Crosville 1941 Leyland Titan TD7 Body unknown see text in -Gallery’
This shot is from the Roger Cox gallery contribution titled "The People’s League for the Defence of Freedom" click on the title if you would like to view his Gallery and comments. The shot is shown here for indexing purposes but please feel free to make any comment regarding this vehicle either here or on the gallery.
This bus was built for Southdown as No 288 with a Park Royal body part of a batch numbered 266-292 in 1940 but due to travel restrictions on the south coast they were deemed surplus to requirements and diverted to other companies, Crosville receiving 16 the others went to Western Welsh 7 and Cumberland 4, none ever ran for Southdown. The fleet numbers were used after the war the first of their Leyland PD1’s.
Southdown Motor Services 1929 Leyland Titan TD1 Brush O27/24RO
Seen at the Southgate roundabout on the A23 Crawley By Pass during the 3rd May 1970 HCVC Rally is UF 4813, a 1929 Leyland Titan TD1 with the Brush open top O27/24RO open staircase body that it carried from new – it is not a conversion. It was restored by Southdown who ran it on the Brighton seafront service for some years, and it currently remains with the Stagecoach heritage fleet. The TD1 model, very advanced when it appeared in 1927, had a six cylinder 6.8 litre overhead camshaft petrol engine of up to 98 bhp driving through a four speed sliding mesh gearbox. Most examples were bodied with the Leyland lowbridge body, the firm initially holding the UK royalty rights for the single offside gangway upper deck layout. Until these patent rights expired in the mid ‘thirties, other manufacturers employed the twin gangway form of the upper deck for lowbridge orders. AEC initially used the ‘camel roof’ design on its highbridge Regent buses purely for cosmetic effect to give a low height appearance from street level, but this was soon abandoned as public acceptance grew of the stability of double deck buses. UF 4813 carries the radiator design of 1929 that then became familiar on all subsequent TD1 and the later TD2 machines. Earlier production retained the radiator shape of the Leviathan.
The posting a little while ago of the Bradford Daimler CVG6 was a reminder that although both they and Leyland were then manufacturing rear-engined double decker chassis in large numbers, not all operators were yet willing to make the change to them. Southdown’s later Queen Marys are examples of some of Leyland’s last traditional front-engined vehicles. Judging by the number of them that have been preserved, (many of them went on to have second lives with independents, of course), and by comments I’ve read, Queen Marys have a great number of fans. Not everyone liked them, however, and I’ve also heard some unflattering remarks about their appearance. Prior experience makes me reluctant to express my own views just yet! Queen Marys, which Southdown bought in very large numbers, were pretty well standard fare when I joined as Traffic Superintendent, Brighton, but I never really got to drive them. A Maidstone & District District Superintendent who I respected and admired made a point of becoming familiar with all vehicles allocated to him, which struck me as an eminently sensible idea. It was quickly made clear to me, however, that at Southdown such a practice was regarded as ‘inappropriate’, so a trip to Devil’s Dyke and back was all I ever managed at the wheel. The photo is of the final ‘Panoramic’ version of the Northern Counties bodywork, in which the cream paint is taken straight across the front rather than curving round the windscreen as it did in the more numerous earlier Queen Marys. Three years later, Southdown followed their eastern neighbour by changing to Fleetlines.
Photograph by Diesel Dave Copy contributed by Roy Burke
I have never understood the Queen Mary name for these. Only Southdown versions seem to have been given this name, while the PD3/MCW combination with Ribble was given the name Tank. Even ex-Southdown drivers of my acquaintance don’t seem to know the reasoning. Is it just an enthusiast nickname, like certain railway locomotives have unofficial names (Class 40 Whistler, Class 50 Hoover, etc)? Of the bodies, I liked the “Panoramic” style the least, whether it was the Northern Counties on a PD3 or an Alexander on an Atlantean. Some Ribble Atlanteans, of similar vintage to this, had Northern Counties bodies with the same front dome. To me, it just doesn’t look right. Put “Panoramic” windows on a coach, however, and it’s a different story!
Pete Davies
12/10/12 – 15:32
I tend to agree with you on that point, Pete, I like the original version of these, and whilst I would say that the Alexander ‘Y’s look far better as a Panoramic, the double decker’s with the same front as the MCW clone just looked wrong, however, I quite liked the later Alexander D/D’s with the larger windows.
Ronnie Hoye
12/10/12 – 18:06
At the risk of making myself unpopular with all of this website’s southern readers, I never understood the popularity of this design – or for that matter the popularity of Southdown’s (to me rather “yucky”) livery. Ribble’s PD3/MCCW FH72Fs were clearly better looking and the colour scheme suited them down to the ground. And this comes from a man who can barely look at a standard MCW Orion body without shaking his head. I never felt a similar affection for the PD3/Burlingham variant with the full-front, much preferring the Burlingham design as a half cab with the BMMO front as supplied to Scout. As for the later “panoramic” version of the Southdown PD3/NCME (as shown above), perhaps it should be transferred to the Ugly Bus page before it gives us all nightmares. Some very unfortunate designs came out of Northern Counties in the latter half of the 1960s, making one wonder if personnel from Massey Bros had taken over the design team after the take-over of that company by NCME. Massey were renowned for their aesthetically challenged body styling – their lowbridge vehicles had a (thankfully) unique “stepped on by a giant” look while their single-deckers were hideous without fail. I look forward to opposing viewpoints!
Neville Mercer
12/10/12 – 18:14
I much preferred the earlier versions with single headlamps and the ‘conventional’ upper deck front dome. I thought the opening vent in the nearside front windscreen spoiled the design which was otherwise very well balanced. And of course the livery helped. Simple but very classy and also timeless. It would still look good on many of today’s modern buses.
Philip Halstead
13/10/12 – 07:00
Neville, you’re not upsetting me! My ancestry is Lancastrian, and my schooldays were spent in Lancaster itself and British West Bradford, though I was born in London. I’ve lived in and around Southampton for over 40 years now, and many of the contributions I’m planning reflect this. So far as the livery is concerned, I have encountered a number of operators with what might best be described as pseudo-Southdown arrangements, Southern National before they succumbed to the “Barbie Doll” being the biggest example. Perhaps a darker green might have helped (but not NBC “LEAF”!)
Pete Davies
13/10/12 – 07:01
Calm down, calm down, Neville, it’s only a bus! To condemn the above bus to the Ugly Bus page, is extreme. And I feel that ones taste in buses, like anything else is hardly a North-South Divide’ thing. I’ll stand with Philip on my view on this vehicle. I certainly don’t feel that the Ribble version looked better, the Orion body was, as many Orion bodies were; less attractive and the livery blander, but not deserving of being condemned to the Ugly Bus page! (Of course, am I toning my real thoughts down, in the interest of your blood pressure!). We do agree about Massey bodywork, however, especially those with outrageously curved upper deck fronts.
Chris Hebbron
13/10/12 – 07:01
A piece of local folklore? The Southdown terminus in Southsea was at South Parade Pier. Drivers and conductors would gather to chat and smoke prior to their next departure on the promenade. Looking out to sea, one observed the Queen Mary (the liner!) passing through the Solent one day. ‘My that’s a big ship – big just like our new buses – they must be the “Queen Mary”s of the bus world,’ – or something like that. PS: I don’t believe a word of it!! However, opinion amongst ex-staff here in Portsmouth as to whether or not the term originated with employees, or is pure enthusiast is divided – so take your pick!
Philip Lamb
13/10/12 – 07:02
I feel that I must take issue with some of your contributors. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that, but, to me, this is a pleasing design with a timeless, attractive livery. I don’t think that the Queen Marys were universally popular with the staff. The drivers had a hot and noisy engine in the cab with them. The conductors had nowhere to stand, when passengers were boarding and alighting, as they funnelled past him (or her). Without a recess, he was simply ‘in their way’. And, I would have thought that the fitters would probably have preferred the easier access offered by an opening bonnet. But for the passenger – heaven! Over the downs to Newhaven, Seaford, Beachy Head and Eastbourne. Those lovely big windows and sunny aspect through the Perspex roof panels. Along the coast road to Worthing, Chichester and beyond. Looking out to sea from their own personal observatory. Or up through the Wealden countryside, over Crowborough Beacon to Royal Tunbridge Wells. Bus travel at its best. Things were going to go downhill after this. Single deckers, then Leyland Nationals, harsh Bristol VRs with a thin skin and small windows. No thanks, a panoramic Queen Mary for me any day, thanks !
Peter Murnaghan
13/10/12 – 07:03
The problem with this design in my view (and I suspect in Southdown’s view at the time) is that it is a hybrid of two aesthetics. What they really wanted to do was to put a BET windscreen on it. They tried a couple of times, but it meant moving the radiator and that didn’t work too well. As long as the rad filler was in that position they had to use the throwback windscreens, which looked silly beneath the modern upper deck window. No doubt the change of livery was a failed attempt to disguise the fact. As for Northern Counties post-Massey, there was definitely some Massey influence (and almost certainly some Massey parts) in certain designs, but not this one. Northern Counties’ idea of using the rear window of a BET single decker at the front of the upper deck was a straight copy of what Alexander had done using the Y type rear window. Unfortunately it didn’t fit so well, although it seemed to fit better on Southdown vehicles than anyone else’s – possibly because of deeper side windows.
Peter Williamson
13/10/12 – 10:38
OK. Gloves off. As Neville’s biggest fan: Don’t agree about Southdown livery but agree about Tanks. As a Roe man, I still think an Orion can look good in the appropriate livery, though. Suppose I do agree, as a Burlingham man, with the comments on full-frontal Ribbles. Have to defend Neville on the ugliness of Panoramic QMs – back to balance of design or lack of it – and certainly of Masseys. [See also Peter W’s comments.] …..but Peter M, you don’t need to take issue. As you say, beauty in the eye of the beholder. Friendly banter and tongue in cheek digs help liven us up here on OBP. Sometimes a knee jerk reaction needs further contemplation – even in a forum like this. So often we challenge comments and then on reflection see how true they are and that we probably actually agree with them.
David Oldfield
14/10/12 – 07:22
Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. I never liked the Queen Marys or the Ribble equivalents. Disguising what was a chassis designed for half cabs was never a good idea and the blame goes back pre WW2 to Blackpool and others. Even some of the full front front engined singles looked poor. An honest half cab can’t be beaten. But what do I know – I liked the Park Royal Renown. Big, brutish without the vices of the Park Royal Bridgemaster it plainly stated I’m a BUS. It looked good in North Western and King Alfred colours and when Crosville inherited theirs, the large amounts of solid green set off with black wheels looked very smart – possibly the best scheme ever applied until some idiot applied NBC logos and horrible grey wheels. See www.sct61.org.uk/nw964
Phil Blinkhorn
14/10/12 – 08:02
Phil, I’m with you all the way – especially re Renown.
