off I braked harder and was nearly thrown through the windscreen. Then we had different suspension Dunlopillow was one where after a short while the conductor was sick because the rear of the bus just kept bouncing up and down all day. All garages were told to drive the bus in different ways we were told to drive in automatic at all times, Cricklewood were told to drive in manual it was supposed to save on fuel, I found that when the bus was fully loaded in the rush hour because the gear change from 1st to 2nd was so quick you lost all power so I used to pull away in auto click into second manually gun it then back into top. I last drove an RM in 1965 when I left, I am now 72 and have the chance to climb back into that wonderful bus for one more run {only on the test track at Canvey Island Essex} but I am looking forward to it you never forget how to drive them.

Bix Curtis

24/04/18 – 06:47

Just to say in my opinion the last Routemasters front design was the best looking and handsome bus to this day.
The bonnet, grill, lights etc., never seem to get dated.
Anybody agree?
A real Bus!

Chris Campbell

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

10/06/18 – 08:50

Can anyone help me with info for a model of a Northern Routemaster in yellow. Three were painted in yellow for Tyneside area operation but one carried ‘GATESHEAD’ fleetnames, the other 2 ‘Northern’. Can anyone tell me which one it was that carried ‘Gateshead’ please.

Rob

11/06/18 – 05:56

Whilst the undermentioned website lists all 50 Northern General Routemasters with photographs of each one (and in some cases a history of allocations, liveries etc) some vehicles have only the dates new, date renumbered and date sold. //www.northernroutemaster.co.uk/
There is a photograph of FPT 595C (Fleet number 2125 renumbered to 3109) in yellow but I can’t read the fleetname but it looks like Northern.
On the SCT61 website there is a photograph of RCN 687 (Fleet number 2125 renumbered to 3109) in yellow with the Northern fleetname. On the Northern Routemaster website there is a note regarding this vehicle: ‘In August 1975 this was one of two Routemasters to receive a less striking version of the Newcastle PTE yellow livery’. Photo here: //www.sct61.org.uk/ng3071
Hope the above helps narrow down your quest I don’t know.

David Slater

23/06/18 – 06:51

NGR_1
NGR_2

These pictures of a Northern General Routemaster in a sorry state were taken in June 2014 at the yard of Carnell’s Coaches, Long Sutton , Lincolnshire. Carnell’s had previously gone into liquidation in November 2013, though the site still seemed to be in use, though access was not possible when I took the pictures. I cannot identify the actual bus because no number plate or fleet number can be seen. The destination blind shows “Eastbourne”, and “Hailsham” is also just visible, which might give some clue to its earlier operation and hence identity. I returned to the site again shortly after to take another look, but the vehicle had then gone.

Roger Cox

Northern General – AEC Reliance – EFT 551 – 2154


Photographer unknown – if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

The Northern General Transport Company
1961
AEC Reliance 2MU3RV
Burlingham Seagull 70 C41F

On the subject of bus liveries that has been discussed on this site recently. Some operators seemed to adopt a one style fits all livery that hardly varied from one type of vehicle to another, and made little or no allowance for differences in body style or trim. This example from the NGT group is a rather sad looking AEC Burlingham Seagull that was once a rather attractive Wakefield’s coach number 251 based at Percy Main, the depot I worked at. Unfortunately I don’t have a picture of one of these in coach livery, but in common with most other Northern group coaches ‘except Sunderland & District’ it would have been predominantly cream with maroon window surrounds and skirt, I cant remember if the roof was cream or maroon, but they did look rather splendid. This one seems to have had some other changes made, the centre roof window above the windscreen has been removed or painted out, and the seats appear to have been changed as the originals would have been red and didn’t have grab rails fitted. Sunderland & District had some Leyland Tiger Cub’s with identical bodies and they ended up in bog standard stage carriage livery.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye

A full list of Reliance codes can be seen here.

