Merthyr Tydfil Corporation – Tiger Cub – 964 DTJ – 100

964 DTJ

Merthyr Tydfil Corporation
1958
Leyland Tiger Cub PSUC1/1
Weymann B44F

I haven’t seen any offerings of Merthyr Tydfil vehicles on this site so to correct that, here is an ex-Leyland demonstrator 964 DTJ which found a home with said operator. This classic Weymann B44F body (M8461) was mounted on chassis number 577569 and new in 1958 but is seen on home turf at Bus & Coach Wales 2009.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson


08/09/16 – 05:39

Nice, Les! Thanks for posting. I have a bought slide of this one, with more cream – presumably your view shows the first Merthyr livery after she ceased her ‘demonstrator’ career

Pete Davies


16/09/16 – 06:31

For anyone interested in Merthyr’s buses there is an excellent site at www.alangeorge.co.uk/buses.htm

Peter Cook

Hull Corporation – Leyland TB2 – CRH 928 – 3

Hull Corporation Leyland TB2 Trolleybus CRH 928_lr

Kingston upon Hull Corporation Transport
Leyland TB2
1937
Weymann H28/26R

The first trolleybus route in Hull commenced in June, 1937. It replaced the tram route SWC, but not directly, as a short lived motorbus service, numbered 12 ran in the interval between the end of the trams and the start of the trolleybuses. The route ran along Spring Bank, Spring Bank West and Chanterlands Avenue. A new route number series for trolleybuses was instituted at this time, the first number being 61, along with a short working to Goddard Avenue turning circle, which was numbered 61A. This latter was renumbered to 65 in 1943.
To start the service, along with the Newland Avenue (62, 62A) routes, 26 trolleybus chassis were purchased from Leyland. These were of the TB2 type, equivalent to the Titan TD2 chassis. Numbers were 1 to 26, which commenced a separate series from the motorbuses. Registrations were CRH 925-50. The trolleybuses carried the newly introduced streamline livery.
During the war, in 1941, due to service cuts four trolleybuses (1 to 4) were loaned to Pontypridd UDC, being returned the following year. No 3 is shown at the Old Bridge in Pontypridd, seeming to be causing interest to the gentleman on the bridge! Although still carrying the streamline livery, the white has been over painted in a light blue colour, making the livery a two-tone blue. Of note is the pre-war “HULL” on the upper deck side panels, and “Corporation Transport” being on white lozenges.
I have seen this batch also quoted as being of the TB4 type, but if anyone can provide a definitive answer I would be grateful. Chassis numbers were in the series 12280 to 12306.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Keith Easton


I wonder who over-painted the white to light blue – Hull or Pontypridd? Interesting photo – not many wartime photos exist, especially of those who went to foreign climes for a while!
Headlamps restricted and white painting around the front edge, but no window netting. Maybe they didn’t feel there was a strong likelihood of air raids in that area.
Pontypridd must have had an acute shortage of buses/trolleybuses in the war, for Portsmouth Corporation sent several trolleybuses there, too. Imagine having to tow and steer these vehicles such long distances!

Chris Hebbron


I believe that Hull was responsible for the over-painting, as native buses and trolleybuses were also treated similarly. I cant say about window netting, as I’m not quite that old! Hull certainly did have some air-raids during the war, and lost 35% of the bus fleet in May, 1941. No trolleybuses were affected, however.

Keith Easton


The over painting was carried out by the Transport Department over a period of ten days in late May 1941. All trolleybuses were parked along main roads at night to prevent their loss if a garage was hit by bombs but the white could be seen from the air and the undertaking was asked to do it, Geoff O’Connell (whose father was an inspector) told me that he remembered seeing TB7 no 52 being all blue at the front and offside but with normal livery on the other!

Malcolm Wells


Hi Malcolm, can we can confirm that these trolleys were actually TB4 and not TB2? I have seen them quoted with both model types but the date would make TB4 more likely. I have a photocopy sheet from Geoff, which shows the layout of the original Black on white blinds, with routes 61, 61A, 62, 62A, 62B, 62C, 63, 63A, 64, 64A, 65 and 66. Of course the 65 and 66 were not operated as such, but were the 62B and 62C ever operated? The ‘A’ route numbers are shown as being blanked out along with 65 and 66. You mention the Anlaby Road route as being 99, but I have no record of this, was it actually used in service?

Keith Easton


Do not know if the following will help but the dates below are for when the TDs first appeared.

TD1 – 1927        TD2 – 1932        TD3 – 1933        TD4 – 1935 
TD5 – 1937        TD6 – 1938        TD7 – 1939

Spencer


The reference to service 99 was a typing error – it was 69.
Leylands 1 to 26 were designated TD4 in the original tender from Leyland Motors in July 1936 and this was quoted in the minutes but was subsequently altered to TB4.
The 62B and 62C were never operated but no reason for doing so has ever come to light although a difference in headways might have contributed – there were more trolleybuses per hour on Beverley Road than on Newland Avenue.

Malcolm Wells


I’m sure most people who have posted on this subject already know this but there are some really fantastic short videos on YouTube concerning Hull trolleys and motor buses from before WW2 to the present day. It seems Hull has been more fortunate than many places in having such a wonderful pictorial transport record!

Chris Barker


25/02/14 – 16:12

Having lived in Hull from 1946 to 1963, I can clarify the route number situation.
61 was Chantlands Avenue (up to Cottingham Road)
65 was the shortened version of 61 terminating about 200 yds from the start of Chantlands Avenue- peak only
62 was Princes Av/Newlands Av (to Cottingham Road)
66 was the shortened version of 62 terminating at Pearson’s Park.
63 was Beverley Road (up to Cottingham Road)
67 was the shortened version of 63 up to Pearson’s Park – peak only
All of the above originally ran on the pre-war Leyland Buses, but were replaced in 1950 by the forward control dual entrance and dual staircase Sunbeams – which were supposed to have counters on the stairs with the forward staircase for ascending and the mid-bus staircase for descending- this was not a success.
64 was Holderness Road
68 was the shortened version up to East Park – peak only.
These used the 1940 Leyland vehicles for the duration of the trolleybus system
69 Analby Road – almost to Boothferry Park
(There were 169 and 269 shortened but these did not come about until after the end of the trolleybus system)
70 Hessle Road – almost to City Limits
(a shortened version (170 or 270) ran but only after the end of the trolleybus system.
All 69’s and 70’s used 1948 vehicles which (from memory) were B.E.T. (which was a joint A.E.C./Leyland venture) for the duration of the trolleybus system.

Frank Burgess


26/02/14 – 07:52

The joint Leyland and AEC was actually BUT. They also supplied engines for early railway Diesel Multiple Units. The sight of Hull trolleys in Pontypridd must have confused any potential German Spies!!!!

