Sistema ferroviário - sem repinte indicador sistema de negociação download grátis

Uma História: a Palavra do Ano do Dicionário.
Palavra do ano.
Nossa escolha de Palavra do Ano serve como um símbolo dos eventos mais significativos de cada ano e das tendências de pesquisa. É uma oportunidade para refletirmos sobre a linguagem e as ideias que representam a cada ano. Então, dê um passeio pela estrada da memória para lembrar de todas as nossas seleções anteriores da Palavra do Ano.
Não foi moda, engraçado, nem foi cunhado no Twitter, mas achamos que a mudança contou uma história real sobre como nossos usuários definiram 2010. Ao contrário de 2008, a mudança não era mais um slogan de campanha. Mas o termo ainda tinha muito peso. Aqui está um trecho do nosso anúncio da Palavra do Ano em 2010:
O debate nacional pode ser resumido pela pergunta: Nos últimos dois anos, houve mudanças suficientes? Tem havido muito? Enquanto isso, muitos americanos continuam enfrentando mudanças em suas casas, contas bancárias e empregos. Só o tempo dirá se a última onda de mudanças pela qual os americanos votaram nas eleições intermediárias resultará em um resultado negativo ou positivo.
Tergiversar.
Esta palavra rara foi escolhida para representar 2011 porque descreveu muito do mundo ao nosso redor. Tergiversar significa "mudar repetidamente a atitude ou opiniões de uma pessoa em relação a uma causa, assunto, etc." Os editores do dicionário viram o mercado de ações, os grupos políticos e a opinião pública passarem por uma montanha-russa de mudanças ao longo de 2011. E assim, nomeamos tergiversar a Palavra do Ano de 2011.
Em um ano conhecido pelo movimento Occupy e o que ficou conhecido como a Primavera Árabe, nossos lexicógrafos escolheram a tag como sua Palavra do Ano de 2012. Aqui está um trecho do nosso lançamento que dá uma boa explicação para a nossa escolha:
2012 viu as campanhas políticas mais caras e alguns dos eventos climáticos mais extremos da história da humanidade, desde enchentes na Austrália a ciclones na China, ao furacão Sandy e muitos outros.
Ficamos sérios em 2013. A privacidade de todos estava naquele ano, desde a revelação de Edward Snowden do Project PRISM até a chegada do Google Glass. Aqui está um trecho do nosso anúncio em 2013:
Muitos de nós abraçamos as mídias sociais, optando por oferecer informações íntimas e fotografias pessoais no Facebook, Twitter e Instagram; Esta participação robusta ecoa uma observação de Mark Zuckerberg em 2010 de que o nível de conforto do público em compartilhar informações pessoais on-line é uma “norma social” que “evoluiu com o tempo”. Mesmo assim, uma pesquisa recente da Harris Poll mostra que os jovens estão agora monitorando e alterando suas configurações de privacidade mais do que nunca, um desenvolvimento que o USA Today apelidou de “efeito de Edward Snowden”.
Alerta de spoiler: As coisas não ficaram menos sérias em 2014. Nossa Palavra do Ano foi a exposição, que destacou o surto do vírus Ebola no ano, chocantes atos de violência tanto no exterior quanto nos EUA e o roubo generalizado de informações pessoais. Aqui está o que nós tivemos a dizer sobre a exposição em 2014:
Do senso de vulnerabilidade que permeia o Ebola à visibilidade de atos de crime ou má conduta que provocaram conversas críticas sobre raça, gênero e violência, vários sentidos de exposição foram expostos ao público este ano.
A fluidez da identidade foi um grande tema em 2015. A linguagem em torno do gênero e da identidade sexual se ampliou, tornando-se mais inclusiva, com acréscimos ao dicionário, como gênero fluido, bem como o prefixo neutro de gênero Mx. A identidade racial também teve muito debate em 2015, depois que Rachel Dolezal, uma mulher branca se apresentando como uma mulher negra, disse que se identificou como biracial ou transracial. Nossa Palavra do Ano em 2015 refletiu as muitas facetas da identidade que surgiram naquele ano.
Xenofobia.
Em 2016, selecionamos a xenofobia como nossa Palavra do Ano. O medo do "outro" foi um tema enorme em 2016, do Brexit à retórica de campanha do presidente Donald Trump. Em nosso anúncio, pedimos aos nossos leitores que refletissem sobre este termo em vez de celebrá-lo:
Apesar de ser escolhida como a Palavra do Ano de 2016, a xenofobia não deve ser celebrada. Pelo contrário, é uma palavra para refletir profundamente à luz dos acontecimentos do passado recente.
A palavra cúmplice surgiu em conversas em 2017 sobre aqueles que se manifestaram contra figuras e instituições poderosas e sobre aqueles que permaneceram em silêncio. Foi um ano de verdadeiro despertar para a cumplicidade em vários setores da sociedade, da política à cultura pop. De nosso anúncio de Palavra do Ano de 2017:
Nossa escolha para Palavra do Ano é tanto sobre o que é visível quanto sobre o que não é. É uma palavra que nos lembra que até a inação é um tipo de ação. A aceitação silenciosa do erro é como chegamos a esse ponto. Não devemos deixar que isso continue a ser a norma. Se fizermos isso, então somos todos cúmplices.

Sistema ferroviário - nenhum sistema de negociação de indicador de repintura download grátis
Guarnições da roda de transporte de Londres.
Na década de 1950, toda a frota de Londres (7000 ônibus?) Ostentava placas completas de nave de popa traseira que arrumavam sua visão lateral e deveriam ter facilitado a limpeza. De repente eles foram embora & # 8211; porque?
E os restauradores modernos os procuram, para um toque final?
E & # 8211; enquanto em rodas & # 8211; quão diferentes (e horríveis) são os AECs e os Leylands que correm sem os anéis de porcas nas rodas da frente! Isso fazia com que parecessem ônibus de empreiteiro.
Talvez porque eles tenham milhametros nos cubos traseiros e aqueles indicadores de porca amarela na parte dianteira & # 8211; e traseira? Com as capas, era mais difícil ver se a roda estava caindo. Elf e segurança sabem.
Eu me lembro de ter lido em algum lugar (embora, por favor, me corrija se eu estiver errado) que um disco de engate de roda traseiro uma vez saiu de um LT enquanto em velocidade e causou uma lesão séria a alguém, resultando na remoção imediata de toda a frota .
Victor, eu não posso falar por LT, mas eu suspeito que tudo poderia ser parte do mesmo, não poderia se importar menos com a síndrome que afetou as empresas BET e BTH quando a NCB surgiu. De 1967 a 1975, trabalhei na Percy Main Depot, da NGT, em Tynemouth & amp; Os Wakefields, como a maioria dos depósitos dentro do grupo, estabeleceram padrões muito elevados, os veículos foram meticulosamente mantidos e, após as verificações semanais, foram cuidadosamente limpos da cabeça aos pés, além da excursão noturna pela lavagem e pela limpeza noturna. . O orgulho na frota ainda era algo a ser encorajado, e isso se refletiu no veículo, pequenos danos foram reparados rapidamente, e os revestimentos das rodas sempre foram substituídos após as verificações de manutenção. Então veio a nova vassoura da NBC, como muitos outros depósitos, os veículos foram trocados entre frotas, com alguns indo de um extremo ao outro do país, até um pouco erroneamente Oscar Wilde, os contadores "sabiam o preço de tudo e o valor de nada & quot; cantos foram cortados para tentar economizar dinheiro, ou seja, guarnições e crachás brilhantes foram pintados, ou simplesmente não foram substituídos se a carroçaria fosse necessária, as guarnições das rodas começavam a desaparecer e, ao todo, a frota começou a parecer decrépita e negligenciada. A NBC tornou-se um acrônimo para No Body Cares. Infelizmente os PTEs pareciam ser um pouco melhores, para ser justo, o Go Ahead parece fazer um esforço, e seus veículos são melhor apresentados do que os de outra empresa de origem escocesa, mas temo que além de um punhado de empresas menores, a glória os dias se foram.
Eu gosto da sigla que Ronnie postou, NBC = No Body Cares. Um pouco diferente & # 8211; não imprimível na & # 8216; família & # 8217; circunstâncias & # 8211; estava em uma revista de comércio que cruzou minha escrivaninha alguns anos atrás. Felizmente a hierarquia percebeu a tempo, e decidiu não usar o NBG depois de tudo!
Manchester foi um dos vários empreendimentos que, por um período, especificaram as guarnições das rodas traseiras. Para grande aborrecimento do Escritório Central, certos depósitos os removeram o mais rápido possível com a desculpa regular de "perdidos em serviço". Outros depósitos os mantiveram até meados dos anos 1960. Os motivos reais para a remoção foram superaquecimento dos freios, tempo de remoção e substituição quando as rodas precisavam ser trocadas e, mais importante, a necessidade de verificar regularmente as porcas das rodas quanto à estanqueidade que mais tarde se tornaria uma verificação regular obrigatória e, pelo que entendi Naquela época, a roda de Londres desapareceu em pouco tempo.
Eu tinha ouvido a mesma história que John Stringer. Todos pareciam desaparecer dos ônibus quase da noite para o dia. Então, um decreto do andar de cima pareceria razoável. Isto foi, é claro, muito antes dos dias dos indicadores das porcas das rodas ou dos hubometros, de modo que o "cair fora" o incidente soa eminentemente plausível.
Eu costumava viajar diariamente em Country Bus RTs de Godstone e East Grinstead e todos eles tinham os discos verdes simples, exceto um ônibus em particular (não me pergunte qual deles). Este tinha o círculo levantado, a meio caminho entre o meio e o perímetro escolhido em alumínio polido. Comparado com todos os verdes simples, este parecia muito inteligente. Duvido que poucos passageiros tenham notado a diferença, mas eu fiz!
Eu acho que eles poderiam ter sido entregues novos neste estilo, mas normalmente foram repintados sem alívio.
Quanto a como / onde os preservacionistas os encontram agora, isso é um mistério. A menos que algumas garagens armazenassem uma quantidade para uso como tampas de lixo!
Parece-me estranho que, depois de mais de vinte anos e milhões de milhas em serviço, uma guarnição de roda se soltar de tal maneira a ferir alguém e provocar uma remoção em massa. Os acabamentos foram fixados por um suporte em forma de u aparafusado em cada extremidade do cubo. Um clipe de mola no centro do suporte passava por uma ranhura no centro do trim e segurava o trim sob pressão. As guarnições eram um ajuste apertado ao redor do aro da roda, por isso, se a mola falhava, o disco inicialmente permaneceria no lugar por força centrífuga. Uma mudança na velocidade ou em uma superfície irregular da estrada acabaria por desalojar a guarnição, mas com os motores dos veículos da LT governados a baixas velocidades e, mesmo nas áreas rurais, o tráfego lento, eu apenas me pergunto a que velocidades poderiam ser atingidas. a guarnição voa para causar ferimentos. Mais provavelmente, este foi um decreto de manutenção emitido por uma reformulação da administração. Embora tenha sido um longo tempo antes dos indicadores das porcas das rodas, os casos de rodas soltas em veículos grandes não eram incomuns & # 8211; Eu vi três caminhões perderem rodas na M1 em um período de dois meses em 1967 & # 8211; e um regime de inspeção mais rigoroso do que anteriormente foi implementado por muitos operadores de veículos de grande porte.
Eu acabei de dar uma olhada no livro de Ken Blacker, "RT & # 8217; (Capital Transport, 1979) e ele afirma que "em novembro de 1971, a ordem saiu para garagens para remover os discos. e os suportes de retaguarda deles / delas das rodas traseiras de todos os veículos & # 8230; .. a razão dada era economia & # 8230; .. Algumas garagens cumpriram imediatamente e trataram da frota inteira deles / delas dentro de uma questão de dias; outros eram mais letárgicos. As duas últimas garagens, Wood Green e Palmwrs Green, removeram gradualmente os discos das suas RT's e RM's durante o início de 1972. Então parece que eu posso ter meus fios cruzados com a minha sugestão anterior.
Confesso que não pensei sobre esse recurso antes, mas não consigo me lembrar de ter visto um ônibus da família RF, RT ou RM em serviço sem aqueles controles de roda traseira inteligentes. Tanto quanto eu sei, eles nunca foram adaptados para os projetos posteriores "off the peg" operados em Londres. Uma rápida olhada nos meus próprios slides e negativos não revela nenhum exemplo de família de RF / RT / RM sem os acabamentos, mas, na internet, eu vi uma imagem de um RT sem esses acessórios enquanto ainda estava no serviço LT. A postulada 1971 data do decreto que estipula a remoção dos caimentos se encaixa com o fato de que, a partir de 1º de janeiro de 1970, a London Transport veio “sob nova administração” quando as operações da Central Buses and Underground foram transferidas para o Greater London Council. No debate da Câmara dos Lordes de 10 de junho de 1969 sobre a proposta de lei de transporte de Londres, declarou-se desdenhosamente que “a administração do Transporte de Londres é muito fraca”, isto de um político conservador cuja carreira tinha sido principalmente na agricultura. Assim, a dinastia Broadway / Chiswick que efetivamente reinou desde os dias do general chegou a um fim abrupto. Todas as vassouras novas gostam de ser limpas, mesmo que alguns dos itens descartados sejam benéficos. Sem dúvida, as guarnições das rodas eram vistas como uma irrelevância supérflua. O departamento de ônibus e ônibus do país, que foi entregue à National Bus Company, não tinha a obrigação de seguir o mesmo caminho. Todas as minhas fotos da ex LT LCBS mostram os trims no lugar, e eu trabalhei no Reigate HQ durante esse tempo. De fato, este foi o período em que Stokes (des) liderou a British Leyland e se viu incapaz de fornecer novos veículos e peças sobressalentes para a indústria de ônibus em todo o país. As peças sobressalentes para os modelos ex LT tornaram-se particularmente escassas e os itens disponibilizados foram imediatamente adquiridos pelo London Transport, controlado por GLC. LCBS sofreu severamente em conseqüência. A NBC elaborou os veículos que conseguiu para o LCBS, e foram contratados ônibus de Southend e Maidstone para ajudar a preencher as lacunas. Determinado a reduzir o tamanho do problema, o LCBS vendeu o maior número possível de barramentos RT / RMC / RML / RCL para o London Transport Executive. Tenho certeza de que a frota LCBS residual dos tipos ex LT manteve suas guarnições de rodas até o final. Há um pequeno ponto no comentário abrangente de Phil que eu questionaria. Os motores dos ônibus do London Transport foram diminuídos e não controlados. No entanto, o departamento de ônibus e ônibus do país. A frota foi equipada com diferenciais mais avançados quando 40 mph se tornou o limite legal. Posso assegurar-lhe que a RT de um país em uma seção rural como a da garagem de Chelsham até Westerham, na 403 (mais tarde 483), certamente não funcionaria quando as circunstâncias exigissem, e havia muitos outros exemplos de rotas semelhantes.
Obrigado Roger por me pegar no ponto sobre os motores que estão sendo governados. Em algum lugar nos recessos do meu cérebro envelhecido pareço lembrar de ler que os veículos da LT tinham governantes, mas pode ser que quem escreveu isso usasse o termo errado em vez de desclassificar.
Quanto à remoção dos acabamentos, visitei regularmente Londres até o início de 1970 para o trabalho e nunca vi um RT, RF, RLH em serviço sem os trims. Minha próxima visita foi no final de 1971 e fiquei surpreso com o número de veículos sem cortes.
Absolutamente, Roger: Hillman Imps com aqueles motores de alumínio bonitos mas propensos a problemas tinham anti congelamento especial. Eles não precisavam de direção hidráulica - você podia girar facilmente de trava a trava.
Confesso que nunca gostei de nenhum tipo de guarnição nas rodas, especialmente aquelas coisas cromadas e barulhentas usadas nos leves leves da década de 1960 (e até mesmo, vergonhosamente) alguns dos treinadores peso-pesado. Além dos pontos completamente práticos de acesso de porca, refrigeração de freio e assim por diante já mencionados, eu gosto de ver os hubs, que muitas vezes revelam a marca do chassi. Mesmo quando eixos comprados como Kirkstall são encontrados em mais de um tipo de ônibus, eles têm uma dignidade honesta que não precisa de ocultação.
Seu post no LCBS v Central controlado por GLC é muito interessante e esclarecedor, Roger; THX. Quanto à influência da NBC, isso também se estendeu aos RMF's do Norte, cujas frentes traseiras e dianteiras desapareceram com o advento da NBC.
Em defesa da NBC, lembro-me de muito poucas instruções do tipo mencionado acima. A maioria das decisões foi tomada localmente, provavelmente sob o estresse de reduzir a renda e a necessidade de fazer economias para manter máquinas cada vez mais complicadas em condições de tráfego operacional cada vez mais difíceis! Isso pode ser em nível de empresa, área ou garagem!
A montagem de acessórios de roda nos ônibus de Bristol foi uma instrução do Tilling Group (acho que foi antes da NBC) para o BCV, mas era mais provável que o capricho do Engenheiro Chefe local ou até mesmo os engenheiros de garagem os mantivessem. Eu gostei da aparência deles, mas nunca teria infligido o processo de remoção e substituição para cada verificação de porca de roda na equipe de manutenção duramente pressionada.
Os únicos ditames da NBC que me lembro foram:
NBC corporativo libré! (Algumas empresas cobriram a nata com branco de uma só vez, outras mantiveram as duas pinturas separadas intactas até repintar totalmente "Quanto tempo o depósito de Ambleside conseguiu manter o último treinador em libré de Ribble longe do branco nacional?)
No Leyland National, o sinal circular da Leyland foi desespecificado (por que a NBC deveria anunciar a Leyland? O mesmo raciocínio que os veículos mais antigos, tendo o nome dos fabricantes substituído por placas da empresa. A maioria das frotas os removeu na próxima ocasião apropriada, talvez em repinta. [Como outro lado, quando eu tinha 11 anos, fui a Blackpool e vi Leylands óbvias ostentando uma placa de radiador de Ribble, então quando fui para casa em Bristol, eu assumi que todos os Bristols também eram Leylands!]
A faixa branca na cintura foi desespecificada porque a Leyland estava carregando demais para adicioná-la ao veículo pintado com spray de uma cor. Algumas frotas a eliminaram no resto da frota (especialmente aquelas que eram pintadas com spray), eu a adicionei a todas as Nacionais no UCOC (porque nós ainda estávamos pintando a mão) antes de elas pegarem a estrada e quão mais bonitas elas pareciam!
Como eu disse em minha salva de abertura, Geoff, os contadores da NBC sabiam o preço de tudo e o valor de nada. Seus comentários confirmam isso.
Eu acho que a mensagem básica de Geoff era que, nos primórdios da NBC, uma grande dose de discrição era permitida a empresas individuais. Quando a mentalidade politburo e a mão morta da era Freddie Wood chegaram, a conformidade absoluta, sem graça e sufocante, tornou-se a ordem do dia (depois do dia, depois do dia).
Maior Manchester ônibus.
Eu tenho estado recentemente olhando algumas fotos de velhos ônibus da Grande Manchester de 1986 a 1988 e me deparei com algumas fotos que mostravam ônibus com o prefixo FK antes do número do ônibus. Estes eram geralmente o depósito que o ônibus pertencia a OM Oldham, PS Princess Road.
Alguém pode por favor lançar alguma luz sobre o prefixo FK e onde foi etc etc.
FK era o código para Frederick Road. Este foi anteriormente o QG de Salford City Transport.