30/10/11 – 15:02

Most regulars know that I am both an AEC and a Burlingham man. Whilst it is self evident and accepted that the original Seagull was a classic, unlike many others, I quite like the 60/70 models – even if they were not quite up to scratch with the original.
I never remember one of these in Manchester in the 70s but I only ever remember coaches in this livery, not the reversed cream version. Was the Tyne – Mersey service treated as a bus service for these purposes? This would still qualify as a quality livery by today’s standards.
One fascinating piece of trivia is that individual NGT group fleets were either AEC, Leyland or Guy fleets. So no standard corporate ordering there then.

David Oldfield

02/11/11 – 06:46

David, you are not on your own. Whilst, undeniably the Burlingham Seagull was the ‘Creme de la Creme’ I also had a soft spot for the 60/70 series.
My local operator Baddeley Bros. of Holmfirth had two original Seagulls on Royal Tiger chassis KWU 844 (1951) and LWY 653 (1953). They then had Bedford SBG/Burlingham RWY 277 in 1956, again still quite attractive. Then came four SB3’s in 1959 with the hugely curved windscreen Burlingham body (probably a coach version of the PA series Vauxhall Velox/Cresta cars of the period) Then in 1961 came Bedford SB1 2496 WY with the Burlingham 61 body. This body, I thought, suited the front engine Bedford better than the underfloor AEC/Leyland chassis. This coach was followed in 1962 by a Duple Gannet bodied SB5. Things were starting to slide Burlingham wise!
All these coaches served me as school buses between 1965/70 so perhaps I’m looking through rose tinted glasses.
I thought the 1959 petrol engined SB’s mundane, 2496 WY and it’s Gannet bodied sister 433 BWU, so-so but when we got the Royal Tigers with the classic Seagull body which was not that often, despite there age, that was the ‘Creme de la Creme’!

Eric

02/11/11 – 09:26

Couldn’t agree with you more, Eric. They were a superb coachbuilder but, towards the end, had more than their fare share of dogs – especially regarding design. Apart from the plastic roofs on Seagull 60s, I’m not aware of any considerable drop in quality and the Duple Continental and Firefly/Dragonfly were Burlinghams in everything but name and seemed to have a good reputation.
I’m a Sheffielder, who had relatives in the Barnsley and Huddersfield areas, and always thought Baddeley Brothers looked quite classy. I was only really aware of them as a student in the early 70s, passing through on the X19. By that time, the principal vehicles were Bedford YRQ/Plaxton Panorama Elite Express grant vehicles. They still looked smart, though.

David Oldfield

02/11/11 – 15:04

David, Your mention of plastic roofs on the 60’s has jogged my memory. I remember the cloth trim on the interior ceiling of both 2496 WY and 433 BWU being quite badly stained by the ingress of water when they would probably be only about five years old. Baddeley’s also had a Duple Alpine Continental on a Leopard chassis 474 EWW. Of course the other sizeable coach operator in the Huddersfield area was Hanson’s who had two batches of Firefly’s on Ford chassis in 1963/4

Eric

03/11/11 – 06:27

Strange, isn’t it, how many operators had heavy (or medium) weight service buses and lightweight coaches? Hanson and Booth and Fisher (recently posted) had AECs and Ford coaches, York Pullman was AEC/Bedford, the Doncaster indis went down a similar road and this was replicated around the country. Firms like Baddeley Bros were less common, but by no means unique, with their mix of heavy and light weight coaches.

David Oldfield

03/11/11 – 17:46

Hanson’s was rather a complex fleet in the fifties. The coaches were a mix of Regal III and Reliances and Bedfords and the buses were AEC with a smattering of Albions. Between 1956 and 1966 most of the AEC’s went on to be rebuilt as buses. The Bedfords were kept anything from 2 to about 5 years and from about 1959 all new coaches were Fords right to the demise of the Hanson business in 1974. This change of allegiance is thought to have being something to do with Hanson Haulage buying large numbers of Ford lorries.
Baddeley’s although being a smaller operator chose both Leyland and Bedford for new coaches in the fifties, many with Burlingham bodies, this policy continuing into the sixties. They also purchased quite a few secondhand coaches, including 2 that had been operated at one time or another with Hansons. Another feature of Baddeley’s was the hiring in for the summer season of coaches from local dealer Hughes and the Baddeley’s fleet name and number being applied. Several of these were in Wallace Arnold cream as the had be leased by WA for one or two seasons from Hughes when new. This led to Baddeley’s having quite an interesting and varied fleet. Wish I had owned a camera in those days.