David Oldfield
14/10/12 – 08:03
I, too, found the appearance of the “panoramic” version of the Southdown Queen Mary PD3/4s to be a curious hotchpotch of clashing features. The earlier style of Northern Counties FH39/30F bodies on these buses possessed classic lines, which, in my view anyway, were more aesthetically appealing than their Ribble MCW equivalents, but then I have never been a fan of the Orion body and its derivatives. To me, the Burlingham bodied version of the Ribble PD3 was much superior in appearance. London Country obtained examples of both the Southdown and Ribble PD3/Burlingham for training purposes, but the Southdown Queen Marys were subsequently used in service from Godstone garage on the long 409 route between Croydon and Forest Row, and on the interworked 411 between Croydon and Reigate. These ex Southdown machines were of the semi automatic PD3/5 type, of which Southdown bought a batch of 40 in 1961/62. They were not very successful, having particularly poor hill climbing ability, and they were soon relegated to the flatter services. Unfortunately, though I rode very often as a passenger on the Southdown Queen Marys, I never got to sample the performance of the three LCBS examples. Though they must have struggled on the stiff gradients around the Caterham Valley, and Redstone Hill, Redhill, they gave a year of faithful service on those routes. After the unsuccessful flirtation with the semi automatic PD3, Southdown reverted to the PD3/4 with clutch and synchromesh gearbox, but the Northern Counties bodies took different forms. In addition to the initial classic style, some were built with convertible open tops, and then came the somewhat odd “panoramic” version. The variations did not end there, because one of the earlier examples was rebuilt with a repositioned radiator as part of a prototype saloon heating system. The absence of a front mounted radiator allowed the fitment of a panoramic style windscreen, which looked decidedly incongruous on the otherwise standard body. This bus, No. 257, can be seen here:- www.sct61.org.uk
Here are some more pictures of Queen Marys.
BUF 428C of 1965 is an example of the convertible open topper, distinguished by the slightly greater depth of panelling between decks – unlike its permanently roofed fellows, the front route number box is not located directly under the base of the windows. It is seen at Old Steine, Brighton, in winter garb, and again at Beachy Head in its summer form.
FCD 296D is a 1966 bus, and is seen in Haywards Heath.
HCD 362E, also at Old Steine, is one of the panoramic buses delivered in 1967.
Roger Cox
14/10/12 – 10:33
The panoramic windowed body on these Titans was in many ways a front engined version of the panoramic bodywork supplied on rear engined chassis to Yorkshire Traction among others an example of which appears in the YTC section on this web site The bus with the curved windscreen looks to me for all the world like a Southdown NCME Leopard with an upper deck dumped on top! When one of the Southdowns appeared at the 1966 Earls Court show the only other front engined bus was an AEC Regent V for South Wales with a very traditional Willowbrook body A design that to my mind that has not dated as much as the Southdown one However as a totally biased member of the Roe fan club to me the acme of traditional bus design was the 30 foot AEC Regent Vs bought by my beloved Leeds City Transport from 1962 to 1966!
Chris Hough
14/10/12 – 10:34
Thank you, gentlemen, for your comments, which I’ve read with much pleasure. When I joined Southdown, which I did with immense enthusiasm, I was very keen to compare their modern ‘traditional’ Leyland fleet with M&D, whose PD2s were all at least 14 years old, and whose Atlanteans were very expensive to buy, run and maintain. I was also interested to see what improvements Leyland had made to their front-engined chassis. However, since Southdown didn’t think it necessary to give the likes of me access to management accounts, (or to any management or operational information for that matter), I was never able to make an operational evaluation. My very short driving experience was rather disappointing. As Peter M points out, these PD3s were pretty noisy in the cab, the full front reduced nearside visibility slightly, and they were not noticeably improved from the PD2s I already knew. With your eyes closed, travelling in a Queen Mary was no different either, except that occasionally they could give out a kind of rattle or clatter inside at certain low engine speeds. Moreover, the Engineering Department’s control was such that the Traffic Department’s involvement with the fleet consisted solely of providing crews – full stop. Eventually, I simply lost interest in any of the fleet; at Southdown, unlike either M&D or West Yorkshire, people just did their own thing in isolation. Pete D has reminded me that I never heard the term ‘Queen Mary’ while I was at Southdown, but I can see how their appearance could have been likened to an old ocean liner, as Philip L suggests. Livery is a very personal thing; for me, Southdown’s was O.K. although the capital letter version of the name was undeniably old-fashioned, which didn’t project a progressive image, and it made replacing damaged panels more expensive than it need have been. (None of my business!). I’m afraid I can’t agree with Neville, however, about Ribble’s full-fronted vehicles, which always seemed to me to look at best severe, and even drab when the paintwork aged. As several correspondents have pointed out, the original full-fronted design hardly lent itself to attempts at modernisation, which left the ‘Panoramic’ looking awkward and ungainly. At that time, there was a fashion amongst some motor manufacturers to make alterations to their older models by adding an extra chrome strip here and there, or to enlarge the rear window – Rover’s P4s got that treatment – and the Panoramic seemed like the bus equivalent of the fashion. One small thing about the full front that always irritated me slightly was that the nearside interior of the cab, which intending passengers could clearly see, often became dirty or stained, and sometimes littered with drivers’ detritus such as chocolate or crisp wrappers, and even, once, an empty cigarette packet. That, of course, was an Engineering Department responsibility: Traffic keep out of things that aren’t your concern!
Roy Burke
14/10/12 – 11:27
Lest anybody should think that I am prejudiced against Southdown in general, let me put the record straight. My comments on “yucky” livery didn’t apply to the coach version with two-tone green AND cream which I always thought was one of the more attractive liveries – particularly on the Weymann Fanfare and Harrington Cavalier designs. Once the cream was dropped they became rather drab and unimaginative – they might have benefited from a larger area of the darker green to counter-balance the relentless apple. As regards SMS double-deckers I never had any problems with the livery on Arabs and PD2s, but somehow on the PD3s it became a different livery altogether. Perhaps those ridiculous “D-shaped” windows on the lower decks tipped the scales from my viewpoint. And again (personal opinion!) I thought that all panoramic windowed deckers were ugly, including rear engined examples. The feature gave them all something of a mutton dressed as lamb pretentiousness. On the positive side I always found Southdown to be a well-run company and its route network was excellent – far better than that of my own beloved North Western which was painfully thin in rural areas (while resolutely blocking new entrants who could have improved things) and must have forced many rural commuters into car ownership as the only alternative. If you doubt my assertion of how pitiful NWRCC’s country network was I advise you to consult a timetable (say from the mid-60s), compare the population of the villages to the services on offer, and then conduct the same exercise with Southdown or another more imaginative operator. Not impressed with their livery (or their PD3s as icons) but very impressed with their levels of service! One final point. My memory might be failing me but it seems to me that the cream (or buttermilk or whatever you want to call it) was several shades lighter than the colour used on OOC PD3 models. At least one of the preserved examples (based in West Yorkshire) seems to use the OOC shade rather than the one I remember. Photographs vary according to the lighting or the type of film used but most seem to agree with my memory rather than the OOC variant. Has anybody else noticed this discrepancy and which shade is correct?
Neville Mercer
14/10/12 – 14:29
Neville the D shaped rear lower deck window was not confined to Southdown, Wigan Corporation PD3s from the same company also had the feature while similar bodied PD3s with Yorkshire Traction did not. So who specified it is difficult to say however the Wigan PD3s given a reasonable impression of what a half cab Southdown may have looked like shots of them are on www.sct61.org.uk
Chris Hough
14/10/12 – 14:31
Sorry to disagree with you again, Neville. I know nothing about North Western Road Car’s operations, although I met the General Manager, (Mr W. Leese, I think), once or twice, and so can’t comment on them. However, in my view Southdown was inefficient in a number of respects compared with the two other companies I knew reasonably well. Just two examples: as someone else has remarked elsewhere in these pages, the dominance of the Engineering Department could result in unnecessary delays in replacing vehicle failures; secondly, their staff rotas, (well, certainly those in Brighton in my time), were sloppy and, frankly, unprofessional – they’d never have been approved in Harrogate. There were quite a few aspects of Southdown, in fact, that would make me disagree with the idea of describing them as ‘a well-run company’.
Roy Burke
14/10/12 – 16:14
I have to point out that car No 257 mentioned by Roger Cox was most definitely not converted in any way but was built from new with the BET screen and the radiator under the stairs as part of what I think was a Clayton Dewandre “Compass” heating system, It spent most if not all of it’s life at Worthing depot on mainly flat terrain where it was still prone to overheating. A second similar system appeared on car No 315 at the 1966 Earls Court show but this one had a Panoramic style body with BET screens on both decks that is rear screen on the top deck and front on the lower. This spent some time at Brighton depot and made occasional journeys on the 12 route to Eastbourne where I drove it on one occasion on an early morning duty in late 1969, I found the visibility from the cab was much better than the standard version which had some very awkward blind spots to anyone above average height, the high noise level was I remember much the same. It would appear that this bus was not so prone to overheating as 257 judging from it’s appearances on the very hilly 12 road. Remarks about the Queen Marys not being universally popular among drivers due to high noise levels and the aforementioned blind spots are quite correct, thier propensity to brake fade in hot and hilly conditions when well loaded didn’t win them any friends either dropping down the hill into Eastbourne in the summer with a load on was a nervous expierience even in low gear you always hoped traffic lights would be green. To my prejudiced eye the livery looked good on just about any body style but I have to agree it did look uncomfortable on the Panoramics, regarding those D shaped windows at the rear on some models they were fitted with a hinged fan light as seen on cars of around that time, you know the ones car drivers flicked their fag ash out of.
Diesel Dave
15/10/12 – 07:30
Am I allowed to say I like the appearance of the Queen Mary’s?
Ken Jones
15/10/12 – 09:48
Ken…I’ll be brave and agree. Maybe we are not experts! Based purely upon looking at them as a design, I think the large panoramic windows upstairs are an inspired idea and reflect a time when people were trying to make things “futuristic” in appearance. It must have given a wonderful view when on the sea front etc. I doubt it was a very practical design though and fitters probably hated lugging such large glass panes into place. For me the worst bit is the front with that far too steeply dropped windscreen, those unmatched windows, the awkward beading and that it looks “wrong” however you paint the bands…straight across looks strange and following the curve makes it look miserable. However…think back to the day they were new and imagine being that young bus spotter on the pavement and I think they would have been thought wonderful! That glass, the full front, the colours and I know I and my old friend Clive would have loved them at the time.
