Tag: Park Royal

ex Guernseybus – Leyland RTL – KYY 647

Preserved - ex Guernseybus - Leyland RTL - KYY 647


Copyright both shots Bob Gell

ex Guernseybus
1950
Leyland RTL
Park Royal H29/23F

A couple of weeks back we had a question on the ‘Q&As’ page regarding front entrance ex London Transport Leyland RTLs. In response Bob Gell contributed the above shots which were taken at the North Weald Rally, 6 July 2008 and the following information of an ex Guernseybus converted RTL.
As can be seen it is now preserved and back to carrying its original London Transport fleet number of RTL 1004 but not quite the original livery. Bob is led to believe that KYY 647 was converted by Guernseybus in their own workshops, for use as back up on inclement days to their open top RTs one of which was was RT 2494 registration KXW 123 with a Weymann body; it carried Guernsey registration number 54636. Guernseybus may have moved the entrance to the front, which I will come back to later, but as can be seen from the insert shot the staircase was only moved towards the centre of the bus and the stairs went rearwards.
The subject of the original query, JXN 366, the former RTL 43, new to London Transport in 1949 joined the A1 Services fleet in February 1958, owned by T & E Docherty of Irvine. A photo of that vehicle can be seen here. It is thought to have been converted ‘in house’ in this case, the staircase was moved to the front as per normal front entrance vehicles. In 1971, it passed to Duff, a fellow member of A1 Services, who operated it until December 1973. It is now in preservation.
Two questions arise out of this posting there is always at least one, firstly, KYY 647 carried two registrations 47312 and 995 during its time on Guernsey does anyone know why. Secondly whilst researching into these conversions other sites and documentation described the conversion of them to forward entrance not front entrance, Bob thinks that could spark a whole debate on its own, I think he could be right.

Photographs and Information contributed by Bob Gell

By common consent, Front entrance means just that – at the front, by the driver. Forward entrance means as far forward as possible – ie just behind the front axle (and engine) of a standard half-cab (or full-fronted) vehicle.

David Oldfield

I am guilty of using ‘front’ entrance for such vehicles but reading supports the use of ‘forward’ entrance. It seems that front entrance should be used for more modern vehicles, such as the Atlantean, Fleetline, etc. I think some confusion arises where fleet lists show anything not centre or rear entrance as a code ‘F’.

Scott Anderson

Not one, but two forward-entrance RTL’s from different sources. These were complete news to me. Thanks for the interesting post.

Chris Hebbron

The first picture gives the impression that the main object of the modification may have been one man operation – i.e. angled window on left hand side of cab, as was done to various half-cab single deckers by sundry operators.

Stephen Ford

I had quite a few enquirers regarding what the conversion of the rear entrance looked like, well, Bob obliged with the following shot.

Peter

KYY 647_rear_lr

Wow – art deco rounded glass at the rear – very expensive, I’d have thought. Better to see an off-centre rear view than full rear one, because the large rear pane of glass downstairs would be off-centre and the overall look quite asymmetric. Also the offside window ahead of the rounded one seems higher than its counterpart this side and the other side windows. In general, though, a neat job.

Chris Hebbron

Hi Chris I think the higher window you refer to is the new Emergency Door see the little shot inserted in the text.

Spencer

Ah Yes, Spencer, I missed the little photo: the door isn’t so clear on the upper photos. Thanks for clarifying.

Chris Hebbron

06/07/11 – 07:21

The team of inhouse coachbuilders at the then operating Guernseybus were tasked with relocating the rear entrance forward in order to allow the company to continue to operate its entire fleet with just a driver onboard – which was standard practice on the island.
As for the registration number changes, between 47312 and 995, it’s mainly to do with a relatively lucrative market for cherished number plates in Guernsey, which has numeric only registrations. The number 995 may well have been sold (or indeed bought as an investment) by Guernseybus during the double deckers tenure in the island. 47312 would, as a registration number have very little value.

Neil (Guernsey)

31/03/13 – 07:52

You have a photo of my guernsey bus I restored this bus in 1984 the reg on it was JPA 81V as this was the year it came over from the island it was sold for £65 and then it cost £110 pounds on the fery. I got Swansea to give me a reg for it’s year 1958 it was then LSV 748. Hope you find this of use.

John Sergeant

14/09/14 – 07:21

RTL 1004 was the Lambeth Safety Bus in the 1970.
The Abbots Langley Transport Circle bought it from a scape yard in Essex near Ongar. We had the bus for a number of years. We had to sell the bus on when we lost our parking space, and was unable to find another close to our base in Abbots Langley Herts’.

Stephen Norman

23/01/17 – 07:30

I use to own this bus wondered where it ended up and what is it doing now.

Alan Ullmer

A. H. Kearsey – Leyland 7RT RTL – KGK 797- 62

A. H. Kearsey - Leyland 7RT RTL - KGK 797- 62

A. H. Kearsey
1949
Leyland 7RT RTL
Park Royal H30/26R

The London Transport RTL class, known to LT as the 7RT, appeared from 1948, and consisted of a modified Titan PD2 chassis frame to accord with features of the AEC Regent RT, enabling the interchangeability of bodywork between the two types. Though fitted with the standard O600 engine, the gearbox was the AEC preselective epicyclic of the RT class, a transmission option that was not a standard offering by Leyland to operators elsewhere. A total of 1631 RTL buses was made, though, as with the 4826 of the RT class, that number never ran together in service. The majority of RTLs had Park Royal bodies, though 32 were originally fitted with Weymann and 500 with Metro Cammell bodywork. To these were added 500 of the mechanically similar eight feet wide RTW class, all of which had Metro Cammell bodies. Under the LT Aldenham overhaul system, bodywork became swapped about between chassis on passing through the works, and tracing individual bodies to chassis during their London Transport lifetimes is complicated. With characteristic profligacy, LT went ahead with developing its new wonder, the Routemaster, from 1954, despite the fact that large numbers of brand new RT and RTL buses were then languishing in store without ever having turned a wheel in revenue earning service. Four years later these stored buses eventually took to the road in 1958, the year before the first production Routemasters began appearing in volume, and they then began displacing the perfectly sound earlier RTLs of 1948/49 after a service lifetime of a mere nine to eleven years, during which full chassis/body overhauls had been undertaken. These withdrawn RTLs, in fine mechanical and body condition, soon found favour with operators at home and abroad (many went to Ceylon) where they rendered years of reliable service. The former RTL 133, KGK 797, delivered to London Transport in February 1949, was sold in January 1959, despite having received a full Aldenham overhaul in 1956, when its original body was replaced with another, also by Park Royal. It was then bought by A. H. Kearsey of Cheltenham, together with RTLs 138/149, KGK 802/813, and all remained with that operator when it was taken over by Marchant’s Coaches in January 1968. In the August 1970 picture above KGK 797, fleet number 62, in Kearsey’s sombre grey and blue livery, is seen (if I recollect correctly, though hesitantly after half a century) in Bishop’s Cleeve. Marchant’s continued to serve this area right up to October 2019 when all its bus routes were withdrawn following issues with Gloucestershire County Council over funding. More Kearsey pictures may be found here:- www.flickr.com/photos/tags/kearsey/

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

08/03/20 – 12:29

A minor correction to the details given here by Roger. The 500 Leyland 6RT, RTW class, had Leyland bodies and not Metro Cammell ones.

John Kaye

09/03/20 – 06:32

You’re right John. My error.

Roger Cox

09/03/20 – 06:33

Did some also have Cravens bodies?

Roger Ward

10/03/20 – 06:03

I think that there were some Saunders Roe bodied RT’s as well?

Andrew Charles

10/03/20 – 06:06

The Cravens bodies, as with the Saunders bodies, were on the RT class, A.E.C. Regent III.
RT1402-1521 had Cravens bodies, whilst RT1152-1401 and RT4218-4267 had Saunders bodies.

John Kaye

11/03/20 – 06:25

The bus has generous destination panels, yet, Kearsey left the bus completely ignore every one of them!
Marchant’s Coaches, Cheltenham, are still in fine fettle, with some 7 local school bus services, private hire and mystery tours, and regular day-out tours to places like Legoland. Nice to mention a well-established family concern not in trouble or to announce its demise.

Chris Hebbron

12/03/20 – 06:07

……though they recently pulled out of local service operation, citing too much bureaucracy amongst other issues. Until, I think, the 1980s, they had an amazing network of stage routes around the Cotswolds, worked from a base at Aldsworth, the timings of which they seemed to regard as a state secrets – the recently dropped work around Cheltenham had come from other sources, notably replacing the estimable Castleways when that concern closed.

Phil Drake

15/03/20 – 06:47

Those painted-over destination boxes bothered me as well. I grew up in a place and an era when the buses I saw displayed half a dozen via points on the front, back and nearside, and showed the destination front and back, and even now TfL buses have some route information on the front. So I’m baffled – how did Kearsey’s passengers know where the RTL was going? Was it only ever on one route, which was known to everybody who was likely to use it, or did the conductor shout from the platform “We’re only going to the Town Hall today, love, but we can drop you off at the shops if you like? No sir, we don’t go to the station, not on a Wednesday!”?

Don Davis

Like it, Don; good point well made. Mind you, there were good displays, but confusing ones, too. Portsmouth Corporation, in its middle years, had double-lettered routes. ‘A’ one way and ‘B’ coming back. there was never mention anywhere of this and folk would wait for an ‘A’ return journey and ignore the ‘B,s going by! And this at a seaside resort with lots of holidaymakers. I grew up with suffix letters on route numbers in London, although they never went very high,, but Portsmouth had one route, 143, which went from ‘A’ to ‘F’. ‘A’ was the whole route, then the higher the suffix the shorter the route. Much higher than ‘F’ and the route travelled would have been about a hundred yards!
Incidentally, Cheltenham, which historically only had numbered routes, now has some with letters. I’m surprised that Gloucestershire County Council, which controls bus route numbers, hasn’t forced a change.

Chris Hebbron

16/03/20 – 06:50

16-03-2020

The mention by Phil Drake of Castleways of Winchcombe reminded me of this photo taken in November 1973 of their Leopard PSU3B/4 Plaxton Panorama C49F, apparently named Countess, new in November 1972 looking absolutely stunning in their dark blue and silver grey livery. Taken in Cheltenhams somewhat bleak bus station amongst the autumn leaves.