Philip Carlton


26/02/14 – 12:13

Chris Hebbron is certainly right in an early comment that Pontypridd needed extra vehicles during the war. However the Portsmouth and Hull trolley-buses were probably not operated concurrently. The main caption above mentions the Hull quartet on loan to Pontypridd in 1941 to 1942. The Portsmouth quartet went to Wales in August 1942, so presumably were replacements for the Hull ones returning north. Pontypridd gained an extra six seats per vehicle. But they lost out on standardisation, as two Portsmouth vehicles were AEC 663T, and two were Sunbeam MS3s. Two had MCCW, and two EEC bodies, one on each make of chassis. Also two had EEC motors, but one regen the other augmented field, the other two having BTH motors, one regen, the other regulated field. Such was Portsmouth’s desire to experiment! None of them had traction batteries, and had been in storage at Portsmouth since c.1940 so that they wouldn’t block the streets in the event of power cuts due to bombings etc. Three of them stayed at Pontypridd until November 1945, the fourth returning in August 1946.

Michael Hampton


26/02/14 – 16:40

Can I provide the following route details at 1 January 1958:
61 Chanterlands Avenue North
62 Newland Avenue (Cottingham Road)
63 Endike Lane – much further north than Cottingham Road – there were no turning facilities at the eastern part of Pearson Park on Beverley Road
64 Ings Road
65 Goddard Avenue – short working of the 61 – originally the main service – was used at peaks and during the day in later years
66 Pearson Park – short working of the 62 – used only in days immediately preceding holidays such as Christmas
68 East Park – short working of the 68 – alternate trolleybuses turned here from 29 June 1952
69 Meadowbank Road – extended from the roundabout at the Boothferry Road junction on 30 March 1947
70 Dairycoates – well short (over a mile ) of the city boundary.
71 Boulevard – short working of the 69 – used for rubgy league specials on Saturdays (mainly)
The twenty Leyland TB7s (nos 47-66) were delivered in the Summer of 1939 – Nos 47/48/51/52 were licensed from 1 August 1939. By December 1960 only seven were left (48/54/55/61/63/64/66) and several Crossley TDD4s were sent to Holderness Road to maintain the 64/68 service. All seven were withdrawn on 28 January 1961 when service 70 was withdrawn.
KHCT never operated BUT trolleybuses – the 1948 vehicles were Sunbeam F4 with Roe H60R bodies (8 feet wide). All ten entered service on 1 June 1948 but were later split between the 69 and 70.
The dual door trolleybuses were Sunbeam MFsBs with Roe H54D bodies. No. 101 arrived in later 1952 whilst the further fifteen entered service from November 1954 to May 1955. they were intended for one-man operation using tokens and tickets – no cash and Mr Pulfrey, the GM, wanted the 63 to be the trial route but due to Union opposition they never ran in that form. No. 116 was fitted with an electronic counter on both stairs but it was not successful. No. 116 also had a Grant farebox fitted but never ran in service as such. They gained the nick name “Coronations” as no. 101 entered service in January 1953.
The service 67 was the renumbered 63A which ran to Chanterlands Avenue North via Beverley Road and Cottingham Road at times during the war and for a short time thereafter. The Original 63A was intended for short workings to Haworth Arms. KHCT wanted a roundabout here so that alternate vehicles on Beverley Road could turn here but nothing came of this partly due to the start of the war.
The 61/62 were the preserve of Leyland TB4s pre-war whilst the Crossleys ran the 63 – they were kept apart in Cottingham Road garage!
Nos 1 to 4 were recalled from Pontypridd to permit the Anlaby Road tram route to be converted to trolleybus operation.
Full details of the fleet list were posted on this site by Keith Easton some time ago and can be viewed at this link.

Malcolm Wells


There is is also a very in depth article that maybe of interest at the following link Bus, Trolleybus and Tram Routes of Kingston upon Hull Corporation

Peter

North Western – Leyland Tiger Cub – FDB 586 – 586A


Stephen Howarth collection

North Western Road Car Co
1955
Leyland Tiger Cub PCUC1/1
Weymann B44F

FDB 586 a Leyland Tiger Cub was new to North Western RCC in 1955.
It was converted, along with the rest of the batch to OMO in 1958/9, as denoted by the ‘A’ suffix after the fleet number.
586 is shown here (in rather a grubby state) working the 1 hour 36 minute duration Service 65 from Ashbourne to Buxton. The picture was taken outside the Devonshire Arms Hotel in the picturesque Derbyshire village of Hartington, a view which has changed little over the years. There was still over 50 minutes to go before it reaches the end of the journey in Buxton Market Place.
It was withdrawn in 1968, and passed to Worth’s Motor Service Enstone, Oxfordshire.


Stephen Howarth collection

Taken from their website “Worth’s were established in 1922 in the village of Enstone by Thomas (Dickie) Edmund Worth who started, like a lot of Bus and Coach Companies of that time by repairing motor bikes, bicycles and lawn mowers. He later progressed to running Ford Model T taxis’, and then on to Char-a-Bancs running day trips to the coast.”
This year the company will be celebrating 90 years in business and continues to be run by the Worth family with the motto still being well known as:- “For a rattling good ride”.
There website can be found at www.worthscoaches.co.uk
FDB 586 is shown here outside the Garage in Enstone.


Stephen Howarth collection

I have included a modern day picture of the premises, and as can be seen the garage building, unlike the fleet, has altered little.

Photographs and Copy contributed by Stephen Howarth

25/09/12 – 16:45

Purely from the “observer” point of view, Worth’s has always struck me as being one of the better operators. Others, of course, may feel or know otherwise! As for North Western, what can one say other than “R.I.P.”?

Pete Davies

25/09/12 – 18:57

Pete: yes and yes.

David Oldfield

26/09/12 – 07:07

The No. 65 doesn’t look overburdened with passengers does it? And to think, until the late 50s this route was paralleled by a railway line, whose stations, on the whole, were nowhere near the villages they purported to serve!