Richard Leaman
15/10/12 – 17:00
Dave, thanks for that information about the panoramic windscreen versions of the Queen Marys. I always thought that they were operator modifications. Yet again the comments on this site expand our knowledge considerably. The PD3 would never have won any prizes in the brakes department, irrespective of the body fitted. In Halifax it was mandatory (i.e. a disciplinary matter if caught out) to descend hills in the same gear required to go up, and nobody in his/her right mind would have disregarded this rule in a PD3. Even then it paid to keep a prayer mat handy. I always liked the Southdown livery, which, until the advent of NBC, seemed to be quite well maintained. Traditionally in the bus industry, there was always mutual suspicion between Traffic and Engineering. The curious arrangement in some BET companies (Aldershot and District was another) under which conductors reported to the Traffic Manager, but drivers came under the Chief Engineer, seemed to be based upon the view that drivers were machine operatives, whereas conductors were revenue collection personnel. Did any BTC companies follow this pattern? This simplistic attitude evaporated with the extension and ultimate complete adoption of one person operation. All my Southdown experiences were gained as a frequent passenger, but it did appear that the company’s engineering department had some curious ideas. On a several occasions it was apparent that the engine fuel pumps had been “recalibrated” to improve economy. This was painfully evident enough on Leylands, but the effect upon the Gardner 6LWs in the Arab IVs was extreme. I recall a trip on one of these very fine buses on the 23 route from Crawley to Brighton, where the engine governor had been reset to cut out at around 1500 rpm. The bus wouldn’t exceed a level road speed of about 25 mph. making the steep ascents en route exceedingly slow, and the entire journey absurdly protracted.
Roger Cox
17/10/12 – 08:25
Interesting comment from Roger about which gear should be used on hills! When I was first learning to drive, my instructor gave me the same advice: “You’ll fail your test if you don’t, lad!”
Pete Davies
17/10/12 – 17:50
Like Pete, I thought that every vehicle has three types of brake, hand brake, foot brake and the gearbox. When I did my HGV instructors course, I was told to instruct pupils to engage the correct gear for leaving a roundabout etc, but not to use the gearbox as a brake. Obviously whoever thought up that pearl of wisdom had never driven a PD3 or a vehicle with an air over hydraulic system.
Ronnie Hoye
17/10/12 – 17:51
Having read Roy Burke’s comments on the demarcation that existed between the traffic and engineering departments which was not always obvious to the road staff. Clearly he had to deal with on a daily basis, no doubt frustrating at times, maybe his way would have had benefits all round but we’ll never know. I wonder if maybe the engineering side felt that they dealt with the real world on the ground and traffic dealt in paper and figures, just a thought. If however his office was in Southdown House he no doubt would have used the subsidised canteen there which he may or may not have been aware was barred to all road staff with very few exceptions even when they had reason to be in the Freshfield Road garage in the basement, another form of demarcation, then again Portslade Works was not much better but we were tolerated although looked upon with suspicion as someone who was likely to ruin their good work but despite all my moans I am still proud to say I worked for Southdown and enjoyed it especially before NBC exerted it’s stranglehold.
Diesel Dave
18/10/12 – 07:42
Yes, Ronnie. Both when I took my Advanced Test (IAM) and my PSV, I was told brakes to stop and gears to go.
David Oldfield
19/10/12 – 06:27
Except, of course, that every time you remove your foot from the accelerator pedal, the engine is acting as a brake, unless you knock the transmission into neutral.
Roger Cox
21/10/12 – 11:30
Thank you, Dave for your response, (as well as for providing the photo for the posting) – after all, you have far more experience of these vehicles than any of us. My office was in Steine Street. After induction, I never once went to Freshfield House and so didn’t use the canteen there. That its use was arbitrarily restricted, however, doesn’t surprise me at all. You’re absolutely entitled, Dave, to feel proud to have worked for Southdown; my grumbles don’t extend to the platform staff in any way, and I was lucky, (and grateful), enough to have the support of a really good Chief Inspector who helped me in many ways. I felt sympathy for him having traffic problems that wouldn’t have existed in the other operators I’d known, and for which now and again I had to write apology letters to passengers.
Roy Burke
30/10/2012 15:15:10
In my childhood I was a latch key kid but had the privilege of being brought up by Bob Mustchin who was the foreman at Bognor Garage in the late 50’s/60’s. I would hang around the bus station and curiosity got the better of me venturing into the garage which had recently been swopped with Hall & Co who preferred Southdowns original garage opposite the Goods Yard for oblivious reasons as there base was there. Bob finally succumbed to my intrusion into his work place and strictly told me not to stray from his side which opened up an exciting world of bus engineering and operation. In later years this relationship proved invaluable when I approached him as District Engineer to buy one of the post war PS1’s which had found a new lease of life at Bognor as a left luggage facility. In early years both vehicles would be utilised to go to the store at the old garage at Eastergate but they finally became static moving only at the beginning and end of the summer season. When the purchase had been completed Bob arranged for the AEC Matador based then at Chichester to tow HCD 449 (1249) latterly 689 to Dorking where I stored it at my work place at the back of Dorking Town Station. This started a career in bus preservation focusing on ex Southdown vehicles and adventures more apt in a book than on this comment. A later acquisition brought an ex Southdown breakdown tender 0181 (ex EUF 181) originally a TD1 Double Decker that later was rebuilt onto 181’s chassis and based at Edward Street garage in Brighton. My first tow was an ex Blackpool TS7 coach converted to a de-icing vehicle, accompanied by the famous DUF 179 (1179) an iconic example of Harrington/Leyland TS7 coach. It was Blackpool to storage in Kent an epic journey at 28 mph!! Later tows included recovering 0182 (ex EUF 182 from Brighton seafront after cylinder failure on the HCVS London to Brighton run. A range of ex Southdown vehicles passed through my hands to name a few Fleet Nos 649, 196 and a PD12 from a Shoreham Company which retired from staff transport. A working relationship grew with Tony Hepworth the manager of Portslade works who would go to great lengths to help restore an ex Southdown vehicle known to me. The highlight was a phone call I received one day during a meeting at work saying the last roll of Holdsworth moquette had been laid in the canteen as carpet!! I went immediately down to Portslade and struck a deal with Tony to take up the valuable material and replace it with commercial carpet which I paid for. This concludes an interaction with a company that I had grown to admire and was aware of their quality and service to the public. My story finally ends with a PD3 (Queen Mary) 422 on a reg AOR 137B) that was the beginning of my own bus company Leisurelink which is the subject of another story. This was the result of extensive cooperation with Richard Alexander, Chief Engineer at the Southdown management buyout days and survived into the Stagecoach era with basing the Leisurelink open toppers at Worthing depot. My happiest memories are of getting out of the office in Newhaven and driving 422 on a shift beginning with a run into Brighton on the 12 route with a standing load created as a school contract to run in service especially at the right turn at the Clock Tower traffic lights when any oncoming buses gave way to an old lady who was about to succumb to another snatch change from the standing position!! The nickname comes from the first PD3’s of the Queen Mary type were allocated to Hilsea depot who thought they were bigger than anything at the time. It was thought they were akin to a ship and of course HMS Queen Mary was at Southampton hence the nickname as a reflection of their size.
Clifford Jones
26/01/13 – 16:58
I’m a former Hilsea driver who cut his teeth driving PD3s and I can categorically state that they were NEVER referred to by Hilsea staff as ‘Queen Marys’. I honestly believe this was an anorak invention much towards the end of their lives. Julian Osbourne insists they had always been known thus. Rubbish!
Mark Southgate
18/04/13 – 07:20
Arriving at Conway Street Garage, Hove, in 1976 as an escapee from Southern Vectis my first encounter of the Queen Marys was with training bus 2880 CD and Inspector Les Dawson, who required me to parallel park the thing between two cars. Having been used to the Isle of Wight’s Bristol Lodekkas with loads of Gardner torque, I was a bit disappointed to find that I had to start in first gear even on the level with those Leylands – on the Lodekkas it was very rare indeed to have to use first to pull away even on hills. Inspector Dawson had to demonstrate to me how to do a snatch change on a hill! But during the time I was at Conway Street I grew to love those Marys and often wish I could have another go!
Patrick Hall
18/04/13 – 16:35
Hi, they have Queen Marys at the Goodwood Revival in September. They also have 4 coaches to take the Marshalls onto the track then pick them up after. I will take pictures of these this year.
Andy Fisher
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
11/09/18 – 06:38
I remember the first time l saw one of the new Queen Marys at the Old Steine in the early 60s. They had only just come into service, it was a number 12 and it was the bus l was getting on. I always thought as a passenger that they were great. The last time l saw one was when l was in the U K on holiday in about 2008. My father had been a driver for Brighton Corp. on the old trolley busses, we had picked him up from London and were going towards Shoreham when he told us to turn right opposite the old cement works at Beeding. It took us to an old bus Mecca. He was delighted to catch up all the old buses he remembered.
This Titan PD3/4 in the Southdown fleet is seen in somewhat strange surroundings. She is adjacent to a public park outside Dock Gate 4 in Southampton on 23 August 1982 while on hire to Southampton City Transport on park and ride duty in connection with the Tall Ships Races. Portsmouth and Thamesdown loaned buses for the event – I saw some of the Portsmouths but none of the Thamesdowns. My apologies to those of our number who cannot abide the NBC green . . . She has Southdown’s normal Northern Counties body of (in this case) FCO69F layout. She dates from 1964.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
29/06/15 – 06:55
Like many, I prefer buses with half cabs, but I quite liked the Southdown ‘Queen Mary’ Titans in their original form and I think that this one may have curved windows at the front which really didn’t go with the overall design. I also hated National green.
David Wragg
29/06/15 – 10:24
Thank you, David. I, for one, have never quite understood how a full front could possibly help with cooling the engine (and/or the cab!) Now, it could be achieved quite easily with a half cab. Still, design is what matters, rather than fitness for purpose. There are schools in Southampton which won design awards, but the roofs leak like sieves!
Pete Davies
30/06/15 – 06:43
At least this NBC Green is fresh, with a gloss. Probably done specially for the occasion! Three weeks hence and it would be faded and matt finish! Of course, I exaggerate, but only slightly! Nice to see a three-quarter rear view of a Queen Mary.