David Lennard

17/03/20 – 07:07

17-03-20

My delight with Castleways was seeing their Temsa Safari coach, which looked absolutely gorgeous in the black with gold band livery. (Photo by R Sharman).
On one occasion, I took their coach on their route to Stratford-upon-Avon. Cheltenham Bus Station, although the late 1940s reinforced concrete shelters have now been replaced by light metal glazed ones, is as bleak, draughty and lacking any comforts as it ever was. Not even a toilet. Perhaps the bus is too uncomfortably reminding them of the Great Unwashed!

Chris Hebbron

18/03/20 – 07:02

They used single deckers on their routes, and the double deckers on schools/factories and as duplicates on stage services.
They were well kept up until Marchants took over. They lost the ladies college work and other work to Castleways and started to go down hill. Marchants was always to be avoided if possible. Its only in the past 20/30 years that Marchants have improved.

A number of years ago Cheltenham and Gloucester used the same numbers, so country routes were adjusted to 3 numbers, and some renumbered, Cheltenham went to letters, Red and White Forest routes renumbered.

Mike

19/03/20 – 06:39

Thx, Mike for that info.

Chris Hebbron

19/03/20 – 06:41

Chris Hebbron mentions Portsmouth’s confusing route numbers. Another seaside resort determined to baffle holidaymakers was Southport. Most routes were cross-town, and the route number went with the destination, so if you went from the town centre to Woodvale on an 11, you would return on a 10 bound for Preston New Road. Then when there was a timetable change, the routes would swap partners, and the 11 to Woodvale might return as a 2 to Marshfield!

Peter Williamson

19/03/20 – 06:52

Middlesbrough Corporation Transport used all the letters A – Z. That all changed when TRTB, MCT and Stockton were merged into TMT. Then they moved to numbers, as TRTB and Stockton used numbers. The “O” Bus or “0” ZERO was a joint Stockton/Middlesbrough Bus. 46 and 47 routes later. United then had to add a “2” so the 63 became the 263 to avoid confusion. Then it became Cleveland Transit, a disaster. Then Thatcher scrapped the buses!

Mr Anon

20/03/20 – 06:22

Castleways livery may have looked Black but was Trafalgar Blue.

Tim Presley

21/03/20 – 06:45

As my wife will testify, with a tut and a sigh, Tim, (“Do you think this colour suits me?”) I’m colour blind!

Chris Hebbron

21/03/20 – 06:47

Morecambe managed without route numbers until the sixties as did Ledgard until the very end of the company.

Chris Hough

21/03/20 – 06:50

Checked to see if my comment came and then thought no that’s not right it’s Wellington Blue.

Tim Presley

Stockton Corporation – Leyland Panther Cub – GUP 501C – S1

Stockton Corporation Leyland Panther

Stockton-on-Tees Corporation
1965
Leyland Panther Cub PSRC1/1
Park Royal B43D

Not the best shot in the world I think it was the first shot on the film and suffered from a touch of light getting into the cassette. Anyway there are not many shots of duel entrance vehicles on site so I think it is worth showing. The engine on the Panther was positioned horizontally under the floor at the rear and inline with the chassis as opposed to the Atlantean which had a transverse vertically mounted engine. As can be seen in the above shot the seats behind the centre door had to be raised to go over the rear axel and engine compartment. But having the engine at the rear did as can be seen enable it to have a very low step into the vehicle all though there is a step up immediately behind the driver. The coach version of the Panther had a one level raised floor but with having the engine at the rear it meant it had 120 cubic foot (3·4 cu.m.) underfloor storage for suitcases and the like. The engine was the reliable Leyland O.600 six cylinder diesel developing 125 b.h.p. in the bus chassis and 130 b.h.p. in coaches with a four speed epicycle gearbox with fingertip electric change and air suspension was offered as an option.

———

I know you are not meaning to mislead, but you haven’t mentioned that the Panther Cub (as opposed to the Panther) had the well regarded, but noisy, 0.400 engine.
This was the final version of the 0.300/0.350/0.375 Comet/Tiger Cub engine. The 0.400 was better known in the Bedford VAL/VAM14 and Bristol LH applications. It was necessary to fit this compact unit to the Panther Cub as it has a shorter rear overhang than the Panther.
The power output, at 125 b.h.p, was the same as the 0.600 but the torque (pulling power) and therefore potential life span was less.

David Oldfield

Manchester Corporation – Panther Cub – BND 872C – 72

BND 872C

Manchester Corporation
1965
Leyland Panther Cub PSRC1/1
Park Royal B43D

Delivered in April 1965 and photographed in June 1970 following the formation of Selnec is Manchester Corporation Panther Cub No 72, BND 872C. The Panther Cub was a shortened version of the Panther, the length being reduced from 36ft. to 33ft. 6ins. on an 18ft. 6ins wheelbase. With the 6.5 litre Leyland O400H engine instead of the Panther’s 9.8 litre O600H, the Panther Cub proved to be somewhat underpowered. The limited appeal of the model resulted in its being offered only from 1964 to 1968 during which 94 examples were built, though the same basic chassis with more powerful AEC engines was more successful as the AEC Swift. Manchester took eight Panther Cubs, BND 863C- 880C, Nos. 63 to 80, with Park Royal B43D bodywork, though the seating capacity was later altered on No. 71 to B36D and on No. 74 to B42D. The Corporation tried to improve the engine output on some of these buses by experimenting with turbocharging, not entirely successfully. The picture above is of additional interest in that the fleet number of BND 872C is displayed as 27 rather than 72. Was this just an inadvertent “numerical spoonerism” by the body shop?

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

09/02/20 – 08:31

The legal lettering on a Southampton Atlantean mentioned, for some odd reason, PROTSWOOD Road rather than the correct PORTSWOOD. I saw in Stubbington on one occasion a road marking for GOPSROT, and there is a hotel in Southampton which ‘failed’ some years ago. The rot seems to have set in after the opening of a brasserie, spelled incorrectly after one has to assume the sign writer was distracted by the presence of a lap-dancing club opposite. Who knows what distractions the fellow applying 27 had?

Pete Davies

09/02/20 – 10:22

The fleet number is correct – it had been renumbered not long before when Manchester renumbered their single-deckers from 46 upwards as 1 upwards (so fleet numbers were reduced by 45). The whole batch of Panther Cubs totalled twenty with the original pair new as 61/62 (ANF 161/2B).

David Beilby

10/02/20 – 06:47

CPPTD made a success of our Panther Cubs, mainly because the city is mostly dead flat. One survives.

Dave French

10/02/20 – 06:48

Thanks for the corrections, David. I overlooked the original two. I did not know that these buses had been renumbered – Peter Gould’s LTHL listings do not record this. Apologies also for the typo in my copy. Eight should read eighteen.

Roger Cox

10/02/20 – 06:50

I didn’t know about that renumbering, and evidently I’m not alone, as Peter Gould’s fleet history in the Transport History Library says that 61-80, 81-99 and 101-110 passed to SELNEC retaining the same fleet numbers. I wonder, did the missing Panther 100 (destroyed by fire at MCW before delivery) result in a missing 55, or were 101-110 reduced by 46 instead of 45?

Peter Williamson

10/02/20 – 11:12

I suppose Portsmouth (CPPTD) could be described as making more of a success of the Panther Cub, but they were still rather short-lived compared with more traditional vehicles. Typically, the PD2s and PDR1 Atlanteans worked for around 16 years, those converted to open-top even longer. But of the 26 Panther Cubs, nine went in 1977, at just ten years old. Four more went in 1979/80. The remaining 13 were withdrawn in 1981, which may have been life-expired withdrawals, but was also influenced by the results of the then-recent MAP project. The result of that saw a “rationalisation” of services, and saw all 14 of the five-year old Leyland Nationals sold as well! The Panther Cubs did look smart when new in their traditional CPPTD livery, but I did not like the eventual transformation to an almost all-white scheme with just a red line. I wonder whether drivers, mechanics, etc saw them as a “success”?

Mr Anon One

10/02/20 – 11:13

It was SELNEC which renumbered the ex Manchester single deckers.

Mr Anon Two

11/02/20 – 06:53

To add to the comments from Mr Anon Two, according to the P.S.V. Circle SELNEC Fleet History (PC7), the vehicles transferred to SELNEC under their old numbers on 1st November 1969, and the fleet renumbering was introduced in March 1970.
Peter W asks about the Panther Cubs and the Panthers. 61-99 became 16-54, and 101-110 became 55-64.

John Kaye

11/02/20 – 06:55

SELNEC 55 was GND 101E, so there was no gap in the new numbers for the missing GND 100E.

Dave Farrier

11/02/20 – 16:26

Thanks everyone for clarification. I hadn’t noticed the date of the photo, and I was fooled by the apparent survival of the “City of Manchester” fleet name, though I must say whatever is above it doesn’t look much like the city coat of arms.

Peter Williamson

12/02/20 – 16:46

Did the registration number GND 100E signify the bus was fitted with a Ford side valve engine? If so, it is not surprising that it was missing, although not in the accepted sense of the word. Try changing the plugs!

Mr Anon Three

13/02/20 – 06:06

72/4/6/8/80 were allocated to Queens Road Depot from new. I used to travel to school on them sometimes on service no 142. There was one regular driver who always started in third gear, another started in second then slammed it into fourth without a pause. I always thought they were lively performers.
I believe 61-70 had the turbocharged engine. Some if not all of these had machines to cancel prepaid tickets which were bought in books of ten. These ten also had lever controls for the exit door, while 71-80 had the exit door controlled by an extra position on the gear lever, as later became standard on the Mancunians. All had the front door controlled by a foot control.

Don McKeown

15/02/20 – 06:31

It was 71-80 that had the turbochargers, but they were troublesome and usually disconnected. I too thought the Panther Cubs were lively performers, as long as the revs were kept up. I’m quite surprised at the widespread view that they were underpowered.