Stephen Ford

East Yorkshire – Leyland Panther – JRH 323E – 823

East Yorkshire - Leyland Panther - JRH 323E - 823

East Yorkshire
1967
Leyland Panther PSUR1/2R
Weymann Topaz II

The Panther and Panther Cub were Leyland Motors’ rear underfloor-engined offerings during the mid- to late-1960’s. By this time AEC had been taken over and its Swift model shared the same chassis as the Panther, each using their own engines (O600/O680 and AH505/691 respectively), the Panther having a front mounted radiator, whilst the Swift’s was at the rear. Both bus (with a stepped chassis frame) and coach (with a high, straight frame) were offered, the Swift also being offered with a constant-mesh gearbox in place of the more usual semi-automatic. The shorter Panther Cub – originally introduced to meet the requirements of Manchester CT – had a shorter rear overhang and of necessity had to feature the smaller O400 engine. An equivalent shorter Swift was offered with the AH505 engine only.
Several operators – both municipal and company, and some overseas – bought the Panther and Panther Cub in their bus form, and operated them with varying degrees of success, many having relatively short lives mainly due to bodywork deficiencies. The coach version was relatively uncommon though, the largest operator probably being Seamark’s of Bedfordshire, along with Skill’s of Nottingham.
East Yorkshire took 24 Panthers and 17 Panther Cubs. The Panthers consisted 15 buses, 4 DP’s and 5 coaches – but all based on the PSUR1/2R coach chassis. The second batch of three coaches had Plaxton Panorama bodies, but the first pair (823/824) had very rare Weymann Topaz II C44F coachwork.
Here 823 is seen emerging from the company’s Anlaby Road, Hull premises in 1972.The pair were repainted into the NBC corporate white livery in 1973, but were to pass to the NBC’s vehicle cannibalisation centre at Bracebridge Heath, near Lincoln in 1976 to be stripped for spares, after which the remains were sold to Pickersgill & Laverick, the Carlton breakers.

Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer


29/11/17 – 08:24

A Willowbrook DP-bodied PSU3 of 1962 also in view.

Mark Evans


30/11/17 – 08:14

Not a bad looking coach but a bit let down by the rather oversized front grille.

Philip Halstead


01/12/17 – 06:53

Good point, Philip. One expects something better from Weymann.This is a touch vulgar.

David Wragg


02/12/17 – 07:30

I think it’s unlikely that the Topaz II was designed by Weymann, and even more unlikely that it was built by them, since the factory had been closed for 18 months by the time it was delivered. Blame MCW.

Peter Williamson


02/12/17 – 07:31

Can you see that the outline of the grille is basically Duple 1963-1965 (Bella Vega/Vega Major)? By this time, of course, Weymann no longer existed. It is strictly speaking a MCW body.

David Oldfield


13/12/17 – 08:00

Maybe a bit of a BET Group thread here; EYMS with Panther buses and a few coaches, similar to PMT with Roadliners. I wonder how reliable the Panthers were? Would they be used on extended tours? The zig zag flash on the body side forward of the rear wheel arch looks strange and as already commented the front is rather bland with its unappealing grille.

Ian Wild


13/12/17 – 09:48

I took a photo of another coach in Ilfracombe whilst on holiday in 1969 and there is one of these Panthers parked up in the background, so it seems likely they were used on extended tours. I’m very surprised now that I didn’t photograph the Panther also. //www.sct61.org.uk/zzrdf880g

John Stringer


15/12/17 – 07:24

The entire design looks rather untidy to my eye. Not just the bizarre zig zag on the side and the “parts bins” frontal appearance, but also the fractionally deeper first side window, all conspire to give an insipid, rather than an ugly effect. Wasn’t the original Topaz of circa 1962 redesigned around 1965, which would make the example above a very rare Topaz II?

Roger Cox


15/12/17 – 11:03

About 6 on Bedford VAL14, I believe, and the East Yorkshire Panthers. That was it.

David Oldfield


16/12/17 – 09:20

I have to confess to liking this design: it is all the things the 50’s juke box styles were not- simple, easy on the eye- very 60’s, perhaps Farina. Shortcomings in appearance are surely down to an unsympathetic livery: the white roof dropped down the front, giving too much emphasis to the darker grille- no attempt to use a colour or shade that would draw the necessary elements- lights, vents, displays- together: imagine the dark East Yorks blue overall here and generally replacing the insipid lighter blue : similarly the windows, where the smaller front group would provide the point at which the flash could (if anywhere) begin.
I now digress: purely on livery, has anyone seen a Borismaster in adverlivery? Window dividers on examples I have seen are not then camouflaged to give the impression of a single glazed area, and one I saw had white dividers: the result just emphasises the bizarre design.

Joe


17/12/17 – 07:22

I must point out that the ‘white roof dropped down at the front’ actually, erm…doesn’t. The original slide was a bit on the pale overexposed side and in editing the scan I boosted the colour saturation but it couldn’t bring out the primrose at the front without overdoing the rest of it. In fact I don’t think the roof was white either! I normally wouldn’t submit such a print but it just seemed a bit of a rarity and there wasn’t one on the site.

John Stringer


17/12/17 – 09:19

FWW 809C

This Bedford VAL was parked at Gosforth Park races sometime in the late 1960s, my only ever sighting of a Weymann Topaz body.

Richard Slater


17/12/17 – 10:22

This was operated by Billies coaches of Mexborough, The previous VAL purchased having been a much more traditional Duple bodied item meant this one seemed quite exotic at the time. I assume being a bit of an oddball just meant that they got it for an attractive price.

Andrew Charles


22/12/17 – 07:04

I feel that this coach has a stylish charm of its own. In my humble opinion, the chief problem is that the zigzag flash at the back goes DOWN. If the flash went UP at the same point, it would give a ‘Get up and Go’ impression, rather than its unfortunate ‘Down at Heel’ look.
But I do accept that these things are subjective and our personal tastes will all differ.

Petras409


23/12/17 – 07:57

Interesting to look at other EYMS bus liveries using the dark blue- under EY on this site. Dark blue worked well for the late lamented GNER trains too.

Joe


23/12/17 – 07:58

Petras409, I can’t help but agree with you that the overall design did have a charm of its own, let down by the zigzag flash. A simple straight moulding front to rear would have improved things I feel, especially if positioned to ‘kiss’ the top of each wheelarch. Alternatively, the ‘new’ horizontal moulding could have been stepped down to subtly match the window line at the first bay. In either case the moulding could then have terminated at the centre line of the upper headlamp, which would have made more of a feature of the radiator grille.
With respect to Joe’s comment re the livery, East Yorkshire’s coaches looked splendid in primrose and blue and were always very smartly turned out. Use of the dark blue, primrose and white livery on 823/4 would have meant that they had been demoted for bus work, although it has to be admitted they would still probably have looked just as smart. Now is my memory playing tricks, or am I right in thinking that for some reason the Topaz-bodied Panthers did not carry the usual EYMS ‘xxxxxx Star’ names on their sides?

Brendan Smith


03/04/18 – 07:00

I remember the Topaz bodied Bedford VAL FWW 609C of Billies Coaches very well & in later years it passed to Howards Coaches of Whitby who named it “Concorde”. Even though the VAL has always been one of my favourite types of PSV,the driver would have his work cut out winding one up to 65 MPH on the motorway so they were not Supersonic in any way!.