Chris Hebbron
30/06/15 – 09:53
This is an interesting question Pete. Forward control “Queen Mary” lorries became almost universal in this country but I suppose the driver tended to be over rather than alongside the engine. Nevertheless smaller goods vehicles had the engine in the cab. Was it also a question of designing buses for looks- with poor insulation and airflows? On the other hand, half-cabs gave better access and better visibility, especially on the kerbside- allowing for some tin-fronts, but at the cost of looks and municipal pride. Then we got Wulfrunians, Ailsas and a whole lot of rear engines… problem solved?
Joe
30/06/15 – 09:55
Thank you, Chris. There were two of these in overall advertising livery, “Maritime Britain” which are too dreadful for publication, as well as some of the early ‘flat front’ VR members of the fleet. I have one in mind for a future offer.
Pete Davies
01/07/15 – 06:29
There are hundreds of photos of the iconic Southdown Northern Counties/Leyland Titan PD3/4 showing the front near quarter but not so many of the rear end. At first glance I wasn’t sure if I was looking at a Bristol VR top half or a Bristol FLF bottom half. I was never a fan of the NBC livery or the fact that so many interesting liveries were lost, if only we all had digital cameras in those days.
Ron Mesure
02/07/15 – 05:56
There’s an old saying -“An ounce of image is worth a pound of performance”. By the early 1960s in the psv world, the ‘modern look’ was enshrined in the likes of the Atlantean, Fleetline and Wulfrunian, none of which remotely rivalled the traditional front engined chassis in terms of reliability or cost effectiveness. Southdown, amongst others, sought to achieve the best of both worlds by fitting full fronted bodywork to front engined machinery, progressively pursuing this policy to the bitter end with curved glass and panoramic windows. The public, it was thought, would be taken in by appearances. It was the adoption of one person operation for double deckers that finally knocked this philosophy on the head. I agree that the best of the Southdown PD3 “Queen Marys” (there is a school of thought that vociferously refutes this nickname, but it was widely used nonetheless) were the original flat screen versions. The desperate later efforts with curvy glass and panoramic side windows looked like creatures from the Heath Robinson Design Bureau to my eye, akin to fitting wide tyres, twin headlamps, bonnet airscoops and a rear spoiler to a Reliant Robin.
Roger Cox
02/07/15 – 08:35
Well said, Mr Cox!!!
Pete Davies
03/07/15 – 06:36
…not to mention go-faster stripes! Patrick Hutber, a Sunday Telegraph journalist/economist coined the saying that “Improvement means deterioration” which equally applies to the sort of problems which arose with changes from front to rear engine’d buses you mention, Roger. The slightly later Ailsa, while not perfect, trod a good path of compromise in both engineering and OMO terms and was quite popular, if not the runaway success it arguably merited, being everything the Wulfrunian was not!
BUF 279C fleet number 279 is nearest the camera in this view taken at Dunsfold on 10 April 2011. Her close cousin, 972 CUF fleet number 972, is alongside. Both are Leyland titan PD3/4 vehicles with Northern Counties FH69F bodies. 972 was new in 1964 and 279 is from 1965. The third member of the group is UUF 116J fleet number 516, a Bristol VR/ECW combination. The vehicle is obviously too new for these pages, but it does show what a timeless livery the Southdown one was – dignified on any outline and far better than certain random applications of paint seen on too many buses these days.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies
13/04/16 – 06:04
The “dignified colour scheme” seems to have had quite an evolution. When venturing darn sarth many years ago, the scheme that impressed and still does is that olivey green which can be seen on the ill-starred 1952 PD2 “coach” on this site. We seem to have moved on here, even allowing for colour process and it’s now a bit vivid – but at least not the miserable NBC green which has also featured here.
Joe
13/04/16 – 06:05
Attached are 2 pictures of 279 with OK Motor Services of Bishop Auckland. This bus was my regular vehicle when I worked there, on the Bishop Auckland to Wolsingham School AM journey.
Stephen Howarth
13/04/16 – 13:42
Joe, I ventured ‘darn sarth’ many years ago, but I stayed! I only remember this style and the NBC green. Perhaps the livery on that PD2 was a failed experiment! My trouble is that, when I return to the north west, folk up there think I’m a Southerner. Nice views, Stephen! Another dignified livery.
Pete Davies
13/04/16 – 13:43
The Southdown livery is one of my favourites, along with Royal Blue and Brighton Corporation/BH&D, before the Corporation changed to an insipid blue and white, while BH&D was absorbed by Southdown and the livery became the much detested National Green.
David Wragg
14/04/16 – 06:02
I am Sussex born and bred, and feel I can make some comments on Southdown livery. The green used on most preserved vehicles tends to be a little too bright. From memory, and looking at some of the other Southdown colour pics on this site and in various books, Southdown green was slightly more ‘yellowy’ and closer to a true apple green. However, we should not let this detract from the splendid job that the preservationists have done.
Roy Nicholson
14/04/16 – 08:14
Interesting, Roy. The Southdown which made such an impression on me was yes, apple green (introduced, it says somewhere, in 1932) which was less vivid and yes a bit yellowy or even olivey. If you look around the net, there seem many shades of Southdown green, but occasionally I see the one I remember. It went with holidays!
Joe
31/07/17 – 07:25
Southdown livery brings back many happy memories of holidays with relatives in Fareham in the 1960’s, taking buses to Lee-on-Solent or Southsea
Andrew Stevens
23/11/17 – 07:23
I drove one of these in the eighties. It had been converted for exhibitions, with lengthways seating, a fridge, sink and a bar upstairs and downstairs. It was registered as a motor caravan by this time. I’m fairly positive it is no longer in existence.
Taken in the summer of 1963 in the Old Steine area of Brighton this photo is of Southdown 756 one of a batch of ten Leyland PD2/12’s with Northern Counties H30/26RD bodies No’s 755-764 delivered in 1953. These always appeared wider and heavier than any of the other four body builders used by Southdown on their PD2/12 fleet No’s 701-812 the others being Leyland (my personal favourites) 701-754, Park Royal 765-776, Beadle (on Park Royal frames) 777-788 and East Lancs 789-812 Southdown’s last half cabs. Prior to these came No 700 the well known coach bodied PD2/12 with Northern Counties FCH28/16RD body which was trialled on London express services from Eastbourne somewhat unsuccessfully due to body roll and a sluggish performance. This was Southdown’s only 4 bay D/D body and also had small extra windows above the lower deck half drops and quarter lights in the roof.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Diesel Dave
19/05/14 – 09:19
What an odd mixture of styles. The panelling and the roof look like a throwback to the 1930s the foremost and rearmost nearside upper deck windows and the half drop windows have a touch of RT about them yet the front upper deck windows are totally NCME.
Phil Blinkhorn
19/05/14 – 15:39
The Southdown PD2s (701-812) were buses I grew up with in Portsmouth, being seen on a daily basis, although not so frequently used due to my school route being along Copnor Road. Southdown did not have a regular service along that road, so I relied on Portsmouth Corporation routes. The NCME members of that series were my “least favourites”, as they all seemed rather “dark” inside. Were the windows smaller? However, they must have been good buses, as Southdown had “discovered” NCME with some of it’s Guy utilities and early post war Arab IIIs, and followed later by 285 Queen Mary’s. When they were new, we didn’t know them as Queen Mary’s, though. I only became familiar with the term many years later (c.1979). Diesel Dave also refers to 700, the PD2/NCME coach. It’s final years were spent at Bognor, and I saw it several times parked in the yard at the back. It didn’t seem well used! Rather a shame when other operators like Ribble and EYMS made good use of a small fleet of double-deck coaches. It’s a puzzle that Southdown didn’t succeed when others could, and did.
Michael Hampton
19/05/14 – 17:59
I also grew up with the Southdown PD2/12’s on Route 22 (Brighton – Midhurst) travelling to school at Steyning, and vesting grandparents in Brighton. NCME bodied ones were my least favourite, and agree with Michael that they always appeared dark inside, probably due to the brown rexine panelling and varnished wood strip below the window line, and also the half glazed doors. Southdown specified half drop windows up to 1955. All 1956 deliveries of PD2’s and Arab IV’s had sliding vents. My favourites were the East Lancs versions. These had fully glazed sliding doors, and the platform areas were finished in green rather than the murky brown previously used.
Roy Nicholson
09/01/15 – 05:52
Like Michael Hampton, I also grew up in Portsmouth riding the PD2/12’s. A big thank you to Diesel Dave for the data on the bodywork. One thing that has been bugging me for years – which of the bodies had the sliding door?
Southdown Motor Services Ltd 1950 Leyland PD2/12 Northern Counties FCH28/16RD
In the post about Southdown’s Leyland Titan PD2 756 (MUF 456), Diesel Dave made mention of Southdown’s one-off 700 and Michael Hampton said he saw it in Bognor Depot’s Yard. KUF 700 was Southdown’s 700, a 1950 Leyland Titan PD2/12 with Northern Counties FCH28/16RD bodywork and was intended to be the first of a fleet of such vehicles for use on express services from the South Coast to London. It began work on the Eastbourne to London service, but proved totally unsuitable, suffering excessive body-roll and under-performance, being overweight and therefore under-powered. By 1952, it was relegated to private hire and bus work. This photo was taken at Bognor Depot in 1959, with the bus still looking remarkably chipper and still possessing its coach seats, although with its roof lights painted over. In this limbo situation, it somehow survived in service until 1966, when it was taken into Portslade works for conversion to a breakdown tender, but the work remained unfinished and the vehicle languished there for some six years, eventually being scrapped there in 1973. Sixteen years active life for a bus, which was somewhat of an embarrassment, could be considered quite an achievement, as it happens. The lower front bears a definite resemblance to Southdown’s later Queen Mary’s and the body, as a whole, still has the overall look of NCME’s pre-war models, notably the Leicester AEC Renowns of 1939, a design not destined to last much longer.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron
15/01/15 – 06:10
It is wonderful to see Chris’s colour photo of Southdown 700 as I only have a B/W photo which I bought in 1958 from the late Eric Surfleet of Lancing. This shows 700 on an excursion still in it’s original livery which had green window surrounds and the usual dark green lining on the horizontal beading also the corner bumpers on the front and rear,the bumpers are still on the front at least even after it’s repaint. The top deck coving panels were I believe always translucent and not clear glass. Sad to say despite living in the area at the time, and attending school in Hailsham which was on it’s route, I don’t recall seeing this fine vehicle.