Peter Williamson

London Transport – Leyland Cub – CLX 548 – C111

London Transport
1936
Leyland Cub SKPZ2
Park Royal RC18F

CLX 548 is a Leyland Cub SKPZ2 and dates from 1936. New to London Transport with fleet number C111, she has Park Royal C18F bodywork in what used to be called an ‘observation coach’ style. Some people call this body layout as HDC18F while others call it RC18F. This view was taken at Southsea on 9 June 1985. I’ve never seen her since.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

09/10/15 – 07:29

Lovely photograph! If only more observation coaches survived, especially the elegant Whitson versions of 1948-52. The correct body code for observation coaches is “RC”. “HD” refers to a Crellin-Duplex half-decker with a continuous roof line and interweaving compartments on two levels. Anybody who describes observation coaches as “HD” clearly hasn’t understood the PSV Circle body code system (and, sadly, this includes some compilers of published fleet histories who SHOULD know better, so I understand confusion on the subject!). Airport coaches such as the 4RF4s of BEA and the similar Leylands at Manchester are also correctly prefixed with an “R” as this actually stands for”raised floor-line” rather than “raised roof”.

Neville Mercer

09/10/15 – 07:29

Both this, and sister CLX 550 are listed as survivors in the PSV Circle’s 2015 edition of Preserved Buses. But they both seem extremely camera shy. I’ve never seen either of them in real life.

Petras409

09/10/15 – 17:25

The non-LT livery was used on these vehicles, because they operated the night-time Interstation service around Central London, where their large luggage capacity was invaluable. There is some argument about the seating capacity, being also quoted as both 19 and 20! If memory serves, they were replaced by ST’s during the war, no doubt to increase passenger capacity.
Not only have these buses (bar one) disappeared, but so also has our 24-hour rail network!

Chris Hebbron

13/10/15 – 06:30

Some photos of this taken last year here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/rw3

Paul Turner

13/10/15 – 06:30

The tube is to run 24hr from later this year and you will find many more night buses (although no night trams or trolleys) in London than when CLX 548 was built.

Stephen Allcroft

13/10/15 – 08:58

LT inner 1
LT inner 2

Here are internal photos of C107, showing 4×2 seats (8 passengers) in the lower saloon and 4×2 (8 passengers) and 1×4 (4 passengers) in the upper, total 20. It would seem that, although the rear seat would seat 5, it was designated for 4.

Here is a photo of sister (just) survivor CLX549, How folk can let this sort of thing moulder into dust is beyond me. Windows open and all!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rw3-497alh/15006248806/in/photostream/

Chris Hebbron

14/10/15 – 07:19

One worry when the 24-hour tube services start (commencing I believe on a few lines to start with) is when will the track cleaning and maintenance get done? Some years ago there was a programme on tv about the night staff maintaining the Underground and it was amazing the amount of dust, fluff and other debris that accumulated each day on the track and tunnel walls. A team of ‘fluffies’ were employed each night to walk the tracks after the power had been switched off, simply to clear it all away. This it was said, was on safety grounds, not least to help reduce the risk of fires. I sincerely hope the powers that be are aware of this, especially in these days of cost-cutting in the public sector..

Brendan Smith

14/10/15 – 16:12

Yes, Brendan, I remember that programme. Don’t for a moment think that such realities might have entered the heads of the present management, though!

Pete Davies

14/10/15 – 16:13

I double-checked on the TfL website and it reinforced my thoughts that this 24 hour service is only on Friday/Saturday nights and, initially, not on all tube lines. Maybe with the backlog of maintenance behind them, one assumes that they can deal with doing it in the remaining time in the rest of the week.

Chris Hebbron

15/10/15 – 07:13

For the record, the very sad picture of the Cub mouldering away somewhere in Epsom isn’t C112 (CLX 549), but is C113 (CLX 550). At least, that’s what the PSV Circle says and I am inclined to believe them.
But, thank goodness that C111 (CLX 548) has been rescued and returned to the road, so that she can be seen and appreciated by all. Well done, Mr Cross, the owner.

Petras409

16/10/15 – 06:05

First of all, well done whoever took the interior shots. Exterior shots are always the most important, but it is very helpful sometimes to be able to see inside, especially with such an unusual layout.
I remember seeing a BTC film many years ago ago about night maintenance and cleaning in the deep tube tunnels. The Friday and Saturday night operation will mean a very heavy accumulation of dirt for Sunday night, and I wouldn’t mind betting that Sunday night is the peak period for absenteeism. All it would need is a spark and given the strong winds that blow through the tunnels because of the pressures created by moving trains in tight spaces, and one could soon have a fire out of control.

David Wragg

02/12/17 – 10:55

CLX 548 and CLX 549 were both sold to London Fire Brigade, in the early 1950s. CLX 548 was used as a coach for the Brigade’s sports teams, and CLX 549 was used as a control unit. According to ‘The Fire Brigade Handbook’, CLX 549 was written off, in a collision, in 1959. I would be very interested to see CLX 548, if someone can tell me where, in Kent, it is stored.

Bill Edwards

06/12/17 – 09:53

I would like to see photographs of CLX 548 when in service with London Fire Brigade. Colour pics would be best but any would be very welcome.

Ian Morrison

07/12/17 – 08:49

No sooner said than done, Ian M! www.london-fire.gov.uk/

Chris Hebbron

10/12/17 – 06:20

Many thanks to Chris Hebbron but I need pics of CLX 548 which was the London Fire Brigade sports team coach. I believe it was painted dark green by the brigade but have no pics so do not know what shade or if the vehicle had any other colour with the dark green and carried any brigade markings etc.

Ian Morrison

11/12/17 – 07:01

According to this site https://cazana.com/uk/car/CLX549
CLX 549 was MoT tested and passed! in September 2008
It also had a registration number change in April 1984 It had been previously registered under SV 4837.
Registered as a Leyland National!

John Wakefield

12/12/17 – 08:33

Interesting comment, John W! It reminds me of an airshow once where a young lad (6 or 7 at the time) was proudly telling his father that the plane performing was a Lancaster Bomber (it had 4 propellers, you see, and was actually a Hercules) and father either didn’t know better or didn’t bother to correct him. Likewise, an aircraft with four jet engines was a Nimrod (USAF B52 which actually has four pairs). Ah, well!

Pete Davies

13/12/17 – 07:35

Pete. I dont think this is a mistaken id, the MoT refers to the MoT test of the Royal Enfield motorcycle (now registered SV 4837). It begs the question as to how the motor bike got the CLX 549 reg from the Leyland in the first place & why was it then re registered as SV 4837, SV is an age related series issued by DVLA for vehicles in the 1920/30 age group. That registration could have been obtained directly from DVLA on production of a dating cert for the RE motor bike. So what is the id of the ‘Leyland National’ now registered as CLX 459? Looks like there has been some fiddling going on here with registration numbers!
I have recently obtained the following info from a PSVC member
“According to Alan Cross, Mr Rubery did buy CLX 550 from Scotland. Both CLX 549 and CLX 550 were sold to W North (dealer); CLX 549 became a henhouse in Perthshire”

John Wakefield

13/12/17 – 07:35

DVLA has a number of the Bristol Cars products registered as BMCs.

John Lomas

03/05/22 – 06:04

CLX 548_2

Following on from comments regarding this vehicle. It stopped briefly at The Maybury Inn in Woking Sunday night (Sunday May 1st 2022). Had a quick chat with the owner who told me the vehicle had recently undergone some restoration but will be attending shows in the coming months.

Gary Avery

Douglas Corporation – Leyland Comet – KMN 519 – 21

Douglas Corporation - Leyland Comet - KMN 519 - 21

Douglas Corporation
1959
Leyland Comet CPO1
Park Royal B30F

We don’t often see a Leyland Comet with bus or coach body, as it was normally considered to be a lorry chassis, and we see even fewer in Municipal liveries, but Douglas Corporation’s fleet was renowned for being “different”! KMN 519 is an example of the CPO1 model, with Park Royal B30F body, and we see it in Bold Street, Fleetwood, on 18 July 1999. It is taking part in the Tram Sunday event.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

20/08/16 – 05:56

Just look at that enormous bonnet, the steering wheel and imagine the driving position in relation to it. To pull up behind a small car in heavy traffic must require some careful judgement!

Chris Barker

20/08/16 – 10:25

No problem at all, just stop where you can still see Tyres and Tarmac, shouldn’t be any closer anyway.

John Lomas

20/08/16 – 10:25

The Douglas fleet always seemed to be immaculately maintained and turned out. It had several quirky features. In addition to these bonnetted Comets it had Guys similar in design to LT’s GS class which had huge destination boxes front and back for the very informative route blinds. There were also some ‘conventional’ saloons with the same arrangement. Some of the Regent V double deckers also had the large destination displays. Brings back happy memories of holidays spent on the island in the summers of 1967 and 1970. Another quirky feature in those days was the pubs being open all day!

Philip Halstead

20/08/16 – 11:09

Interesting thought from Chris, and reply from John. I used to work with a fellow whose parking idea in the office car park was to apply the handbrake when he hit the wall. One of my neighbours uses the same method. He calls it ‘parking by braille’. . .

Pete Davies

21/08/16 – 11:07

OPB 536

Actually, Chris, the driver’s view from the cab of the Comet was not as bad as the picture of the Douglas example suggests. That photo has been taken from a position quite low at the front, which exaggerates the bonnet height and length. I frequently drove the former Brown Bus (A.T. Brady of Forest Green) Comet CPO1 on the Forest Green – Ewhurst – Wallis Wood – Horsham route on my weekend moonlighting job (excuse mixed metaphor) when the Brady business was taken over in 1971 by J.D. Wylde t/a North Downs Rural Transport. Initially, the Comet model was powered by the 75 bhp Leyland O300 5 litre diesel, though a petrol option was offered for export. The direct top five speed gearbox had sliding mesh engagement for first and second, and constant mesh for third and fourth. A Girling hydraulic braking system was fitted. In 1950 the engine became the 90 bhp O350 of 5.76 litres, and the model thus became known as the Comet 90. The bonnet structure was the product of Briggs Motor Bodies which also supplied the front end for the LT Guy GS bus, as well as Ford and Dodge goods models. When Ford took over Briggs in 1953, the supply to other manufacturers ceased. Here is a picture of OPB 536, a 1950 CPO1 machine with a Duple C32F body, taken at Forest Green. The Comet was a pleasant vehicle to drive, and the gearbox quite easy to use. Its only vice was the abysmally large turning circle that required precise placing of the machine on tight corners. I recall reading somewhere that OPB 536 was originally supplied with a petrol engine but was quickly converted to diesel, though this seems improbable to me. I understood that OPB 536 was subsequently bought by preservationists but I can find no recent references to it, so one must fear the worst.