Andrew Spriggs


05/05/18 – 06:43

Weymann did all the Topaz II bodies on VAL14. The two on Panther were built by MCW.

Stephen Allcroft


07/05/18 – 07:11

Phillip and David W – I couldn’t have described the radiator grille any better – “a touch vulgar” indeed.

Chris Youhill

Sheffield Corporation – Leyland Olympic – RPA 771 – 211


Copyright Ian Wild

Sheffield Corporation
1952
Leyland Olympic HR44 
Weymann B44F

Sheffield bought three early Leyland Olympics in 1951 and followed up two years later by the acquisition of this former Demonstrator. It put in a good service life lasting until 1968 when it was sold to Dodd, (Dealer) in Dromera, Ireland. I wonder if it found a buyer or whether it was scrapped? The bus was originally fleet number 211 being renumbered as shown in the 1967 scheme. This photo was taken on 10th June 1967 at the Hillsborough terminus of the 31 Lower Walkley service which was characterised by narrow streets and steep hills.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild


25/04/12 – 05:16

I think I remember these in Sheffield: were they the “integral” versions? Some had an Olympic torch badge on the front, I think. They always seemed high-floored (the opposite to what you could expect) and a bit awkward, but presumably suited the route.

Joe


25/04/12 – 05:17

From 1952 until 1956 I lived on the 31 and travelled on these and the back loader Royal Tigers. This is now a terminus for Stagecoach 52 and is also close to where the Malin Bridge branch leaves the main Supertram line to Middlewood.

David Oldfield


25/04/12 – 08:36

Can anyone tell me what size engine were in these Olympics please. I believe the King Alfred Olympic that is currently being restored and nearing completion was rescued from Ireland. I always thought it was a great shame that one of the Halifax Corporation Worldmasters were not saved for preservation especially fleet No1 – KCP 1 what a great registration number! Two of these vehicles ended up in Ireland with Keneallys coaches.

Richard McAllister


25/04/12 – 09:20

The Olympic was the integral predecessor of the Royal Tiger and shared all the same mechanical units – including the 9.8 litre 0.600. They were high floored and probably awkward – but what else would you expect of an early underfloor vehicle? [The open backed Royal Tigers 222/223 were even more awkward.] As for suiting the route, they only suited it for the operator (dimensions and power for a hilly route) certainly not passenger friendly – especially the aged and infirm. Passenger comfort only became a priority from about ten years later when technology and new designs allowed it.

David Oldfield


25/04/12 – 15:27

Yes- they looked like the ugly sisters in the sixties- especially as you say, the Tiger rear loaders. My point is that I assume in an integral bus you are not fixing a body to a one-size-fits-all chassis and could therefore make some allowance for the passengers… or what’s the point (I think that was the problem- there wasn’t one…?… or was weight reduced?) What were the advantages? You were presumably stuck with the basics of the original body for good?

Joe


25/04/12 – 16:33

Modern integral buses are monocoque, just like cars (which also used to have separate bodies/chassis)and, I think, are almost universal nowadays. You’re right, though, Joe, you picks your body length, they bold on all the mechanicals and you’re stuck with it. London Transport’s tram/trolleybus department, separate from its bus department, created integral trolleybuses around 1937, using several companies to build them, including Brush and Leyland. Strange how long it took for this system to begin to become popular, around the time when Olympics were coming off the lines and said trolleybuses were starting to go to the scrapyard!

Chris Hebbron


25/04/12 – 16:37

Leeds single deck requirements were few in post war years indeed they only bought 10 saloons in the fifties but managed to have three chassis types! These were 5 AEC Reliances 3 Leyland Tiger Cub and a pair of Guy Arab LUFs. All had the same body layout which was B34C + 14 crush load standees in a central vestibule opposite the doors. Like Sheffield’s Royal Tigers the steps were vertiginous and deep most off putting for intending passengers. Getting a push chair aboard was a major logistical exercise! The overall body shape was common to all ten but the final pair of Reliances had a more upright profile. They were mainly confined to two routes one of which passed under a low bridge and another which crossed the canal on abridge with weight restrictions.

Chris Hough


25/04/12 – 17:39

Joe, the intention with all early integrals was to save weight – it was impossible to be passenger friendly until the dawn of the rear-engined bus. Unfortunately, all of the major manufacturers found that the weight saving margin was no where near enough and that, quite the opposite, there were major weaknesses – often around suspension mountings. This was certainly true of the Bristol LS which transformed after five years into the almost identical MW chassis. Similar problems beset the AEC Monocoach which died out in favour of the Reliance. The other problem was that British operators preferred, and still do, to choose their own bodywork – cf the Leyland National of later years. Ironically the change from LS to MW and Monocaoch to Reliance were not so evident as the separate body chosen for the separate chassis tended to be identical, in all other respects, with the earlier integral body. [Come to think of it, many moved over to the Royal Tiger with identical Weymann coachwork!]

David Oldfield


25/04/12 – 17:39

Just wait until someone discovers the advantages of “demountable” bus bodies: bodies can be changed or swapped on a “chassis”, giving greater flexibility, more opportunities for upgrading, and cutting service times. Why didn’t anyone think of that before?

Joe


26/04/12 – 06:14

1904 is beyond most people’s memories, Joe.

David Oldfield


26/04/12 – 11:39

There were demountable bodies in the early twenties, Joe, although they were usually in the form of exchangeable lorry/charabanc bodies. It never carried over, though into exchangeable bus bodies, to my knowledge, at least, not in a big way.

Chris Hebbron


26/04/12 – 11:40

Nice one, Joe. However, the idea of demountable bodies does actually go back a long way. Maidstone and District started in 1911 with three Gilford chassis; these had bus bodies during the day which were changed for lorry bodies at night. I believe the lorries were used to carry vegetables to and from Covent Garden. I’m sure there are plenty of other examples elsewhere, too.
No doubt David is right when he talks about weight saving being a factor in the development of integrals, but I rather suspect that other motives in early post-war attempts were to use parts from pre-war chassis, and to generate extra work for the maker. Beadle, of course, were prominent in this field; others included Harrington and Saunders-Roe.

Roy Burke


27/04/12 – 07:22

I remember this bus from my student days and wondered why there was an odd one with a Surrey registration.
It would have demonstrated for Weymann, who were based at Addlestone. Evidently it was never fitted with standard Sheffield blinds. I never rode on the 31 although I had “digs” near Crookes on the 52 route.
The open-platform Royal Tigers used on the same route looked odd and a bit reminiscent of Edinburgh; I think the local Inspectorate had something to say about the arrangement.