FK era o código do depósito para Frederick Rd, Salford, o antigo quartel-general e trabalha para a Salford City Transport.
Alguém sabe de um ônibus ou treinador com o nome de Jack Harrison, VC, MC em Hull.
Jack foi premiado com uma Victoria Cross póstuma em 1917 e eu acredito que um ônibus ou treinador foi nomeado após ele.
Obrigado por qualquer pista que você possa dar.
Havia um treinador de Kingston-upon-Hull, número 40 (B40UAG) que foi nomeado "John Harrison VC".
Era um Dennis Dorchester com corpo Plaxton Paramount 3200 (C50Ft).
Era novo em julho ou agosto de 1984 com nomes de frota da Kingstonian.
Fotografei em 18/09/1984 no International Garden Festival, em Liverpool, mas não tinha nome visível.
Um livro da frota de Ian Allan, corrigido até janeiro de 1985, dá-lhe o nome.
Se você usa o Google & quot; B40UAG & quot ;, o primeiro resultado deve fornecer uma foto do falecido Roy Marshall em Hull, em 1986, e mostra o nome sendo transportado entre os limpadores de pára-brisa.
A que distância da Holderness Road em Hull os trólebus funcionavam? Esse é um poste de pórtico verde que fica em frente a Kingston Vets, do mesmo lado do pub Apollo, perto da rotatória?
Oi Brenda. Pelo que sei, os trólebus não se estenderam além de Ings Road na rota Holderness Road depois que eles substituíram diretamente os bondes nessa rota em 1940. O poste de tração verde que você se refere na rotunda de Diadem Grove realmente se parece com um antigo polo de trólebus. . Eu suspeito que este foi um dos muitos a serem re-plantados em vários locais para fins de iluminação pública após a retirada dos trólebus em Hull em 1964. Isso levanta a questão de por que ele ainda está lá, aparentemente sem propósito.
Os trólebus da Holderness Road terminavam perto de Ings Road. Os pólos de tração do Hull eram de seis tipos diferentes, então seria útil ter uma fotografia para tentar identificar o pólo.
Muitos pólos foram mantidos para fins de iluminação, mas eles foram transferidos para o Departamento de Engenheiros da Cidade, então é possível que alguns tenham sido reutilizados.
Malcolm, aqui está um link para a vista da rua mostrando o pólo em questão. Sua identificação de qual tipo é interessante. Clique aqui para ver.
Isso não parece um pólo de tração para mim, mas sim uma abertura de esgoto, o topo canelado é um indicador da sua função, em vez de ter um remate como era normal nos pólos de tração. Devo dizer que eu não notei um esgoto em qualquer lugar por algum tempo.
Essa foto parece mais um cano de esgoto do que um poste de tração.
Muito obrigado, David e Phil, por identificá-lo como um esgoto. Eu nunca soube que tais coisas existiam em uma estrada pública. Certamente parece ter saído da era dos trólebus, então Brenda estava certa em fazer a pergunta. Mistério resolvido e algo novo aprendido.
Acabei de ver a fotografia e estou certo de que não é um pólo de tração.
O outro ponto que trabalha contra ser um pólo de tração de trólebus é que o tubo de ventilação parece ser vertical, reto e verdadeiro. Pólos de trólebus eram, eu sempre fui levado a acreditar erigido com uma inclinação para fora, de modo que uma vez que os fios aéreos fossem instalados e tensionados, os pólos assumiriam uma posição vertical & # 8216; vertical. Isto foi certamente confirmado pelos pólos que permaneceram ao longo da Estrada Sutton em Maidstone, que foram mantidos como padrões de luz muito depois de terminados os trólebus. Sem os fios, todos eles relaxaram para um decididamente & # 8216; posição.
Mais uma vez, um antigo cronômetro me disse que esse desenho pré-tensionado era muito mais pronunciado para os padrões de trólebus do que para os postes de bondes, devido ao peso extra da fiação de cobre.
Plaxton Body Style em Chassi Bedford J2.
Os primeiros corpos construídos por Plaxton no chassi Bedford J2 de 1961 eram o "Consort & # 8216; estilo 7ft 6in wide com o envoltório em torno de 2 peça windscreen e 3 peça traseira.
Em 1965, isso mudou para a mais ampla "Embassy"; estilo 8 pés de largura com telas de uma peça mesma frente & amp; traseira.
Mas havia 2 treinadores construídos em 1969 no estilo mais antigo para o Bradford Ambulance Service, sendo eles o LAK 118G e o 119G.
Minha pergunta é por que Plaxton voltou ao estilo anterior desses dois treinadores?
Anexo fotos do LAK 118G e também do ABC 330K do estilo posterior para comparação.
John, eu não posso imaginar que uma empresa como Plaxton teria construído dois dos corpos de estilo mais antigo pela simples diversão de fazê-lo. Meu palpite seria que o cliente especificou o padrão. Talvez, sendo para o Ambulance Service de Bradford, eles quisessem veículos com a mesma pegada & # 8217; como uma ambulância.
Pete, tenho certeza de que você está correto, presumivelmente, o Serviço de Ambulância de Bradford exigia os 7 pés e 6 pés mais estreitos, de modo a torná-los mais acessíveis a ruas urbanas estreitas. Os J2 teriam sido usados ​​presumivelmente como ônibus de bem-estar para transportar os idosos & amp; desabilitado para consultas ambulatoriais em hospitais locais & amp; clínicas.
Ambulância Bradford também teve mais dois no lote LAK 120 / 121G, então quatro no total, o que suponho que valha a pena ressuscitar o projeto anterior.
Apenas LAK 118G & amp; O LAK 119G sobreviveu, 118 como um veículo de catering e 119 como um motor home.
Eu sou um anorak de ônibus / ônibus e me pergunto se ainda existem ônibus Burlingham Sun Saloon com frontão completo. Minha razão é que eu perguntei a Oxford Diecast se eles poderiam produzir um modelo em 1:76, como eles já fazem em seus modelos em escala menor, mas foi dito que nenhum existe na & quot; vida real & quot; Obrigado pela sua ajuda.
Por que nenhum exemplo 1: 1 é importante?
De acordo com a Wiki, são apenas 4 a 5 anos desde que eles fizeram o 1: 148, certamente eles ainda têm os desenhos e outros materiais de referência que eles usaram então.
Depois de digitar meu último comentário, notei que o Paragon Kits anunciava um corpo de 1:76 Sun Saloon. paragonkits /
Peter Bourne e eu estamos recebendo mensagens diferentes sobre os produtos Oxford Diecast. Eles me disseram há alguns anos que pesquisam com muito cuidado quando planejam um novo modelo, incluindo vistas copiosas de um veículo na pintura sugerida. Eu sugeri um modelo de MTD 235 em libré Pennine ou Leyland Demonstrator. Como eles podem dizer a Peter que eles não podem produzir um modelo em 1/76 quando produzem em 1/148 para a escala de N britânica? Talvez devessem conversar com as pessoas de Bachmann, que modelam em uma escala e ampliam ou encolhem para a outra!
Não, Peter, eu não estou ciente de qualquer um desse estilo de corpo ainda "vivo". em termos reais.
Há alguns anos alguém no Bus & amp; Os classificados da Coach Preservation estavam oferecendo um Guy Arab III para venda que tinha sido equipado com um corpo Sunsaloon de outro veículo (doador não especificado no anúncio). Eu não consigo encontrar o anúncio sem passar por centenas de cópias de volta, então mais detalhes podem demorar um pouco para chegar! Eu pareço lembrar que o veículo estava localizado na Europa continental no momento em que foi anunciado, e que o preço pedido estava bem acima das expectativas.
Por que nenhum exemplo 1: 1 é importante?
De acordo com a Wiki, são apenas 4 a 5 anos desde que eles fizeram o 1: 148, certamente eles ainda têm os desenhos e outros materiais de referência que eles usaram então.
Talvez eu esteja sendo espessa. Eu pensei que estava andando em um Burlingham Sun Saloon na semana passada & # 8211; Steve Morris, ex-Bournemouth PS2. (Um de três que eu pensei estava todo em preservação.)
Acabei de ver o comentário de David Oldfield de 23 de agosto. O salão de sol como modelado em 1: 148 que é desejado em 1:76 é mostrado como um kit Paragon no link fornecido por John Lomas. Isso e o "Bournemouth & # 8217; não são os mesmos.
Para o benefício de David Oldfield, os PS2s de Bornemouth com carroceria Burlingham têm um radiador exposto e são essencialmente uma versão do semi-toldo com cabine de largura total. O Sunsaloon foi um estilo com radiador escondido e molduras de faróis estilizadas de baixo montado, principalmente fornecidas para Walter Alexander & amp; Filhos em Leyland PS1.
Compare e contraste com o design de Bournemouth.
Eu estou escrevendo na esperança de que você possa ajudar com uma pergunta sobre os treinadores de luxo dos anos 1930, em particular o Gilford.
Será que esses treinadores originalmente tinham espelhos interiores art-deco destinados ao uso pelos passageiros? Se você tem alguma informação ou imagens sobre esses espelhos e os interiores em geral que você é capaz de compartilhar eu ficaria muito grato.
A Gilford e todos os outros construtores de chassi de carroceria forneceram uma estrutura acionável auto-sustentada que, na maioria das vezes, era equipada com uma carroceria construída por uma empresa separada. O design de interiores na década de 1930 ficou a critério do cliente, especificando o corpo. Espelhos interiores eram frequentemente montados e estes eram o produto de fornecedores para os fabricantes de carrocerias, essas mesmas empresas forneceriam itens semelhantes para carrocerias de carros de luxo contemporâneos.
Alguém pode me dizer onde há ou me dar uma breve história de construtores de ônibus Banarbys.
"The ABC of British Bus Corpos" por James Taylor afirma que foi fundada em 1870 como um ferreiro / fabricante de rodas. Tornou-se B Barnaby & amp; Filhos em 1926 e, a partir de 1937, a Barnaby's Bus Bodies (Hull) Ltd, com instalações em Neptune e Ropery Street. A empresa foi vendida em 1960 e finalmente acabou em 1974, construindo recentemente os carros funerários. A maioria dos clientes vinham de Yorkshire, os primeiros ônibus incluíam charabancs e nos anos 1930 estavam construindo carrocerias de um único deck em chassis como Leyland Cheetahs e Tigers. No final dos anos 1940, construiu corpos em Dennis Lancets / Tigers e Bedford OB. Ele também re-bodied alguns chassis, também. Também construiu alguns corpos de dois andares.
Barnabys construiu corpos para os Everingham Brothers of Pocklington, alguns dos quais passaram para a East Yorkshire Motor Services.
O Carnegie Center em Hull tem alguns álbuns de fotos dos produtos da Barnaby, mas eu não sei se eles têm alguma outra informação.
Barnaby era um fisiculturista muito fascinante & # 8211; em anos posteriores conservadores em estilo, e nos primeiros dias até os anos 1930 seus produtos eram sem vergonha antiquados na aparência e deliciosos para ele. Em todos os momentos, no entanto, a construção era boa e com bons materiais. No Ledgard, tivemos dois "Leões da Luz" e um Cheetah, todos adquiridos com o negócio de G. F.Tate de Leeds quando ele morreu tristemente em 1943.
Fascinante, Chris Y. Você tem fotos de algum dos três?
Booth & amp; Fisher, Halfway, tinha três Bedford OBs bodied por Barnaby em 1948. Eles foram registrados LRB 749/50/1 e suponho que este era o mesmo Barnaby.
Você nos deixou orgulhosos, Roger, encontrando esse grande número de fotos. Quão triste o primeiro ônibus, o TD3, parece em seus últimos dias como um ônibus de contratante, com a janela do lado de cima da frente do andar de cima apagada com o embarque! Se David Aston voltar para visitar o seu posto, ele ficará satisfeito com o que nós, tardiamente, inventamos três anos depois de sua investigação!
Barnaby também construiu muitos corpos comerciais de van e ambulância. O & # 8216; Needlers & # 8217; uma vez famosa empresa de chocolate / doce de Hull sendo um.
Interessante comentário re qualidade, porque o meu entendimento de sua qualidade início dos anos 1950 era tão pobre que York Pullman pediu um substituto para um veículo de 3 anos de idade ou então, portanto, o late bodying de JVY 516.
O JVY 516 de York Pullman foi seu último treinador de Barnaby mas, até onde eu sei, o corpo ainda encaixado era o original. Se o chassi tiver 3 anos de idade quando estiver registrado, é mais provável que ele esteja de acordo com a política conservadora de compra da York Pullman (a menos que eu tenha perdido alguma coisa).
Os corpos de Barnaby em FVY 410/11 certamente falharam no início dos anos 1960, resultando no recebimento de novos corpos Roe.
Algum de vocês pode vir a minha ajuda?
Como alguns de vocês estarão cientes das minhas postagens neste site, entre 1967 e 75, eu era um piloto na NGT Percy Main Depot, Tynemouth e Wakefields como era então. Principalmente para satisfazer minha própria curiosidade, tenho tentado compilar uma história de T & W para eles, tornando-se parte da NBC. Eu obtive uma grande quantidade de informações dos Arquivos da Biblioteca de North Tyneside, sobre como a empresa começou com os bondes e, posteriormente, tornou-se parte do grupo BET. O primeiro ônibus foi um 1914 & # 8216; B & # 8217; digite Daimler e veio do norte em 1921, & # 8216; J 2551 & # 8217; D1 numerado mais tarde T1 na frota de T & amp; W, mas aqui é onde eu tenho algumas lacunas gritantes em o que eu posso desenterrar. Eu estou procurando informações gerais sobre veículos com os seguintes números de frota 2/38 & # 8211; 43/81 e # 8211; 87/9 e # 8211; 111/17. Alguns podem ter sido utilitários, enquanto outros veículos pré-guerra foram reagrupados no final dos anos 40, embora aqueles que mantiveram seus números originais de frota. Algumas informações que tenho sobre veículos entre 118 e amp; 156 também está incompleto, e. alguns teriam carregado o nome de Wakefields; obviamente, vários lotes estariam dentro desses agrupamentos de números, e nem todos com o mesmo chassi ou construtor de corpo, mas eu agradeceria qualquer ajuda que alguém pudesse me dar.
Você deve tentar obter uma cópia da história da frota da sociedade PSV Circle / Omnibus de Tynemouth & # 8211; Cobre também Tyneside e Venture. Tem cerca de 40 anos e agora é um pouco datada, mas mesmo assim, para qualquer pessoa interessada em Tynemouth e Wakefields, é inestimável. Como seu post tem três anos, eu não sei se você ainda está atrás dessas informações, mas se você quiser, posso resumir o que ele tem a dizer.
Imagem do barramento dos anos 30 Northumberland.
Eu estou procurando uma foto do tipo de ônibus que estaria em serviço entre Blyth, Northumberland e Newcastle upon Tyne na década de 1930. A imagem é para uso em um projeto de arte da comunidade para acompanhar as reminiscências de uma senhora, agora com 98 anos, que era uma condutora de ônibus na época. Alguém pode me ajudar a procurar uma foto dessas por favor?
O operador mais óbvio no serviço Blyth para Newcastle foi a United Automobile Services Limited.
A United era uma das grandes operadoras de empresas territoriais cuja rede de serviços de ônibus se estendia de Berwick-upon-Tweed até Scarborough / Bridlington, de modo que a disponibilidade de algumas fotografias históricas de seus ônibus é bem possível.
A United abriu uma garagem em Blyth por volta de 1919 e construiu uma rede de serviços, além de adquirir empresas menores. A United adquiriu o negócio de Thomas Allen da Blyth em 1933, que também operou um serviço da Blyth em Newcastle.
Eu tenho uma revista que inclui uma fotografia de um ônibus de dois andares Leyland TD1 de 1929 operado pela United que tem Newcastle e Newbiggin na tela de destino (‘Buses Extra 7’ publicado em 1977/1978). Se é ônibus de dois andares, a senhora lembra, então este tipo é possivelmente um tipo que ela poderia reconhecer. (Restrições de direitos autorais impedem que o artigo seja carregado neste site, mas estou disposto a enviar uma cópia para Michele se o meu e-mail for encaminhado para ela).
Este link leva a uma fotografia de um ônibus de estilo similar operado pela Wilts and Dorset, uma grande empresa similar à United: busmanjohn. files. wordpress.
Este link leva a uma fotografia de um ônibus de um único ônibus da United em 1934 (United LH165 (HN 9765), uma carroceria da Bristol H com Eastern County): sct61.uk/ualh165.
Enquanto isso, vou ver se alguma coisa aparece em quais livros eu tenho.
Alguém sabe qual empresa forneceu a Hastings Tramways Company com seu primeiro bonde, em abril de 1906, por favor?
John, de acordo com o excelente manual LRTA & quot; The Tramways of the South Coast & quot ;, Hastings & # 8217; Os primeiros bondes (1-30) foram construídos pela ER & TCW (The Electric Railway e Tramway Carriage Works Ltd) em 1905.
O bonde abriu em 31 de julho de 1905 e foi substituído por trólebus em 15 de maio de 1929.
O sistema era interessante porque, devido a objeções ao uso de fios aéreos ao longo do Passeio, usava a seção de fornecimento de energia de contato de superfície Dolter de 1907. Devido a problemas de segurança e eficiência, em 1914 alguns bondes foram equipados com gasolina Tilling Stevens. motores elétricos para cobrir esta seção até que os fios aéreos fossem finalmente erguidos em 1920.
Como um aparte, lembro-me que Blackpool começou com o sistema de conduíte (pelo menos em frente ao mar) e sofreu problemas intermináveis ​​com areia e água do mar entupindo e inundando abaixo de & # 8217; até que foi abandonado!
Indo ainda mais longe & # 8216; de lado & # 8217; do que o comentário de Chris Hebbron, o Wolverhampton usava um sistema de contato de pinos que tinha entre suas características uma falha comum para o garanhão (levantado pelo magnetismo através de um skate sob o bonde) para retornar à posição mais baixa . Assim, permaneceu vivo. Os cavalos locais acharam isto bastante chocante!
De fato, Pete, o sistema de contato de superfície teve problemas onde quer que fosse usado. De fato, foi relatado que em uma cidade (Lincoln?) Meninos jovens foram pagos para "testar"; os prisioneiros! Eu suspeito que histórias de quase fatalidades tenham se tornado exageradas ao longo dos anos, mas uma grande falha era que os bondes ficariam encalhados entre dois prisioneiros que não funcionavam e teriam que ser empurrados pelos passageiros.
O sistema de eletroduto de Blackpool, referido por Chris, obviamente não era adequado para a operação à beira-mar, mas é claro que numerosas cidades o usaram com sucesso por muitos anos (por exemplo, Londres e Washington).
Hoje, temos um desenvolvimento do sistema stud sendo construído e operado enquanto falamos, a saber, a "energia de nível do solo" francesa. sistema que recolhe energia de um terceiro trilho central ativado por duas sapatas coletoras embaixo de cada bonde. Este sistema não é infalível e só o tempo dirá se os franceses o desenvolverem mais.
Outro dos primeiros a adotar o & # 8216; Dolter & # 8217; o sistema de contato do parafuso prisioneiro era Mexborough & amp; Swinton Não foi apenas os cavalos que foram energizados pelos prisioneiros defeituosos, os mineiros locais com conjuntos de aço em suas botas também eram freqüentes faíscas brilhantes. Just to prove the adage what goes around comes around have you noticed the posh new trams at the Rio Olympics?, they have the Aps system which stands for something like Alimentation par sol, fed through the soil (?)