Roger Cox

21/08/16 – 16:19

Actually, Roger, the view was taken at my normal viewing height of camera to eye – I’m 5ft 8in – and with my feet on the road. I suspect your view of OPB might have been taken from a grassy bank. Yes, the angle of view does affect the perception quite a lot!

Pete Davies

22/08/16 – 17:01

Parking by Braille was fine when cars had proper bumpers; these days breathing too heavily near the car might need a respray! (only a slight exaggeration)

David Todd

J Wood & Sons – Leyland Atlantean – KTD 551C


Copyright Ian Wild

J Wood & Sons
1965
Leyland Atlantean PDR1/1
Park Royal H41/33F

A comment from Chris Hough dated 20th March concerning Bolton ABN213C mentions this ex Demonstrator Leyland Atlantean operated by Joseph Wood and Sons of Mirfield, West Yorkshire. It has a Sheffield design Park Royal body and it ran on the Mirfield to Dewsbury service which was joint with J J Longstaff & Sons and Yorkshire Woollen District. Its livery with Woods was slightly modified from that which it sported as a demonstrator. The photo was taken in September 1979 by which time the bus was 14 years old.
The bus has another claim to fame. I have a newspaper cutting dated July 1966 headed PRINCE OF THE ROAD which tells of a  visit by Prince Philip to Leyland Motors where he drove KTD ‘for a mile long drive on the test track’ and ‘returned the £8,000 bus safely’. A photograph with the inevitable 007 route number records the event. Amongst his passengers were Sir Donald Stokes, Managing Director of Leyland Motors together with Chairman Sir William Black.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

04/05/12 – 07:37

Yes KTD replaced the ex Baxters Crossley that is now preserved and currently up for sale at Quantock Motor services. The plaque describing the driving by the Duke was removed before the bus was scrapped and is owned by Mr Colin Wood the son of Joseph Wood.

Philip Carlton

04/05/12 – 08:55

While it was a demonstrator the bus served with the Wallace Arnold subsidiary on the “Kippax and District” route from Leeds via Halton, Crossgates and Garforth to Kipaax and Ledston Luck – again with the somewhat tiresome “007” in the route number display.

Chris Youhill

04/05/12 – 14:43

The livery of this bus, to me, looks modern and gives a more modern appearance to the vehicle than might otherwise be the case. I like the way the ‘W’ has been incorporated in the waistline stripe. Simplicity is usually best.

Chris Hebbron

08/05/12 – 07:36

Oh how I agree with Chris regarding the livery style of the Atlantean and even more with his view that simplicity is usually best. The concept of a simple refined livery and layout appears to be totally forgotten nowadays with swoops and slashes and assorted disjointed shapes which bear no relationship to the lines of the bodywork in fact they seem to be deliberately “designed” to jar and clash. The new First livery is a glaring example of this both inside and out, I also find the Stagecoach layout to be unpleasantly disjointed and the interior rather garish.

Diesel Dave

08/05/12 – 12:07

I agree entirely Diesel Dave – public transport has never looked more appalling and meaningless – at obscene expense. Managements insist that such horrors of marketing actually increase passenger numbers considerably, but I doubt if the artwork is the reason at all. I bet a straw poll of folks in the street would reveal conclusively that hardly a soul has any idea, or the remotest interest, – IF the vehicle is on its branded route, often they are not for obvious operational reasons. Thank goodness for the restrictions imposed by, I believe, TFL which ensure that buses in the Capital are practically pleasing red all over.
Digressing very briefly, the same unsightly nonsense applies also to the railways. I look out of my flat at Headingley station a quarter of a mile away and see the Northern Rail trains all day – anyone would think quite justifiably that the Depot yards had been invaded by an organised army of aerosol wielding graffiti louts. I despair.

Chris Youhill

09/05/12 – 08:09

Weren’t they a rather pleasing Maroon/Brown/Dark Green colour with a large gold ‘N’ originally (I’m colour-blind, Chris Y).

Chris Hebbron

09/05/12 – 08:11

I too agree with Diesel Dave, particularly about the First livery, just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, it did! The truly insipid pastel shades introduced a couple of months ago were, I understood, to have provision for local identity but I haven’t seen any evidence of such. The new Wright bodied deckers for First Manchester bear the words ‘We believe in improving your bus service’ Hardly a convincing message when they’ve recently been fined a quarter of a million pounds for poor performance!
My local operator, Trent Barton, not only route brands but has a different livery for each separate service with just about every colour on the shade card being used. The downside of this is that many passengers think that they are all operated by different companies. Sure, they’ve won ‘Bus Operator of the Year’ a couple of times but although such awards are coveted within the industry, I doubt, as Chris Y says, they mean anything at all to people in the street, none of whom had a vote!

Chris Barker

09/05/12 – 09:26

To be perfectly honest Chris H there have been so many railway livery changes in recent years that I’ve lost track (Oh dear, I promise no pun intended there) of the time and detail boundaries. The simple but pleasing WYPTE (Metro – that poor over used word again) colours were plain maroon with a light custard band – individual, sane, and universally understood. When the franchise was gained by Arriva the trains were painted in that Organisation’s colours of pleasing mid blue with the “cow’s horn” cream section, again excellent. I do vaguely remember the plain gold “N” but I think that this was applied only temporarily to stock remaining in Metro maroon and cream (gold). The basic Northern Rail colour is a quite rich and pleasant “regal” blue and the “N” logo is OK, but then the rot sets in. The wild and totally meaningless (and expensive) coloured graffiti shapes have to be seen to be believed, as have huge pictures of town halls and waterfalls and so forth.
Sorry to seemingly digress onto railways, but the atrocious waste of money and disfigurement of otherwise handsome vehicles is a parallel scandal to the one we are discussing on the buses.

Chris Youhill

09/05/12 – 19:17

One exceptional disfigurement, Chris Y, was dinosaurs on the IoW 1938 LU stock. One, at least, now carries true 1938 livery with silver roof and richer red, as befits a 74 year-old!

Chris Hebbron

09/05/12 – 19:34

Yes, Chris Y & H, I agree with your aversion to the manic and illogical bus and train liveries now so common throughout the UK. However, one notable exception is the smart Grand Central Railway livery which (so far) has not fallen under the influence of their new owner – Arriva.

Paul Haywood

02/06/12 – 07:06

How I agree with the comments above on “modern” liveries, most of which seem to be the product of ecstasy induced nightmares. The preposterous original version of the “First” (how supremely ironic a name for such a company) Barbie livery had the grubby white/pink/purple shades blending into one another. Whoever devised that, and I expect that a consultancy firm received handsome payment for the aberration, had no concept of the practical world of panel damage. Not only are such liveries painful excrescences to the eye, but the over tight grasp exerted by the big groups upon their maintenance budgets is painfully apparent in the appearance of external paintwork. The older, and by no means old, buses of my local Stagecoach outfit are scruffy in the extreme. They bear absolutely no comparison with the impeccable fleet standards offered by the nearby Delaine and Norfolk Green businesses.

Roger Cox

02/06/12 – 11:59

The version of First’s livery to which Roger Cox refers was known as ‘Barbie 2’ and used for older types of vehicle. Many may may not realise that the ‘fading shades’ applied to the lower panels was actually an enormous vinyl that was a nightmare to apply, requiring several people several hours to wrap it around the entire bus, trimming and snipping around the wheelarches, fuel filler and other access flaps, grilles, lights etc. It had to be fitted around all the beading strips between the panels and around the wheelarches, but inevitably bubbled up, split or peeled away round the edges. If any oxidation occurred in the aluminium panels it would form large bubbles which someone would always be tempted to burst. The bus washing machine then had a field day with it !
Repairing minor accident damage was then very difficult. One depot actually started to cut the vinyls down by half into a narrower strip, eliminating the fadeout effect, but looking equally silly. I don’t imagine anyone involved with maintaining the buses was ever consulted about the practicality of it all.
Design Consultants eh ?

John Stringer

03/06/12 – 07:03

Nothing really to do with this subject. But John Stringer mentions a word I hate… Consultants. I’m sure John will remember the time at WYPTE, when a consultant said that there was no need for 2 vehicle workshops based on Kirkstall and Thornbury, so Thornbury went. Then a couple of years later another consultancy came along and said there was a need for central workshops in either division.
Personal titbit, worked with Colin Wood when I worked at Abbeyways 1994/5. Great bloke, good sense of humour.

Chris Ratcliffe

03/06/12 – 07:03

The new”local livery” now used by First is little better using a pale lilac that will surely fade quickly Far better to use proper local colours based on the former colours of constituent companies.

Chris Hough

03/06/12 – 11:12

You can live in hope Chris, but I fear you will die in despair!

Eric Bawden

03/06/12 – 19:35

Sadly Eric I fear you are right!

Chris Hough

06/06/12 – 07:46

Consultants : “They borrow your watch to tell you the time, and then sell it back to you.”
Committees : “The incompetent, picked by the incapable to do the unnecessary.”
I’ll just go and put my tin hat on!

Stephen Ford

06/06/12 – 09:46

Why?

David Oldfield

07/06/12 – 10:31

Why indeed Stephen – I’m sure that 99.9% of folk to several decimal places agree with you. I find the new “First Leeds” local “livery” to be as bad and un-necessary as anything before it. Who on earth wants to pay towards silhouette pictures of local landmarks concealed within the “LEEDS” lettering ??