Diesel Dave
15/01/15 – 09:31
Thanks to Chris for the great colour shot of 700, and Diesel Dave for it in it’s earlier more public life. As I said in the earlier posting, my usual sightings of it were c. 1960-62, and it was always in the Bognor yard. But it was always in a different position, so clearly saw some use. It does seem strange that East Yorkshire and Ribble operated a small fleet of such vehicles with (presumably) some success, while Southdown, usually effective in their plans, found they could not make 700 work on the coach work originally envisaged. A fleet of such vehicles on the 31 had to wait until the Queen Mary PD3s arrived, and they didn’t have coach seats!
Michael Hampton
15/01/15 – 10:32
What a wonderful photo – thanks Chris for posting it. As many readers will know, this vehicle has generated interested on the SCT61 website and it is good to see these two further views of this magnificent coach. When it was downgraded to bus duties, did it keep the luggage areas in the lower saloon? If so, a capacity of just 16 must have been a major factor in its demise. A similar fate befell the East Yorkshire and Ribble d/d coaches but at least they managed to get 20 and 22 seats respectively in their lower saloons.
Paul Haywood
15/01/15 – 11:21
Following Michael H’s comments, here’s a photo of a Leyland PD2 49-seat Ribble White Lady. There were 50 of them, in two batches, with bodies (5-bay) by Burlingham and 4-bay East Lancs ones. There seems an irony to put a lowbridge body on a so-called coach, but it did not seem to affect custom!. Ribble – //tinyurl.com/os4f47k And here’s a photo of East Yorkshire’s Leyland PD2 with Roe normal height body. East Yorkshire – //www.sct61.org.uk/ey568 There was something very satisfying about double-deck coach design of this period, even conventional half-cab types. I recall the West Yorkshire version of a Bristol K6B Scarborough Express, way down the OBP page, the upper photo, not the lower abomination! SEE //tinyurl.com/ono24n2
Chris Hebbron
23/02/15 – 14:31
I remember 700 KUF 700 very well as a school boy in Bognor yard where I spent most of my after school time. Bob Mustchin the foreman in the garage took me under his wing and many a time I helped him shunt it around the yard when it been dumped from a private hire or bus relief working. This led to me buying one of the left luggage offices D689 HCD 449 which has been fantastically restored now by Bob Gray. The yard has a vivid memory for me with a flint stone boundary with access only through the bus station rear doors until the retail development created an entrance from Queeensway giving access directly into the yard and changing the in/out pattern for local services and coaches. I remember the transition from TD5’s TS7/8’s with PD2 1’s through to underfloor Leylands and the arrival of PD2/12’s to PD 3’s
Clifford Jones
13/03/15 – 07:12
I have posted my memories of this vehicle already however I would like to add that the B/W photo of it showing an excursion blind in taken in Bognor Regis High Street with 700 heading west as Lloyds bank is in the background. My family banked there with the International store visible to the right including trees in the foreground which were a feature in the High Street of that era. I have a photo of 700 solitarily languishing in the corner of Bognor yard against a corner of the flint wall overshadowing the Queensway development which would shortly see the demise of the wall. My memories of Southdown in Bognor my birth place are being prepared.
Clifford Jones
13/03/15 – 16:52
I, for one, will look forward to your jottings of Southdown in Bognor Regis, Clifford. I lived in Pompey for 20 years, the Western boundary of Southdown. I travelled on its two most Westerly routes (I think), from Portsmouth to Warsash and Portsmouth to the somewhat mundane place name, Meon Hut! Your mention of International Stores reminds me of all the other grocery stores of the time: Home & Colonial, Pearks, Maypole Dairies, David Greig and, of course, Sainsbury, before it became a supermarket. Other, later stores/supermarkets were MacFisheries (our first local supermarket), Victor Value (bought by Tesco), Bejam, Kwiksave and Somerfield. But I digress!
Chris Hebbron
14/03/15 – 12:50
Chris, you left out Lipton’s, another of the names from our nostalgic past before the present age of bland uniformity.
Roger Cox
14/03/15 – 16:14
Chris, the place you are thinking of west of Portsmouth on a Southdown route is the West Meon Hut. It’s a pub at the junction of the A32 and A272. The actual West Meon village is nearby. A friend of mine once owned an RM stored near here, and it could be a useful venue once we returned from a rally day when the RM had finished it’s day out. I don’t think the Southdown route terminated here, though short workings might have done. It was the 38, and in the 1950’s I remember Guy Arab utilities thundering up Southwick Hill Road out of Cosham heading for Southwick, Wickham and Droxford. At some point a railway closure entered the picture, and the route was extended to Alton. However, the usual buses then were saloons, such as the 1500 series Royal Tigers or 620 series Tiger Cubs. Strangely, I don’t recall these so well, but have seen photos in various Southdown books in my collection. I too will be interested to see Clifford’s Bognor Regis notes – I was always fascinated with the occasional visit to Chichester and Bognor with their own set of routes down to the Witterings, Sidlesham, etc.
Michael Hampton
16/03/15 – 06:43
Roger C – I should have remembered Liptons, but there wasn’t one around my area. Michael H – It was a 1500 series Royal Tiger around 1964, after they’d been converted to OMO operation. I went with GF and friend with his GF, too. We had lunch at the pub there. The bus performed well, but was a bit creaky, I recall. Nice-looking vehicles, though. You mention the austerity Guy Arabs thundering up the hill. Did they have 5 or 6LW engines, or a mixture of both, or did Southdown upgrade them at some time. I only travelled on them to and from the Hayling Ferry, when they were open-toppers and never noticed what they were on dead-flat Hayling Island!
Chris Hebbron
16/03/15 – 11:54
Chris, I don’t recall whether the Guys I remember had 5LW or 6LW engines. I don’t have access to my SEC books at the moment, but I think Southdown had a mixture as new in the war, and they did swap engines around afterwards, too. Will have to investigate later, unless others have more immediate knowledge.
Michael Hampton
17/03/15 – 06:16
Economic, Grandways, Gateway (didn’t they become Somerfield?), Hillards, and perhaps most recently Jacksons. I think Economic, Grandways, and Hillards were local to the Yorkshire area. I wonder if there is an “Old Grocery Photos” website where people are posting “not really to do with grocery shops but County Motors . . .”. Local ITV stations seem to have disappeared. One, very small, thing that seems to have bucked the trend is bus stop flags: the old Department for the Environment standard style of the early 1970s now seems to be in retreat in many places . . . such a shame about the buses stopping at them.
Philip Rushworth
17/03/15 – 16:49
They must be Yorkshire ones, Philip, I’ve only heard of Gateway/Somerfield, the latter of which has become the Co-op. I believe, which we’ve all heard of! The simple black on white bus stop flags are disappearing fast, in favour of ‘busy’ multi-coloured ones where the bus image is hardly discernable; at least that’s ‘the Stagecoach way’. I thought the original ones were an early attempt at helping those with impaired vision – they certainly don’t help now!
Chris Hebbron
18/03/15 – 06:58
This is only the beginning… Maypole, Meadow Dairy, Gallons, Thrift Stores, Melias, Home & Colonial… then there were the prominent grocers/bakers in every town – Arthur Davy in Sheffield, Hagenbachs, Hodgson & Hepworths in Doncaster, Vaux Bros in Ponty (Chris), Websters in Wakefield, Silvios in Bradford… how do I connect this to Old Bus Photos? Many Doncaster Corporation Buses had a big sunburst tween decks, advertising Dysons Flour, and these seemed always to be on derelict deckers in scrapyards or the “bus” ? canteen at Marshgate in Doncaster which peeped over the North Bridge Wall. How accurate is that bit of nostalgia therapy?
Joe
18/03/15 – 06:59
I’ve found some facts about the utility Guys and here are a few pertinent ones. Southdown received 100 examples: only the first two were Arab I’s. About 25% in total received 6LW engines, randomly supplied. Many 6LW-engined ones had engine swaps with 5LW engines before disposal. Not all open-topped conversions were fitted with 6LW engines, but those climbing to Beachy Head were. All the Arabs had gone by 1964. One survives into preservation.
Chris Hebbron
19/03/15 – 07:11
Thanks Chris H for the 5LW/6LW info – I’m away from my resources until the end of the month! The Portsmouth Arabs may have been 5LWs as delivered as Pompey is a flat area (Southwick Hill Road being a minor exception, although all cars bound for Waterlooville and northwards would have had the slog up the main London Road). However by the late 50’s those used on the 38 to Droxford etc may well have been upgraded. Just listening to some of the Guy Arabs in the sounds section of this site is an aural delight, too.
Michael Hampton
19/03/15 – 07:12
Bus stop signs: The bus logo on the stop plate was not for visibility. When introduced it formed part of the TRO (Traffic regulation order) that made parking restrictions enforceable – which is why it has the same outline as the bus on bus lane signs. Whether legislation has changed since I don’t know.
Alan Murray-Rust
12/04/15 – 07:10
Thank you for your comments while waiting for my observations. I was born in Bognor Regis in 1947 when my parents moved down from Croydon. My mother had a dress making shop with a flat above opposite the General Post Office which is how I became a bus enthusiast looking out of the window at the Southdown pre war buses stopping opposite and the occasional appearance of a Green Goddess fire engine when the siren went off. My memories are currently being compiled taking me from an enthusiast to a bus operator in Brighton. Look out for it on Classic Bus web site SCT’6.
Clifford Jones
09/01/16 – 17:46
Hi, just seen this article and comments. I remember this bus being in the Bognor area when I was young and for a while it ran on the 31 Portsmouth to Brighton service, and at the time was common knowledge that it had been exhibited at the Festival of Britain on the South Bank, showing the future of British Transport. Assuming this is correct then it is a pity it came to a disappointing end.
Brian Allsopp
10/01/16 – 05:57
Alan, with regard to your post of March 2015 [which I seem to have missed] in respect of the bus stop poles and signs, they are in the Department For Transport’s (or whatever that outfit is called this week!) Traffic Signs Manual, which prescribes the assorted outlines typefaces and dimensions. The picture of the bus was supposed to be the right sign before I retired, and it was black on a white background. Yes, I know, an increasing number of operators use their own, which makes me wonder if the rules have changed in the not too distant past! Equally, the post ‘shall’ – the manual used to say – be black or silver. So much for the operator’s livery colour!
Pete Davies
10/01/16 – 10:53
I always imagined that bold ‘black bus on white background’ consistency was introduced to help those with sight impairment, entirely logical, but perhaps misguided by the way it’s fast disappearing. Stagecoach are introducing such multi-coloured ones with fancy writing/numbers, that I, who suffer from colour-blindness, has difficulty making out the dedicated route numbers on the various signs. I must look out for the manual you mention, Pete. Maybe I can throw a spanner in the works!