Mention of London Transport’s conduit pickup system reminds me of this colour photo I’ve had for some years of plough ejection/insertion taken by my uncle just before the trams were scrapped. It was taken between Tooting Broadway and Colliers Wood in South London. The trams never stopped either way, with the conductors raising/lowering the roof pole whilst walking along and the plough being manually inserted as seen here, being put into the inverted ‘U’ between the trucks of this E1. The plough automatically slid out by following the slot coming into the centre and joining into a common slot, ready for a plough to go out again – see bottom right for slot coming in. The change to overhead power here was necessitated by a railway bridge, whereby trains would have fouled any U/G feed equipment under the road. I admired these guys, who worked in the open in all extremes of weather, yet were always smartly uniformed! I never passed by on foot without watching this operation for 30 mins at least and sometimes rode in the trams, too!.
Pedant’s Corner: the metal protectors you put on your pit booits were actually “Segs", Andrew: I had to say that because it’s such a lovely word and conjures up images of cobbler’s shops reeking of leather and glue with cards of these segs for sale: Blakey’s segs have a website I see!
With regard to the Rio trams (I know that there is usually a fair bit of movement from the original topic on this site, but change of mode and country is unusual – not that I have any objection). I only speak a few words of Portuguese (picked up on a wonderful Railway Holiday) but ‘Alimentation par sol’ looks like ‘Solar powered’. No doubt one of the readers has the necessary expertise to confirm or refute this.
Andy, the French system APS (Alimentation par le Sol) is translated as "feeding via the ground". It was first used in Bordeaux in 2003 but has since been used in Reims, Anger, Orlean, Tours and Dubai.
There have been operating problems and many in the industry are sceptical of its long-term potential. However, for use within historic or visually-sensitive city centres it offers a useful option.
I also spent many a fascinating half hour or so watching the shoes entering or leaving the trams near the Common end of Streatham High Road on the old A 23.
I’m going back to 1971. I got a place at De la Salle teacher training college in Middleton. Because said college only had campus accommodation for years 2, and 3, first years lived ‘out’. I was in Glen Avenue, Blackley. I used to get the number 60 to visit girlfriend students at Sedgley Park. (Now a police training college) What was the exact route of this service? I used to get on at the ‘tram office’ on Rochdale Road in the ‘dip’ just further towards Middleton from Glen Ave.
I have an undated SELNEC bus map which would have been published sometime just after the time of the formation of the PTE (November 1969 so perhaps published during 1970).
In the list on the map it refers to service 60 as ‘Cannon Street-Blackley Circular via Cheetham Hill or Rochdale Road’. There were clockwise and anti-clockwise circular services that both carried the same service number 60.
Following the map the anti-clockwise service ran via the following route: Cannon Street, High Street, Shudehill, Rochdale Road, (Blackley tram office), Rochdale Road, Victoria Avenue, Middleton Road, Cheetham Hill Road, Corporation Street, Cannon Street.
The clockwise service appears to leave from Cannon Street travelling via High Street, Shudehill, Withy Grove and Corporation Street. The route after that is clearer travelling via Cheetham Hill Road, Middleton Road, Victoria Avenue, Rochdale Road, (Blackley tram office), Rochdale Road, Shudehill, Withy Grove, Corporation Street then Cannon Street.
The ‘tram office’ Mike refers to stood in the ‘v’ of the junction of Middleton Old Road and Rochdale Road. The building can be made out on Google Streetview.
There is an older photo of the building at: pinterest/
I wonder if you could help, we are wondering why Coach Companies often have the ending ‘tonian’ por exemplo. Altonian/Bedfordian?
Brutonian in Somerset spring to mind…
It is to show allegiance to a place, generally the operational centre;
Brutonian, means native to Bruton, just as Glaswegian means native to Glasgow.
That wonderful thing called wikipedia tells me that this word ending is a demonym. It is a term for residents of or associated with a particular place. There are several types, and include "Chinese" for the people of China, "English" for the people of England, etc. For the ending in question the site notes "Prestonian" for Preston, Lancs, and "Torontonian" for Toronto. I guess all those coach companies have taken their place name and added this suffix to indicate their place of origin. This just goes to show that coaches must have a personality, as the suffix is meant to apply to people!
Barfordian Coaches once of Great Barford near Bedford but now with a Bedford address. barfordiancoaches. co. uk/  
Truronian of Truro (according to Wikipedia: Truronian was formed in September 1987 by former Western National managers….in April 2008, Truroninan was purchased by FirstGroup….in March 2012, the trading name was sold to Newell’s Travel).
Many of these only added the IAN as in the Alton-ian and Bedford-ian examples.
This idea was also used by Duple in developing their Hendon-ian body.
Windsorian is another.
You can’t do it with all names, though: I find the following imaginary ones unconvincing:
Yr Wyddgrugian—the English version of which would sound distinctly mildewy.
As "-ian" is from Latin, I suppose we shouldn’t expect our earthy Saxon, Danish and Celtic place names to fit into the pattern. Salopia Saloon Coaches has no final "-n" and sounds quite happy, but only because the Romans couldn’t pronounce words beginning with "Shr-".
Just remembered my Oxfordshire days . . . and Heyfordian – still going I believe.
I think we can all understand why there are no Isle of Wight coach companies called Caulkhead-ian!
There’s one not far from Bedford – Barfordian Coaches. I believe it was originally based in Great Barford, but is now in Bedford itself.
Kingston upon Hull City Transport’s coaching section was named "Kingstonian".
Can anyone help me please with history of this coach a Bedford SB new to Watsons of Strood in 1-1952. with a Duple body C24F. a description describes it as a luxury coach. This coach was later in the fleet of Redby Coaches of Roker, Sunderland date unknown I would be grateful of any help in tracing any change of ownership after Watsons and again after Redby. Whilst with Redby it was regularly used by Sunderland football club, their ground being in Roker close by to Redby’s garage.
There’s a mention of OKJ 210 on the ‘Buses On Screen’ local na rede Internet.
Private Coach (1953, British Pathe News) OKJ210, Bedford SB/Duple of Watson, Strood – a luxury coach with hostess service, radio message service and toilet providing free travel to London, seen leaving Aylesbury. It’s the idea of car dealer Raymond Way to bring potential customers to his car showroom in Kilburn! (Thanks Martin Ingle)
After Watsons. 1952, this coach is known to have gone to Scott Greys of Darlington before going on to Redby Coaches of Sunderland.
I ask can anyone be able to help with change of ownership dates also after Redby’s would be of interest to me. The Scott Greys information just been forth coming to me 5/2/17.
Buses in Manchester Circa 1940 – 1945.
This seems to be the best place to aid my search.
My grandfather, Daniel Francis Kelly, was a bus driver in early 1940’s in Manchester.
All I know for certain is that he moved back to Ireland in 1945, so that would be when his service ended.
I’m trying to find out what kind of bus he would have driven. Presumably it would have been Manchester Corporation? I’ve had a quick search and some names have come up like a Streamliner and Daimler Utility.
Ultimately I’d like to find out what route he also drove, however I feel this will be highly unlikely – still worth a shot!.
During the late thirties, Manchester Corporation had a standard design of bus body which was built on Crossley, Leyland and Daimler chassis, the bodies being built by Metro-Cammell, Crossley, Leyland and English Electric, so your grandfather might have driven any of these, they were probably the most common buses in Manchester during the war. The Daimler Utilities were only a small part of the fleet and were not built until late in the war. It is also possible that he could have worked for North Western, which had a depot in Manchester.
When you say he drove buses in Manchester, he could of course have driven for any of the surrounding Municiple Undertakings, all of which worked in to Manchester.
These being Ashton under Lyne, SHMD, Stockport, Oldham, Salford, Bolton, and Rochdale.
North Western Road Car Company has already been mentioned, and there was also Lancashire United Transport, and of course Maynes, the only independent operator to run Stage services in Manchester.
I know it slightly blurrs the boundaries for you, but Manchester Corporation Transport Department ran more route miles outside the City limits than it did in it.
Good luck in your quest.
"Streamliner" was the name of the standard design that Don described, and this link shows what it looked like: flic. kr/p/qxRGjh.
The Greater Manchester Transport Society archive at the Museum of Transport, Boyle St in Manchester, is the custodian of payroll records for MCTD, including those from the wartime years. It might be a laborious search (and, realistically, you’d have to do it for yourself!), but the records are there and we’re a friendly bunch. A phone call to George Turnbull, the Museum’s archivist, on 0161-205-2122 (Wednesdays are the best days to catch him)would give you some idea of what might be discovered.
Well first of all thank you all for your replies – some very useful info there.
I’ve been able to get some more info too. My grandmother, who met my grandfather on the bus route lived in Salford, Broughton area.
In that area, the current bus routes and operators in the area are as follows.
Stage Coach Manchester.
151, Hollinwood, Morrisons – Mandley Park.
294, Langley – Trafford Park.
First Greater Manchester.
42, East Didsbury Parrs Wood – North Manchester General Hospital.
52, Salford Shopping Centre – Failsworth.
59, Rush croft – Manchester Piccadilly.
135, Bury - Manchester Piccadilly.
I have no doubt that the routes are different as are the numbers. But hopefully this narrows down which operators were in that area circa 1943.
I’ll make my way down to to the museum and speak to George Turnbul and see if I can have a look through the archives.
Thanks all for your help so far.
Living in Broughton, which was in the Salford City Transport area, the probability was that your Grandfather drove for that Corporation. The majority of the fleet at that time comprised Leyland Titan TD4 & 5s and AEC Regents 8.8 litre (Manchester Museum of Transport has a splendid preserved example of one these). There were other marques still in use during that period including a few Dennis’ acquired in 1932 and Crossley Mancunians dating from 1934 and 1938. Most of the bus fleet at the outbreak of war was less than 5 years old but by the end of the war it was in a deplorable state due to poor maintenance and management. One bus route in the area that does date back to that era is the 135, then the 35 Manchester to Bury route which was a joint service between Bury, Manchester and Salford Corporations.
If your Grandfather lived in Broughton it is also conceivable that he worked at Manchester’s Queens Rd garage in Cheetham Hill as it is not far from Broughton and, if so, experienced driving the Leyland and Crossley Streamliners. Buses from that garage served a wide area of North Manchester up to Rochdale, Oldham and beyond plus several cross city services.
James, your grandfather would not have been confined to a single route. He would have worked from a depot, and most likely would have worked in rotation on all the routes that that depot operated. If one of those routes went through Broughton then I think the operator would be Salford, as Manchester didn’t operate in that area until later, unless anyone else knows different.
Orla has given a very comprehensive and accurate answer. All I would add is that, in the 1930s, up until around 1938, both Manchester and Salford gave job priority to people living within their own boundaries wherever possible due to high levels of unemployment. Had your grandfather been employed before 1938, living in Broughton would have almost certainly precluded his employment by MCTD as the occupation of driver was not hard to fill from within the Manchester boundary. By 1940, with large numbers of eligible men having been recruited to the forces or priority industries, the restrictions were ignored if not lifted.
Arthur Hustwitt (Memorial) Collection. Copyright NA3T.
Does anyone know if Albion Victor FT39N Duple C31F which was new to Cronshaw of Hendon 1950 still survives in preservation?
According to PSVC Preserved Buses it has been listed with Leary, Pilsley for a number of years but does not appear on the rally scene, nor on the DVLA web site. Previous to Leary it was listed with Simpson, Killamarsh circa 1999. Photo above shows it at Wembley in 1952.
Below are two views of CCB 300 owned by Cadman of Thorne taken by me in their yard at Thorne. Date unknown.
Also a photo of another vehicle there which may be of interest 571 BWT.
I’ve been hoping someone might have remarked on why it is registered in Blackburn.
Cronshaw coaches were registered in Blackburn until 1959. At one time the company did apparently have an operation there, but it’s my recollection that registration of the coaches in Blackburn continued even when the bulk, at least, of the operation was in London. This was a time when I didn’t have the same interest in coaches as buses, and I’m sure others will be able to elaborate on this story.
In 1928, Lewis Cronshaw ran an hourly Blackburn to Manchester service.
He was established in Blackburn, then started a business in Hendon, but registered some coaches in Blackburn.
At some stage it was merged into Valliant-Cronshaw, which later merged with Silverline.
Cronshaw had a second Albion CCB 301.
CCB 301 An FT39 72869B Du 54035 C31F 1950 Cronshaw, NW4.
I came across CCB 300 less than ten years ago under a tarpaulin at a preservation storage site in Derbyshire. It wasn’t in a usable state, and didn’t appear to have any work being done on it. I haven’t heard anything about it since.
Peter, Pilsley the address of Leary the recorded owner is in Derbyshire so looks like its still owned by him. Amazing the people pay rent on storage year on year but never do any restoration. Hopefully it may find a new owner before it gets beyond restoration.
Interesting submission from John W, there. I’d been aware of the listing of CCB 301 on BLOTW (but no sign of CCB 300) so I had assumed there was only the one vehicle, and BLOTW was in error. CCB 300 has now appeared on BLOTW, I’m inclined to suppose after intervention by John. Could I ask, does the additional information come from a PSVC chassis list? I notice that the vehicle is quoted in the caption as an FT39N, while BLOTW gives FT39. There was also an FT39AN model, I seem to recall. Could someone possibly remind me of the differences between the various models? I recollect that differing lengths/wheelbases was in it somewhere.
Also, I see that CCB 300 is consistently given as C31F, rather than FC31F. This is something else which I’m sure has been discussed before, IIRC some models of Albion were not regarded as full-front since they had never appeared as half-cab, despite being front vertical-engined. Here again, could someone remind?
Dear David, When I read your request for information on which Albion chassis were built with a full-front structure I was at home and had a copy of Albion of Scotstoun by Adams and Milligan to hand. So here is, as far as I can see, the information you are requesting. You are correct that some Albion PSV models with front vertical engines and axles mounted at the front of the chassis were designed to take full-fronted bodywork, having the same cab floor and dash structure as related lorries: these were the Viking CX41 and HD61/73, and the Victor FT and VT.
The Viking was a full-sized bus for unpaved road markets although one was given a 37-seat Thurgood body and registered (NJH150) in the UK. BLOTW has it as FC37F despite the above.
The Victor FT was a smaller model, part of the lightweight FT (under 2-tons unladen, 6 ½ ton Payload) series of goods chassis current from 1939-59; the last of the previous PH series Victors had been built in 1939 and the first of the new series was the petrol powered FT3AB announced in 1947. The engine was a six-cylinder unit initially EN277 of 4.25 litres but from 1949 EN282 of 4.6 litres. Like the Viking it was lorry-derived with a straight frame. By the end of 1948 the FT39 version was in production, this had the four-cylinder 4.88 litre EN286 engine as did the FT37 Chieftain lorry, as the earlier type had been the passenger version of the FT3, major differences being confined to longer springs and dampers all round. A five-speed gearbox with crawler first was fitted to the FT39 as opposed to the four-speed on petrol versions.
The A suffix from 1952 indicated a number of driveline and suspension revisions, a change to spring mountings causing a slight lengthening of offered wheelbases. Overall lengths remained constant being coded N for25ft nominal bodied length, L for 27ft 6in and LX for 30ft.
The K revisions producing the FT39KAN, KAL and KALX entailed a larger EN287 5.5 litre engine and heavier duty front springs. In all over two thousand FT series Victors were built until 1958 over forty are listed as preserved/surviving in 1999. The VT series was derived from the CH Chieftain and built from 1959 until 1966.
Further to what John Wakefield was saying, I am in close proximity to bus preservationists on a weekly basis and have been for a number of years. Often work gets done only when time money and inclination come together; for instance: a friend got his Derwent II bodied YRT ready for its MoT over a period of years on that basis. Sadly the first time he was to take it out for public display at the Riverside Museum just under a year ago he suffered a low speed traffic accident at Glasgow Green; this, though, has been the spur to get previous in-service damage to the lower body frame repaired and over the last year Scott, a GVVT member who is a time served coachbuilder and who has a real flair for composite bodies has renewed much of the frame below the waist-rail including re-instating a boot that fell out over twenty five years ago. Conversely there are other buses and coaches at Bridgeton that have either never been restored, such as a 1971 ex Glasgow J-Type Atlantean; some are currently half restored and have been for a decade (these include an ex-Guernsey Victor lacking seats, glazing and panels) or were once fully restored and then left out in the open to moulder away. The owner of one such here, a pre-war Alexander Bluebird Tiger, will do nothing to re-restore it but will only sell for a price that will recompense him for the work he once did. Thus, it exists critical (previous neglect in the open) but stable (under cover and dry for a few years) and unlikely to be a candidate for rehabilitation while the current owner lives.
P. S. Does anyone reading this have a set of BMAC rear lights of 1960s/1970s pattern suitable for a Plaxton Derwent II?
To Stephen’s comments about inactive preservation I would add that it isn’t always safe to assume that rent is being paid year after year. If an enthusiast is running a storage site and the rent on a vehicle stops coming in, what is he going to do? I remember the late Norman Myers, when he was running a site in Bolton, selling the same vehicle three times without ever buying it. On each occasion the owner agreed to give him the vehicle in lieu of unpaid rent!
Leeds City Transport Fleet List.
Does anyone know of a Leeds City Transport fleet list? 1930’s until it’s demise.
The PSV Circle published a fleet history of Leeds City Transport circa 1969. I don’t know of any update of this history.
Another source of information on Leeds buses is the series of books published by the Leeds Transport Historical Society under the title Leeds Transport. There are five volumes in the series and have comprehensive details of Leeds buses. The books are quite expensive averaging about £35 each.
There now appears to be an attempt to clear stocks of the ‘Leeds Transport’ série de livros. Last year I invested in four of them from MDS Books priced at £25 each, and I noticed last week on a visit to Otley (the Yorkshire one) that a discount bookshop there had them in their window at the same price. This is still of course far too much to spend just for the fleet list aspect, but they are superb books and well worth it at this reduced price.
I was wondering if anyone might know what number bus in 1973 travelled from Sheffield to Doncaster (via the Steelworks district) and what bus station in Doncaster it arrived at. Also, how long would the journey have taken and was it a double decker bus.
Many thanks in advance for your help with this matter.
Service 77 ran from Pond Street Sheffield through the east end to Rotherham and then via Conisborough to Waterdale Doncaster or later the southern (or only?) bus station. It was operated by the three municipalities and took I think an hour. For many years it was single deck operated but changes of route or bridges in the ?50s made double deck working possible. In the mid sixties Doncaster used newish front entrance PD3s or CVG6s and Rotherham older CVG6s. Corrections and improvements please!
Further rootings (or routings): Single deck working of route 77 (the only Doncaster CT route number ever displayed) seems to have ceased in 1958, when Doncaster 22 23 & 24 ,1953 AEC Regal III 9.6 half cabs were stood down. 22 now belongs to DOLRS and is preserved at Sandtoft. The Sheffield third was not of course the “municipality” but SJOC, who at one time used PD2/30’s. … and there was once a Southern Bus Station, probably as daunting as the “Northern’- now no more.
This is an enlargement from a Valentine’s postcard in my collection taken in Commercial Street, Halifax in the mid-1930s. It shows a pair of Halifax Corporation AEC Regents with what I believe were Short Brothers open-staircase bodies with their distinctive "camel-roof".
Mention has been made of this style of bodywork on other Old Bus Photo threads before, but I think this is the first illustration of them on this site. Sadly, on enlargement, exact identification of them has not been possible.
The "camel-roof" bodies were designed to allow head-room for upper-deck passengers along the central gangway. I understand this was a failed attempt to compete with Leyland’s early "lowbridge" bodies. With the hump, they look to be normal height so the question is – what apparent advantage or benefit did they offer over normal highbridge bodies?