Geoff Kerr


27/04/12 – 08:39

Yes, Geoff, there were responsible for the fitting of the odd looking emergency door at the rear – NEXT to an open rear platform!
Roy, what said is true but Weymann and Park Royal never did a Beadle with second-hand parts.
I type this about my home town of Sheffield from two miles up the hill from Addlestone. Funny old world.

David Oldfield


27/04/12 – 09:34

And I, a Surrey-ite, who long ago moved away, still visit my brother in Ottershaw, just across the M25 from you, David. Incidentally, whatever happened to Weymann’s works? I assume it no longer exists.

Chris Hebbron


27/04/12 – 10:35

Well, for the initiated Chris, I’m typing IN Ottershaw itself! [Funny AND small world.] Until I retired a year or two back, I passed it on the way to school – St George’s College – but ever since the turn of the millennium it has been a deserted, speculative, office block awaiting tenants. All glass and security guards with nothing to do! You must know that Addlestone Garage is a gated development (yes, in Addlestone) and the Co-op long ago made way for Tescos.

David Oldfield


28/04/12 – 08:48

A remarkable coincidence, indeed, David!
Pardon my irony when I say that the changes you mention pass, nowadays, as progress. The supreme one, though, is the gated development!
My abiding memory of Ottershaw is the Aldershot & District Dennis Lances passing by to and from Woking and the occasional ride on them as part of my journey from Portsmouth by rail.
Lovely buses. The whole area was a hotchpotch between London Transport and A&D and you could never be sure what company’s bus would pop out from some side turning.
Also, Ottershaw was the last/first telephone exchange in the London Area and I would use a callbox there to make calls to my London relatives at local call rates. Some would say miserly, I call it ‘being careful’! Happy days.

Chris Hebbron


28/04/12 – 14:47

You could have been a Yorkshireman!!!

David Oldfield


20/07/12 – 15:48

One of the benefits of the open platforms was that passengers could “hop off” whilst the vehicle was approaching the stop, preventing the driver having to do steep hill starts. The conductor would be ready with his finger on the bell to let the driver know he did not have to stop. No H&S in those days, conductors encouraged it. I got very good at jumping off buses coming up Haymarket to turn right up high street on my way home from school. I believe that is why London kept the Routemasters so long, people could hop on & off where they liked, speeding journey times.

Andy Fisher


21/07/12 – 07:38

Is that Haymarket, Sheffield, Andy?

David Oldfield


21/07/12 – 12:10

While the subject of bell-ringing comes up (not campanology, silly!) I recall, post-war, the LT conductors giving three rings to signify to the driver that the bus was full up and he could ignore queues at future stops until some passengers got off. Standing was unlimited post-war, I seem to recall, or the limit was ignored, then became eight, and eventually five. Admittedly, buses engines/brakes are more powerful (the latter more vicious, too!) but it was amazing how much more fluid passenger movement was then. They moved around the vehicle, up and down stairs and got on/off the platform effortlessly ‘whilst the bus was in motion’, moved around the vehicle. Despite my advanced years, I’m still fit, yet wouldn’t do those things now, apart from moving to the exit before the bus stops and that with great care and a tight grip on stanchions!
I used to love travelling on worn-out LT/ST’s, overloaded beyond belief. Juddering clutches, slow acceleration in waves, the vehicle leaning alarmingly round any corner. Despite all that so-called gentleness, an aunt of mine failed to stop me, as a baby, from falling out of her arms when she was climbing the open staircase of an LT and being caught by a surprised man, unharmed, so they say! Some of you might regret this, boring you with such tales!

Chris Hebbron


23/09/17 – 07:02

Regarding the bells, I was a conductor in Sheffield, with a good driver you became a good team and could trust each other, so not just quick bells for passengers getting off but when the last passenger had one foot on the platform and one hand on the pole it was ding ding, if in doubt assist them on with their spare arm. Yes for us three bells was full up and a shower of bells was emergency stop. We didn’t like the passengers using the bell because it sometimes confused things, we preferred the request of next stop please verbally.

Pete

Halifax Corporation – Leyland Leopard – OCP 231 – 231


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

Halifax Corporation Transport and Joint Omnibus Committee
1961
Leyland Leopard L1
Weymann B34D

I thought that this bus was a one off being a dual entrance vehicle with Halifax Corporation, but on research I find that they had half a dozen Karrier WL6 with Harris & Hassall duel entrance bodies in 1928. The above bus was only a dual entrance for three years before being modified to to a front only entrance and seating 42, it was then re-seated the following year to a B44F.
As a matter of interest the 1928 Karriers were all withdrawn by 1932 they were not even re-bodied, dual entrance did not seam to work for Halifax. I think dual entrance buses were more useful in cities rather than towns mainly for the speed of on and off loading of the passengers.


With reference to the Karriers, many vehicles built prior to the late twenties weren’t expected to have lives of much more than five or six years anyway -timber-framed bodies, stiff springing, solid or narrow-section tyres and granite setts didn’t make for longevity.
Karriers were probably the worst motorbus ever perpetrated on the industry, even at a time when there were a lot of poor quality specimens on offer -rebodying these atrocious machines wouldn’t have made sense to anybody however many doors they had!

David A Jones


Earlier comments about these Karriers are well-founded! Another problem was that it was not realised then that if you had two driving rear axles, you needed a third crown wheel and pinion BETWEEN the axles. Thus, many half-shafts needed replacing regularly! And to compound the problem, Karrier never bothered to keep spares much beyond the time when a model had been replaced! Apart from getting extra length with 6-wheelers, one bonus was having braking on all four rear wheels. At that time, effective front wheel braking was not easy to achieve in the late ’20’s.
This was told to me by an old boy who’d worked for Portsmouth Corporation who had made the mistake of buying half a dozen Karriers, they also didn’t last beyond about 1932!

Chris Hebbron


This was actually the prototype Leopard, to spec L1, it had a unique badge different to all other leopards and was built 2 years before any others, in essence a Tiger Cub chassis with a Worldmaster engine and synchromesh gearbox, clearly Mr Lefevre decided to experiment at this time.

Christopher


27/11/11 – 08:06

I remember driving this bus during my time at Halifax, by which time it had lost its centre door. When one took it straight out from the garage, with cold engine and gearbox, it was virtually impossible to change gear with the thing, so stiff was the linkage (and, presumably, the gearbox internals). Even when warmed up, it was a serious challenge. All Leyland buses of that era had very heavy controls, but this bus, No. 231, was in a class of its own.