Eric

04/11/11 – 07:04

I agree with you David. The last of what some would call ‘proper coaches’ to carry the Wakefields name were two Plaxton Embassy Bedfords ‘SB8’s I think’. The next Wakefields after that were Alexander ‘Y’ type DP’s on Leyland Leopard chassis, but I think that would have been a decision based on economics. Percy Main depot didn’t have any long distance or express routes, so the coach fleet was only used for private hires and excursions and most were de-Licensed at the end of Blackpool Illuminations, so apart from three double deckers the Wakefields name virtually disappeared from October until about Easter, where as the DP’s were used all year round and went onto stage carriage work in winter months. If memory serves, for the first couple of years some of them had the seats changed to ordinary bus type during the winter.

Ronnie Hoye

13/11/12 – 08:40

I remember going to the Lake District in the early 60s on one of these and it did indeed have the reversed coach livery the above is a later incarnation.

Malcolm Swaddle

18/04/13 – 17:40

EFT 550

Not in colour I’m afraid, but I’ve found this photo of one of EFT 551’s sisters in its original Wakefield’s livery. As I’ve said, Percy Main had four of these, EFT 550/3 – 250/3; and they remained in service as coaches until about 1970, they were then transferred to Northern and downgraded to D/P’s

Ronnie Hoye

Northern General – AEC Reliance – FT 9917 – 2262


Photographer unknown – if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

The Northern General Transport Company
1957
AEC Reliance MU3RV
Willowbrook B43F

When it was new in 1957, this Willowbrook bodied AEC Reliance was one of three in the Tynemouth and District fleet, FT 9916/8 – 216/8 the livery was always all one colour but they never carried adverts. They were originally DP41F’s, but when they were transferred to Northern General they were re-seated as buses and I think the capacity was increased to 43. They had a lever operated manual door, and believe me your arm got rather tired if you had one of these on a busy local service route, so needless to say the door spent a lot of time left open on warmer days. As I remember them from their days at Percy Main, they had a lower trim on the front, similar to the Venture bus to the right of the picture, and they also had a trim that ran from the rear of the front wheel and right round the back of the vehicle at the same height as the top of the inspection panels, but 40 odd years on it may well be that the memory is playing tricks.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye

12/03/13 – 13:16

I have to say the lack of any form of relief – trim or paint – reminds me of some other operators in the BET group. It just goes to show the level of tolerance for “individuality” that once prevailed (or still does) in some groups. The relief Ronnie mentions, even if it’s only the trim as seen on the Saro Tiger Cubs Ribble had, or the front end on the Venture vehicle in the picture, does make a lot of difference.

Pete Davies

12/03/13 – 14:08

Pete, I’ve just been talking to a former colleague of mine from Percy Main, and he reminded me of something I had quite forgotten. When they were about six or seven years old, one of these (unknown) caught fire and was extensively rebuilt, it may well have been this one, and that would explain the lack of trim.

Ronnie Hoye

12/03/13 – 14:58

It would indeed, Ronnie. Thanks for the update.

Pete Davies

18/05/14 – 06:28

The registration makes it look older as most registration offices had progressed much further in their issues by 1957 ie 3 letters, 3 numbers and some were well into reversed series. Yes, Tynemouth had its own vehicle registration office issuing one mark (FT) and up to 1957 had only issued 9917 marks!