Thx, Paul, for posting this photo – views of these buses are certainly rare. You pose the question that many of us enthusiasts have asked over the years. To me, they would only be useful in a Beverley Bar situation, rarer even than photos of these buses!
If the Leyland system was patented, how was it that it became so common – did other bodybuilders pay a royalty to Leyland for building their product?
Presumably camel back buses were more Beverley Bar than Leyland “L". Many old rail bridges were arched and the bus would just have to clear a more narrow central span. Like Beverley, it would have required a greater degree of precision! The arched rail overbridge at Woodlesford near Leeds has an “optional" single central lane marked on the highway and I’m sure there are others - perhaps in Elland, which may have something to do with these. Maybe our Halifax panel will know how this worked in practice… The Leyland patent was more desperation than comfort, trapped (not literally) between bridges of the railway boom and length restrictions for single decks. Access was difficult, capacity restricted by spreading passengers and the limited height did not help to ventilate the cig smoke. Then there was the lower saloon stoop.
Surely they would lessen the chances of a bridge strike at any arched bridge.
Perhaps Halifax had a preponderance of those and thought this design could be a cost cutter.
Halifax’s ‘Camel Roofed’ Regents came from three different bodybuilders – the first ones from Short Bros., the second ones from Hoyal and the later ones from English Electric. There were recognisable differences between all these and both the vehicles in the photo are from the later batches with English Electric bodies. The one in the foreground appears to be in the CP 94xx series (116-120, CP 9442-9446). The one in the background looks to have just two or three numbers in its registration number, which would make it one of 2-6 (JX 321-325), 103-105 (JX 46-48) or 133-136 (JX 331-334).
Chris, I believe I have read somewhere that Leyland’s patent for the lowbridge side-gangway layout only required a payment when used by others for a limited number of years – perhaps five? During that time, such alternatives as these hump back roofs, and double side gangway upstairs were used to avoid paying a royalty to Leyland. Once the patent royalty fee period had expired, the other designs seem to have been rapidly dropped in favour of Leyland’s design. I cannot recall where I read this, but someone else may be able to pinpoint the source or veracity of this.
The information following is from the late Alan Townsin’s book on AEC Regents published by TPC and correspondence in the PDF copies of Leyland Torque.
Leyland did have a patent on the Titan style body; it was purchased from General Motors, who had several us patents on double deck body design but had only extended the one by the Fifth Avenue coach Company to other territories. It expired prior to world war 2.
Notably the Yellow Coach/ Rackham US patent is different to the patent Leyland bought.
The purpose of the Camel-Roof body (an AEC registered design) was cosmetic, to make a highbridge bus look as low as a titan from the viewpoint of a pedestrian. This mattered in areas were double deck buses were novel and in areas where Titans were seen as safe and the previous generation of double decks such as the Leyland G7 and the AEC PS not.
Thanks, Gentlemen, for your thoughts and logical suggestions of the design being an early "Beverley Bar" idea to negotiate arched railway bridges. (Was it this design which led EYMS to take the next step?)
Many thanks also to John S, for your local knowledge.
Your reply opens up more questions and conundrums.
Why did these come from three body builders and over what period? Did Short Bros and Hoyal (who??) decline to make any more because of an AEC royalty demand?
Their fleet numbers and registrations also raise an eyebrow in their lack of sequence. Did they take the fleet numbers of withdrawn buses? Being from a city where fleet numbers and registrations followed a fairly logical and sequential pattern (Leeds) it seems strange that fleet numbers 2-6 should have higher registration numbers than 103-105 etc.
Similarly, for the Halifax prefix CP registrations to be well up into the 9000s in the early 1930s seems remarkable. Perversely, for the prefix JX to have only two or three numbers during this same period seems equally incredible.
John, please can you give us more fleet details of all three batches of these remarkable buses?
Thx, Michael H for some background info about the Leyland patent. As for the Hoyal Body Corporation, they were a shortlived bus body builder (single and double deck) working out from Weybridge between 1922 and 1931, when they went into voluntary liquidation.
It is possible that in those early days these Regents may have been ordered from AEC as complete vehicles and then the bodywork subcontracted out by them to various bodybuilders in the south-east. Leyland offered a complete standard vehicle at the time and AEC’s Chief Designer John Rackham was keen to have a similar arrangement for the Regent.
Hoyal had its origins as Chalmer & Hoyer Ltd., registered at 41 Charing Cross Road, London. They were the first company to take out the patent rights to build the Weymann flexible framed car body design, and became prolific builders of car bodywork – particularly for Morris. They also were early builders of motor boats at premises near Poole in Dorset. By 1927 Chalmer had left and H. W. Allingham was sales manager. Taking the ‘Hoy’ of Hoyer and the ‘al’ of Allingham the company became The Hoyal Body Corporation, and around this time they began diversifying into bus and charabanc bodywork, but this only appears to have lasted for about four years or so.
I have tried to put together a list of the camel-roofed Regents but it doesn’t really help to explain things to be honest – not without having the entire fleet history before you. There seems to have been some initial indecision at first as to whether to have separate number series for the two fleets or not. Buses were allocated fleet numbers upon being ordered, but some were changed upon or just after delivery to fill gaps, and they weren’t necessarily delivered or put into service in the order they were ordered in. Also in between the Regents there were Regal single deckers too.
As for the numbering of the Halifax fleet – well, where do I start ?
The numbering system started straight forwardly enough with the three original Daimler CC types nos. 1-3 of 1912/13 and continued onwards up to ex-demonstrator Regent 57 in 1930, with just six Karriers 1-6 reusing vacated numbers. 53-56 were the first ‘Camel Roofed’ Regents.
Then in 1929 the Joint Committee came into being, though its effect numberwise took a year or so to take effect. A considerable number of former Corporation vehicles were transferred to the JOC fleet, but retained their original numbers. The fleet of George Garrard of West Vale was taken over by the JOC and their vehicles became 60-65. Four more ‘Camel Roofed’ Regents for the JOC became 66-69. Thirteen vehicles from the Hebble fleet became 70-82, and an unknown number of LMS Railway vehicles were briefly operated, the only known ones being 83/84 but is is believed that there were probably many more taking numbers maybe to around 100 or so.
The next new Corporation buses ‘jumped over’ the JOC numbers and started at 107, continuing to 124, whilst lots of new JOC vehicles flooded in to replace the older and second hand ones taking their vacated numbers and continuing up to 105, then ‘jumped over’ the Corporation numbers and continued from 125. The next Corporation deliveries then reverted back to a new series starting from 2 (the original Karrier no. 1 still being in service).
From here Corporation buses ran in a series from 2 up to 88 by 1940, and JOC buses continued from 125 and reached 208 by 1939.
After the war JOC buses continued the prewar series from 209, eventually reaching 293 by 1954. A new series for postwar Corporation buses began at 301 and reached 360 by 1951. By 1954 there were just 25 prewar Regents remaining (all from the Corporation fleet) so the entire Corporation fleet was put into registration number order and renumbered from 11 to 86, though a solitary batch of manual gearbox PD2’s were kept separate as 100-108. A further batch of new CVG6 followed on as 87-98. From 1958, new GM Richard Le Fevre commenced new series for both fleets, Corporation buses starting from 1, and JOC buses from 201. They were numbered in neat blocks with gaps between e. g. 1-9, 11-18, 21-28 etc, and equivalent buses for the two fleets had matching numbers e. g. Regent V’s 11-18 (Corp.) and 211-218 (JOC). Later many of the earlier JOC buses were renumbered into the 300’s to make way for future deliveries.
Then in 1963 Geoffrey Hilditch took over, and…..well….. The system went totally astray after that !
My word, John – many thanks for a fantastic reply.
I’m very grateful that you took the trouble to respond to my rather presumptuous request for further information.
What a complex and fascinating history Halifax Tramways/Corporation had. Until now, I’d only given attention to their wonderful tramway where, in the early days, no far-flung outpost was seemingly off limits, regardless of their potential traffic earnings. Sorry, John – another question:
Could these "camel-roof" Regents also have been the first to wear the "Glasgow" colour scheme?
Yes, the first ‘Camel Roofed’ Regents were also the first to carry the green, orange and cream livery. The first buses of 1912/13 had varnished wood bodies with the bonnets and other bits painted in the current tram style dark blue. With the arrival of manager Ben Hall, as the trams changed to a dark red and cream (not neccessarily the correct terms) so the buses became cream and the same dark red, with the later Karrier WL6’s and the one-off experimental Karrier Chaser, Dennis EV and Leyland Tiger painted in allover dark red.
The prototype AEC Regent(chassis no. 661001) with Short ‘Camel Roofed’ body was put into service by them as a demonstrator on 13th February 1929, registered MT 2114 and in the current AEC demonstration livery of off white with blue relief. It paid an early visit to Halifax in that year where it impressed sufficiently to result in an immediate order for some similar buses. By November 1929 it was repainted into Glasgow’s green, orange and cream livery for demonstration in that city, resulting also in an order from them. It has often been said that the inspiration for Halifax adopting a similar livery was due to its demonstration here in the Glasgow livery, but a reliable authority on the subject insists that he has photographic evidence that it was still in the original off-white and blue at the time. It is still fairly certain that at some point after its visit to Halifax, and after repaint into Glasgow livery, some local councillors saw it – probably at a show, or maybe it even stopped off locally on its way to Scotland – and they made their minds up then. The first three Halifax Regents (53-55, CP 8009-8011) were delivered in November 1929, The official AEC photograph of Halifax Regent 53 was apparently taken almost immediately after the one of MT 2114 after repaint into Glasgow livery so the whole process of seeing the Glasgow livery, deciding to adopt it, having Short’s paint them and getting them them into service seems to have happened impossibly quickly.
Alan Townsin in his TPC book ‘Best of British Buses – AEC Regents 1929-1942’ confirms that designer John Rackham wanted to offer a standard body to complement his Regent chassis, and was responsible for the ‘Camel Roofed’ design and, having no bodybuilding department of their own, he had Short Bros. build a number of bodies on the first few chassis. The demonstrator was the first one, and Halifax took nine, others going to the National Omnibus Co., Wallasey Corporation and two went to Cornish Buses Ltd.(later taken over by Western National).
The initial Halifax livery was very similar to the Glasgow one in layout, with orange lower panels, cream from a band below the lower deck windows to the cantrail (and including the bonnet top), green upper panels, a cream band below the upper deck windows, green around the upper deck windows, and a silver roof.
After a short time this was modified so that the lower deck window pillars and surrounds were also green (as was the bonnet top), with just cream bands above and below, giving a ‘three-banded’ layout.
From the mid-1930’s this was changed again such that the upper deck window pillars and surrounds became cream, and roofs became green instead of silver.
With all the above liveries there was extensive use of black lining separating the different colours. For the record, further minor changes were made after the war with a reduction in some of the black lining. GM Roderick McKenzie introduced a simplified non-banded livery with the arrival of the CVG6’s in 1954, and then applied this to many of the existing vehicles, but there was a quick reversion to the previous style inbetween his leaving and his successor arriving – thanks to some underhand dealings by the body shop ! Once again, under Geoffrey Hilditch’s tenure the livery variations were many and varied.
Many thanks again, John, for your comprehensive reply which gives me more insight into the origin of the Glasgow livery in Halifax. I never realised that there were so many variations of it. Fascinante.
A further point which comes to mind after reading Alan Townsin`s book is that the camel roof design was simply a device to avoid the Leyland lowbridge patent whilst making the bus look like the popular TD1, even though it was essentially a highbridge bus. Leyland introduced the Highbridge body for the TD1 about 1930, so did the patent then elapse, as the standard lowbridge\highbridge concept seems to have been adopted by most body builders by this time?
Not really anything to do with "Beverley Bar" type ideas!
So the ‘camel roof’ double-decker was an AEC design to avoid making ‘lowbridge’ patent payments. I’ll bet that gave Leyland the hump…… (Well someone had to say it!)
John’s comprehensive historical knowledge of the Halifax transport scene never ceases to amaze me. OBP is privileged indeed to include him as a valued contributor. On the subject of the camel roof concept, this, as John Whitaker states, was devised entirely for cosmetic reasons, the appearance from ground level being similar to that of the low built patented Leyland lowbridge (single offside upper saloon gangway) design. The Leyland lowbridge concept originated in the United States, where, between 1922 and 1926, G. J. Rackham had worked for The Yellow Coach Manufacturing Company, later to become the bus manufacturing arm of General Motors. On being appointed as Chief Engineer to Leyland in the summer of 1926, Rackham brought back with him the idea of using the US lowbridge arrangement in his new double deck design, and negotiated the patent rights accordingly. With its lowered height, the new Titan looked supremely stable against much of the tall, ungainly double deck competition, and this undoubtedly contributed to the initial sales success. On moving to AEC to create the even more modern Regent, Rackham was prevented by patent rights from emulating the Leyland lowbridge concept, though, as I understand it, the lowbridge double gangway upper deck design was still available to use, albeit at a penalty in passenger accommodation. Instead, Rackham fell back on another American idea. In the USA at that time, some double deck bodies were constructed with the lowered headroom over the upper saloon seats, but the central gangway was open to the elements. Rackham adapted this to meet the vagaries of the British climate by humping the roof to give adequate gangway headroom, and the camel roof was born. As public acceptance quickly grew of the stability of the highbridge double decker – ‘normal’ height Leyland Titans and Regents began appearing from 1929 – the camel roof thankfully faded away into history. It would seem, also, that the Leyland lowbridge patent lapsed after about five years.
As John has described, in its brief existence between 1921 and 1931, Chalmer and Hoyer, who became, from 1928, The Hoyal Body Corporation of Weybridge, was preoccupied mainly with car bodywork manufacture on the patented lightweight Weymann principle. This employed a (very) lightweight wooden frame with metal inserts at all the joints to preclude timber to timber contact. The whole thing was held together with straining wires and then covered with a layer of muslin stretched over chicken wire, which in turn received a cosmetic layer of leathercloth as a final finish. Internally, seats and fittings were bolted directly to the chassis. The end result was extraordinarily light and reasonably rigid – even some upmarket cars like Rolls Royces had Weymann patent bodies – but one shudders to think how such a flimsy construction would stand up to accident impact. The designer was Charles Terres Weymann, who, despite the German sounding name, was born in Haiti of an American father and Haitian mother, and thus held dual American/ French nationality. He was a pioneer aviator from 1909 and flew during WW1, and his lightweight construction ideas were clearly based upon early aircraft manufacturing principles. He set up a factory in Paris and another in Indianapolis, and licensed his car bodywork design to a number of British manufacturers – Gurney Nutting, Harrington, Mann Egerton, Mulliner, Plaxton and Rover are names that will be familiar to OBP aficionados. Obviously gratified with the success of this venture, Weymann himself then set up a British manufacturing facility, initially in Putney in 1923 before moving to the old Bleriot aeroplane works in Addlestone in 1925, only a short distance from the Hoyal business in Weybridge. By the end of the 1920s the Weymann car body method was losing popularity in favour of metal panel construction and the fortunes of several of the licencees faded likewise, with several moving into other product areas such as bus and coach bodywork. Hoyal became bus builders, but the depression took its toll on many in the motor industries, and the firm folded in 1931, not helped, one imagines, by the more successful presence of the Weymann business just down the road. Indeed, the Weymann factories in Paris and Indianapolis themselves closed in 1930 and 1931 respectively, but the Addlestone business prospered right through its MCW phase from 1932 until closure, after a lengthy strike, in 1966. The Hoyal bus bodies would seem to have been quite soundly constructed, and the firm was well regarded by the local Brooklands motor racing circuit for its speedy, last minute repairs and modifications to the racing cars. Here is a link to a picture of the last Hoyal bus body to enter the Halifax Corporation fleet. AEC Regent No.115, CP 9078, was placed in service on 24 July 1931, but three more entered the Joint Committee fleet after that date, the last, CP 9439, not entering service until 13 January 1932, well past the final creditors meeting of the Hoyal business which was held on 28 August 1931 to wind up the business voluntarily. One wonders where CP 9439 had spent the last four months of 1931. Perhaps it became embroiled in the scramble for assets by the creditors. nonsequitur. freeforums/
Moving on to the subject of the Halifax fleet numbering ‘system’ under Geoffrey Hilditch, this was something that totally bemused me during my two years as a Traffic Clerk at Skircoat Road. As an example, the OBP entry for Halifax Corporation – AEC Regal – BCP 544 – 258 tells of the strange, idiosyncratic approach. This bus was originally JOC number 269 before briefly passing to the Corporation fleet as number 99. It then went back again as JOC number 269, but was then renumbered 268, a number borne by an identical Regal that was withdrawn in 1964. Finally, this bus became number 258, a number previously carried by Albion Nimbus RJX 258, which was the first of these unloved machines to be sold off (to Warrington) in 1965. 268 was then given to a new dual purpose Leopard, and 258 was later awarded to the rebodied ex Bourne and Balmer Reliance NRK 350. Were fleet numbers subject to a rationing scheme in Halifax? The whole merry dance seemed utterly pointless to my simple southern senses. Other buses moved into and out of the 300 series of numbers under a ‘system’ that would have surely baffled the boffins at Bletchley Park.
To add to John’s detailed descriptions of the various Halifax liveries, perhaps one should add the two experimental efforts. The first was applied to a Regent III in February 1955, which had unpainted aluminium panels below the lower saloon waistline instead of orange paint. Curiously, in his book ‘Halifax Passenger Transport 1887 to 1963’ GGH describes this episode in a caption to a picture of bus number 381/281, BCP 675, yet gives the identity of the vehicle as number 282, BCP 676; perhaps John might be able to clarify the matter. The other experiment involved Daimler CVG6 number 285, DCP 844 which had the areas of orange and green reversed, green at the bottom, orange at the top. This was entirely sensible, for, besides being subject to severe fading, orange is a peculiarly difficult colour to match. Green is far less troublesome. During my own time with HPTD it was quite common to witness buses with the lower repaired panels displaying an unsightly chequerboard appearance in varying hues of orange. Legend tells us that the reversed livery provoked a storm of outraged protest, though I cannot understand why this should have been the case, unless it emanated from an attitude in certain quarters of inbuilt intransigence towards intelligent progress that I myself noted during my (thankfully brief) sojourn at Skircoat Road. That livery would have resembled the old Chatham & District scheme which had green at the bottom and brown above. A Halifax version would have surely adopted black mudguards and bolder lining out to beneficial effect. Ah well, it’s all down to personal taste, I suppose. s622.photobucket/
Thanks for your kind comment, Roger.
There were one or two errors in Hilditch’s book, and the caption to the photo of 381 is an example. I’m sure I have a photo of the Regent/Park Royal to which he refers which was in standard livery save for the lower panels being in an unpainted stucco form. I can’t lay my hands on it for some reason but I’m fairly sure it was 282 (BCP 676). The one depicted in the photo in the book is of 381 (formerly 281, BCP 675), which was repainted in the 1950’s/1960’s Glasgow style ‘half and half’ style with all orange below the upper deck floor level, all green above, with a single cream band separating the two. He had obviously got his wires crossed a liitle there. I don’t remember seeing 282 with the unpainted panels, but I do remember 381 and it looked absolutely dreadful. It is surprising how just rearranging the same colours into different proportions and layouts can actually make the shades themselves look different.