Chris Youhill

10/06/12 – 08:15

This discussion seems to be getting further and further away from the attractive outline and livery of this Atlantean. Am I right in thinking that this same Park Royal style was used on Birmingham’s KOX…F series? It’s pleasing to know, however, that there are still SOME operators who use liveries of a traditional style. Delaine, Pennine, and a few others are well known. Here in Hampshire, there is a father and son operation XELABUS, based in Winchester and Eastleigh, using the old Hants & Dorset livery. Very nice, too!

Pete Davies

10/06/12 – 14:46

Xelabus are operating Southsea’s Open Top Sea Front service (X25), from Gun Wharf Quays to the Royal Marines Museum, Eastney, via Clarence Pier, Blue Reef Aquarium and South Parade Pier, but only on Saturday, Sundays and Bank Holidays throughout the summer: daily during the Summer School Holidays. The original CPPTD route ran from Clarence Pier to Hayling Ferry. They have kept the original route number, which was 25. Wonder what vehicles they will use; certainly not Leyland TD4’s!

Chris Hebbron

12/06/12 – 18:51

A nice write-up on Xelabus in the latest “Buses” magazine (No.687 June 2012) states that the principal bus to be used will be an ex-Lothian Atlantean, GJZ 9571), originally registered BFS 14L. The reserve vehicle will be an ex-Portsmouth Atlantean, No 11 ERV 251D. This is one of their heritage fleet. I don’t know what liveries these now carry – haven’t been to Southsea to see them yet, even though I’m local! So we’re getting back on track with the comments – two Atlanteans, albeit with different bodies (Alexander and Metro-Cammell) to the original Park Royal one at the top.

Michael Hampton

13/06/12 – 09:41

What happened to Woods? Didn’t they become part of the Abbeyways “group”, but then what . . . ? I remember that, in the 1980s, they ran an ex-Singapore Alexander-bodied 12m Leopard (in Abbeyways livery)on the 205 (as the Dewsbury-Knowle-Mirfield route had become under WYPTE numbering), but then they seemed to disappear – at some point.
Incidentally, Longstaff has recently given up on this route – its timings have passed to Lyles of Batley, although Metro publicity still refers to operations as being conducted by “Longstaff of Mirfield”. Anybody know the story here?
Anyway, what were Wood’s colours? I’ve always assumed they were black and white – because they look black and white in the only photographs I’ve seen, which are black and white . . . errm . . .

Philip Rushworth

15/06/12 – 05:47

As stated Joseph Wood and Son was purchased by Abbeyways under the guise of Go Big Ltd. The livery was always Black and Cream. The depot was in Lee Green Mirfield and shortly after Abbeyways had wound up the operation it was sold to Ron Lyles of Batley who afterwards moved back to Batley. Then the depot was demolished and today there is now old peoples flats there. With regards to J.J. Longstaff earlier this year the operation along with the two buses was sold to Albert Lyles Coaches who are trading on the service as Longstaffs. The only difference is that the service now starts and finishes at Dewsbury whereas before the service started and finished at Northorpe where Longstaffs garage was.

Philip Carlton

16/06/12 – 07:21

I worked for Abbeyways in 1993/4. I remember being sent with a message for Colin Wood one day at a garage which had the Crossley in under restoration, and I think a coach in the Abbeyways livery that had been withdrawn sometime. It certainly was not Luck Lane in Huddersfield, and I seem to remember coming away from there and turning right on to the A62 towards Leeds, but I couldn’t tell you if that was the Woods Depot, although the Crossley was a big clue I suppose. Going by what Steven Ives did in Blackpool with Abbots Coaches, then it is probable that apart from the name he bought nothing. Happy to be proved wrong on this but that is certainly what he did in Blackpool. I seem to think though that Colin Wood lived next to this depot, and part of the deal was for him to keep it. Somebody out there will probably know.

Chris Ratcliffe

17/06/12 – 07:35

It has been interesting to read some of the comments here regarding peoples’ preference for traditional livery applications.
I personally never liked this particular design of body. It was basically a late-in-the day attempt by Park Royal to disguise its original MCW-style box to compete with such as the superb Alexander design, and in my opinion it never looked right in any livery. Oddly, Roe – part of the Park Royal Group – managed to do quite a good job of updating the low-height version by adding an Alexander-inspired front to Atlanteans for West Riding and King Alfred. I thought they looked really good, even though mechanically they were perhaps not so.
I am afraid that I do not believe that Wood’s livery did this one any favours either. The band below the lower deck windows just looks wrong – too thick and set too low – as does the total absence of relief colour on the top half of the bus.
I think if it ever looked even passable, it was probably when in its original demonstration livery.
I am in agreement with most about preferring the traditional liveries of old, though many would be just too fussy to transfer comfortably to the lines of certain modern buses, and would need simplifying.
A number of operators over the years have revived an old livery on a new bus to celebrate an anniversary. Many have looked really well, but some looked really awkward and self-conscious.
I have always thoroughly disliked First’s livery, but am staggered frankly at their latest mess. I have to admit that as modern liveries go, some of the Blazefield/Transdev companies schemes seemed to be quite good – strong, distinctive, contrasting colours applied quite simply. I had rather hoped that when Giles Fearnley moved to First some of this influence might have come with him. Instead the new ‘style’ is pale and wishy-washy, with odd stripes here and there for no apparent reason, starting and finishing in the middle of nowhere. It looks like it was designed by a committee to me. A thorough disappointment.

John Stringer

17/06/12 – 07:36

Regarding the operation by Abbeyways of Joseph Wood mention has been made of the ex Singapore Leopard demonstrator that was used on the service from Dewsbury to Mirfield. My recollection is they also used buses from the Hyndburn hire fleet both doubles and single deckers and for a while they ran service 208 from Dewsbury to Whitley. The depot Chris Ratcliffe visited was at Lee Green Mirfield as mentioned in my earlier posting. I have never found out why Abbeyways gave up operations at Mirfield but this seems typical of Steven Ives.

Philip Carlton

18/06/12 – 08:01

Lets hope for a return to some traditional colours in West Yorkshire. I’ve heard on the rumour mill that First has put everything in Yorkshire (and more possibly) up for sale with the exception of Leeds – including the York operations it invested in quite heavily a few years back. That might explain why I haven’t seen any Halifax/Bradford/Huddersfield names on the new livery (what would First have chosen as the sky-line for “Bradford”, given the present state of the city centre [non] redevelopment? – a pile of rubble??). Are First planning to pull out of Sheffield? Whatever, come on Transdev, come on Go-Ahead, buy in there and re-invent (I agree with John, you can’t always resurrect) some of the wonderful liveries from the past. We could debate the aesthetics of this Park Royal body style against its contemporaries, but it still looks way better than today’s offerings – and, moreover, it doesn’t look like it would fall apart when it hit the first stone/pot-hole in the road.

Philip Rushworth

19/06/12 – 08:19

I am intrigued to learn that First are now pursuing wholesale withdrawal from West Yorkshire. One wonders what this group’s business plan now is, as it seems to be getting out of some major conurbations. It withdrew from Kings Lynn a couple of years ago, where the operations were taken over very effectively by the smart fleet of Norfolk Green, whose livery is very much in the traditional style. Since then, Bury St. Edmunds has been abandoned. Perhaps, after the initial flurry of manic, cut-throat competition, and then the establishment of large regional monopolies, we are about to see phase three of the deregulation scene, with the expansion of soundly established independent operators into the “vacated” areas.

Roger Cox

19/06/12 – 09:19

I hope the rumour mill is correct certainly Rotherham seems on its last legs and Stagecoach are proving a viable contender in Sheffield If only Leeds would also go to someone with pride in what they do unlike First with their poor quality take it or leave it attitude.

Chris Hough

19/06/12 – 11:41

Despite early bad publicity – often either malicious or simply incorrect – Stagecoach has developed into one of the best groups around, along with Go-Ahead. As someone who does not have shares in Stagecoach but an informed observer, this pleases me. I, like many others, would be happy to see First disappear from South Yorkshire – and many other places too – but feel that it would be unhealthy if Stagecoach were left to it themselves. I agree that the best situation would be for a decent independent to emerge. Failing that for Go-Ahead to come in and support “healthy” competition.

David Oldfield

19/06/12 – 13:35

Roger, the actual words used by First were ‘We may have to re-position our UK bus portfolio’. That was when they felt the need to issue a profits warning earlier this year. That’s what it’s all about, unfortunately, their primary duty is to make a profit for their shareholders, but how is it, that some seem to achieve this in a better way than others? I agree with the view about Stagecoach, some of their tactics in the past have been despicable, but they do appear to have become one of the better players. How many times have you seen the words ‘municipal pride’ attached to many of the old council operations? What a great shame the former municipals in South and West Yorkshire, in their present day ownership, have become very much a case of profit first, service second!

Chris Barker

20/06/12 – 08:32

Just returned from a weeks holiday in Cheltenham were we travelled just about everywhere by Stagecoach. We made use of their excellent West Megarider gold ticket which, at £19.50 gave unlimited 7 day travel covering an area centred on Gloucester as far out as Hereford, Tewkesbury, Oxford, Swindon, Marlborough, Trowbridge, Chippenham, Lydney and Monmouth. There is also a good selection of smaller area runabout type tickets to choose from at varying prices. Excellent value when you consider the five minute journey from where I live into Halifax costs £2 with First. Whilst Stagecoach do have some competition from smaller independents in the Gloucester/Cheltenham area by and large they seem to “rule the roost” with there network of services yet still provide a ten minute frequency from the suburbs into Cheltenham plus the ten minute frequency between Cheltenham and Gloucester using high quality double deckers (leather high back seats etc.). One must also bear in mind the largely rural nature of most services once out of the towns and cities. Being visitors to the area we also found the drivers willing and helpful in answering our queries.
From my experience of Stagecoach West I think it shows that a large conglomerate, with a bit of thought, can get the balance right between shareholder needs and providing a service to the public

Eric Bawden

21/06/12 – 06:50

Usually, once a year, I go for a Grand Day Out, by bus, with a friend. However, on a Friday, last summer, I got the megabus from Gloucester to Swindon, a Stagecoach West bus from Swindon to Andover, then used Stagecoach Hampshire to get to Winchester, where a friend lives. We came back by car on the Monday. I got some advance advice from Stagecoach West, not for the first time, and have always found them to be helpful, making enquiries of their neighbouring colleagues, where necessary. They have also re-introduced a through service from Gloucester to Hereford and later buses on Gloucester’s routes, now leaving town centre at around 23:30hrs. My local town service had a 15 minute frequency during the day, hourly after 19:00hrs. I have no connexions with the company.
Local Gloucester independents are Aston’s, Pullen’s, Swanbrook, Jackie’s and Mike’s Travel. The days of National Welsh and Midland Red, who ran an express service to Birmingham, are long gone! Other routes went to Abergavenny and also Cardiff, although the latter route has been progressively cut back to Newport, then Chepstow, now Lydney!