Roger Cox


27/11/11 – 09:16

Roger, you’ve brought back vivid memories to me of the earliest batches of 36 foot Leopards which were operated by Wallace Arnold. They were hard work with a vengeance – cold or warm. The clutches were far too heavy and the brakes were poor to the point of inadequacy, especially when needed frequently at speed or on gradients. The four speed gearbox was ludicrous, and these luxurious vehicles were unable to ascend certain hills on some of the most arduous tours, or at least were prohibited from doing so “just in case.” A further constant irritation was the enormous steering wheel, mounted by the bodybuilders far too close to the dash assembly. To be fair the 30 foot Leopards were far more acceptable in general, being less cumbersome and far more spritely. The comparison between the large Leopards and the big Reliances from AEC was incredible – the latter being swift (small “S” and no pun intended) ideally geared, and a joy to handle all day – and capable of speeds which, after all these years, I’d be reluctant to mention in print !!

Chris Youhill


28/11/11 – 10:28

I well remember as a child looking out of out the bedroom window of our house at Stump Cross early one Saturday morning – it would be 1961 – and catching my first fleeting glimpse of 231 as it flashed by at great speed towards Hipperholme. It was most likely travelling empty to Brighouse to operate the local Stoney Lane-Brighouse-Field Lane 51 route, to which it had already been banished apparently. I had never heard of a bus having two doors, let alone seen one – it looked very strange. I saw it again a week or two later travelling in the opposite direction, then that was that. Though its appearance was very similar to the earlier Worldmasters, it made a different sound – louder and with much more rasping exhaust.
The following year another sixteen similar buses arrived – nine for the Corporation (31-39) and seven for the Joint Omnibus Committee (232-238). The Corporation ones immediately replaced the preselector Regent III’s on the Northowram route – my daily bus to school. The badge on the front announced that they were Leopards – 231 did not have such a badge at the time and looked a bit blank. The front number plate was attached slightly higher, above the dividing strip between the upper and lower panels, whereas 231’s was in the lower panel. Inside, the interiors were all painted metal – typical MCW of the period – with dark green lower panels and pale green window surrounds, but the inside of the doors was all over dark green, whereas 231’s were divided half and half like the rest of the interior. Trivial differences, but features that made them instantly identifiable from one another. The seats were upholstered in an uncomfortable, slippery green vynide, unlike the moquette-covered ones on the Regents. They were also incredibly noisy inside. The route continued to be crew-operated for quite a while, and the older drivers did appear to struggle with them at times, and it was clear many did not approve.
The next time I saw 231 it was a conventional single door bus just like the others. I did not subscribe to ‘Buses Illustrated’ at the time, and knew no other enthusiasts – indeed I believed I was probably the only person in the world who was interested in buses. I eventually concluded that the two doors had been all in my imagination, and it was to be a few more years before the truth was verified, and a lot longer before I was able to obtain a photograph.
I had always a soft spot for these buses, due to my childhood school bus associations, but years later when I was to drive them in service, that spot was burst for ever ! They were utterly unsuited to Halifax’s hilly local routes, frequently stopping and starting and negotiating awkward turns – the driver constantly grappling with the heavy, stiff gear change linkage and hard pedals. The accelerator was frustrating, the revs taking their time to build up and die down. The steering was relatively light, but like all Leylands of the time the wheel was enormous in order to achieve that. Many would jump out of gear when climbing long hills. Frequent bashing of the steering wheel rim by omo drivers’ heavy metal Ultimate ticket machine boxes had chipped the covering, leaving patches of cold bare metal, and jagged plastic sticking out to cut the fingers. The driving position was very low – it was like you were sitting on the floor with the passengers towering above. The destination winders behind a flap above the windscreen were awkward to access, the door operating lever was a long reach forward. The change dispenser mounted above and behind the driver’s left shoulder was literally a pain – though this feature was common to all HPT buses. The demisters were totally ineffective, so the windscreens would quickly mist over, especially with a full load of standing passengers, so a goodly supply of paper towels was always called for. In winter they were always freezing cold, and the windscreens would often freeze over on the inside, requiring frequent stopping to scrape a clear patch.
In fairness, once up through the gears and on the go they would motor on nicely. They could eventually achieve a fair speed, and their road holding was excellent, but it was not often you got them on a long run. Occasionally one would find its way onto the Rochdale route as a changeover for a newer type, and they would usually romp noisily up from Littleborough to Blackstone Edge and over the moors in fine style with good sound effects from the exhaust. The engineers would probably have argued that they were more reliable and durable than the subsequent AEC Reliances, but as a driver I certainly know which I preferred !

John Stringer


28/10/15 – 07:08

The early Leopard L1 had a basically Tiger Cub chassis with a Worldmaster engine, not that this mattered it was a Leyland so Le Fevre would buy it, Halifax later choose Reliances because of the spare wheel carrier, would you believe that Leyland refused to move this and thus Halifax went AEC and as you have noticed the AEC had nicer steering, easier clutch, good brakes and was a more pleasant vehicle to one man, those with 505 engines could go, I recall coming back from London on one of 273/4 running at 85 miles/hour only overtaken by an EYMS Leopard with 2 speed axle. Once the L series was discontinued in favour of the PSU3 type (11 metre) or PSU4 (10 metre) then Halifax switched back to Leylands.
231 had a special Leyland front badge that was slightly different to others that came later, I cannot say how it was different but it was.

Christopher

Sheffield Corporation – Leyland Leopard – 1502 WJ – 1002


Copyright Ian Wild

Sheffield Corporation
1959
Leyland Leopard L1
Weymann Fanfare C41F

This bus delivered as B fleet number 1302 was one of the first batch of six Leopards to enter service in the autumn of 1959. They made quite a stir being completely different from anything that had been purchased previously (if you exclude the one off AEC Reliance / Roe Dalesman of 1958 but which was not used on normal service for several years). 1302 was renumbered to 1002 in 1967. The Weymann Fanfare coaches were never converted for OMO whilst in Sheffield service and the photo shows 1002 complete with conductor reversing at the Dungworth terminus of the occasional 107 service on a lovely summer Sunday evening in May 1967. The 107 was an extension of the main service 7 to Stannington, another of those services to outlying hamlets which Sheffield seemed to specialise in and which made it so different from many other Municipal Operators. 1002 was withdrawn along with the rest of the batch in 1971 and was sold to Tiger Coaches (dealer) in Salsburgh, Scotland.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

15/06/2011 15:59

I have fond memories of these Fanfare bodied Leopards in the mid sixties.
My aunt and uncle used to keep the Dog & Partridge Inn at Bordhill on the climb to Woodhead pass and I spent many happy school holidays there. These coaches and the ECW bodied versions made the refreshment stop at the pub when working the X48 Sheffield/Manchester service and they were always crew worked.
I still have in my possession a letter from the Sheffield general manager thanking them for the hospitality shown to the crews and passengers over the years, when they left the pub in 1968.