I also remember the CVG6/MCCW 285 (DCP 844) in its ‘reversed’ livery. It wasn’t an exact reversal of the standard orange and green livery. The green lower area extended unrelieved right up to the top of the lower deck windows, there was the a cream band above the windows, orange upper deck panels to just below the upper deck windows, cream just below and around those windows, then a green roof. I was only very young at the time but I do remember everyone who saw it saying how awful it looked. I do have two photographs showing it in this short-lived scheme and the green colour looks a very different shade altogether – much paler – but being taken from an old 1950’s slide one can’t always trust the colour rendition. I must say that I’m glad they didn’t adopt that style, practical though it may have been, but then as a died-in-the-wool Halifax man I am a bit of a traditionalist I suppose. Unfortunately I am prevented from reproducing either photo here, more’s the pity.
Thank you very much, Roger, for adding yet more fascinating information about these buses. I never thought that my old postcard would have generated so much detail and interest.
Your photo of the last Hoyel bus begs the question about its livery. I know black and white photos can be deceptive, but the lower panels seem to be very dark compared to my postcard. Assuming both photos show them with the Glasgow livery, were the shades changed at some stage or was it simply a trick of the light?
Roger Cox’s reference to the storm in Halifax at the possibility of reversed bus livery should not be a surprise. It is sometimes said that the reason Halifax preserves so much of its handsome Victorian (and earlier) town centre is that, unlike its neighbours, its good folk could never agree in the 60’s on a plan for redevelopment.
As with all subjects, reference to the published literature usually supplies an answer. Between us all, on this site, we probably have access to just about every bus book ever published, so most answers can be "dug out"! With regard to the published literature, I have always regarded Alan Townsin as THE "guru" , although there are, of course, other worthy contributors!
Looking at AT`s AEC books again, it seems that the first production run of Regents had some buses with Hall Lewis lowbridge bodies. Did these avoid the Leyland patent by having 2 gangways as the contemporary Salford Lances, and were the Devon General Titans and Oxford Regents like this too?
The open staircase camel roof body seems to have been first supplied to Southern National. Wallasey had a single bus, and there was, of course ST1139. Who else got them as well as Halifax?
The camel roof was also later available as an enclosed staircase body. Nottingham received 2 batches in 1930, one by Hall Lewis, where the "hump" was even more pronounced.
Thanks for that clarification about those experimental liveries, John, and you have every reason to feel proud of being a dyed in the wool Halifax man. As for my comment about ‘resistance to intelligent progress in certain quarters’, you know exactly what I mean. It was certainly not a reflection of the entirely justifiable and commendable generic independence of the Halifax approach to events. As you describe it, the reversed version of the scheme does seem dreadful. My juvenile appreciation (I was seven years old when I last beheld it) of the Chatham & District colours were entirely favourable, and a straightforward swap of the Hilditch era layout of green and orange would have surely been OK. Turning to Paul’s comment about the relative shades of the Hoyal body in the picture, this suggests that the photograph was taken on orthochromatic rather than panchromatic film, which rendered reddish colours rather darkly, and blue green ones a bit light. Finally, in response to Joe, yes, Halifax can commend itself upon the retention of its splendid Victorian heritage, unlike my home town of Croydon with its 1960s onwards architectural excrescences, but Halifax did then disfigure the skyline with Burdock Way, so the locals needn’t get too smug.
ST1139 had a Short Bros. highbridge body, John. However, there were five ST’s with double gangwayed Short bodied which were delivered in May 1930 (ST 136 and 140 were two from memory). Maybe the twin gangways were, indeed, different enough to get around the patent problem. Photos elsewhere on OBP are here: tinyurl/gv3k58g.
Thanks for correcting my senior moment re. ST1139 Chris. The Wallasey photo looks like a camel type but can anyone confirm this as it is difficult to tell from my photo. Short Bros were building both types at the same time!
I have found 5 more Camel types! Nottingham had 5 rear entrance enclosed 1929 Regents with English Electric bodies, of pure EE design.
Perhaps we should collectively compile a full list of the camels!
Does anyone have any info about Howards Coaches operating in Surrey somewhere near Cobham Ridges, maybe 1930-1950? I have a photo at a Railway Station with a level crossing with a single deck Bedford coach with that name on the destination indicator.
BLOTW shows a new Bedford OB chassis 147359 with Duple C29F 48139 registered to Howards, West Byfleet 1/1951.
My Little Red Book for 1958/9 shows Howard’s Garage, 12 Station Approach, West Byfleet, Surrey as an operator. They had 3 Bedford/Duple vehicles and both Stage and Excursions and Tours licences. The livery was described as tan and buff.
They are not in my 1968 Passenger Transport Yearbook, but as neither book was a complete list of operators it doesn’t necessarily mean a lot, but it points to them ceasing trading some time between those dates.
Looking on the net there’s an interesting picture with more details at flic. kr/p/881RU3 This vehicle still exists, see flic. kr/p/8aRvGW.
A picture of a 1931 Bedford WLB operated by Howard may be found here:- flickr/photos/megaanorak/
I imagine that the ‘HOSPITAL destination, that the bus was going to, was the Rowley Bristow Hospital in nearby Pyrford, now long gone!
5261 Engine Swap at Sutton Coldfield.
I was an 18 year old fitter at Midland Red Sutton Coldfield garage when it was decided to swap the Gardner engine in D11 5261 for a 10.5 D9 unit. Although it took a bit of juggling it worked, it seemed somewhat harsher than the Gardner but if I remember all those years a go it seemed popular with the drivers. I transferred to Swadlincote depot shortly after wards to get married so I never found out what happened to it. If anyone has any information I’d be very interested to here what happened to it.
It says a Gardner engine was refitted in 1968 and the bus was transferred to West Midlands PTE in 1973.
Old Coventry Corporation Buses.
As a child in the early 1960’s I remember travelling on the old Coventry Corporation buses, open at the back and half a cab at the front with a backward facing full width seat on the lower deck at the front. Who made these buses?
Hello Mr Edmunds,
You might like to look at this website which shows a good selection of Coventry buses operating in the 1960s.
Hope this helps to rekindle good childhood memories. sct61.uk/
Tracing origin of Registration SOX 1.
I am trying to trace the origin of Registration SOX 1. I am lead to believe that it was first used on a bus/coach in Birmingham, allocated in around 1955.
Any information would be greatly appreciated. I have owned this number since about 1975.
I’ve checked buslistsontheweb. co. uk and they do not list that registration, by no means conclusive but nevertheless it probably means it was an uncommon type of coach with a small operator or even a works or welfare bus.
Long shot—but could it have belonged to a hosiery manufacturer in, say, Leicester?
The SOX (series) was issued Birmingham CBC January 1956. A few cases are known of individual numbers (low numbers) being issued prior to the main series ie; ‘HOV’ for BCT buses – some two months before. For some strange reason my old addled brain seems to recall seeing SOX on a Commer Avenger SB (Worthington/Allenways perhaps) so don’t give up on the PSV connection.
Nigel, according to Bus Lists On The Web, in 1956 Jackson’s of Castle Bromwich took delivery of SOX 700, a Bedford SBG/Duple C41F coach, and Worthington’s of Birmingham received SOX 858/859, which were Commer Avenger III/Duple C37F coaches, so your memory has stood you in good stead! The Commer Avenger IIIs (with Plaxton C41F bodies) delivered to Allenways are listed as being SOV 880-883. Although this information does not really progress Roland’s query as to the history of registration SOX 1, I had wondered if it could originally have been on a Mayoral car. However, the only ones that come close in Noel Woodall’s trusty book ‘Car Numbers’ are SOB 1, issued to the Lord Bishop of Birmingham, and SOL 1 which graced Solihull’s Mayoral car. Is it possible that SOX 1 may have been issued to a motorcycle when new, as at one time quite a few licencing authorities reserved two-digit registrations for 2-wheeled machines?
I thought that the reason for reserving two-digit numbers for two-wheeled vehicles started after the introduction of year suffix registrations.
There was no room on motor-cycles or scooters for 7-digit registrations, so purely a space-saving decision to limit plates to 6 digits.
My Lambretta was registered SKA 59G, the rear plate being square with SKA over 59G.
With respect, I don’t think that is quite right, Dave. In the 1960s I had a 1935 Scott Flying Squirrel with the registration WK 9322 (high mileage memory now a bit hazy – it may have been WV) and I also had a Pannonia 250 motorbike registered BLN 877B.
In the 60’s I bought a car from one of those nice little dealers: I wanted a fairly distinctive registration (free!) so he rang the Council and said “Can I have a motorcycle number - love” (this was Sheffield)- they sold them as well. I got one - two numbers and a suffix.
WV was Wiltshire, Roger. and your bike might well have been WV. I had a 1937 Ariel Red Hunter motorbike, by which time the registration had become 3+3, in my case AWV 260.
WK 9322 was issued early 1929, WV 9322 late 1935. So Roger’s motorbike was probably WV.
Many thanks to Chris and David for clarifying the number of my old Scott motor bike. WV is clearly correct. I just wish that I still had that machine now – a 1935 Flying Squirrel with a 1930 short stroke 600 cc engine. I wonder if it still exists. The square rear number plate employed quite small letters and figures to get 9322 on it. Motor cycles used to have a curved vertical registration plate along the top of the front mudguard, but this nowadays seems to have been abandoned, presumably on safety grounds.
There seemed to be an interim period, Roger. My last motorbike, a 1957 BSA B34, had a front mudguard with flat side edges, deep enough to display the registration mark either side. In 1962, I bought my first car, a Renault Dauphine – 356 DLA!
Yes the vertical mounted front registration plate ceased being fitted on safety grounds. Apparently they were very good at scything into the flesh if you went over the handle bars or that of pedestrians unlucky enough to get in the way.
Trent X8 Nottingham to Gt Yarmouth Service.
After reading the fascinating and enlightening article by Neville Mercer on Huntingdon Street Bus Station and additionally now having been proffered photographic evidence of LUT vehicles departing from Nottingham to Great Yarmouth, Please can anyone offer any further information or perhaps a timetable of this Trent Gt Yarmouth service.
Desde já, obrigado.
Are we sure this was X8 as my ABC for 1953 says X7? It shows a summer Saturday service of up to 6 services per day with 1 on Monday-Thursday + 2 on Friday and Sunday with one journey on a Saturday extended to/from Derby. Schedule on the core section was 6 hours 25 minutes outbound and 6 hours 40 minutes inbound.
Responding to the Q&A from Mike Norris today, I’m attaching two scans of the Summer 1971 timetable for the service.
The timetable was subject to seasonal adjustments but this particular version gives a fair idea of the underlying service pattern.
My thanks to Roger for the correction (Not X8, but X7) and to Mike for taking the trouble to download the service information.
Having read Nevilles latest posting about the City Coach Company Leyland TEP1 Gnu which was only one of three before being followed by the TEC2 chassis. This got me to thinking what exactly did the TEP and TEC stand for, in fact what did most of the Leyland codes stand for.
Is anyone interested in solving these codes? If we manage it I will compile a table and add them to the ‘Abreviations’ página.
I will start it off with the two easiest:-
So if anyone wants to have a go at some of the others ie Tiger Cub PSUC code, Lion LT or PLSC code or maybe the Cheetah LZ code.
I have a bell ringing that the S in code TS1 originally stood for Side (driver alongSide engine, i. e. forward control), differentiating the higher capacity TS1 Tiger from the bonneted TB1 Tigress…
When a double-deck version came along, the TD1 was created.
That said, I think that the follow-on PS1 derivative did indeed indicate Passenger ‘Single-decker’.
This one will run for some time, I think!
I’m afraid that the "P" in PD and PS stands for "Post-war" rather than anything to do with an engine. The PD1 and PS1 had the E181 engine while the PD2, PD3, and PS2 had the more up-to-date O.600.
PSU1/2/3/4 as in Royal Tigers, early Worldmasters, 36ft Leopards and 32ft Leopards respectively stood for Post-war Single-deck, Underfloor engined and PSUC the same plus the word Cub to differentiate between a Royal Tiger and a Tiger Cub. In the PSUR designation of Panthers the "R" indicated rear-engined, with PSURC continuing the logic by being a Panther Cub.
However, many other post-war designs followed a completely different logic. The HR40/44 were the "Home Range" versions of the single-deck Olympic (the number indicating maximum seating capacity) while the light-weight version of the Olympic, the Olympian, used LW1 and LW2 for the bus and semi-coach versions. When the Worldmaster became available on the home market (for those who found the Tiger Cub too gutless!) somebody decided to allocate "RT" designations – presumably to indicate Royal Tiger as there was also a small number of models called Royal Tiger Cubs with RTC codes.
I could go on, but I’m supposed to be typing the text of my next book so I’ll let somebody else have a go!
Thanks for that Neville I have amended my copy above and made a note of the rest for the ‘Abreviations’ página.
There has been quite a bit of correspondence in the Leyland Torque magazine about the designation of the 1950’s integral, Tiger Cub-based Olympian single decker. Readers researching official Leyland and MCW company documents seem to have concluded that the LW designation was purely an MCW Group one, and that Leyland themselves do not seem to have allocated a code.
I would agree that when the Tiger TS was introduced the ‘S’ does seem to have indicated ‘Side Type’ i. e. forward control, this having been applied to other earlier models throughout the 1920’s. However, with the equivalent Titan TD clearly indicating ‘T-series, Double Deck’, it gradually became believed that ‘S’ indicated ‘Single Deck’.
As for the Gnu TEC2. This was based on a Steer twin-steer, six-wheel goods chassis, modified to have the engine and cab on a front overhang. The Steer was coded TEC (there were TEC1, 2, 3 & 4). In the same T-range of goods chassis there was the Hippo conventional 3-axle chassis, coded TSW (T-series, Six Wheeled), and the Octopus 4-axle chassis coded TEW (T-series, Eight Wheeled). However, faced with coming up with a code for the Steer they seem to have regarded the model as basically an Octopus with a rear axle removed, so modified TEW to TEC – so maybe, and rather irrationally, it stood for T-series, Eight, Chinese !
As often happens (look at London Transport type codes) someones starts off with a logical system, then as time passes and new models and complexities arise, the system all goes a bit astray and illogical.
An obvious continuation of Neville’s theme is PDR1 and 2 for Atlantean and its prototype predecessors – post-war double-deck rear-engined. One small correction: the Panther Cub was PSRC. Presumably PSURC was too long for somebody or something.
The P in PLSC (the Lion) stood for "pneumatic" at a time when tyres were changing from solid rubber to air inflated.
I have received of a scan from a book that states that the P in PD, PS, PSU etc stood for Passenger.
Originally Leyland’s early models were allocated a single letter code, going alphabetically from A and I think reaching O.
In the 1920’s they started a new system whereby a seemingly random single letter code was used to indicate the weight range of the model. 30cwt=Z; 2-ton=A; 3-ton=C; 4-ton=G; 5-ton=P; 6-ton=Q. This was followed by a number to indicate variations e. g. C7, G2.
When forward control variants were introduced Leyland referred to these as Side Types and inserted an ‘S’ in front of the code e. g. SG9. Some models were of higher build, so had an ‘H’ inserted e. g. GH2, SGH6.
Until then the same basic chassis had been used for both goods and passenger use, but to compete with other makers a new range of chassis was introduced specifically designed for passenger use. These had lower chassis profiles and were allocated the prefix ‘L’. They also introduced names for all new models at the same time. These were the small Leveret LA1, LA2 & LA3 (L-series, A=2 ton, with three variations); Lioness LC1 (L-series, C=3 tons, first version); Lion LSC1 (L-series, Side Type, C=3 tons, 1st variant); Leopard LSG2 (L-series, Side Type, G=4 tons, 2nd variant), which was very rare; Leviathan LSP1 double decker (L-series, Side Type, P=5 tons, 1st variant). As Roger mentions, when pneumatic tyres were fitted these models acquired a ‘P’ in front, giving PLA, PLC, PLSC, PLSP etc.
When these models were replaced by the Rackham-designed T-series, the six cylinder single decker was the Tiger TS (T-series, Side Type) which ran from versions TS1 to TS8, then TS11. A few TS7’s and TS8’s had a second rear axle added to allow them to be 30 feet long, and if this was non-driven (i. e. trailing) a ‘T’ was added to the end, or if double drive a final ‘D’ was added – por exemplo. TS7D, TS8T. The double decker was the Titan TD (Titan Double) which ran from TD1 to TD7. A six-wheel double decker specifically designed as such was the Titanic TT (T-series, Three axle?) running from TT1 to TT6. Goods models are outside the scope of this site, but the Badger TA4 (T-series, A=2 tons, 4th version) was occasionally bodied as a bus, and West Mon UDC certainly used the Bull TQ1 (T-series, Q=6 tons, 1st version) and Beaver TSC8 (T-series, Side Type, C=3 tons, 8th version) as buses for the Bargoed Hill service. (The C=3 tons had though by that time become inappropriate for the Beaver, as it was by then about a 6/7 tonner !).
A lower powered 4-cylinder single decker was the Lion LT (presumably Light, T-series – though they were not exactly light) which ran from LT1 to LT9, with LT5A and LT5B variants, though the LT9 was effectively a TS8 chassis with the Lion engine. A bonnetted version was the Lioness LTB1 (Light?, T-series, Bonnetted). A bonnetted LTB3 with Tiger units was confusingly named Tigress.
From 1932 a small, bonnetted lighter chassis was introduced to compete with Bedford etc. Built at the former Trojan works at Kingston, Surrey it was the Cub KP (Kingston, Passenger – the goods model was KG) going from KP1 to KP4. The introduction of an oil (i. e. diesel) engine caused an ‘O’ to be added, giving KPO2, KPO3 etc. Forward control models had an ‘S’ (=Side Type) prefix, giving SKP2, SKPO3 etc. Then a new Light Six engine (which could be petrol or diesel) came along, an ‘A’ indicating petrol, or ‘Z’ indicating diesel e. g. KPZ4, SKPZ5. The largest SKPZ5 version was named Lion Cub.
The Lion – especially when bodied as a coach – tended to be rather underpowered, so eventually a new full sized lighter weight single decker model was introduced using a new chassis, with some Lion parts and the Light Six engine from the Cub. This was the Cheetah LZ (Lightweight?, Z-type engine), which ran from LZ1 to LZ5 as a diesel, or with an ‘A’ suffix if petrol e. g. LZ2A. (An equivalent goods chassis was the Lynx DZ).
The Gnu has already been discussed, and the solitary experimental Panda without the set back axle, and with an underfloor engine does not appear to have been allocated a code.
A special for London Transport’s Green Line fleet, having half cab, but underfloor engine and preselector gearbox and coded TF by LT, was coded FEC by Leyland, though what this stood for is anyone’s guess ! Also for LT, a half cabbed, but rear engined Cub, coded CR by them, was coded REC (Rear Engined Cub) by Leyland.
Trolleybus chassis of the 1930’s were the 2-axle TB (Trolley Bus), 3-axle TTB (Three-axle, Trolley Bus), and a single experimental low floored, front entrance 3-axle example was the TTL (Three-axle, Trolleybus, Low).
According to the scan from the book FEC – Flat Engine Coach.
Peter, the ‘P’ in PD and PS definitely stood for ‘Post War’, not ‘Passenger’. It is believed that Leyland considered that the TD /TS series numbering had become somewhat cumbersome (the next numbers would have been TD8 and TS12), and the PD1/PS1 models were decidedly different from their predecessors. The pre-war Cub was lettered KP or KPO (oil) or SKPZ (side driving position, not sure about the Z) and the K in these stood for ‘Kingston’, though the factory was actually the former Sopwith Aircraft premises at nearby Ham.
Yet again from the scan Z = a new ‘Light Six’ motor.