Chris Hebbron

21/06/12 – 06:51

When I attended the Harrington Gathering at Amberley, I got chatting to a Stagecoach employee from Brighton. Among his comments about my life in Southern Hampshire was one that falls in with several above. The recent service changes which First made here a couple of months ago were an utter waste of time and money. I had heard from several of the local drivers and inspectors that it was a last ditch attempt to generate more than they were spending, but the chap from Brighton said the other groups between them give First six months before collapse.
We shall see!

Pete Davies

21/06/12 – 11:29

I’m sure the MD of Stagecoach West would be pleased to hear the above comments. [I have to declare an interest here; he’s a friend of mine.]

David Oldfield

22/06/12 – 11:17

This was Woods last decker and was replaced by a Plaxton bodied Leyland Leopard. The body design although mainly associated with Sheffield was also bought by Birmingham Leicester and Salford.

Chris Hough

22/06/12 – 15:05

David O, you are welcome to show your md friend my comments on Stagecoach West

Eric Bawden

23/06/12 – 06:05

Sorry to contradict the comment about KTD 551C being the last decker.It was replaced by an ex London DMS TGX 769M.Incidentally the Leopard mentioned had its Plaxton service bus body scrapped and the chassis was sold to Stanley Gath of Dewsbury who had a number of older chassis rebodied but for some reason this never happened and the chassis was dismantled for spares.

Philip Carlton

23/06/12 – 06:06

This is a bit off topic, I know, but relates very topically to the issues discussed above, and very indirectly to Woods-will the “Woods” return?
Metro, that is the West Yorks Transport Authority have today announced a plan to take control- as they may- of local buses in terms of “quality contracts”- supposed to be like London, but sounds like the Railways to me, too. Bus passengers have plummeted: presumably the idea is to make the buses run where they are needed, on time, at approved fares- and most importantly, turn up at all, on some routes. In my youth it was unthinkable that the bus would not turn up… that attitude- the Woods or Ledgards or some of the old Municipals- is what we need. Presumably First got wind….

Joe

23/06/12 – 14:22

Thanks Philip I’d forgotten the DMS The other independent Longstaff ran an ex Devon General tin front AEC Regent III for a while and bought a long wheel base Atlantean with NCME bodywork which ran for the late lamented Black Prince for a time.

Chris Hough

24/06/12 – 15:24

The Leyland Atlantean of J.J.Longstaff was sold by Black Prince and eventually became a cut down recovery vehicle with Yorkshire Traction. I drove for Longstaffs in the late 1970s.Incidentally Mr Brian Longstaff the last surviving son of the founder John James Longstaff died a couple of years ago. As mentioned in these listings the family have sold the business to Albert Lyles Coaches of Batley who are still operating the service 205 from Dewsbury to Mirfield exactly as Longstaffs did.

Philip Carlton

25/06/12 – 07:33

Nice to see the business (and route) going to another independent.

Chris Hebbron

25/06/12 – 07:34

I had a aunt who lived at Ravensthorpe and we occasionally visited for tea. After a while I would escape and go watch the buses passing by along North Road. These were on the joint YWD/Wood/Longstaff service mentioned, but it was interesting that it was only when Metro (WYPTE) took charge of timetables that all three operators’ timings were listed. YWD had stubbornly refused to mention the other two’s timings, giving the impression that it was only hourly instead of every 20 minutes. I remember Wood’s Crossley, and the replacement Atlantean, but there was also an ex-Glasgow Leyland Worldmaster – FYS 689 – which for a while ran with its original Weymann/GCT body before Wood’s rebodied it with a new Plaxton Panorama Elite coach body. It later passed to Tower Coaches who ran it for many years, although by then it had a later style Leopard badge, and sounded more Leopard than Worldmaster, so they may have replaced more than just the body. Worldmasters sounded distinctly different from Leopards – we had nine of our own in Halifax and I was very familiar with them (more of these another time).
I seem to also remember a Burlingham bus bodied Atkinson single decker before that.
Longstaff’s had an ex-LT RT – HLX 321 – which then gave way to a marvellous ex-Devon General Regent III/Weymann Orion (with ‘New Look’ front)of the PDV-registered batch, like the two that Ledgard’s had. This was replaced with the unusual Daimler CSG6/30 /Northern Counties LSN 286 with David Brown synchromesh gearboxes, that had been new to Garelochhead Coach Service.
Longstaff’s too had a single decker, which was a Tiger Cub/Weymann Hermes, which I think was ex-Rhondda.

John Stringer

25/06/12 – 17:06

Longstaff’s Tiger Cub replaced a far more interesting saloon, Sentinel STC4/40 OUP 579, which ran for them on the Dewsbury service from November 1961 to November 1965. The vehicle had been new in October 1953 (making it one of the last STC4/40s to be sold) and was originally operated by Trimdon Motor Services. Strangely TMS only kept it until February 1955 – most of their Sentinels lasted until the end of the decade before disposal. It then ran for a couple of contractors on staff services (an astonishingly young vehicle by most contractors’ standards!) before being acquired by LG Phillips of Glynceiriog in June 1961 from the Don Everall dealership. Three months later Everalls repossessed it (their version) or had it returned to them because it was rubbish (Phillips’ version) and then it went to Longstaff.
The fact that Longstaffs kept it for four years, in daily service on a busy urban route, might help readers to make up their minds as to which version was true. It certainly looked very nice in Longstaff’s two-tone blue livery, and an excellent colour shot of it can be found in Geoff Lumb’s book “The Heyday of the Bus in Yorkshire” (Ian Allan).
After withdrawal by Longstaff it went to another Phillips, this one of Shiptonthorpe, and gave another year of service on works contracts before being scrapped.

Neville Mercer

26/06/12 – 06:46

Regarding John Stringers comment about Y.W.D not acknowledging that the service from Dewsbury to Mirfield was a joint service rang a bell with me. Longstaffs and Woods departed from the side of Dewsbury Minster yet the YWD bus left from the bus station on the other side of the road. Brian Longstaff once told me that they acquired a Saunders bodied London RT with a route roof number box. Longstaffs painted the number 11 on it and were given a sharp rebuke from YWD and were told to remove it which they did. Yet later when YWD were having a severe vehicle shortage a Longstaffs bus went on hire to YWD in the evenings and was crewed with a Longstaffs driver and a YWD conductor and of course this timing went from the bus station.

Philip Carlton

15/02/14 – 15:25

One of the problems of fitting vinyl is that in corners there is a tendency for the vinyl not to fit right into the corner but take a short cut. If you could see a side on view it would look like a triangle with the vinyl being the long edge. This is called “tenting”.
Inevitably the vinyl eventually tears (as it is under stress) or develops a hole, water is trapped behind it and creates a bubble that some are tempted to burst. Either way it can provide the conditions for rot to get a foothold.
Vinyl comes in various grades and many operators choose the cheaper grades. Sunlight is not kind to it!
In a similar vein: Contravision.
Contravision is quite simply perforated vinyl. From the outside the eye sees the “big picture”. The eye doesn’t see the thousands of very small holes.
In theory from the inside the eye sees through the holes to the outside view as this is brighter. I am sure we are all familiar with various optical illusions and how the “mind” can be confused. This can happen with Contravision where some just seem to see the inside of the vinyl.
What causes the problem is the perforated holes fill up with grime / grease etc. Washing doesn’t seem to remove it as any brush glides over the top as the vinyl sits proud. The only solution is to literally pick out the grime from each hole – a fools errand.
As much as advertising revenue is important to operators I seriously wonder if the long term loss to the business (in terms of customer perception and satisfaction etc) is greater.

David R

23/02/14 – 06:51

First of all may I make a comment about the ostensible ‘joint’ service referred to – and this will come a bit alien to anyone who wasn’t around at the time of Road Service Licensing.
Longstaff and Wood operated a joint service, to the extent that it was covered by a joint Road Service Licence. The YWD Service 11 was completely independent, even though it followed exactly the same route – except for the terminating arrangement in Dewsbury, of course. However the timings were coordinated to the effect that, between the three operators, a twenty-minute service was provided.
The above, John S, is the reason why there was no mention of the Longstaff/Wood service in the YWD timetable – YWD would have had no more reason to include it than they would the service of any other operator which ran in its area. However there was a time (this would be the early 1970s, at least) when there was a separate section in the YWD timetable for other operators’ services – and the Longstaff/Wood operation was shown there, i.e. not in the same section as YWD Service 11. This showing of other operators’ services was widespread throughout the NBC at the time.
Finally, Philip C, referring to the story of Longstaff going on hire to YWD, if the hirings took place in the evenings (rather than peak times), it sounds as though it was drivers YWD were short of at the time, rather than vehicles.

David Call

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

24/02/14 – 07:43

I drove for Longstaffs in the early 1980s. Brian Longstaff once told me that on Sundays they were willing to have the day off alternating with J,Wood on a weekly basis but Alice Wood would not comply so the three services ran even though there was not enough passengers for one bus never mind three. Now a days the service does not run on Sundays and terminates at 8 P.M whereas when I drove we worked until 11.30.

Philip Carlton

Manchester Corporation – Leyland PDR1/1 – HVM 914F – 1014

Manchester Corporation - Leyland PDR1/1 - HVM 914F - 1014

Manchester Corporation
1968
Leyland Atlantean PDR1/1
Park Royal H45/28D

One of the famous Mancunians which revolutionised the double deck bus in the late 60s is seen turning into Portland Street in May 1968 when just a couple of months old. The stunning livery brightened up Manchester – sad that they soon succumbed to SELNEC orange and white.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

25/05/20 – 07:24

1014 was one of the vehicles delivered in the cream and red livery based on the scheme previously used on the Panther single deckers. It was displayed in Piccadilly along with 1001 which was in the white version of the livery and the public were asked to comment. The result was a majority in favour of white so 1014 and, I think, 1017 went back to the spray booth.