John4521

PMT – AEC Reliance – 761 CVT – C8761

PMT - AEC Reliance - 761 CVT - C8761

Potteries Motor Traction
1958
AEC Reliance 470
Willowbrook C41F

PMT had five of these coaches plus one similar acquisition on a Leyland Tiger Cub chassis from the takeover of Dawsons, Ash Bank. They suffered as always with AH470 engines with cylinder head gasket and wet liner seal failures. This is why this photo was taken adjacent to Llandrindod Wells Railway Station on a summer evening in June 1971. A similar Reliance had taken a party of Scouts on a weeks expedition to Tenby and inevitably the engine had failed in South Wales. I was summoned at short notice to take a replacement vehicle arriving at South Wales Transport Ravenhill Depot shortly before midnight. I chose the scenic route rather than the M6/M5 as I didn’t fancy becoming another engine failure casualty at the side of the Motorway. During 1971 and 1972 three of these Reliances were modified for one man operation and repainted in bus livery. The conversion included jack knife doors the motor for which would only fit in the space occupied by the nearside front passenger seat hence reducing the capacity to 39. As the vehicles were 13/14 years old by this time one wonders if it was really worth the effort. I recall 762 which was allocated to Biddulph Depot put in some quite respectable mileages as an omo saloon.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

16/11/14 – 09:44

An odd design which seems to transition from the early 1950s at the front to the late 1950s at the rear.

Phil Blinkhorn

16/11/14 – 11:21

JCN 449

Northern General had a batch of very similar C37F Willowbrook Viking coaches on an AEC Reliance 2MU3RV chassis, so as I understand it, they would have had the larger AH590 engine. Delivered in 1959, they were JCN 445 to 454, numbered 1845 to 1854. About 1967, it was decided to convert them for use as OPO vehicles, but the changes were far more radical. I don’t know if the conversion was carried out ‘in-house’ or whether they went back to Willowbrook to be done, but the whole front end was chopped off, and a new service front grafted on, I believe they were also up-seated to 41. Here is an example of the end result, I believe they remained in service until around 1975

Ronnie Hoye

16/11/14 – 18:03

Were the gasket/liner problems eventually cured by AEC?

Chris Hebbron

17/11/14 – 06:47

In a word, Chris – No! AEC’s involvement with wet liners began in 1935 with the introduction of the ‘6.6’ A172 engine (actually of 6.75 litres) in the lightweight Regal II. This engine proved to be decidedly troublesome, and the wet liner problems were carried through into its postwar ranges developed from about 1953. In the end, AEC reverted to dry liners in the AV/AH 505/691/760 engines. By contrast, Dennis employed wet liners in its ‘Big 4’ petrol and O4/O6 diesels from the mid 1930s onwards, and all were generally free of the troubles that plagued the AEC efforts.

Roger Cox

17/11/14 – 06:47

2MU3RV was still the AH470, Ronnie – 2U3RA was the AH590. Both of these had wet liners and gasket head problems. The AH691 and AH760 were new dry liner engines which did not have the same problems. Sadly the reputation was tarnished and many did not return to AEC. Also, like the later Leyland Panther, others persevered and overcame the problems.

David Oldfield

17/11/14 – 09:51

Thx, Roger. It’s amazing, from what you say, that folk continued to buy AEC’s with these engines, if they were so troublesome, although I admit that post-war distress purchasing would retain undeserved loyalty to a large extent. Were LTE’s engines of this type? I’ve never heard of problems with those Incidentally, did AEC/Leyland ever offer ‘outside’ engine options at ordering stage, such as Gardner? I’ve never heard of any, but who knows?
David O, strange that, following on with gasket/wet liner problems, which existed for decades, AEC cured Crossley’s engine breathing problem within months!