Chris Hebbron
11/01/16 – 09:26
Paul H (15/01/15 – 10:32) implies that, like Southdown’s KUF 700, Ribble’s early post-war double-deck coaches were, in due course, downgraded to buses. In fact, that only happened in respect of the first 30 (2518-47: BRN 261-90 – later renumbered 1201-30), which were actually PD1/3, only the last 20 being PD2/3. From the mid-1950s they were demoted to bus work, with the luggage pens replaced by seats, presumably raising capacity to 53. They were also repainted in bus livery, but I understand that these things (demoting/increasing capacity/repainting) did not necessarily all occur at the same time. After becoming buses, they were particularly associated with Ribble’s Furness operating area. The later PD2/3s (1231-50: DCK 202-21) were never downgraded to buses, they remained on medium distance express services until replaced by Atlanteans 1266-85 (RRN 415-34) in 1962.
David Call
11/01/16 – 13:37
Brian A above says No 700 was at the Festival of Britain in 1951. I’m not sure about that, as I thought it was one of the standard Leyland-bodied PD2/12s on show at that event. In C. Carter’s book “The Heyday of the Bus, the Postwar Years”, there is a picture of No.701 (KUF 701) on a plinth there. This was the first of 24 such vehicles, followed by another 30 (Later ones had bodies by other makers). If 700 visited as well, was it just on an excursion, or was it an additional exhibit?
Michael Hampton
15/12/18 – 06:38
I was a regular in Bognor Regis bus garage from 1964 to 1973 and I never saw KUF 700 do any other work than an occasional schools bus service.
Southdown Motor Services 1956 Leyland Titan PD2/12 Beadle H59RD
There have been comments over the years about the last Beadle double deck bodies to be built delivered to Southdown in Nov/Dec 1956 but few photos. To try and rectify this I attach two photos of this batch No’s 777-788 Reg No’s RUF 177-188, That of 783 was taken outside Pevensey Road bus station, whilst not a very good photo I included it as this bus was later converted into a tree lopper after an accident at I believe Jarvis Brook railway bridge which was near Southdown’s Crowborough garage, I heard that the unfortunate driver was an Maidstone & District man trying to reach the garage. That of 785 was taken in Pool Valley Brighton when being reversed on to the stand for the Brighton local service 38 which later became the regular haunt of the RESL/6L’s the route had a significant amount of hill work. Believed to have been built by Beadle on Park Royal frames, the easy way to tell these near identical batches apart was the Beadle’s had sliding ventilators and the Park Royal’s had half drops.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Diesel Dave
30/01/18 – 16:33
In 1956/7, both NGT and Newcastle Corporation took delivery of batches of very similar Park Royal bodied vehicles. Those of NCT were all AEC Regent V. The 1956 NGT group vehicles were GUY Arab IV, and the intake for 1957 were R/D versions on a Leyland PD2/12 chassis. Although they looked very similar to these, one notable difference was that both NCT & NGT were all four bay construction, whereas these are five. Was that Southdown spec?
Ronnie Hoye
01/02/18 – 07:10
Further to Ronnie Hoye’s post, Northern took 28 Guy Arabs with Park Royal bodies in 1956, 20 for the main fleet and 8 for Tynemouth. There were 10 PD2s in 1957 for Northern. All were 63 seaters.
Newcastle took 20 high bridge examples in 1956, 137-156 (XVK 137-156) and 20 in 1957, 157-176 (157-176 AVK) ten of which were low bridge. The high bridge vehicles seated 62 and the low bridge vehicles 58.
Living north of the Tyne, I was more familiar with the Tynemouth and Newcastle buses. I thought they were well proportioned buses, but the interior finish on the Newcastle vehicles left a lot to be desired, red painted lining panels, narrow seats and a distinct lack of ventilation. Tynemouth’s vehicles were far better finished in my view. A couple of photos are attached illustrating a Northern vehicle and one of Newcastle’s 1957 high bridge buses.
R Slater
02/02/18 – 05:37
Your not wrong, the NCT vehicles were positively spartan in comparison to those of the NGT Group. It was the same story with the Orion bodied Leyland PD’s that followed these. Every expense seems to have been spared on the NCT vehicles, with their painted metal interiors, whereas the NGT were covered. Those of Tynemouth & Wakefields were finished to an even higher standard with moquette upholstered seats. Getting back to the Park Royal GUY Arab IV’s. As you say, Tynemouth & District had eight of them, FT 9408/15 208/15 I started as a driver at Percy Main in 1967, so by now they were nearly 11 years old, but they were VERY reliable, and for all their age they were a delight to drive, but how much better would they have been if they ha been fitted with a G6LW rather than a 5? 214 was written off after an accident, and dismantled for spares, and the remainder were transferred to Northern in 1968. By this time we had quite a number of the superb Alexander bodied CRG6LX Daimler Fleetlines, so I was probably in a minority, but I for one was sorry to see them go.
Ronnie Hoye
08/02/18 – 14:46
I could go on a real nostalgia fest here, Ronnie. Tynemouth was my local fleet. My memories date from the mid 1950s when I can just about remember the ECW rebodied Leyland TD5s and the trio of AEC Regents rebodied by Pickering. Wallsend locals were largely in the hands of successive batches of Guy Arabs. I used these services to go the the Buddle school and later the grammar school. I recall end of school day transport at the Buddle was provided by four vehicles, two for High Farm and two for Sunholme, usually older vehicles but sometimes newly overhauled vehicles doing what I assume were running in turns. The Guys gave way to Leyland PD2s and PD3s, Atlanteans and Fleetlines. I’ll shut up now!
Richard Slater
11/02/18 – 06:23
Like you Richard, our school bus was either one of the Pickering rebodied pre war Regents or, occasionally, one of the Weymann bodied, early post war variety. As the bus came off an earlier “Workmen”s service it was usually late,a source of delight to we pupils, but consternation to the school. In 1957, I started to attend Tynemouth High School, where it was decided we lived near enough to walk to school. 4X4s were rare and mostly restricted to the farming community in those days! I remember the ECW rebodied TD5s also largely because they were quite fast and refined mechanically, for a bus of that era.They seemed to spend a lot of their time on the 5 Whitley Bay (St. Mary’s Lighthouse) to Newcastle (Haymarket)until about 1955, when they I think (its all a long time ago now) they were largely replaced on that route by the 1955 Orion bodied Guys.
Southdown Motor Services 1946 Leyland Titan PD1 Park Royal H26/26R
Taken with my rather primitive Comet S camera in Brighton in 1960, this picture is not one of my best. There were twenty five of these PD1s delivered between June and September 1946, and 269, GUF 669, arrived with Southdown in July. 269 was withdrawn in 1963 and sold to Mexborough and Swinton who upseated it to H32/26R, but withdrew it for scrap just three years later. The PD1, with its 100 bhp 7.4 litre E181 engine and slow gearchange, was never a lively performer, and would have found some of the hills around Brighton to have been a bit of of a challenge, but several were based at Worthing depot, and in the picture 269 is operating along the relatively easy coastal route 9 from Arundel to Brighton.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox
01/05/22 – 07:37
Poor photo you might feel, Roger, but photos of immediate post-war buses are often fascinating. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a Park Royal bodied one before, still five-bay. Weymann ones are seemingly more common. I agree with the painfully slow gearchanges on these vehicles; you could drink a cup of tea between gears, at least you could with London Transport’s austerity TD4 STDs, which sometimes would appear at Raynes Park, on the 77A route! Why they were given challenging routes in Central London and not allocated to Country services, I don’t know. But that’s London Transport for you!
Chris Hebbron
22/05/22 – 06:47
I went on a family holiday to Worthing in 1959, our first Southern holiday. I remember these PD1s from that holiday and this particular bus from its days with Mexborough and Swinton as I worked as an apprentice at Parkgate at that time just along the road from the M&S depot. I don”t recall ever travelling on it or its sibling. They have a certain rugged attraction to the bodywork and certainly dissimilar to any other buses that I came across. Thanks for the memories!!
Ian Wild
24/05/22 – 05:46
Chris, the utility London Transport STD class of 1941/2 comprised eleven “unfrozen” buses of the Leyland TD7 variety, a type that was introduced in succession to the TD5 in 1939. The TD6 was a special Birmingham only gearless version of the TD7, the model number being changed by Leyland for the wider market. In addition to being higher geared than the TD5, a significant change was the adoption of flexible engine mountings, and, to reduce rock, the engine was equipped with a heavier flywheel than before. This, however, resulted in the engine revs taking a long time to die between upward gear changes, which, added to the high gearing, made the TD7 painfully slow on intensive town services. Perversely, the London TD7s were all allocated to Victoria garage where they were regarded with an attitude bordering on hatred, and STD 101-111 were the very first utility buses to be withdrawn from front line service by London Transport. They all went unlamented for scrap. In practice, several provincial operators found that the flexible engine mountings of the TD7 weakened the chassis frame at the back of the engine and restored their examples to the solid mountings of the TD5, so was it all worth it, one wonders. The wartime bus industry is reported to have been utterly dismayed when the Leyland TD8 utility bus option was cancelled by the Ministry of War Transport, leaving only the suspiciously unknown quantity called the Guy Arab available to operators. Perhaps the heavy flywheel TD8 might not have proved popular in practice, whereas the Arab went on to earn a reputation as a truly dependable workhorse. Despite having a rigidly mounted engine the PD1 also precluded remotely speedy gear changes, and Geoffrey Hilditch declared that this model had the slowest gear change he ever encountered, though it seems that he didn’t come across the equally ponderous TD7. Strangely, the single deck PS1 of identical mechanical specification did not seem to earn a similar reputation. No doubt the lighter vehicle weight permitted better forward progress through the gears.
Southdown Motors Services 1934 Leyland Tiger TS6T Short Bros. B40C (B39C from about 1946)
Two of these impressive and handsome vehicles (51 & 52) were purchased in 1934 for the Eastbourne to Beachy Head tourist service. The local authority would only allow the service to operate with single-deckers, so Southdown decided to buy the largest single-deckers available at the time, which, by law, had to be 30 foot long six-wheelers. Long-time Leyland adherents, they settled on the fairly rare TS6T (T standing for Trailing Axle), which enabled them to carry 40 passengers on the profitable route. A further two (53 & 54) were bought in 1935, this time TS7T’s. Originally fitted with Leyland 8.6 petrol engines, they were all fitted with 8.6 diesel engines in 1940. Despite their luxurious appearance, they were considered to be buses by Southdown, bearing the name in letters rather than “real writing”! After their hard lives, they were all withdrawn from service in 1952. The photo shows 551, in about 1950, about to depart from Eastbourne Pier and grind its way up to the top of Beachy Head. Note the driver in his summer uniform.
Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron
29/05/11 – 17:46
What truly magnificent vehicles, and even further enhanced by the cream side destination boards. My own experience of the ascent on service 97 to Beachy Head is confined to the delightful open top Guy Arabs in the 1960s – and there’s scarcely any need to go into detail about the delightful acoustics of that journey !!
Chris Youhill
29/05/11 – 19:15
Yes, the austerity Guy Arab II’s were converted to open-top around 1950-51 and some re-engined with 6LW engines for the Devil’s Dyke/Beachy Head services. The service became 197 around that time, too. The open-toppers were used all along the South Coast, even a couple on Hayling Island. They lasted until about 1964. Unlike the TS6T’s, the basic Guys were regarded as coaches and given ‘Southdown’ side panels in ‘real writing’! A 1964 film, The Chalk Garden, has Hayley Mills and Deborah Kerr boarding one of them, with it pulling away. I don’t know how extensive the rebuilding of the bodies was, but they always looked impeccable, right to the end. Southdown were a class act.
Chris Hebbron
30/05/11 – 06:25
So true Chris H, Southdown were exactly as you say – “a class act.” The winning combination of high quality handsome vehicles and impeccable maintenance was perfected even further by perhaps the most dignified of all liveries in such very pleasing colours.
Chris Youhill
31/05/11 – 11:40
…and what about the Harrington Cavalier coaches with only 28 seats for there road cruises.
Roger Broughton
31/05/11 – 11:58
By the late 1960s, the Devil’s Dyke service was operated with convertible ‘Queen Mary’ Leylands. At Southdown, vehicle allocation, (including when the tops were to be removed), was decided by the Engineering Department rather than the Traffic Department, unlike other companies I knew, a practice that didn’t always contribute to efficient traffic management. Their policy on which style of company name to apply to any particular vehicle or type, was inconsistent. I am well aware of Southdown’s reputation amongst some enthusiasts, and I have no desire either to offend anyone or spoil their image of the company. Certainly Southdown itself thought it was a ‘class act’, a view it didn’t hide from its BET neighbours. However, at the risk of being thought sour, I remain to be convinced that Southdown was anything out of the ordinary. From an enthusiast’s point of view, its fleet was less interesting and in some ways less operationally imaginative than, for example, neighbour M&D’s fleet. For instance, I always thought M&D’s AEC Reliance coaches with ZF 6-speed gearboxes were decidedly better for both drivers and passengers than Southdown’s Leyland Leopards with Eaton 2-speed axles. The standard of maintenance and turnout was high, granted, but the same could be said of pretty well all major operators; their livery was attractive, (even though the capital letter version of the name was distinctly old-fashioned), but, again, the same could be said of many other operators. By coincidence, this posting follows one of Richard Fieldhouse’s lovely postings: – a West Yorkshire K6B. Having been involved at close quarters with the management of both companies, I have little doubt about which of them was operationally the ‘class act’. From a management viewpoint, West Yorkshire would win hands down every time. Sorry if I have upset anyone.
Mr A Non
01/06/11 – 08:21
I don’t have any professional reason to hide my identity but, in confidence, I can pass on similar comments from friends in the industry. The professional perspective and that of the enthusiast often differ and I have spent hours with professional friends explaining cogently why certain things had to happen which leave enthusiasts in a spin – including the splitting up of that sacred cow, London Transport. Personally, I couldn’t agree more about the superiority of the ZF Reliance (and M & D). I also include Southdown and Ribble amongst the all time greats – but one of my professional friends pointed out (with proofs and from personal experience) that both were basket cases when sold off by NBC at privatisation. […..and then there was the criminal end of those proud coach operators Yelloway and Sheffield United Tours (aka National Travel East) under the leadership (?) of ATL Group.]
David Oldfield
01/06/11 – 13:30
Mr Non, You know, you should never speak ill of the dead!
Chris Hebbron
16/01/12 – 17:35
I was born and lived in Southdown territory for over 50 years and drove for them for almost 22 years at their Eastbourne depot from 1969 so worked quite a few trips to Beachy Head but I regret only with the convertible PD3’s, except for a couple of “memorable” trips with a Bristol LD6B borrowed from BH&D for a summer season. The lack of performance was embarrassing so much so that drivers on the local private coach companies complained to the management of their sluggish efforts to climb the steep twisty road up out of Eastbourne. The company was definitely a “class act”, although conservative in it’s choices the vehicles were always solid reliable and very comfortable with well upholstered higher backed seats in an attractive patterned moquette, the same standards were maintained until the end of the PD3 deliveries after that they got pretty much what they were told as did all NBC companies. We felt at Eastbourne that our standards of maintenance and cleaning were higher than any other depot a view borne out when we drove vehicles from other depots (yes we were snobs) but of course all this went downhill as NBC increased it’s stranglehold on the company and things sunk to a low level, a brief respite when it was privatised (so it was a basket case) then came Stagecoach about whom I would rather say nothing. What followed was an extremely sad and messy end to a very proud and respected company but in it’s prime a true CLASS ACT by any ones definition. R.I.P Southdown
Diesel Dave
17/01/12 – 07:07
To be fair, Dave, it may not be (traditional) Southdown but, by all modern standards, Stagecoach IS a class act. It’s just not enthusiasts’ heaven – no one makes vehicles today that are interesting enough!
David Oldfield
17/01/12 – 15:54
Very belatedly, I’ve just seen A Non’s comments above, which, by chance refer to the three companies I knew well in the 1960’s: Southdown, Maidstone & District and West Yorkshire. I was both surprised and gratified to see that views I’ve always had, but have often kept to myself for fear of offending others, are shared by at least one other person. I think he’s spot on. First, I agree wholeheartedly that M&D’s AEC Reliances, with their 6-speed ZF gearboxes, were decidedly superior to Southdown’s Eaton 2-speed axle Leyland Leopards, both to drive and from a passenger standpoint. A Non is absolutely right, in my view, and I was glad to see David Oldfield’s endorsement of his comments. A Non is also correct, I believe, in describing M&D’s fleet policy as being more imaginative than Southdown’s. M&D didn’t always get it right, (as their sad experience with the Albion Nimbus and the early Atlanteans demonstrates), but they displayed a greater concern for their passengers and staff than their conservative southern neighbours. I agree with him, too, in his assessment of the management and management style of Southdown. They certainly made no secret, to their BET neighbours at least, of their own superior opinion of themselves. M&D and Southdown operated a number of long joint services with each other – to the point, unusually, of each company’s staff operating the other’s vehicles – but the relationship between the two managements was not especially close or particularly friendly. M&D’s Traffic Department co-operated more closely with East Kent, and both regarded Southdown as stand-offish. M&D was a pleasant company whose staff enjoyed intimate working relationships; Southdown was not. A Non’s right about the influence of the Engineering Department at Southdown over matters that at other companies were regarded as Traffic Department issues; that policy caused unnecessary operational problems and costs, and made for relations between Traffic and Engineering that were often strained and always distant, as I know from personal experience. Finally, A Non is totally correct in his judgment that West Yorkshire were a better managed company than Southdown. Southdown had a clumsy and inefficient management structure that may have flattered its own perceived superiority, but it cost more money than it was worth, it made decision-making difficult, and it had seriously demotivating consequences. In their own way, the Traffic Department at West Yorkshire had a high opinion of itself as Southdown’s did, but with one major difference: they were justified in their opinion. As a number of correspondents have pointed out, enthusiasts’ recollections of those days are sometimes coloured by memories of nicely turned out vehicles in smart liveries, perhaps ones they didn’t often come across and which therefore have extra nostalgic value. The managerial realities of the companies involved, however, does not always correspond with those recollections. I’m very sorry if I have offended any Southdown fans, but A Non raised important and valid points that were worth making even if they are often left unsaid.
Roy Burke
17/01/12 – 16:00
I’m assuming, David O, that your comparison is with the other big groups and am genuinely interested in learning in what respects it outshines the others. You’re right about the lack of ‘interesting vehicles around today, although ‘bottom fishing’ around the small independents sometimes produces the odd gem!
Chris Hebbron
17/01/12 – 16:01
Sorry, David. I totally disagree about Stagecoach. I have worked for this operator in the past, and now have to put up with a very poor and unreliable bus service through my village to the neighbouring towns. The Stagecoach maintenance budget is greatly over constrained, with buses suffering from extended silly faults that could be easily fixed with suitable finance. The basic obligation of a bus operator is to run the service(s) safely and reliably with clean, inviting vehicles. This is impossible if maintenance standards do not measure up. Deregulation gives bus operators carte blanche to run what they like and charge well above a reasonable margin in fares. Stagecoach has just handed out £340m to shareholders with Brian Souter and Ann Gloag personally getting £88m between them. A bit more on maintenance would be more appropriate. The present structure of our public road and rail transport industries is a disgrace.
Roger Cox
17/01/12 – 17:57
I am but a humble professional musician/music teacher with a PSV who has spent many (many) years driving buses and coaches (and preserved vehicles) on a part time basis. I am never “opinionated” because all my comments are considered and based on fact and verifiable material. Different managers, companies and sheds may occasionally fall short of the mark; politicians may ensure that expensive initiatives funnel investment into city areas and away from the rural population but Stagecoach has been vilified, often unjustifiably, for being Stagecoach. [I am talking about the mature company, not the young “pirate”. I am talking about the experience of industry professionals and real passengers alike.] You may not like them – that is your prerogative – but that is not my point. Only Stagecoach and Go-Ahead consistently win awards and plaudits from within and without the industry. It is on material like this – gleaned easily from publications like Route One and Bus and Coach Buyer – that I base my comments. …..so yes, Chris, I am comparing with other groups. And, Roger, it doesn’t mean that I don’t agree with you substantively and everything else. …..oh and, I don’t – and never have – had shares in Stagecoach or any other company.
David Oldfield
18/01/12 – 06:30
A number of interesting comments in this thread about the superiority or otherwise of certain operators but I will just confine myself to pointing out that if you go today to the exact spot where that photo was taken, you will find that the view is unchanged sixty years later (including the lamp post in the background) and that you may still board a bus there for Beachy Head although it may well be a Scania double decker of Brighton & Hove. A visit to Eastbourne is recommended for the annual running day in August which usually includes journeys to the top of Beachy Head in a PD3, a journey I first made some 45 years ago (and have the tickets to prove it).