Phil Blinkhorn

26/05/20 – 06:54

Phil, you are too modest. Part Four of your expansive article, Manchester Buses – A Retrospective, gives the comprehensive story behind the Mancunian double deck design:- Manchester Buses a Retrospective – Article

HVM 903F

Here is another picture, showing the nearside, of one of the early Atlanteans, No. 1003 HVM 903F, taken in June 1970. In 1968 Ralph Bennet moved on to London Transport, later becoming first Deputy and then Chairman. There he came up against the exhibitionist and rabid Thatcherite leader of the GLC, Horace Cutler, who engineered his early removal from office in 1980 on the politically motivated, utterly preposterous grounds that he lacked the necessary managerial expertise. Cutler’s transport legacy of cost cutting, asset stripping and under investment is still felt in London to this day.

Roger Cox

26/05/20 – 06:55

I have a soft spot for these first Atlantean Mancunians. I travelled the 19 route regularly on my journeys from Work, when I was in digs at Debdale Park while working in Denton. Hyde Road also used these on the 169/170 services, to which there is a clue in the destination number box. The 1 has been left, the 6 or 7 wound to 9 and the last last digit the 9 or 0 wound off. Keen drivers would correctly have just used the second and third tracks only, far neater in my opinion. If I could not sit at the front upstairs my second choice was the rear offside seat over the engine to listen to it. The 19 was very convenient for me as the short walk from Victoria Station to Greengate would get me on a 12/31/38 to visit my parents at Little Hulton. To add to Phil’s comments about the colours, perhaps we can add that it was 1044 that later on, suffered a most catastrophic fire. Question to Phil, there was also the first demonstration of a Mancunian in Piccadilly, but that was to demonstrate it against two other operators new buses, neither came near to it.

Mike Norrios

26/05/20 – 06:55

Since my previous comment, I’ve found the record of the deliveries and repaints. There were 7 deliveries for entry into service in March 1968. 1001/03/04/05/10/14/24. Of these 1003/04/14 and 1024 were delivered in red and cream, the rest in red and white. On Saturday February 24 and Saturday March 2 two vehicles were displayed and free rides given in Piccadilly bus station. 1001 in white and 1024 in cream took part with 1014 substituting for 1024 the second Saturday. March deliveries for April entry into service included 1002 also in red and cream but as a result of both the public opinion surveys and previous comments about the cream yellowing on the Panthers – shades of problems to come with SELNEC’s sunglow orange – all five red and cream vehicles were resprayed within six weeks.

Phil Blinkhorn

26/05/20 – 10:53

A Sheffielder, I spent my student days in, and around, Manchester from 1971-1976 – and then stayed to work until December 1980. The Sheffield “standard” PRV body on the 163 Atlanteans and subsequent Fleetlines – and the later London Country/NBC version – is a favourite of mine. However, I always preferred the 33ft Mancunian by PRV/MCW/Roe, but I always felt it was better and more balanced in design as a 33footer rather than this original, shorter, version.

David Oldfield

26/05/20 – 10:55

Mike, the demonstration you refer to was after the 1968 Commercial Motor Show on October 26 when the show exhibit Mancunian, Fleetline 2048 which had been held back to be exhibited by Park Royal, was shown on Piccadilly alongside Sheffield Atlantean 293, also straight from the Park Royal stand at the show and Newcastle 601 an Alexander bodied Atlantean whose hitherto advanced styling was totally eclipsed by the other two with the Mancunian going on to be the template for future double deck design.
Roger, it’s interesting how a later London leader of the same political kidney and with no real experience in transport, wasted millions in removing vehicles found quite satisfactory in cities large and small around the globe and replacing them with a vanity project which could not be operated as designed, cooked the passengers in summer and were designed to look from the rear to fulfil all the meanings of “like the back end of a bus”.

Phil Blinkhorn

27/05/20 – 07:04

Phil, My thanks to you.
My memory seems to recall the Newcastle one, have a reversed nearside staircase, or what the Sheffield one? There was something very peculiar about it, on one of them.

Mike Norris

27/05/20 – 07:05

Who on earth, and what bus, can Phil possibly be referring to?!

Stephen Ford

28/05/20 – 07:12

I guess that Phil Blinkhorn didn’t actually live along one of the routes that the London Bendys actually ran on. Their obstructive characteristics really became apparent where, as they tended to do far more than regular vehicles, they ended up running in tandem. I believe there was an instruction that they were not to overtake one another.
They also had a higher accident record than normal vehicles. I know it’s sometimes presented as no different, but these vehicles paid an additional rate and were only driven by experienced senior drivers who otherwise had a much lower than average accident rate.
Sir Peter Hendy stated there was no loss on the disposal of them because they were leased, and just handed back at a lease break point.
When it comes to “experience in transport”, we can possibly start with a manufacturer who states the first one destroyed by fire was a “unique incident”, the second one was a “extraordinary coincidence”, and the third one was “er … we’re going to do a modification”. I can still see where the classic trees on Park Lane were ruined by the 436 which caught fire there.

Bill

28/05/20 – 07:14

Mike, it was the Newcastle Atlantean that had the near side staircase – a bit of a Newcastle fad at the time.

Phil Blinkhorn

29/05/20 – 06:52

601 was a conversion by Newcastle Corporation of accident damaged 251(KBB 251D). One of the claimed advantages was that the layout gave the driver a better view of the exit door. I believe Newcastle took two batches of Alexander bodied Atlanteans to this layout. Tyneside PTE, and subsequently Tyne and Wear PTE, adopted this speciation. It appeared on Daimler Fleetline chassis, and Willowbrook built some bodies of this layout for the PTE on long Atlantean chassis.

Richard Slater

29/05/20 – 06:53

No Bill, I didn’t live on a bendy bus route but I have driven in cities on five continents where such vehicles operate and they are no more obstructive than any other long vehicle. Their removal was a toxic mixture of the old LT “not invented here” attitude, political reaction to an innovation by an opposing party and flag waving jingoism. Their very expensive replacements are unable to operate either safely or economically as designed. As for fires, 12 of the articulated vehicles were destroyed by fire and fire has also destroyed a number of the new Routemasters – as it has other hybrids and, going back in time, a good number of Atlanteans, Fleetlines, Panthers and other “conventional” buses.

Phil Blinkhorn

01/06/20 – 07:46

We had the very under powered Wright Ftrs in Leeds which were a bit of a disaster to put it mildly York also had some which the council pressurised First into moving to Leeds. York is also home to a number of Mercedes artics on park and ride service which have no problem in the narrow city centre streets.

Chris Hough

09/12/20 – 07:07

In my opinion the Mancunian was the most stylish body/livery combination ever produced on a rear engine double deck chassis. Ignoring the fact that it is not a fully low floor layout, if one of these turned up at anyone’s bus stop today, I doubt if anyone would believe you if you said the design was over 50 years old.

Alan Murray-Rust

11/12/21 – 08:46

Fully agree, Alan.

David P Oldfield

Huddersfield Corporation – Karrier E6 – AVH 497 – 497

 
Photograph by “unknown” if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Huddersfield Corporation
1938
Karrier E6
Park Royal H?/?R – rebuilt 1950 Roe H36/30R

Karrier E6 497 is seen in the mid fifties in Huddersfield Town centre on a through service from Brackenhall to Lockwood. This trolleybus formerly had a Park Royal body and entered service in 1938 but was withdrawn for a new Roe body fitted in 1950. The Corporation Transport Works carried out an extensive refurbishment work on the Karrier E6 chassis, control equipment and traction motor. Roe supplied an external body shell which was then internally finished by Huddersfield.
Twenty eight pre-war Karrier E6 trolleybuses were rebuilt in this way over a period from 1950 to 1954. Trolleybus 497 was in the first group of seven and coded class J1(R) and also one of a few with a narrow cream line rather than a cream band below the upper deck windows. Huddersfield continued this process of fitting new bodies to older chassis with their post-war Sunbeam MS2s from 1955 onwards up to 1962.
By 1963 all the Karrier E6 rebuilds were gone as route conversions to motorbuses took a hold. This rebodying process was always referred to by Huddersfield as a rebuild which was true for the pre-war Karrier E6s but perhaps not so for the post-war Sunbeam MS2s that received new Roe and East Lancs bodies.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Richard Fieldhouse

07/01/12 – 16:03

This comment less pic looks lonely. Could I set the ball rolling by querying the Roe-ness of this body? It seems to have a seam up the middle as if it was made like an Easter-egg. The driver’s corner looks Roe, but what about those bumps/vents above the full windows on the lower deck, and where’s the “familiar” trunking for the electrics between the upper deck windows.. and then there’s the bumpers. Must have been a hot day although they’re still wearing jackets….

Joe

07/01/12 – 17:49

Definitely a Roe body Joe. A lot of people think that the beading up the middle of the front panel was a result of partial replacement of the panel due to accident damage but I’m not so sure. If you look at almost any picture of a post war bodied Huddersfield Trolley, be it Park Royal, Roe or East Lancs they all seem to have this seam up the middle, even on pictures of new buses therefore I think it was a specification of the corporation. The front (and rear) bumpers were also a specification of the corporation on most batches of postwar bodies with the exception of the final batch of new trolley’s, 1959 Sunbeam S7A’s with E/Lancs bodies which had a removable panel at the bottom for use with a swan neck tow bar. These bumpers had variations of between three and five polished strips along them as well as other minor variations, even among vehicles of the same batch. These bumpers were usually discarded at first body overhaul.
I think that on this batch of bodies the trunking for the electrics may have run down the middle pillar of the front windows. This could certainly explain the front dome being split by beading to facilitate maintenance. Many of Huddersfield’s Roe trolleybuses even had vents in the front dome, as did the batch of 1958 Roe bodied exposed radiator Regent V’s for the JOC.
As an aside, the locals of Huddersfield always referred to the Trolleybuses as “Trolley’s” and the diesel buses as “Petrol’s”. I can well remember an aunt of mine still calling the buses Petrol’s well into the 1970’s long after the trolley’s had gone.