Chris Hebbron

17/11/14 – 11:37

The AV (vertical) engines never suffered to the same extent as the horizontal AH engines and substantially LTE had no problems with RMs (once the teething problems were ironed out) – including the AV590. Neither did Sheffield with its Regent Vs and Bridgemasters. [In passing, the AV version of the AH691 was actually a wet-liner and really an “out-boring” of the AV590.] It is surprising that they carried on so long before they eventually reverted to dry-liners – and as I said lost friends along the way. Those who stayed were rewarded by the AH691/760. AEC were not alone in having problems with putting an engine on its side. I am a “fan” of the O.600/O.680 – but this was not without its problems either – as Stephen Barber has alluded to in his Wallace Arnold Books. Conversely, there was enough faith in the later AEC engines to offer them, initially, as an option, in Series 2 REs and VRTs. The famous Werner Heubeck at Citybus who force BL to continue the RE for Northern Ireland was known to be very interested in an AH691 RE but BL back out at the last minute and cancelled the option – much to Heubeck’s anger. [Something similar is thought to have happened with the VRT – when someone showed interest, the option was withdrawn.] As for Gardners, there were the famous Rochdale D2RAG Regent Vs and the less famous Glasgow and Aberdeen D2RVG Regent Vs.

David Oldfield

17/11/14 – 16:50

Huddersfield JOC took delivery of 16 Regent’s and 37 Regal’s with 6LW engines between 1935 and 1939.

Eric Bawden

17/11/14 – 17:19

Forgot those, Eric. Crossley engines were another, and simpler, matter. AEC basically knew the problem – Crossley refused to pay royalties to Saurer and so mangle the design of the piston/cylinder head to make it different. AEC simply came up with a design which solved the problem without infringing the rights of Saurer. [I’m not an engineer, so I cannot elucidate.]

David Oldfield

18/11/14 – 06:23

As I have always understood it, the bored out 11.3 litre version of the AEC AV590 wet liner engine was the AV690, which was introduced at the same time in 1958. It was most commonly employed in commercial vehicle models such as the Mammoth Major V and in many export PSV’s, but was optional in the 2D version of the Regent V, and in horizontal AH690 form in the 2U and 4U larger Reliances, though it was not differentiated in the model designation.
The AV/AH691 was the 11.3 litre dry liner engine which was announced in late 1964 at the same time as its smaller equivalent the AV/AH505. The AV691 was then offered as an option in the Regent V and Renown, models, which were then designated Regent 691 (prefixed 3D) and Renown 691 (prefixed 4B) though none of the latter were built.

John Stringer

18/11/14 – 06:23

David, the wet liner 11.3 litre was the AV/AH 690. The 691 was a dry liner in vertical and horizontal formats. Even the switch to dry liners did not resolve AEC’s engine reputation. The AV/AH 505 in particular soon revealed weaknesses in service. A cover plate was fitted on the top of the block under the cylinder head, and this plate was held in place by a number of set screws. The inevitable expansion and contraction of this component in service caused the screws to fail, leaving a hole that allowed coolant to escape. This, if not spotted and remedied, could result in a seized engine. The design defects were progressively eliminated, but AEC’s reputation as an engine builder was not enhanced.

Roger Cox

18/11/14 – 06:24

Ronnie – that’s a proper bus conversion done by Northern, however as they were done in 1967 they would operate for quite a few years to get the money back. We only started conversions in 1971 and as I said, perhaps a bit late in the day – but don’t forget PMT had the largest fleet of Roadliners in the world and anything had to be tried to mitigate the chronic unreliability.

Ian Wild

18/11/14 – 06:25

Chris, for a short period in 1956/7 the AEC Regent V was offered with the option of a Gardner 5LW or 6LW engine. There were only three takers; Glasgow and Dundee Corporations bought examples with vacuum brakes and spring operated preselector gearboxes (model D2RV6G,) and Rochdale Corporation had examples with air brakes and air operated preselector or semi-automatic gearboxes, model D2RA6G. The Rochdale examples were described in my article on this site.