Nigel Turner
18/01/12 – 06:31
In the area I live in, First Group operate the majority of services, with a few contributed by Stagecoach. These days, I much prefer to travel on a Stagecoach vehicle – their service locally seems generally more efficient, and cleaner. I could almost be attracted to modern buses! That is not say that First are inefficient or grubby, but they are not in the same ball park as Stagecoach in this neck of the woods. In general, the First Group local stock consists of some quite elderly vehicles too, which doesn’t necessarily help the image – but would the man in the street or on the seat notice this? Like some others here, I have no shares in any bus company and have never been employed in the bus industry – just an observer and passenger for many years, and this is just a personal view. Others can disagree, and we will enjoy reading the other comments in due course.
Michael Hampton
18/01/12 – 06:32
Thx, David, for quoting the source of your knowledge about Stagecoach (and Go-Ahead). Roy, it’s not whether ‘fans’ are offended by ‘insider’ comments – I think most of us contributing on this site are old enough to appreciate and welcome measured and informed opinion, rather than be influenced by one livery over another or the smartness of staff uniforms! I, for one, find these discussions useful and I’m sure I’m not alone. One point: for many years, Southdown had a fare-sharing arrangement with Portsmouth Corporation, which involved route-balancing swapping of buses (but not crews) at the year-end, usually with Portsmouth buses on Southdown routes, but I recall one year where the reverse happened. Do you know what the relationship was like between these two organisations?.
Chris Hebbron
18/01/12 – 08:39
A very interesting observation, Nigel, on the unchanged scene after 60 years. almost unheard of in this day and age! And thanks for the heads-up on the annual running day. Where would the actual date be published?
Chris Hebbron
18/01/12 – 10:36
Interesting observation, Chris H. Anyone who’s ever read any of your comments on this site will recognise both your own extensive knowledge of the industry and your commitment to remembering and understanding it in an informed, realistic and unbiased way. On the other hand, there are lots of comments, (you can see some on this page alone), that rate an operator on the basis of well turned out vehicles. Maybe I’m just sour, but I do rather disagree with the often expressed view – it’s clearly your view, and I have no wish to upset you – that Southdown were a ‘class act’. Operationally, they were often inefficient in many regards, certainly in comparison with West Yorkshire. The company seemed to encourage compartmentalisation, which in turn discouraged contact and co-operation both internally and with other operators. I found this to be in stark and unhelpful contrast with everything I had seen at WY and had been taught at Maidstone & District. I can’t, I’m afraid, throw any light on your question, Chris, about the arrangements at Portsmouth between Southdown and Portsmouth Corporation, since I was based in Brighton. However, illustrative of the point I’m trying to make is that in the year and more that I was there, I never met my ‘oppos’ at Portsmouth – my request to do so being summarily dismissed as unnecessary – and I recall speaking to them by telephone only once. Similarly, although we were of course heavily involved in the Brighton Pool with Brighton Corporation and Brighton, Hove & District, those operators were regarded more as competitors for staff than as partners. No need was seen for contact between us at an operational level, (the idea was variously described to me as ‘dangerous’ and ‘pointless’), and there was none. This site is not the place for gripes, however, and I repeat my apologies for attacking a reputation that many fans hold dear. I just don’t share their view. I have a high opinion of the operational efficiency of West Yorkshire, and I have the fondest possible regard for Maidstone & District, ramshackle and bumbling though they occasionally were. Both were, in my experience, better, (and definitely happier), operators than Southdown.
Roy Burke
18/01/12 – 13:56
But apologies are not required, Roy. We speak as we find and, as some of us have already intimated, the professional and insider view can be at variance – sometimes wildly – with that of the enthusiast. My conversations with “professional” friends constantly bear this out. [Personally, I would go for M & D and their Reliances – as well as their later Leopards.]
David Oldfield
18/01/12 – 14:47
I simply have to agree with Roy`s comments on the general points of difference between the likes of “West Yorkshire” and “Southdown”! The former Tilling group`s whole ethos was based on rugged efficiency with a truly Northern “no nonsense” approach, whereas the more noted BET operators always seemed to have the politicians ideal of putting on a “frontal image”. Certainly, in the Bradford area, I do not recall any adverse comments about West Yorkshire, it being an organisation which always commanded public respect. Unlike YWD, or Hebble, its vehicles were always well turned out, and the whole operation exuded total efficiency! Other members of the group always gave me the same impression, United coming to mind. I know I am only an enthusiast, and not an “insider”, but I was well tuned in to public awareness, and this feeling was, I am convinced, well founded. It is a great pity that this superb bus operator is no longer with us, as, like so many of our industrial organisations of the past, we did not know what we had until we lost it! As for the present day, I have no interest whatsoever, and suggest we stick to the 1970 (or earlier?) limit for this website!
John Whitaker
19/01/12 – 05:29
Well my comments certainly provoked a varied response from several of my fellow contributors to the site which I suppose is one of it’s aims. I have to admit my admiration for Southdown came about during my childhood from the early forties so has no basis in administration or engineering just my personal experience of being a passenger and enjoying that. I did drive some of M&D’s Reliances and Panthers on the Heathfield cycle routes and enjoyed the experience very much, if I am honest I must admit that I found the Reliance a far better vehicle to drive whether in bus or 6 speed coach form. If you took the time to master it the Leopard with 2 speed axle was a pleasant vehicle to drive but the engine never pulled as willingly as the AEC motor and the controls were much heavier. So you see my admiration for Southdown is purely a childhood fantasy and I will be forever prejudiced, thank you for indulging me.
Diesel Dave
19/01/12 – 05:30
If I could add my two penny worth to the debate. My vote for the class acts in the North East would go to three independents, OK Motor Services of Bishop Auckland, who had a mixed fleet of new and used vehicles and ran a number of services, and two one route operators, Hunter’s of Seaton Delaval and Economic of Whitburn, the last two had very similar livery’s, but all three had beautifully turned out vehicles, and you could almost set your watch by them. As for Tilling and BET, I worked for a BET company, Tynemouth and Wakefields a subsidiary of Northern General, our buses weren’t bad but Tyneside, another Northern subsidiary, were always immaculate, to be fair they had a much smaller fleet than us, but if I’m honest I would have to say that in general, United ‘a Tilling group company’ always seemed to have a slight edge, but nostalgia’s not what it used to be
Ronnie Hoye
19/01/12 – 17:49
The Eastbourne Running Day has its own website www.eastbourne-classicbus.co.uk This years event is on Sunday July 22nd and already promised are a Leyland Lion, AEC Regent III, Regent V and Leyland PD2 ex Eastbourne Corporation, a Guy Arab and Leyland PD3 ex Southdown and an AEC Reliance ex East Kent. I spent my holidays on the South Coast in the 1960s and 1970s riding on buses like these, well perhaps not the Leyland Lion!
Nigel Turner
27/01/12 – 06:29
As a former West Yorkshire engine fitter from 1969 to 1987, it is heart warming to read comments about the company being a ‘class act’. From an employee’s viewpoint WY was a good company to work for, with generally good facilities and working conditions. Certainly the atmosphere at the Central Works, Body Shop and Head Office complex in Harrogate was that of one big family – with all that that entailed! Despite the loss of our attractive ‘Tilling’ bus and coach liveries under the aegis of the NBC, and the relentless governmental drive towards one-person operation (whether it was needed or not), WY remained a well-run and generally well-respected organisation. Brian Horner was general manager for much of the NBC period, and in many peoples view built on the standards inherited from his predecessor Jack Lawrence. The bus and coach fleet were generally well-presented for what was a fairly large concern, and the tours and holidays side expanded under the steady hand of the late Gordon Dingle. The company had a policy of continued modernisation of its depots, offices and other facilities, and in the 1980’s WY devised a preventive maintenance programme to further improve vehicle reliability, based on its own data relating to component life. West Yorkshire was indeed a ‘class act’ and is sadly missed by many including me. I still have a soft spot for Southdown though……..
Brendan Smith
28/01/12 – 06:34
The Southdown engineering department had a penchant for cutting down the engine output of their Leylands and Guys, ostensibly in the interests of fuel economy, and road performance suffered. I recall particularly a ride in the early 1960s on one of the very fine Park Royal bodied Guy Arab IVs on route 23 between Crawley and Brighton, a service that encountered some pretty stiff gradients across the Weald and over the South Downs. The governor of the bus’s 6LW had been reset to such a low level that the engine died back at a road speed of about 25 mph. I always felt, also, that Southdown Leylands decidedly lacked sparkle on the road.
Roger Cox
17/12/12 – 11:24
I worked twice as a PSV conductor for Southdown Portsmouth depots in the 1960s as a student holiday job and had the fortune to work on PD3s of the time. As for the comment for nowhere for the conductor to stand, it was the custom for them to stand at the front at the base of the staircase and lean through an open window area over the left hand side of the front mounted engine to keep the driver company (obviously when safe to do so). The driver’s job was not so lonely and isolated as it is now on the ‘one-man bands’ that we have all become used to! Some drivers hated the PD3s especially the so-called’one-leggers’ which had a gearing system at the top of a long metal column that was mounted on the floor. I must admit that I considered the introduction of the ‘Queen Marys’ in 1957, when I was still attending school, unusual in the light that most bus companies were looking towards the introduction of Leyland Atlanteans in their fleets. Many PD3s came up to Leicester, where I now live, having being purchased by ‘Confidence’ for use for transporting the then British Shoe Corporation employees.
Bernard Robinson
03/01/13 – 11:23
I used to be a frequent traveller on Southdown route 12 (Brighton/Seaford/Eastbourne) in the late ‘forties and early ‘fifties. But this is about route 126 that went over Hindover Hill. I was assured in my youth that the name “High and Over” was a form of “Hindover” that was invented by the Southdown company in the ‘thirties. Can anyone shed light on that?
Ron
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
15/04/16 – 07:08
Just another comment about Route 126. It ran from Eastbourne to Seaford, via Polegate and Alfriston. I used to use it as a local holiday treat when resident as a kid in Eastbourne during the late 1940s, early 1950s. My real memories of it were grinding up the long hill of ‘High and Over’ just before entering Seaford on the last lap of the journey, but another memory is that I think there must have been a vehicle size restriction on this service because I do remember how tight the parking was for the bus stop outside the famous old pub in the centre of Alfriston. Also, as an aside, does anyone else remember Drusilla’s on this route – a well known tourist destination on this route for its zoo and miniature railway?