Eric

07/01/12 – 17:56

Funny that Joe should say this. I hadn’t noticed any of those details, but what I did notice was that the upstairs rear emergency door window is divided in a manner that doesn’t look like contemporary Roe practice. I would have expected it to be either a single rectangular window, such as seen, for instance, on the internal shot of the “Ideal Service” Leyland PD2, or the earlier divided version in which the top frame of the two parts forms an arch, as seen on Ian Gibbs rear shot of the East Yorkshire (Beverley Bar) PD1. I guess there were many oddities with rebuilds. Does anyone have a rear view of one of these beasts?

Stephen Ford

08/01/12 – 07:55

Geoff Lumb’s excellent Roe/Optare book confirms the Roeness of the body. The two piece window in the rear emergency door was rare but not unknown. I think it was a Huddersfield quirk.

David Oldfield

08/01/12 – 07:56

Stephen, this is yet another oddity of Huddersfield. With very few early exceptions, ie: six NCB lowbridge Regent III’s delivered in 1949, almost all Huddersfield post war double deck bodies, be they trolleybus, motorbus, highbridge or lowbridge, Corporation or JOC, had divided rear windows on both decks until the advent of the first Fleetlines in 1967

Forgot to mention Stephen, whilst not of this particular batch of bodies there are a couple of rear views of the 1951 batch of Sunbeam MS2’s which had almost identical bodies when new, in the book ‘Huddersfield Trolleybuses’ by Stephen Lockwood published by Middelton Press in 2002

Eric

08/01/12 – 07:57

Stephen, to answer your query about the upper-deck rear window being divided, this was a feature specified by Huddersfield for all their post-war Roe bodies for both their trolleybuses and motorbuses.

Richard Fieldhouse

08/01/12 – 07:58

The twenty Rotherham Daimler single-deck trolleybuses that were rebodied as double deckers by Roe also had a divided emergency window, nothing like the standard single rectangular window that was fitted to three Roe motor bus bodies delivered to Rotherham around the same time, and which were followed later by many more.
What was most odd about the twenty trolleybus bodies, however, was the divided rear lower saloon window, definitely non-standard, but very eye catching all the same. I’ve often wondered who in the Crossgates drawing office dreamt that one up.

Dave Careless

08/01/12 – 07:58

Yet another interesting feature of Huddersfield Trolley’s was that the rear platform was at the same level as the lower deck floor, accessed by two steps on the platform edge, rather than the more usual lower platform and riser step into the lower saloon. Another unusual feature (am I boring you?) of the JOC motorbuses of this period was that the handrails on the rear entrances were insulated in black plastic, as per the requirement on trolleybuses, rather than the more normal plain aluminium. Right! I’ll shut up for now, (unless I think of something else) and hope my snippets have been of interest to somebody, somewhere.

Eric

08/01/12 – 16:35

When Wallace Arnold had the Daimler saloons acquired from Farsley Omnibus rebodied as double deckers they also had the large step flat floor to the platform layout.

Chris Hough

08/01/12 – 16:52

Yes, Eric, they are! The steps-up-to-rear-platform flat-floor layout was also found on some Roe motorbuses- eg Doncaster- in the fifties. Must be good for clippies.

Joe

09/01/12 – 07:28

3203

Here is a photograph of Huddersfield Daimler 431 at Holmbridge showing the two piece emergency exit. This was not unique to Huddersfield – Halifax’s Roe-bodied PD2s had this feature, in their case with each half containing a sliding ventilator.

David Beilby

09/01/12 – 07:29

Well Joe, you certainly got the ball rolling, the pic doesn’t look quite as lonely now!

Eric

10/01/12 – 07:15

I think you will find some reference to Halifax’s small batch of petrol engined AEC Regents in Geoffrey Hilditch’s excellent book Steel Wheels and Rubber Tyres Vol 2. They were delivered in April 1939 with Roe bodies and numbered 201-204, they were fitted with 9.6 litre twin carburettor petrol engines and proved more than capable of holding their own against the trolleybuses. A fuel consumption of around 3.5 mpg and war time restrictions saw them all receiving standard 8.8 litre diesels within a year of the outbreak of war. The above information is quoted from page 52 of the book mentioned initially.

Diesel Dave

11/01/12 – 06:40

Further to Eric’s comment on the level of the rear platform, I have a vague memory that this was due to the design of the Karrier chassis. I cannot now remember where I read this. If this is true, did Karrier trolleybuses for other users (eg Doncaster) have this feature? And did Huddersfield perpetuate the design on other makes of trolleybus chassis in order to maintain consistent passenger awareness, even if other makes would have allowed the more usual rear platform level? Maybe someone with a clearer memory or knowledge can deny or confirm this.

Michael Hampton

11/01/12 – 08:51

!cid_DSCN0214

In answer to Michael’s question, the Karrier E6 chassis operated at Huddersfield had spectacle frames at the rear end, so no drop frame was possible and a high platform was a necessary feature. Above is a photo of Huddersfield Karrier E6 frame ex 470 at Sandtoft which shows this spectacle feature. All Huddersfield’s post-war trolleybuses had a drop frame chassis but they continued to specify the high platform for continuity. The only trolleybus operated in Huddersfield with a low platform was the AEC 663T/EEC no 6 later renumbered 406 and delivered in December 1933. I do believe other Karrier E6 trolleybuses such as those at Doncaster had a double step rear platform.

Richard Fieldhouse

15/01/12 – 07:14

Joe,
I’ve had another look at the photo of 497 and looking at the front dome I don’t think it has been divided. What looks at first to be beading down the middle appears, on closer inspection, to be a shadow cast in the strong sunlight, possibly by an overhead cable.

Eric

Leave it with me for a while will do some close ups

497 close up 2
497 close up 1

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

15/01/12 – 16:32

I’m still thinking it’s a trunking or a moulding- very central- who knows?!
Going back to the step-up rear platform on motorbuses too- one example is the late Tony Peart’s Doncaster 122, an AEC/Roe with those funny cranked seats as well. I think there were other similar ones in the fleet around that time. Perhaps the idea came from necessity with these trolley rebodies.

Joe

16/01/12 – 07:39

Joe I remember asking Tony Peart once about the unusual seating arrangement in Doncaster 122 and he was able to explain to me the reasoning behind it.
Unfortunately I can’t remember what he told me.

Eric

16/01/12 – 07:42

West Riding’s Guy Arab IVs also had that platform layout – it was less obvious on the KHL-registered batch as they had folding doors which meant the platform step was set well inside and is very difficult to see on photographs. I have a theory as to why this layout was adopted and it relates to the combination of lowbridge layout and the safety staircase (which is why it only appears on Roe bodies). The problem with the safety staircase is that it tends to be longer as it’s largely straight. This is why early postwar Roe bodies have only 25 seats downstairs instead of the usual seat as the offside rear wheelarch seat was only for two.
This long staircase causes a problem with lowbridge bodies as you have difficulty getting to the rear seats. If the first step is incorporated in the platform, as with this design, that makes the staircase shorter and can help with the layout. As it was the penultimate row on the KHL Guy Arabs only seated two with the rear row seating three.

David Beilby

Southampton Corporation – Guy Arab UF – JOW 928 – 255

Southampton Corporation - Guy Arab UF - JOW 928 - 255

Southampton Corporation
1955
Guy Arab UF 6HLW
Park Royal B39F

JOW 928 is a Guy Arab UF, dating from 1955. It has a Park Royal body and, in the first view it has been renumbered to 903 for duty with the Council’s Welfare Department. It is in the Southsea rally on 17 June 1984.

Southampton Corporation - Guy Arab UF - JOW 928 - 255

This second view shows it restored to its original fleet number, 255, in the yard at Portswood for an open day. 9 July 1988.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

08/05/17 – 08:05

Southampton had twelve of these Guy Arab UF buses, the chassis of which were purchased in 1952. The first six, 244 – 249, were bodied immediately, but the others did not receive bodywork until 1955. The date of 1955 shown in the heading is thus only half correct. It should be 1952/55. Originally, the first five bodies were of B26D dual doorway layout, but this was quickly changed to B36D, which is the form in which the later ones, 250 – 255, first appeared. Nos 244 – 249 were withdrawn in 1963, and the remaining five had their bodies altered to B39F form in 1964, though, strangely, 254 and 255 were withdrawn from service in that same year. 252 went in 1968, but 250/1/3 lasted until 1971. More pictures of these buses may be found on the OBP Southampton gallery.

Roger Cox

08/05/17 – 11:10

An underfloor of real character: uncompromisingly no-nonsense bodywork, a good solid chassis and wonderful sound-effects. My only ride on one of these was not in Southampton but with an independent in Lincolnshire.
Is JOW 928 the bus that is now under restoration by the Southampton group?
Another question: did any heavy UFs have the five-speed gearbox that was fitted to the LUF?

Ian Thompson

09/05/17 – 07:37

As I understand the position, Ian, the UF and later LUF models all had the same catalogued transmission options, i.e. four or five speed constant mesh or four speed preselector. Whether any UFs actually had the five speeder is another matter of which I am uncertain, but a few did have the preselective box.

Roger Cox

09/05/17 – 17:03

Do we know what the L in LUF stood for?

Chris Hebbron

09/05/17 – 17:33

Light, Chris? At least, that would be my guess.

Pete Davies

09/05/17 – 17:33

JOW 918

And here is one with Green Bus of Rugeley

Tony Martin

17/05/17 – 07:48

Yes, Lightweight Under Floor or the L.U.F. for short

Stuart Emmett

18/05/17 – 07:58

Thx, Pete/Stuart.

Chris Hebbron

21/02/22 – 06:15

Southampton & District Transport Heritage Trust – a charity and company limited by guarantee owns JOW 928 n.255. It is kept securely under cover in Hampshire at some great expense. It will be restored in time but has had several attempts before which have not been completed. We hope that this will be done in the next couple of years.

David Hutchings