Don McKeown

18/11/14 – 10:19

The prototype Crossley HOE7 engine design came about when the firm’s engine designer, W.C. Worrall was diagnosed with tuberculosis prior to the outbreak of WW2. He was sent to Switzerland to recuperate, and, whilst there, visited the Saurer factory, where he himself had once worked. Saurer gave him permission to use the company’s advanced four valve head and toroidal piston cavity in his new engine design. Shortly after Worral’s return to Britain, war broke out, limiting Crossley’s commercial options, but three prototype engines were constructed with combustion chamber detailed design being made by Leslie Bennett, a mathematician and combustion specialist. Thus Crossley had done all the right things and succeeded in a designing a powerful and reliable unit. Then, as the new SD/DD42 chassis production began to get under way in 1944, Saurer, entirely reasonably, asked for a royalty or licence payment in recognition of the fact that the Swiss company’s patents were employed in the head design. The exact details of the fees involved have since been buried in the passage of time (probably deliberately). The Crossley MD, Arthur Hubble was having none of this, and refused to comply, instead ordering that the cylinder head of the new engine be redesigned completely to avoid any payment to Saurer. The new head had two valves per cylinder instead of four, and the toroidal piston cavity was reshaped with sharp concentric ridges, the (misplaced) theory being that these would improve the swirl effect. The new head was married up with the original block intended for the Saurer type head, and the result was a motor strangulated by hopelessly contorted airflows. In addition, poor coolant circulation led to overheating and high back pressure in the crankcase. This ill advised redesign ended the involvement of Saurer, but left Crossley with a exceptionally poor engine. When AEC took control of Crossley, it lost patience with Gorton’s refusal to attend to the cylinder head deficiencies and undertook remedial design itself. It is an overstatement to suggest that AEC simply solved the problems with the Crossley engine. The downdraught cylinder head was not a cheap conversion, and, although it did improve the airflow characteristics and reliability issues to a very great extent, the HOE7 could never be turned into a truly good motor. What baffles me somewhat is the fact that Dennis used a four valve head and toroidal piston cavity in its O4 and O6 diesels, yet no payment was ever made to Saurer. Presumably the Dennis design differed sufficiently to escape the Saurer patents.

Roger Cox

18/11/14 – 15:50

Aberdeen Corporation did have five Gardner engined AEC Regent V’s with Crossley bodies (205 – 209). In 1959 they purchased five AEC Regent V’s with AEC engines and Alexander bodies (271-275). By 1963, they also had been fitted with Gardner 6LW engines.
I seem to recall that Maidstone and District also converted some coaches in the same manner as that done by Northern General.

Stephen Bloomfield

19/11/14 – 05:57

Stephen, I think the Maidstone vehicles you refer to had Harrington bodies but the end result was quite similar.

Ian Wild

24/11/14 – 17:03

On the subject of seized AEC Reliance engines I Drove for Stanley Gath Coaches of Dewsbury in the late 1970s. Due to a vehicle shortage one weekend a AEC Reliance/Plaxton was hired from Kirby Coach dealers of Sheffield. Returning from Blackpool on the Saturday night the engine seized up on the M62. Rather then owning up to this, a visit was made to a scrappers at Barnsley and a similar engine was obtained and shoe horned in. I dare say no one was ever the wiser.

Philip Carlton

25/11/14 – 06:31

Thx, folks, for the answers to my queries.

Chris Hebbron

Northern General Transport’s PD3/4s

In 1958, the Northern General Group took delivery of 53 Leyland PD3/4 vehicles. To the best of my knowledge, they were their first 30ft double deck buses; they were also the last rear entrance, although not the last half cabs, that particular label went to the Routemasters of 1963/4. I know a few half cabs were drafted in post NBC, but that was after the lunatics had taken control of the asylum.

The independence NGT allowed its subsidiaries in vehicle choice and specification has been discussed before on this site, and here is another example.
13 were ordered by Sunderland District Omnibus YPT 286 to 298; 286/298
They were primarily bought for use on SDO’s longer routes, and had Burlingham H41/32RD bodies, and very smart they looked in the understated Navy blue and white livery.

The remainder were all H41/32R MCW Orion bodies.

3 for Tyneside NNL 48 to 50; 48/50 Sage green and cream.

5 for Gateshead & District HCN 475 to 479; 75/79 Chocolate and cream.

20 for Northern YPT 825 to 484; 1825/1844 BET red and cream.

12 for Percy Main of which ten AFT 224 to 233; 224/233 for Tynemouth & District and two
AFT 234 and 235; 234/235 for Wakefields Motors Ltd. All twelve in BET red and cream.