The sizeable Leyland Kingston factory was situated near Richmond Road, Ham, and was built by the Ministry of Munitions in 1917. It was taken over by The Sopwith Aviation Company in April 1918 for the production of aircraft for the war effort. When the war ended just seven months later, aircraft orders collapsed, and Sopwith, like many other businesses of the time, was hit by the Excess Profits Tax of 80%. Despite diversifying into motorcycles and civil aircraft, Sopwith went into liquidation in 1920, and the Ham premises were sold to Leyland for £227,000. In 1922 Leyland contracted with Leslie Hayward Hounsfield to produce the Trojan lightweight car, and, up to 1928 when the agreement ended, some 11,000 cars and 6,700 vans emerged from the Ham factory. In 1948, the reincarnated Sopwith company, Hawker Aircraft, bought back the Ham factory from Leyland for the sum of £585,000.
And after leaving the Ham factory, Trojan established themselves in a new factory on the Purley Way, Croydon, building cars, vans and, from 1962 Heinkel bubblecars under the Trojan name. Production ceased later in the 1960s and the Croydon factory was sold in 1970.
All of which is way off topic from Leyland codes, but that’s the joy of this far reaching site!
The website ‘Ian’s Bus Stop’ conjectures that the FEC code, used for LPTB’s TF, stood for "Floor Engine Compartment".
I had understood the FEC to be a Leyland designed chassis for London Transport to be ‘comparable’ to the AEC Q, and hence a forward entrance. I believe all of them had coach bodies, hence a Forward Entrance Coach.
The REC was also developed for London Transport, and is usually referred to as a Rear Engined Cub.
The two ‘LT specials’ had similar looking codes for chassis developed at around the same time – the FEC is clearly not a Cub – so maybe the C did not stand for that (especially as the ‘conventional’ Cub did not have a C in its code) – and was certainly not the same meaning as C in TEC (from a similar time period).
As FEC and REC do not fit the ‘standard’ pattern that John has detailed above, I just wonder if they might refer to Front Engined and Rear Engined ‘specials’ for LT – and as not all were coaches, might the C refer to chassis – or even Chiswick ?
No ‘evidence’ for the suggestion, just looking at what is, otherwise, a fairly logical system.
Two other Leyland trolleybus codes were TB4 (Hull nos 1-26) and TB7 (Hull nos 47-66). the original tender document for nos 1-26 from Leyland quoted TD4 but this was subsequently changed to TB4.
Does anyone know what the fleet numbers were that was allocated to the prewar bus bodies that were given new chassis in 1945 or 1946? for Newcastle Corporation Transport.?
Newcastle fitted pre-war bodies to five Daimler new CWA6 chassis in 1945-7, giving them panel numbers 1-5, registered JVK 421-5. Oddly the batch came into service out of order over that three-year period.
Nov/Oct/Dec 1945: 1 and 2, with MCCW bodies from 153 and 155 (1932 AEC Regent I, reg. VK 7691/3) and 5, with Park Royal body from 142 (1931 Dr CH6, reg. VK 4086).
Mar 1946: 4, Park Royal body from 144 (1931 Daimler CH6, reg. VK 4088)
Mar 1947: 3, Park Royal body from 137 (1931 Daimler CH6, reg. VK 4081)
All five were then taken out of service by Oct 1949, the old bodies scrapped and new ones fitted by Mann Egerton during Oct-Dec 1950.
Some body shuffling also took place in 1945-7 either to keep some of the pre-war donor chassis in service for a little while longer or to sell them off as complete vehicles. Did you need that detail as well?
The information comes from PSV Circle Fleet History PA16 or official records where the latter differ.
Some spin-off questions, hopefully to be answered by somebody out there!
1. Why the protracted period for fitting the second-hand bodies?
2. Why were Mann Egerton chosen to supply the new bodies in 1950?
3. Why did other new vehicles delivered to Newcastle in 1945 take numbers from 13 onwards (13-8, JVK 613-8, more Dr CWA6s but with Massey bodies; 19-26 followed on in 1946), leaving a numbering gap of 6-12, only filled partially in 1949 by low-bridge Ld PD2s nos. 6-11, LVK 6-11?
4. Has anybody got a photo of no. 1 with its second-hand body?
Here are pics of no 3 with its original and new bodies. The latter comes from Ian Findlay’s collection.
Bus Lists on the Web has some vehicles bought new by Lees, Worksop between 1947 – 1958; one bought new by Lees Motorways, Worksop in 1959; others bought new by Lees, Nottingham between 1961 – 1965. Can anyone please tell me if these three are incarnations of the same operator? Was Lees, at some stage, swallowed up by East Midland MS?
I am now informed that Lees passed not to EMMS but to Barton. As is often the case with our shared interest this partial answer leads to more questions. Ian Allan British Bus Fleets 5-East Midlands book of 1965 tells that Barton absorbed 43 smaller operators over the years. My new questions are;-
a) does anyone have a list of those take-overs and.
b) what vehicles passed from Lees to Barton?
I am confident that the OBP ‘Eggheads’ will be able to supply answers.
Barton history Part 2 (1960-85) by PSVC gives:
F. L. Lees of Worksop, first vehicle c 1943.
To Lees Motorways (Worksop) Ltd by 1956 but probably much earlier. To Lees Motorways Ltd by 1960, moved to Beeston c1964.
Some 95 vehicles are recorded over 30 years of operation.
Barton acquired the business in February 1974 and following on from grant-style coaches 1205-1445 were five AEC Reliances taken over from the Lees fleet:
1446 (MYJ 764) new to Dickson (Dundee) via WA.
1447 (589 EYU) new to Global (London)
1448 (KWB 520D) new to Littlewood (Sheffield)
1449 (MRO 138D) new to Frame’s (London)
1450 (KDU 239D) new to Supreme (Coventry)
The first two were withdrawn in 1974, the rest in 1975.
All were Plaxton bodied except 1447 which was Duple Northern.
Many thanks to Dave Farrier for that response. I have so far been unable to obtain a copy of the PSVC work referred to. What a shame that these works of reference are allowed to fade away when sold out.
Does the book itemise all the take-overs?
I am attempting to find details and pictures of the fleet of coaches operated from the 50s to the early 80s Wiltshire’s Coaches, trading as ‘Princess Mary Coaches’ from Soundwell, Bristol. Despite my best efforts, I can find little detail on this fleet from my childhood. There are a couple of pictures out there of their well known and preserved VAM and their Duple Bella Vista VAS which survived well. However, the rest of the fleet over its history is a blank. No apparent fleet list and certainly little photographic reference.
‘Bus Lists On The Web’ lists a total of twenty vehicles delivered new to Wiltshire of Staple Hill, S G Wiltshire of Staple Hill, D W Wiltshire of Staple Hill, or Princess Mary of Bristol. The eight listed as new to Princess Mary are concentrated in the period 1954-65, so that may indicate a temporary change to limited company status. Soundwell is not mentioned, but I appreciate that it may be a more precise description to Staple Hill of the operator’s location.
Of the eight given as new to Princess Mary, the first six were registered in Bristol (all others up to LVLO days were registered in Gloucestershire, but Soundwell does appear to be just outside the Bristol City boundary).
As always, dates of entry into service should be treated with caution – one particular vehicle, given as new in 3/50, carried a registration which was ostensibly not issued until at least 7/52.
P. S. Are you the Dave Wallington who is active in bus modelling?
For such a well-respected operator, Princess Mary coaches do seem to have been a little camera-shy. HAD 915D and EDD 685C are well-represented on the web of course (in preservation and in service with subsequent operators) – the latter is an SB rather than a VAS. A few other ex-Princess Mary coaches can also be found in use with later owners, but here’s a shot of Regal III LAD 511 early in its Princess Mary days. na3t/road/photo/
AD and *AD were Gloucester registration marks.
A great big thank you David Call. It is a great step forward for me. Like you, I find it surprising for such a well respected operator in (well almost in!) a major city to have such camera shy vehicles.
Yes, I am ‘that’ David Wallington and have decided that I will endeavour to model as much as possible of this fleet.
Obrigado novamente.
Northern General Guy Arab 1133.
I am a complete outsider, but entered the site and found it wonderful.
My comments and queries probably should find their way to Ronnie Hoye.
I was born and lived in Beamish. During the 1950s our local (NGT) services were the 4,5 and 15 which ran past our door every 15 minutes (can you believe it?) using fleet 1791-1824, AEC Reliance/Burlinghams, while nearby was the No 7 Grange Villa to Newcastle, Worswick St using 1953 Tiger Cubs.
But my question is this. During the early 60s my friend and I used to intentionally ‘miss’ our scholars bus so that on Fridays we could catch a duplicate service on which a Guy Arab NGT 1133 would be used.
We were thrilled riding on this bus: the narrow stair, the seating, the poles, the way the clippie rapped on the glass with a coin, but above all the sound from the engine. What was this?
Now half a century later I want to know. What made my pal and I yearn to board this ancient Guy Arab. What made that sweet, almost ‘sewing-machine’ like sound as the bus gathered speed. Will I, can I ever hear that sound again?
(Bus was registration GUP *** or something)
Hope someone can help.
Sorry David, my area was north of the Tyne, Tynemouth & Wakefileds and Tyneside. Percy Main only had a hand full ‘all AEC’ and Tyneside didn’t have any, so single deckers were few and far between, so this will have to be a best guess on my part. However, your description seem to fit the B38F Brush bodied GUY Arab III powered by a Gardner 5LW. Northern had quite a number, I cant be specific, but as far as I’m aware, the GUP batch were from 1947, and the fleet numbers were at the cross over from 1000 to 1100. I know there were some with LPT registrations, and they were all in the 1400’s. During the summer months the odd one would be on loan to Percy Main, but apart from Newcastle Worswick Street, and Marlborough Crescent, they seldom ventured north of the Tyne.
Sorry, Dave, assuming all other details are correct you must have remembered the fleet number wrongly. Northern’s GUP-registered Guy Arab saloons were 1068-1116 (GUP 68-116). 1117-52 were AEC Regals (not GUP-registered).
Thanks gents for the comments. I have since purchased ‘Northern General’ Glory Days and find that GUP 76, fleet 1076 shown on page 58 comes closest to what I remember, though the livery was all red by the early 60s. But can anyone of you mechanically minded chaps tell me why that 5L power unit sounded so distinct, and whining or was it just the steep hills of County Durham? The electrics perhaps?
David: whereas inline 6-cylinder engines can be made vibration-free using crankshaft counterweights, the only way to eliminate vibration from an inline 5 is to use balance shafts, as in the modern Scania engine. The Gardner 5LW has no such shafts and therefore, superbly designed and built though it was, it does vibrate.
This vibration, together with the fact that a 5-pot gives only five power strokes per two revolutions of the crankshaft rather than six, gives rise to that grunting, lumpy, no-nonsense sound so characteristic of the 5LW.
With the gearbox remotely mounted halfway down the chassis, the clutch is not enclosed by a bell housing and so is exposed to the air, which causes the whistling sound.
Guy Arab III gearboxes are more subdued than those of the later Arab IV models, so if 1133’s whined really loudly I wonder whether it could have had its g/b replaced by one from an Arab IV?
On the Old Bus Sounds page of this excellent site (drop down from More Pages on the green bar above) are some very musical Arab IV clips. (The Birmingham example is different, having an epicyclic gearbox.)
A longish YouTube clip of a preserved Exeter Arab IV show off the traditional gearbox to best advantage.
David, Gardner engines have a longer stroke than an AEC or Leyland, and are slow revving, usually flat out at around 17 to 1800 RPM, my car ticks over at 1,000, added to which they were usually a slow change giving them a very distinctive sound. Leylands can best be described as plodders, whereas an AEC has a whine when wound up, so although the basic principle is the same, they are all different.
I think that the most distinctive postwar engines were to be found in the Leyland PD/PS’s, which used to ‘hunt’ at tickover, running through all the cylinders quickly, then pausing. This is so obvious with the West Riding PS2/12A in Old Bus Sounds. I imagine that the flywheel kept the engine revs constant which did not affect manoeuvring at tickover/near tickover revs. I can’t recall any other contemporary engines doing this.
And here’s one of the later batch mentioned by Ronnie Hoye. I went up to Harper of Heath Hayes in about 1967 with pal Stuart Wyss, who took the photos, to try out this ex NG-Guy Arab III, with a view (ostensibly) to getting it as an extra vehicle for student use at a college in Reading, but to be honest my real motive was to see and hear this unusual machine close up. Harpers were very trusting and said "Take her for a run" without even coming along to make sure we brought the bus back. I knew beforehand that with only a 4-speed gearbox and 5LW engine sparkling performance was not to be expected, but what came as a shock was the very cramped cab, which is how they squeezed in 38 seats! It was all a bit battered and tired, so I didn’t pursue it. Pity!
As many of you will known Nottingham City Transport had four of their 1963 batch of Daimler Fleetlines re-bodied by NCME to the Nottingham Standard design in 1975/6. The four buses in question were 75/7, 82/3 (75/7, 82/3 RTO). I believe that 82 may have been involved in a bridge collision within a couple of weeks of entering service following re-bodying. Can anybody shed any light on this?
Andy – according to the Circle fleet history on NCT, the accident happened in October 1980, 82 had been rebodied in December 1975.It was repaired by using the roof and upper deck windows of 127 (MTO 127F). From memory, the low bridge involved was on Meadow Lane (probably the one which meant route 8 was always single deck operated!).
Bob, thanks for the information. The Meadow Lane bridge claimed a few casualties in its time. Wasn’t AEC Renown 390 withdrawn following a collision with this bridge. If so it was somewhat ironic that a bus based on a low height chassis was de-roofed because it was fitted with a full height body.
In 1913 Sheffield bought their fist buses. They were Daimlers, but really were badge engineered AECs.
They bought some Daimlers in the late 40s. These had NCB bodywork. As they also had Regent IIIs at the same period, were they real or badge engineered?
Daimler did produce Gardner engined diesel buses before the second world war, but during the war started to produce a “wartime” bus - the CW, with AEC or 5 or 6 cylinder Gardner engines - CWA or CWG: I don’t think these had any connection with AEC apart from the engine.
Daimler produced its own diesel engine towards the end of the war and a few found their way into CW’s, the great example being the Northampton preserved CWD which even has a sound clip here with that beautiful, refined sound. These found their way to many municipalities not used to Daimlers - I’m not sure if Sheffield had any previously: much later it had many Fleetlines, but never, like its municipal neighbours, CVG’s? After the war, Daimler produced the CV (not vehicle - victory!) of which many were built: Daimler or Gardner engines, 5 or 6, were also available, but not, I think, AEC. When the lovely, smelly, hot Daimler diesel ceased, the CV designation continued until the end of half-cabs, with Gardner engines.
I think the AEC connection came from cross-hiring engineers or, like Bristol, sourcing wartime engines?
Who knows better?
There was no connection between AEC and Daimler after 1926 and until the BLMC link up. AEC used Daimler Pre-select transmission until they licensed it to make their own. The NCB Daimlers were CVD, the only post-war Daimlers until 951-953 in 1962 (followed by hoards in 1964 and 1965). The recent NCB book makes an interesting point which supports theories on distress purchase. AEC, in the post-war rush for new vehicles, were unable to supply the required number to STD/SJOC. The bodies were already available/built. ACV could supply ten Crossleys and Daimler ten CVD6. This with twenty Regent IIIs constituted the forty NCB bodies.
The later story of AEC/Daimler links is covered by the contributors above. Going back to the beginning, the first motor buses in the Sheffield fleet were of the Daimler CC type. The confusion with AEC, though incorrect, is understandable. Frank Searle, the Chief Engineer of the LGOC, was responsible for the remarkable ‘B’ type which evolved from the pioneer ‘X’ tipo. In 1910, Daimler, then mainly a car producing company, was taken over by BSA who sought to establish a firmer foothold in the commercial vehicle manufacturing business. A plan, funded by the BSA group, to set up a competitor to the LGOC in London using Daimler KPL petrol electric buses was drafted, and Searle was invited to become the chairman of the proposed Premier Motorbus Company. When the LGOC board got to hear of this it demanded to know Searle’s intentions. Searle refused to commit himself and the LGOC association was immediately terminated in May 1911. In the meantime, Percy Frost-Smith, the Engineer of Thomas Tilling and a collaborator in the design of the Stevens petrol electric vehicle, declared that the KPL petrol electric violated his patents, whereupon BSA offered to buy the rights to the Stevens system. As is well known, Tilling took over the Maidstone company and the KPL manufacturing project and the planned Premier Motorbus Company were abandoned. Searle and BSA then brought out a new double deck motor bus called the CC, which, given the history of its designer, bore very close resemblances to the LGOC B type. It was not a badge engineered AEC. The CC was powered by the Daimler four cylinder sleeve valve engine of 5.7 litres developing up to 40 hp, though under the RAC rating it was known as the ’30 hp’. The CC, said to have been the most refined bus of its time, achieved respectable sales until it was withdrawn from production in 1914. Despite the inauspicious start to the relationship, connections with AEC grew and Daimler became the agent for the sale of surplus B type buses outside the Metropolitan area. Also, AEC built vehicles at Walthamstow using Daimler engines and the Daimler name on the radiator. This agreement finally ceased at the end of 1917. However, in June 1926, the two companies again collaborated in setting up a joint venture called the Associated Daimler Company. The original idea was that chassis built by AEC in its new Southall factory would be fitted with Daimler sleeve valve engines. Sadly, the new Laurence Pomeroy designed 3.57 litre sleeve valve engine proved to be inadequate and unreliable, and AEC continued to offer its own, though rather outdated, 5.1 litre as an option. New ADC models appeared over the next couple of years, but the association between Daimler and AEC had always been a bit rocky, and, in June 1928, the two companies went their separate ways again. Thereafter all AEC and Daimler models were developed entirely independently, though the first preselector gearboxes and fluid flywheels fitted to London’s buses were of Daimler manufacture, and subsequent production by AEC of these units was achieved under licence from Daimler. Between 1935 and 1939, 92 of Coventry’s new Daimler buses were fitted with the AEC 7.7 litre engine (originally of indirect injection, but later of the direct injection type) thus making them COA6 models. Again, when wartime Daimler bus production resumed after the devastating Coventry air raids, once the initial Gardner powered batch of 100 had been completed, the AEC 7.7 became the standard engine in the CW chassis to relieve the pressure on Gardner supplies. Some of the above information has been drawn from the writings of Alan Townsin.
Thanks for that info. My Dad drove both types but I seem to remember the Daimler seemed to have a more refined, quieter engine.
I’m trying to find 1973 bus fare information for Hull, Anybody any idea where to start?
I have a September 1973 timetable booklet which includes fares. Do you have a specific service in mind?
It also has a page describing the exact fare system.
The Fleet Numbering of Enterprise & Silver Dawn.
The fleet numbering of Enterprise & Silver Dawn of Scunthorpe seemed to be totally random and extremely erratic with buses from a batch and often with consecutive registration, body or chassis numbers receiving fleet numbers from anywhere in the spectrum. Does anyone know why they chose to employ this erratic method? I’m also interested to know more about the take-over (and reselling) of this company by East Midland. Is there any written work available about the Scunthorpe operator?
Les, I can’t comment on why this operator chose this method, but others had the same idea. Wigan and Fishwicks, for two. So far as Wigan was concerned, I have read that there was only a set range of numbers available and, if a bus was taken out of service prematurely – whether through accident or faulty vehicle doesn’t matter – its replacement took that number. Over the years, the spectrum broadened. Some operators, notably Lancaster, used the last three digits of the registration number as the fleet number, so that while the Titans bought from Maidstone came in a logical sequence, they entered service with Lancaster with fleet numbers in the 400 and 900 ranges.