Eric

Due to a few requests below is a closer shot of this vehicle, and why not.

1502 WJ close

16/06/11 – 09:32

Vehicles of my long lost youth! The excitement of living in Sheffield was that you never quite knew what to expect – and sometimes, in times of shortage – the B & C fleet Leopards emerged onto mundane tasks like the 8/9 Inner Circle or 38 Lowedges Road (much to my delight).
Wonderful picture, yet again, Ian. For obvious reasons, to those who know me, I wish that more Dalesmans and Fanfares had been built – both attractive and well built/finished bodies. These were quite the opposite of Duple and Plaxton who built buses in their slack, summer, period whereas Roe (in particular) and Weymann built coaches when they had a slack bus period. That being said, Weymann were a little more mainstream than Roe with major customers such as Southdown, Northern General Group, North Western – and smaller numbers for Devon General and South Wales.
These were the only Leopard Fanfares. Southdown had Tiger Cubs, everyone else had Reliances but Northern General also had some Guy LUF for one group company. These were the VERY FIRST Leopards built for and delivered to SJOC in July 1959 before the model was officially launched at the Scottish Motor Show the following November. Two more batches of Fanfares followed for SJOC B & C fleets as well as the ECW and Burlingham Leopards. The original six were first described as PSUC1 Tiger Cub specials but on delivery, this had been changed to L1 Leopard. (This was also interesting as the L1 was the bus version, the L2 the coach version – but ALL SJOC’s Leopard coaches were L1!)
Weymann crept back shortly after with two batches of Castilians for Southdown, lots of BET DPs in 1965 as well as multifarious coach bodies, in minute numbers, on Fords and Bedfords.

David Oldfield

16/06/11 – 11:20

The Burlingham Leopards also worked the X48, I had forgotten about those. I think I have a photo somewhere I took of a Burlingham Leopard stood outside the Dog & Partridge. I’ll see if I can dig it out, but as it was taken on a Kodak Instamatic it may not be good enough to reproduce.

Eric

17/06/11 – 18:07

1005 (1505 WJ) ended its days with Hulley of Baslow. 6170-6174 WJ also went to Hulleys of Baslow after a time with Midland Red.
See the undernoted picture on Flickr: www.flickr.com/
Seen in the picture are the “C” fleet Weymann Fanfares prior to going to Hulleys. The picture was taken at East Bank Garage in January 1970

Stephen Bloomfield

18/01/13 – 16:58

I can well recall 1505 WJ in Hulley of Baslow service . It was highly regarded by the drivers and passengers alike. After yeoman service it was withdrawn in May 1976. I believe it was sold for use as a towing vehicle in Essex and eventually scrapped in August 1978

Jerry Wilkes

19/01/13 – 06:16

And here are some of the Fanfares, as withdrawn vehicles, in Hulleys yard, plus a Yeates-bodied Bedford. www.flickr.com/photos 

Chris Hebbron

PMT – Leyland Atlantean PDR1/1 – 861 REH – L861

Copyright Michael Crofts

Potteries Motor Traction
1961
Leyland Atlantean PDR1
Weymann L39/33F

This is one of a batch of 105 Atlanteans delivered between 1959/1961 and the above picture was taken at the water point at the PMT Newcastle under Lyme depot. It was very rare for this type of vehicle to do the Leek route as it was normally worked by Leyland Titan PD3’s and this bus would normally be on the Longton Newcastle Estates route. So it was a pleasure for me and a first to go to Leek in an Atlantean as I liked driving these splendid vehicles unlike the Daimler Fleetline which I detested. The prefix L in front of the fleet number denotes a low height body which was one of the reasons why this type of bus was normally on the Longton service as there was a low railway bridge in Longton.
During the Potteries annual holidays double deck vehicles would be used on the express service’s to Morecambe and Blackpool, the buses would be either Atlanteans or Fleetlines with Alexander bodies the latter being hard work with their hydraulic throttles and having a top speed of 42 mph, the Atlanteans on the other hand would do between 52-55mph.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Michael Crofts


22/02/11 – 10:06

Thanks, Michael, for this interesting picture of another early BET company Atlantean. As you say, they could really motor, but they didn’t half drink the diesel when doing so. That was just one of the reasons why some operators changed to Fleetlines; lower overall maintenance costs was another.

Roy Burke


22/02/11 – 19:54

Good to see this photo of what was the most common type of bus in the PMT fleet in my time working there. Longton Depot had some of the earliest batch and achieved phenomenal engine mileages of 400,000+ between failures. Frank Ling was the Depot Engineer there and maintained a very high standard of maintenance. My first winter there was a cold one and the Atlanteans frequently failed with the air system unloader valve frozen causing the vehicle to lose all air pressure and hence drive. The unloader valve was mounted under the cab in one of the coldest locations on the vehicle. A rag on a steel bar, dipped in diesel and set alight was the quickest means of unfreezing the unloader and restoring normal operation. Flywheel gland failures were another problem coating the engine bay in oil with the consequent fire risk (wiring fires in the Atlantean engine bays were not uncommon not aided by the wiring insulation becoming brittle with age and falling off). Quite a number of Atlanteans had to be rewired, some being dealt with by local Contractors as the level of work exceeded the available labour in Central Works at Stoke. Leyland tried adding a fan bolted to the fluid flywheel (more correctly the fluid-friction clutch) on a number of buses but there was no real improvement. As originally built, the chassis had rear light units fitted on the rear sub frame and which shone through holes in the fibreglass engine cover. PMT later fitted high level rear lights in the rear ‘tween decks panels thus eliminating the wiring to the sub frame lights located as they were in a very oily environment. The main rear lights were fitted to the lift up rear engine cover and the additional lights were necessary to provide rear lights at night if it were necessary to open the engine cover whilst on the road at night. Oh happy days!!

Ian Wild


22/02/11 – 19:55

The early Atlantean in low height form was a modified lowbridge bus in reality on the other hand the Fleetline with its drop centre rear axle was a true lowheight vehicle from the off It took Leyland until 1966 (four years after the first Fleetlines entered service) before they offered a low height chassis which removed the low bridge layout from the top deck. Having said this the Atlantean PDR1/2 was not one of Leylands finest although when it appeared the AN68 was what the Atlantean should have been from the off

Chris Hough


26/01/13 – 06:24

The seating in the forward part of the upper upper deck on these buses was too low in relation to the window line whilst the rear rows of 4 were too high! This is except the initial row of 4 which were mounted straight onto the raised rear platform resulting in an excellent match between seat height and window level.