I think its fair to say that the Orion would not be everyone’s first choice for favourite body, and the least said about the early ones the better. However, lessons were learned and these 1958 versions were a vast improvement on those on the earlier Guy Arab’s and Leyland PD2’s. As was the practice with Gateshead and District, theirs had a Newcastle Corporation style destination layout, but that and different liveries apart, outwardly, all the Orion’s looked to be pretty much the same. The interiors were finished in brown with Rexene covered seats. However, the 12 for Percy Main were finished to a much higher interior specification, as well as a different colour, ‘green’ they had moquette upholstered seats. Shortly after delivery, the front number plates were moved from the radiator to the front panel below the windscreen. AFT 930, had an extended life as a driver training vehicle, and I’m pleased say that it has survived into preservation, and is currently in the extremely capable hands of North East Bus Preservation Trust Ltd where it is undergoing extensive restoration. There was also a Sunderland District Omnibus example ‘YPT 289’ which was listed as awaiting preservation, but it seems to have dropped off the radar, does anyone know anything about it?

AFT 229 fleet number 229 is pictured above round the back of Percy Main depot, and looks to have just arrived from MCW, but in fairness, their vehicles were always well turned out, but this was in an age before ‘pride’ became an outdated idea that was surplus to requirements.

Ronnie Hoye
01/2016

28/01/16 – 09:55

‘The front number plates were moved from the radiator to the front panel below the windscreen’.
I have often wondered why, when the majority of operators were content to have the front number plate in the traditional position below the radiator, some chose to locate them in odd places.
Below the cab windscreen might have been something to do with better visibility than down at ground level. But why have them up on the waistrail, beneath the destination indicator? Southdown had consecutive batches of buses in this period with number plates ‘up there’ and blow the radiator. So there seems to have been no company policy.
And Barton was famous for putting adverts down below the radiator ‘Parcels by Bus’, for example, with the number plate high up on the body. Clearly, they weren’t worried about road dirt obscuring the number plate, as it would have been their own advert that would have been obscured.
Was it to do with identification of buses in the depot? Then surely prominent fleet numbers would have been the answer and operators have total control of where these are sited.
Does anybody here know the reason ?

Petras409

28/01/16 – 11:39

Usually when operators moved the number plate from the radiator onto the bodywork it was to allow radiators to be swapped from one bus to another without having to swap the plate as well.

John Stringer

28/01/16 – 16:08

YPT 289 is included on the NEBPT’s list of preserved buses with a North-East connection, dated 27/2/14, and that seems to be regarded as the ‘current’ list. It’s given as awaiting restoration, with owner Ritchie, Peterborough.
Is there reason to suspect that its status has recently changed?

David Call

29/01/16 – 07:11

I find it fascinating to note the allocated registration series of these buses. Clearly Northern General allowed it’s subsidiaries to use their local office for their particular batch, so we have, AFT, HCN, NNL, and YPT. One (AFT) is just starting a three letter forward series, one (HCN) is about a third through, one (NNL) just over half-way, and the other (YPT) is the last in a forward series, about to start reverse issues. Quite fascinating when all these issuing offices were in the same area! No doubt that all changed in the 1974 sort-out.

Michael Hampton

29/01/16 – 17:35

Yes Michael, prior to 1974, apart from vehicles acquired by way of a takeover, all vehicles new to United, were registered in Darlington ‘HN’, whereas NGT group vehicles were registered in several different authority areas. Vehicles new to Tyneside were Northumberland ‘JR-NL or TY’ Tynemouth & District and Wakefields Motors were Tynemouth ‘FT’. SDO were County Durham ‘PT or UP’ and Gateshead & District were Gateshead ‘CN’. A handfull of Northern vehicles were registered in South Shields ‘CU’ the remainder were all either Gateshead or County Durham. Strangely enough, Sunderland had two registrations, ‘BR & GR’ but neither seem to have been used by the NGT Group

Ronnie Hoye