I have a AEC Regal motorhome in Australia. The dip stick for the sump does not have any level marks on it. What I am trying to find out is the capacity of oil in the sump. If I know this I can make a new dip stick. Hoping someone out there has this info.
You might find the answer to your question more readily on the AEC Society’s web forum: middx/aec/ then click the link at the top to view the forum. I’ve found them a helpful lot.
Does anyone have a Albion ‘Valiant’ badged vehicle, or a drawing/photo of the badge so that a replica might be made for a restored vehicle. If you can help please contact me through the Old Bus Photos website.
According to the history produced in 1999 by the Albion Vehicle Preservation Trust the CX39N Valiant did not have a model name badge.
D J Jones, Crymych, AEC Regals.
D J Jones of Crymmych (accepted spelling at that time) had a fleet of half-cab Regals based at Milford Haven when Esso were building their refinery there from 1957 – 1960. Does anyone have any information about these Regals? D. J.Js. main fleet was Fords and Bedfords but the Regals seem to have gone un-noticed and unreported.
I’m still drawing a blank on this but would like to put a different slant on the question. As there were ten, all-green, AEC half-cab single-deckers it is possible that these were ex London Country and withdrawn and sold as a batch. My new thinking is that perhaps they were sold, not to Jones, but to one of the refinery contractors and then operated, on their behalf, by D J Jones. Are there any LT experts out there who know of any such batch of ten going to a contractor around 1958-59 for use in West Wales please?
Since my previous posting on the subject of 10 green AEC half-cab Regals being operated by D J Jones (Crymych) in connection with the construction of oil-refineries at Milford Haven I have learned that no less than 199 10T10s were sold to W. North of Leeds between 1953 and April 1957. It is possible that ten of these were the ones for which I search. It is not clear whether Mr Jones owned them, leased them or perhaps merely operated them on behalf of one of the contractors involved. Does anyone know the details of the disposal of these vehicles by W North please.
Nottingham City Transport – Autofare.
Does anybody have records of the dates that NCT introduced the Autofare system on to their services. Initial OMO conversions used manual Ultimate machines, and I believe that Autofare was first used on the 36, 37 & 41 group of services in November 1972. Thanks in anticipation.
The first use of Autofare by Nottingham City Transport was on service 58 for a trial period starting on 4 July 1972. On conclusion of the trial service 58 reverted to ‘Ultimate’ Operação.
The first permanent conversion to Autofare was on 8 October 1972 on services 36/37/41.
Subsequent conversions to Autofare were:
1 April 1973 – Services 4/4A, 5/5A,19, 63.
22 April 1973 – Services 3,58,59.
20 May 1973 – Services 2,6,17,18,28,49,64.
24 June 1973 – Services 25,25A,25B,31,50.
29 July 1973 – Services 10,20,52,57,69,73.
23 September 1973 – Services 11,12,14,21,24.
14 October 1973 – Services 8,9,26,45,54,65.
The first conversion direct to Autofare from crew operation occurred from 4 March 1973 at Bilborough Depot on services 13,16,16A,30,32,53,56,60,62,74.
Medway Town Buses 1940/1950s.
Can anyone please help me with the destination, numbers and/or letters of the old Chatham & District (Traction) and the old Maidstone & District buses during the 1940s and the 1950s? I used to live in the Medway Town and frequently used these buses but can’t for the life of me remember their details.
Further to Ken Measures’ request for information on Chatham & District/Maidstone and District. You may like to look at this website. chathamtraction. uk/
Does anyone know where in Skegness Lawn Motor Park was located?
Trent used it as a terminus for their X3 service from Nottingham, who else used it and to whom did it belong?
It’s been a long time, so may be wrong, but I think Sheffield United Tours dropped us there on our Skeggie hols and remember it being near the bottom of Lumley Road which ran inland from the Clock Tower.
Midland Red’s route K from Leicester to Skegness and Mablethorpe via Grantham and Boston used the Lawn Motor Park, and according to my timetable it was on Lumley Road.
Can’t help with the services but there is a car park called The Lawn, tinyurl/oy2s9dk the 1966 OS map on old-maps. co. uk shows it about double the current size.
Gents, thanks for the information. I think the site on Beresford Avenue, off Lumley Road was most likely the location. When Skegness Bus Station was moved from Drummond Road to form an interchange adjacent to the railway station, a coach park was included which probably superseded Lawn Motor Park, although much smaller. However, the number of coaches visiting Skegness in recent years has obviously declined dramatically.
Does anyone have any information (or even photos) on the Dennis Lancets operated by Boddys, they were HE 5984, HE 6177, WN 8307 & BPT 783. I always understood that the last two were rebodied with the 1948 Burlingham bodies from the Regals FWF 87/8 in 1/52. The Regals then returned to service with new Plaxton bodies in 4/52. This information is not supported by the recent PSVC publication on Burlinghams. Any comments would be interesting.
According to an earlier PSVC publication, Yorkshire TA Coach Operators, of Jan 1971,
HE 5984 was Taylor bodied, ex Yorkshire Traction 440.
HE 6177 was unknown B31C, ex Tracky 441.
WN 8307 was Beadle bodied, ex United Welsh via War Dept.
BPT 783 was Duple bodied ex Featonby & Taylor, Haswell.
There is no reference to any being rebodied.
FWF 87 is stated to be rebodied by Plaxton while FWF 88 may have been rebuilt as KBT 802.
There is no suggestion of FWF 87/8s bodies being reused but clearly Boddy was reusing bodies at the time.
Not sure this adds very much as an answer to the question, but it might trigger some other responses.
I am surprised there is no page for AEC B-type buses of London General.
An open topped double decker with 18 seats over 16 with outside stairs, built as an improvement on the AEC K-type design, between 1910-1914 with a further 250 built in 1919. 26 were built for South Wales but how many were built in total and how many to the provinces? Were there any single deck versions? Is there a production list somewhere?
Ron, There is a very simple reason why no views of many types of bus and/or operator don’t appear, and it is that nobody out there has yet submitted any for publication. Yes, it surprised me that some types and/or operators don’t yet appear in that magical column on the left. I’m working through my own collection of slides and digital views, dredging up several rarities so far, and I have two views of the B type as supplied to London General. I have one of them in line for submission to our editor for his consideration in a little while – unless, of course, someone else gets in first! The other is attached: LN 4743 in the IWM at Lambeth.
Hi Ron. I recommend a brilliant book which gives a wealth of detail of the LGOC fleets up to the 1929 era, together with details of the Independants and London "Pirate" fleets. It would answer all your questions I feel sure! Capital Transport, s "The Battles of The General" by Ken Glazier.
An excellent read!
If memory serves, some 3500 B-Types were built, of which only about 30 were single-deckers. This was an early example of mass-production, along with the Model T Ford. Some 900 were commandeered by the War Office and used in France for transporting troops and some were used as pigeon lofts! The single-deckers were also commandeered and only about 3 ever came back! In 1920, LGOC built 849 of the S Class, of which 79 were single deckers.
I wonder if anyone recalls a bus company, Bloomfield, who ran a service between Nottingham and Arnold, possibly in the 50s or 60s. My husband has a photo of one of their buses, but can’t seem to find out any information about them. Aqui está esperando.
Interessante. I don’t remember this operation at all. Alguma pista? What is the bus on the photo? Any idea what route it took – Nottingham to Arnold was well served by several Nottingham City Transport routes, and there was also the weird Trent 67 that reached Arnold via Colwick, Netherfield and Gedling, taking longer than NCT, and with various restrictions on carryings within the NCT protection zone.
I enjoy a bit of detective work when I read questions like this – even if I don’t know an answer it is interesting to have a ponder!
Unfortunately when we are unable to examine a photograph it doesn’t give many clues. I understand that photo copyright is an issue but is it possible that Lindley might be able to ‘privately’ email the photo to our Administrator so that he may vet it to see if there is a copyright problem and post the photo on the site if a copyright problem does not exist?
If the photo is a family snapshot then presumably the copyright issue would not be as complex.
I never like to think that we are beaten by a query and at least one of the regular contributors to this site might be able to add something of interest or resolve a puzzle.
I’m not exactly an expert on the Nottingham area, but a brief Google search revealed that both Barton and J. Bloomfield ran similar services between Nottingham and Arnold by the late 1920’s. Nottingham C. T. then commenced a competing service in September 1929 and as a consequence Barton withdrew on 3 November 1929, and Bloomfield sold out to NCT. Reference to the fleet history in the book ‘Nottingham City Transport’ by F. P. Groves (TPC, 1978) shows three 1929 Minerva / B26F buses – RR 9981, VO 390 and VO 1218 – were taken over but not used, but the main text otherwise makes no mention of the takeover. So it seems we are talking about an earlier period than was originally mentioned. I hope this may be of some help.
Thank you to John Stringer, David Slater and Stephen Ford for their replies to my query. The photo is quite tiny, so may be difficult to scan, and, therefore, it’s difficult to put an age on it, but Stephen’s helpful comments may mean that it dates back to the 1920s or 1930s, not the era we thought it originated from. It’s quite likely that the firm was taken over by NCT. I’m grateful for your interest.
Newton-on-Trent Coach Operator.
There used to be until a few years ago a coach operator in the Lincolnshire village of Newton on Trent could anybody tell me the name of the operator.
I suspect that the Newton-on-Trent operator may have been "Clipson’s".
I have them on my photo database as a former owner of Bedford YRQ/Plaxton NFW 574P that ended up with Malta Bus Service as Y-0790, later FBY 790.
The operator was indeed Clipson’s Coaches, based just out of the village towards Dunham Bridge. They operated a once weekly market service to Newark until at least 1985, starting at Newton then serving small villages north of Collingham. The journey took an enormous length of time as each regular was carefully looked after. The coach was well turned out in two shades of green and cream. At one time, Lincolnshire Road Car also ran a similar market service through some of the villages (route 43). From Dunham, a mile away across the Trent, Brumptons ran a Market service to Newark with coaches in two shades of red and cream. This ultimately passed to Gash of Newark, and thence became the first route for Marshalls of Sutton on Trent, now a well established operator across the area. Much of Clipsons route is absorbed into a regular service by TravelWright of Newark, another long established and well respected independent.
By any chance would anyone know who was the coach company who used to run coaches from Catterick Camp around the North & Midlands at weekends in the mid Sixties?
Would you also know what type of coaches they ran.
[This is part of research for a family album/book]
The principle operators connected with leave specials were Sunters and Percivals of Reeth, who were related. Details of vehicles operated can be found here: percivalbros/
1950s Cardiff Double Decker.
I remember double deckers with a staircase front and back descending next to the driver cab. Everyone says they do not believe me, but we used to play avoid the conductor by running up one stair and down the other!
alguém pode confirmar isso? it was about 1955, when I was 7.
Anne’s memory is perfectly correct, at least with regard to the trolleybuses. The original idea was that the conductor remained seated by the rear entrance whilst everyone boarded, with passengers alighting from the front. It didn’t catch on – I think one of the reasons was that it relied on a flat fare and it was difficult to increase the flat fare without running the risk that everyone would want change!
The comments below the photo also include a link to an upper deck photograph.
Thanks David: I was intrigued by this question and found a history of Cardiff buses by Mike Street online. mikestreet. webplus/Cardiff_Bus_Fleet_1947-1955.pdf.
The motor buses of this era seemed an ordinary post-war pick and mix of virtually everyone - and not big enough for two staircases, but the twin axle trolleys looked splendid, even if, he admits, rather neglected, body-wise. These had a front exit door as David describes but later sealed up, Mike Street says. The stairs do look like the sort you descend using mainly hands and rails - like an old attic - was this later removed or did you find yourself descending to the wrong end of the bus?!
Clique no link abaixo. In the middle of the first video you can see one of the dual doorway trolleybuses in the cream livery. The second video shows the trolleybus system at about the same time, but no shots of the twin staircase vehicles, unfortunately.
The Yellow trolleybus with a front exit referred to is a Bournemouth vehicle surely. Possibly working as a demonstrator for some reason.
Many years ago I lived on the Hollythorpe Rise/Graves Park routes 35/34 and many times rode on an AEC Regent III bus. I remember one I think number 535 which sounded very different from the others. It did not have the very distinctive sound which others had , including NCB, Craven and Roberts bodied buses. Instead it sounded as if its exhaust had broken or as though it had been fitted with a straight through exhaust as many cars had. I have looked for a long time on your pages to see if anyone else mentioned it. Please can anyone put me out of my misery and satisfy my enduring curiosity.
For the benefit of the uninitiated, Hollythorpe Rise and Graves Park are in Sheffield, and Regent III 535 was 0961/Weymann, new 1947.
From the description, it does seem likely that the vehicle was indeed fitted with a ‘straight-through’ exhaust.
Leeds Bus Route – Carr Manor Road to City Centre in 1968.
Would anyone know which bus travelled from Carr Manor Road to City Centre in 1968.
I’m sure the bus route you ask about was the 70 from Leeds Central Bus Station to Primley Park. It ran from Scott Hall Road, left onto Stainbeck Lane, right up Stainbeck Road then first left into Carr Manor Road and Avenue to King Lane. I used to use this route from King Lane in the early 1960s and remember when it was diverted this way round in 1962. Prior to that it followed the 69 all the way up Scott Hall Road to King Lane.
Yorkshire Traction Fleet List.
Does anyone know of a BET YTC fleet list anywhere: must make fascinating reading. Don’t think Peter Gould ever ventured this far…
An interesting question, Joe. I don’t KNOW of one, but I’d have a guess at either PSVC for a complete listing or the old Ian Allan Books (for the fleet current in any particular year). Again, IA did some individual company ones – Crosville and Ribble for example – so it’s possible. Another thought: is there something that might be classed as the local equivalent of the Southdown Enthusiast Club, who might at least be able to point you in the right direction?
The PSV Circle produced a two-part fleet history of Yorkshire Traction a number of years ago. They are numbered PB20 covering 1902 to 1960, and PB21 covering 1961 to 1984 and also County Motors and Mexborough & Swinton. I don’t know if they are still available though.
Jim Sykes was the author of a company history in the late 1970’s. Not only was this a good photographic record it also incorporated a comprehensive fleetlist that included vehicles absorbed from fleets taken over during the years.
Further to Andrew’s comment, there’s a used Jim Sykes book on YTC on Amazon which may be of interest. veja este link.
In 1979 the Ewer group bought batches of vehicles with YYL-T and CYH-V registrations between 768-801, but I could never find details for 792, I think it could have been a shortened Ford vehicle. Does anyone have any details for this so I can finally fill in the gap.
There never was a YYL 792T/CYH 792V in the George Ewer fleets!
Due to late delivery the Bedford YMT/Duple that was originally intended to be YYL 792T was not taken into stock but instead sold by the dealer Burrells of Ipswich, a Ewer Group company.
The same thing had happened the year before when the vehicles intended to be XYK 744/750T were also sold by Burrells without entering the Ewer Group fleets although both those vehicles had actually been registered in advance.
XYK 744T was sold to Bracewell, Clayton-le-Moors following its registration in March 1979.
XYK 750T was sold to Dawlish Coaches, Devon following its registration in March 1979.
I hope this clears up the mystery!
My thanks to John C for the information on Grey Green vehicles, much appreciated.
Could I suggest that ‘792’ may have become BAA 411V of Coombe Valley Coaches (Chalk), of Coombe Bissett, Wiltshire? The body number follows on from those of CYH/YYL 786-791T/V, and precedes those of YYL 776/7T. Here’s a shot. flickr/photos/johnmightycat/ On the left is FNL 576L, YRQ/Plaxton, new 1973 to Moor-Dale of Newcastle. BAA 411V was sold when Coombe Valley Coaches closed down in 1989, and was later with Wilts & Dorset (6022).
Midland General. Ripley to Eastwood.
Dear ‘Old Bus Photos’ people,
Espero que você possa me ajudar.
I am taking part in a ‘Storyworks’ workshop for the W. I. – we are collecting memories of W. I. members and turning them into digital stories. As part of one of these stories I need to find out the approximate cost of a child’s single bus fare from Ripley, Derbyshire, to Eastwood, Nottinghamshire, in 1953-4. I know this isn’t really your thing, but your members seemed so knowledgeable and helpful when I looked at your site that I thought perhaps one of them may have some idea about this.
I know the bus was a Blue Midland General, route B1, that went from Ripley to Nottingham via Codnor, Langley Mill (past the bus garage), Eastwood, Kimberley, etc. to Nottingham Mount Street, and returned along the same route. I think Ripley to Eastwood was about 8 miles by bus.
Difficult one! Let me venture a guess at a child fare of about 5d or 6d, and then explain my working. According to AA route planner, the distance by the normal route is 6.6 miles. The journey was 27 minutes on a B1. Until 1953 you could also go by an A1 trolleybus. In addition, once an hour, you could go by the A4 limited stop service which only observed 5 stops between Ripley and Eastwood (Codnor, Crosshill, Loscoe, Heanor and Langley Mill) and therefore covered the same ground in 19 minutes. The only fares reference I have for roughly that era is Western National (Cornwall area) for Summer 1957 – 3 or 4 years later, but fares didn’t go up as regularly or as much in those days. A similar journey was Penzance to Lelant on the St Ives route 17. This is 6.7 miles, took 29 minutes, and the fare was 1/3d. Now, my parents (from Nottingham) always regarded Western National as an expensive company, and my own recollection of Midland General fares is that they were fairly reasonable – a bit cheaper than Bartons for example, though not as cheap as South Notts. So, bearing in mind that we are only talking of pennies, and possibly a couple of fare increases from 1954 to 57, I would hazard a guess of a 10d or 11d adult fare in 1953-54. But maybe there’s an ex-MGO conductor out there who can tell us differently !
Stephen, Thank you so much, that sounds about right and is very helpful, thank you.
Just a quick rider to that – don’t forget that in those days the Nottingham buses started from Beighton Street, not Ripley Market Place as per the present day Rainbow 1.
Interesting discussion. I have spoken to a friend who grew up in Langley Mill in the 50s/60s and has even now returned to live in the area. He is of the opinion that 6d would have been about right, but cannot be more specific than that.
At that time I lived in the South Notts area and their fares were terrific value, but don’t we all have fond memories of the other blue fleet in the Nottingham bus scene, MGO/NDT whose vehicles always had a certain dignity. Nice to see them getting some public attention again.
I have a photograph which I bought many years ago of a coach which bears an image of a greyhound on the side, the registration is BWB 202 which was issued in 1935/36 but the very smart bodywork is post war, full front and looks to be Strachans. The location could be Midland Road, St. Pancras and there appears to be an identical coach behind. The registration and Greyhound logo suggests T. D. Alexander of Sheffield but I’m not convinced, no name is visible and I would like to ask; did Alexanders maintain a smart coach fleet in addition to their contract vehicles?
Chris, This Leyland TS7c was new to Sheffield in 1935 with a Cravens B32R body. It was sold to Millburn Motors who had it re-bodied by Strachan. Classic Bus 113 has a most interesting article about Greyhound / TD Alexander.
A friend of mine owns a MCW bus date of manufacture Mar 84,Chassis no MB7648. Body type MK1. The bus is used for tourism purposes. The problem is that the gears will not engage. It has a push button gear select. I suspect that the problem is in a safety circuit ie doors must be closed etc, but no wiring diagrams are avail. Can you please help in sourcing of technical literature and also maybe if you have met this problem before and you know the fix for it.