Ian Wild

Ribble – Leyland Atlantean – RRN 407 – 1807

RRN 407_2

Ribble Motor Services
1962
Leyland Atlantean PDR1/1
Weymann “Orion” L39/33F

Ribble bought a hundred early Atlanteans with MCW “Orion” bodywork in 1959/60, seventy highbridge and thirty lowbridge. These were followed by a reversion to the Titan model, with ninety five PD3/5’s with Metro-Camell “Orion” fully fronted bodies in 1961/2. These were followed by fourteen lowbridge Atlanteans, including this one, which proved to be the last PDR1/1 to enter the fleet. Subsequently Titans and Lowlanders were bought, followed by fully lowheight PDR1/2 Atlanteans. It was generally thought that Ribble preferred the Titan but used Atlanteans for lowbridge/lowheight vehicles.
The original version of the Atlantean Chassis had a dropped-centre front axle, and a “normal” rear axle. This meant that the lowheight body could be built with “normal” seating at the front, but at the rear a side gangway arrangement was necessary. The last four rows of seats were thus on a raised platform, in four passenger benches, but with the gangway on the nearside – the opposite side from the conventional lowbridge double-decker. This photo was taken in the twilight years of the bus, which is wearing the NBC poppy red livery rather than the traditional cherry red livery used by Ribble for so many years. Despite it’s age it was being one-man-operated on an extremely long journey.
1807 is seen here passing through Troutbeck Bridge on the almost legendary service 555, heading from Keswick to Lancaster. This lengthy route still runs, still operated by double-deckers, passing through the Lake District – surely one of England’s most scenic bus routes.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Don McKeown


05/03/15 – 07:13

Very nice, Don. Thanks for posting. This route used to be the 68 when I first took an interest in buses [in my secondary school days in Lancaster] – I’m not sure when it was renumbered to 555.

Pete Davies


Thanks for posting Don. I know the area fairly well having stayed in Troutbeck Bridge a time or two.
To Pete, If it helps, I have just consulted my Ribble Area No 1 timetable, dated 30th September 1963 and under Table 50 it shows these services :-
Service 68, Keswick to Lancaster
Service 70 Kendal to Lancaster
Service 555 Keswick to Kendal
So 555 was shown in use at that time, be it for only part of the route, with 555 journeys shown separately as either between Ambleside & Keswick or between Kendal and Ambleside, but strangely for the most part they did not connect !

Mike Norris

Silver Star – Leyland Atlantean – 1013 MW – 42

Silver Star - Leyland Atlantean - 1013 MW - 42

Silver Star Motor Services  
1962
Leyland Atlantean PDR1/1
Weymann L39/34F

A Leyland Atlantean PDR1/1 with Weymann L73F body, joining the fleet of Silver Star, Porton Down near Salisbury, in 1962. This first view shows her on duty in Winchester, during the King Alfred running day on 1 January 2010.

Silver Star - Leyland Atlantean - 1013 MW - 42

I couldn’t resist this second view, as it’s the only time I have seen her addressed to her home. This second view was taken during the rally at Stokes Bay, Gosport, on 3 August 2014.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies


13/02/16 – 05:36

A very interesting company who very much traded on transporting National Servicemen around at weekends. Great livery and distinctive ‘roofbox’! The nearside windscreen ventilator is an unusual feature.

Chris Hebbron


13/02/16 – 05:37

I remember three of these (there were four altogether) in Bristol Omnibus service in 1963/4, the others being TMW 853 and VAM 944. I assume Bristol removed the Silver Star fleetname from the dome before repainting. They seemed like a startling innovation among all the FLFs!
The fourth one, XMW 706, had coach seats. The PSV Circle fleet history states that TMW 853 went to the USA.

Geoff Kerr


14/02/16 – 08:56

That’s the first mention I’ve seen of TMW 853 since c.1970. Along with the others it went to Super of Upminster in the late 1960s but quickly passed to Midas Motor Services of Brentwood. Midas ceased to trade not long after that and TMW seemed to fall off the face of the earth.
The other three ex-Silver Star Atlanteans passed from Super to Berresfords in 1967. VAM 944 went to Hale Trent Cakes of Clevedon for staff transport in 2/69 – can anyone confirm that it was subsequently scrapped? I don’t think Hale Trent used it for all that long. XMW 706 was damaged beyond repair in a fire at the Berresfords garage in 9/70, although it apparently hadn’t been used since 8/68.

David Call


28/03/16 – 06:01

TMW 853 was indeed owned by Midas Motor Service who bought it from Super of Upminster in 1966. It was still in the red livery of Bristol Omnibus and the roof dome had been removed. Midas put a new gearbox in it and painted it silver blue and black in 1969 and ceased trading in the early 70s when it did indeed vanish of the face of the earth.

Mr Anon


09/05/16 – 16:51

I remember the excitement of the Atlantean being used to ferry pupils daily from St Helen’s Primary School in Brentwood to the Hutton Poplars children’s home in Hutton. I do not remember it being red though: I remember it as silver-coloured. And was the Bristol livery not green?

Quentin Williamson


04/10/18 – 07:45

Further to my own post of 14/2/16, VAM 944 was, according to ‘Looking Back at Independent Double-Deckers’ (by Andrew Wiltshire), operated by Deeble of Upton Cross, Cornwall, from 1975 to 1978. It’s actually illustrated, in service with Deeble, on the front cover of the said publication. No mention of any further ownership, but eighteen years would have been a reasonable life, I suppose.

David Call


07/03/19 – 08:43

Seeing this startling full frontal of 1013 MW, reminded me that I had a photo somewhere of it.

1013 MW_3

I attach the photo of it in Bristol Omnibus Tilling green (BOC 7999), sans Silver Star top box, in July 1963 in Ashton Park on its way to Weston super Mare. Mr Anon mentions Bristol red livery – really?


Probably on the same day, I snapped its mate TMW 853 (BOC 7997) in Lawrence Hill. As the three Atlanteans and service 24 operated out of Marlborough Street I’m not sure why it was at the Works.
Either before or after this date the three were operating on the Portishead service, then 85, but it is alleged the local youth took to pressing their external engine emergency stop buttons as they climbed some of the severe hills on the route.

Geoff Pullin


08/03/19 – 07:07

I have just noticed that Bristol went to the trouble of changing the steering wheel to white to comply with their practice of using this to indicate that the bus was wider than 7ft 6in wide!

Geoff Pullin


12/05/22 – 10:38

TMW 853 was indeed painted Silver Black and Blue it took me a week to mask it up it was then painted by the owner Ted Dover as was the whole fleet.

Tony Buddin


22/05/22 – 06:44

In response to Geoff comment not all 8ft Bristols had white wheels. Wilts and Dorset had black with a brass plaque stating 8ft wide.

Roger Burdett