Chris Bugeja (Malta)
Chassis MB7648 makes it A712 THV, so it’s a former London Transport bus, meaning it would have the interlock fitted to stop the bus driving with the doors open. The door only needs to be slightly open for it to cut the gears out. Check the microswitches are ok and also the doors are free in operation, and closing to their full extent. Quite often with age the door pivots will become dry and stiff in operation.
If you are sure all is well with the doors, make sure there is oil in the gearbox. You need to check the oil via the dipstick (underneath the floor hatch, by the emergency door), with the engine running. Fill it up with it running, then put it in drive for a short while, then in reverse for a while, then re-check and top up as req. If you do find it is empty, check for a leak, the flexible gearbox oil cooler pipes are favourites to leak, especially with age.
Failing all of this, make sure you have an electrical supply to the gear selector button unit. Check that the connector plugs are ok, and there is no corrosion on the connections.
If still no luck, and highly unlikely,- you may have a broken half shaft Best of luck!
Oldham Corporation Number 67.
In 1932 Oldham Corporation Passenger Transport Department bought 5 Leyland TD4 saloons numbered 63 – 67, with registration numbers BU 7102 – 7106. 63 – 66 had B34F bodies by Chas H Roe of Leeds. But 67 (BU 7106) had a B31F body, built by local builder Shearing and Crabtree, who were based at Moorhey Works, Moorhey Street, Oldham, Lancs., and were active from around 1931 to 1936. I was wondering if any contributor on here has a picture of this vehicle. I have tried all the usual paths of investigation, but to no avail.
I can’t find a picture of the Oldham No.67, Stephen, but a bit of information about Shearing & Crabtree may be found here, about two thirds of the way down:- nonsequitur. freeforums/post9720.html#p9720.
Incidentally, was this really a TD4 saloon? Peter Gould has this batch down as TS4s, which is what one would expect, though his lists do contain errors, especially where early Tilling-Stevens vehicles are concerned (I am still ploughing on with research for an article on the Maidstone company, through a minefield of contradictions in historical evidence).
Roger Cox says is Oldham Corporation 67 a TD4?
I have now checked the Oldham fleet list from a number of sources and it would appear that it is a TS4.
Thanks Roger, also for the link to the website but I had already found that.
Bolton 67. BU7106.
Roger Cox appears to be correct, the batch of Leylands 63-67, BU 7102-7106 must have been Tiger TS4s as the Titan TD4 did not emerge until 1935, although it is interesting to note that the chassis numbers of 62-67 Tigers were 918-922, and the Leyland Titan TD2s also delivered to Bolton in 1932 had chassis numbers 910-917 in same sequence.
This question arose on another forum to which I subscribe. Is there anyone out there who knows when Barton’s route 3C (Nottingham – Castle Donington – Melbourne – Swadlincote) was cut back to Melbourne, and then eventually discontinued altogether. Any hints at the service pattern in the latter years would also be appreciated. I have the timetable for 1953 (sad eh!) but the query was specifically about more recent times. Many thanks in anticipation.
The February 1968 Barton timetable shows service 3C as Nottingham-Swadlincote. Broadly speaking it was every two hours. Mondays to Saturdays most trips ran end to end with a couple of Nottingham-Melbourne short runs. Certain first and last trips started/ended at Long Eaton. Sunday service lacked the early morning runs which were operated on weekdays.
Obrigado David & # 8211; that is actually just about what it was 15 years earlier! I assume there must have come a falling off in patronage that made the Castle Donington – Swadlincote part unviable in later years. I cannot imagine why Nottingham to Swadlincote ever WAS viable. I guess it originally grew by linking a number of sections that served local rural needs, rather than by massive Nottinghamian demand to travel to Swadlincote or vice versa!
Sheffield bus crash in Manchester.
I’m trying to find a photo of the Sheffield single deck bus which crashed and partly demolished the canopy outside Manchester’s Victoria railway station. Can’t remember the year. Can you advise where to find one please?
I’m a former conductor, then driver for STD, 1963 to ’74 when I transferred to Manchester (SELNEC ugh!) at the Hyde Road depot until 1977.
Thanking you in anticipation of any reply.
There is a photograph of this on page 218 of C. C. Hall’s book "Sheffield Transport". The date is given as May 1937 and the bus no. 183 is a 1935 Leyland TS7 from the C fleet (BWB 183).
I’d like to post a request to see if anyone has any information about the Bancroft & Powers company that used to operate from the Scotland Estate in Coalville. I’m writing a book about local men who served in the Great War and have detail about Albert Powers but I’m trying to find out who Mr Bancroft was. There are a number of Bancroft families in the area but I’m struggling to identify which one.
Also I’d be interested in any pictures people may have of their coaches. Enclosed is one of the photo’s from the archives of the Historical Society, the link below takes you to the folder with the rest of the archive showing local transport through the years. picasaweb. google/
Bancroft & Powers were also Haulage contractors if I remember correctly they moved mainly bricks and pipes from the local Brick & Pipeworks. The coach side of the business was a result of a sort of merger/join of resources of Bishops coaches and Jaques coaches of Coalville I think in the late 1960,s or early 1970s.
Try writing to the local paper Coalville Times or contact Leicester Transport Historic Trust.
I can help with this. As the previous writer said Bancroft and powers were primarily brick haulers getting into the coach industry in the early 1960s They took over Jacques yard on the Scotlands. Albert Powers was one of the partners and Ron Bancroft was his brother in law. I believe these fine gentlemen to be deceased now. They both lived in Ibstock. I drove part time there when I was a student in the early 1970s. I loved the Bournemouth express runs. Dews coaches still operates a 1944 Bedford OB that was originally Jacques I don’t know if it every belonged to Bancroft and Powers. They were in operation well into the 1980s. Espero que isto ajude.
I often check up on this interesting website but today I’m on it via Google searching for junker buses. Today at Sydney Bus Museum, where I’m a volunteer I was asking about Junkers buses as I had recalled seeing a photo of a junker D/D in a pre WW2 book My father had.
I was a keen bus spotter around 1956 to 1960s in the EK, M&D area. The book and Dad are long gone but I’m sure the bus was a front entrance and was much the style of an AEC Q type.
The German firm Junkers produced many opposed-piston two-stroke diesel engines during the inter-war years, some for aircraft and some for road transport, the latter being of horizontal configuration. If you type in "Front Wheel Drive Gilford" into this site’s search engine on the home page, there is some information on these buses. However, I’m not aware that these engines were used extensively in the UK, or of any actual Junkers buses which were used in the UK.
Last week I briefly saw a bus on Wedding Hire in Sheffield. It looked like a Bridgemaster, with a type of 1/2 Beverley Bar roof. It was painted in a horrible brown with a white roof, the brown was definitely the wrong colour! It had a Registration Plate of RH & 4 numbers so maybe a 1963-4 I guess. Can anyone shed light on such a vehicle please?
It could possibly be 3747 RH owned by The Yorkshire Heritage Bus Company yorkshireheritagebus. co. uk/default. asp Although I can not find any reference to it being ‘Brown’ although it could have been specially painted. In any case even if it isn’t, their website is full of interesting vehicles.
Try this one. flickr/photos/ingythewingy/7140255683/ The Yorkshire Heritage Bus Company is run by the Blackman family.
This cries out "East Yorkshire" I think – presumably due to their relatively low height the need for the classic pointed "Beverley Bar" (picture, source unknown, roof of earlier days was diluted somewhat and a gentler inward taper of the top deck windows did the trick.
Obrigado pela informação.
Looking on the Yorkshire Heritage Bus site, there appears to be the "brown" bus in deep maroon & white roof.
The livery is actually black and ivory (as per the description on the Yorkshire Heritage buses website). It is the livery of Lockeys of St Helens Auckland, which the Blackman family seem to like. The description of one of their buses, that did actually operate for Lockeys, explains this:- yorkshireheritagebus. co. uk/1959AECRegentVPFN858.asp.
For the other vehicles, it is not an accurate historical representation, and whether you like it is, of course, a matter of taste. I think I would prefer the Bridgemaster in its East Yorkshire dark blue.
I think 3747RH is essentially in the livery of Lockey’s, of St Helen Auckland – for whom it never operated – but the Yorkshire Heritage Bus Company do have Regent V PFN858 (new to East Kent) which ran for Lockey’s for several years. Even PFN858, however, carried OK Motor Services colours after Lockey’s – but Lockey’s were a popular operator, with a distinctive livery, so it’s not surprising that people want to perpetuate it.
I cannot assist with identifying the Bridgemaster, but mention of PFN 858 reminded me we used it as transport for our wedding guests in 2010, it ran superbly apparently. I ordered it as a special treat for one of the lads, who used to know it as his school bus when he lived near Bishop Auckland, and it was operating for Lockeys. He was most impressed and keeps mentioning it even to this day.
Not really a bus person, more a train man.
But hopefully someone can help me with a Q about an Oldham bus route. The bus that went down Featherstall road in the 70’s I think was 21 but what was it before that? I remember my parents talking of the A B C and D buses.
Help an old Oldhamer living on the other side of the world.
The bus service that ran on Featherstall Road was latterly the 20, running from Hollinwood to Shaw. Before that (i. e. until 1st April 1968) it had been the 8, a number inherited from the tram service it replaced. This was Oldham’s penultimate tram route and abandoned early in World War II, despite general restrictions on such abandonments, because the track was in such bad condition and also the replacement buses had already arrived.
Oldham’s lettered routes were originally the bus routes, but as tramway abandonment progressed the replacement buses often took the tram service number, rather than letters.
The old 8 service doesn’t exist at all any more. It used to be busy in the peaks as it served a lot of major employment sites such as Ferranti, Platt Brothers and rather a lot of cotton mills. Such mass employment has disappeared as you are no doubt well aware.
On 1st April 1968 Oldham replaced all their route letters for numbers. The B service became the 21.
If you click on the Oldham link on the left hand side of the home page the second thread down the page shows a bus with an "A" service showing where others have a number.
Please can anyone tell me what shade of green Salford City buses were? (Circa 1960). I have a EFE model with a grey roof that I want to repaint green to match the rest of the bus.
Do you know of a near enough match with eg. Humbrol, Railmatch etc.
Wish I could help with a colour code, but sadly not. However, you have reminded me that in 1968, I bought a Triumph Herald, reg 5257 N, from an SCT mechanic which he had crashed/repaired and had had it resprayed by his brother, who worked in the body shop, in the famous dark green colour. Can I claim to have had the smallest vehicle, ever, in SCT’s unique livery ?
I’m not sure that a Triumph Herald would qualify as the smallest vehicle in Salford Green. The colour was used on just about everything that the corporation owned that moved. Even ambulances were Salford Green though fire engines appear to have escaped the ignominy. Dustcarts, highway service vehicles et al were that colour including small vans.
As EFE buses are painted in gloss finish, I expect Humbrol No.3 Brunswick Green is the closest one they do. Whether it is an exact match for Salford Green I cant say, I’ve only ever seen colour photos of the livery. humbrol/uk-en/humbrol-wallchart and you can download their colour chart in PDF form, and see all the colours.
I’d agree that Humbrol Brunswick Green seems to be about the nearest "off the shelf" shade of green. I have commented before about the problems of matching the paint used on the real thing with that used on models, but I’ll repeat the story here for the benefit of anyone who has not seen my earlier thoughts.
Incidentally, very few buses seem to keep their freshly-painted look for long, with panels being repaired or replaced at fairly regular intervals. Multiple shades of what is supposed to be the same colour appear fairly soon, on the one vehicle. True, those dreadful NBC shades didn’t help. Was the paint from the "El Cheapo" factory?
When we try to compare the colour of the model against the real thing, I know of two people who took home tins of paint bought from the operators’ workshops for use on models they were building, in different scales. Both were told that it didn’t look right. "You’ve done a good job of trying to match, but it isn’t right," was typical of the comments. The crunch comes when the tin is paraded before the doubters along with the reply, "From the company workshop, old chap!"
Apart from the problems of matching the exact shade from commercially available sources and that of fading on the real life vehicles, there is another problem – dirt. All road vehicles rapidly attract dust, grime, stains and other marks, especially in joints and indentations. None of the model manufacturers produce anything other than ex-works finishes and to add realism in the form of wear and tear to these in a way that both looks realistic and works with the paint already on the model is very difficult. Scratch builders may have an easier time but, again, the scratch built models I’ve seen are generally finished as ex-works examples. Interestingly in aircraft modelling it has become the norm to "weather" military aircraft, especially with larger scales but airliner models always seem to be built and finished as if they had just been painted yet any casual observation of an airliner that has flown for more than a few weeks will show grime, stains and other marks, long before any fading.
First Female Bus Driver From Portsmouth.
My mother worked for Southdowns buses, just wondering if anyone could help me find the news arrival about my mother Barbara Nicholson who was the first female bus driver from Portsmouth.
Copyright on all Content and Photographs is held by the contributor unless stated otherwise No reproduction allowed by any means without prior permission.
All rights to the design and layout of this website are reserved Old Bus Photos does not set or use Cookies but Google Analytics will set four see this.
Old Bus Photos from Saturday 25th April 2009 to Thursday 22nd February 2018.

Bem-vindo ao Missionforex Top Forex Services 2018.
Bem-vindo a & # 39; Missionforex & # 39; ForexStore 2018! A principal loja digital on-line para os comerciantes. Nós oferecemos a linha mais abrangente de produtos educacionais com mais de algumas centenas de seleção de cursos de Home Office investimento mais vendidos em negociação forex, negociação de ações, negociação de futuros e negociação de opções. Os cursos são adicionados e atualizados semanalmente.
& # 39; Missionforex & # 39; s ForexStore é um centro de balcão único para todos os seus cursos de estudo em casa, você não precisa procurar em qualquer lugar para encontrar esses cursos compatíveis com nossos preços razoáveis.
& quot; Não importa qual é o seu nível de habilidade de negociação, temos o que você precisa para levar sua negociação para o próximo nível. Seja você um novato ou um veterano experiente, sempre encontrará as informações necessárias para se tornar um profissional melhor. Este site oferece aos comerciantes de mercado recursos e materiais educacionais de negociação superiores acessíveis, incluindo clássicos de negociação fora de impressão. Sujeitos incluem gráficos candlestick, análise técnica, Fibonacci, Gann, dia de negociação, swing trading, negociação de curto prazo e sistema de negociação. Leve o seu tempo para navegar e comprar em nossos itens com preços mais razoáveis. Todos os itens são entregues digital e download online. Não há produtos físicos nem frete. Esperamos que você goste de fazer compras neste site e deseje-lhe tudo de melhor em sua negociação & quot; - gerente do site.
Opção de download: Instant, No Waiting! Salvar no envio!
A razão pela qual você deveria nos escolher?
-Nós vendemos produtos premium FX dos mais populares do mundo, Estamos sempre melhorando a qualidade do melhor serviço.
-Nós trabalhamos 100% respeitável e alto senso de responsabilidade. Interter chamada ou mensagem em tempo hábil (via whatsapp +60179843428 ou e-mail)
-Aceito pagamento via PayPal, Maybank2u, cimb clique 100% Seguro, Confortável, Simples e Rápido.
- Preço razoável (tão baixo quanto $ 2!), Apoie o entusiasmo.
(Por favor, ligue / whatsapp-nos em +6 0179843428 se você não receber uma resposta dentro de 12 horas)

Uma História: a Palavra do Ano do Dicionário.
Palavra do ano.
Nossa escolha de Palavra do Ano serve como um símbolo dos eventos mais significativos de cada ano e das tendências de pesquisa. É uma oportunidade para refletirmos sobre a linguagem e as ideias que representam a cada ano. Então, dê um passeio pela estrada da memória para lembrar de todas as nossas seleções anteriores da Palavra do Ano.
Não foi moda, engraçado, nem foi cunhado no Twitter, mas achamos que a mudança contou uma história real sobre como nossos usuários definiram 2010. Ao contrário de 2008, a mudança não era mais um slogan de campanha. Mas o termo ainda tinha muito peso. Aqui está um trecho do nosso anúncio da Palavra do Ano em 2010:
O debate nacional pode ser resumido pela pergunta: Nos últimos dois anos, houve mudanças suficientes? Tem havido muito? Enquanto isso, muitos americanos continuam enfrentando mudanças em suas casas, contas bancárias e empregos. Só o tempo dirá se a última onda de mudanças pela qual os americanos votaram nas eleições intermediárias resultará em um resultado negativo ou positivo.
Tergiversar.
Esta palavra rara foi escolhida para representar 2011 porque descreveu muito do mundo ao nosso redor. Tergiversar significa "mudar repetidamente a atitude ou opiniões de uma pessoa em relação a uma causa, assunto, etc." Os editores do dicionário viram o mercado de ações, os grupos políticos e a opinião pública passarem por uma montanha-russa de mudanças ao longo de 2011. E assim, nomeamos tergiversar a Palavra do Ano de 2011.
Em um ano conhecido pelo movimento Occupy e o que ficou conhecido como a Primavera Árabe, nossos lexicógrafos escolheram a tag como sua Palavra do Ano de 2012. Aqui está um trecho do nosso lançamento que dá uma boa explicação para a nossa escolha:
2012 viu as campanhas políticas mais caras e alguns dos eventos climáticos mais extremos da história da humanidade, desde enchentes na Austrália a ciclones na China, ao furacão Sandy e muitos outros.
Ficamos sérios em 2013. A privacidade de todos estava naquele ano, desde a revelação de Edward Snowden do Project PRISM até a chegada do Google Glass. Aqui está um trecho do nosso anúncio em 2013:
Muitos de nós abraçamos as mídias sociais, optando por oferecer informações íntimas e fotografias pessoais no Facebook, Twitter e Instagram; Esta participação robusta ecoa uma observação de Mark Zuckerberg em 2010 de que o nível de conforto do público em compartilhar informações pessoais on-line é uma “norma social” que “evoluiu com o tempo”. Mesmo assim, uma pesquisa recente da Harris Poll mostra que os jovens estão agora monitorando e alterando suas configurações de privacidade mais do que nunca, um desenvolvimento que o USA Today apelidou de “efeito de Edward Snowden”.
Alerta de spoiler: As coisas não ficaram menos sérias em 2014. Nossa Palavra do Ano foi a exposição, que destacou o surto do vírus Ebola no ano, chocantes atos de violência tanto no exterior quanto nos EUA e o roubo generalizado de informações pessoais. Aqui está o que nós tivemos a dizer sobre a exposição em 2014:
Do senso de vulnerabilidade que permeia o Ebola à visibilidade de atos de crime ou má conduta que provocaram conversas críticas sobre raça, gênero e violência, vários sentidos de exposição foram expostos ao público este ano.
A fluidez da identidade foi um grande tema em 2015. A linguagem em torno do gênero e da identidade sexual se ampliou, tornando-se mais inclusiva, com acréscimos ao dicionário, como gênero fluido, bem como o prefixo neutro de gênero Mx. A identidade racial também teve muito debate em 2015, depois que Rachel Dolezal, uma mulher branca se apresentando como uma mulher negra, disse que se identificou como biracial ou transracial. Nossa Palavra do Ano em 2015 refletiu as muitas facetas da identidade que surgiram naquele ano.
Xenofobia.
Em 2016, selecionamos a xenofobia como nossa Palavra do Ano. O medo do "outro" foi um tema enorme em 2016, do Brexit à retórica de campanha do presidente Donald Trump. Em nosso anúncio, pedimos aos nossos leitores que refletissem sobre este termo em vez de celebrá-lo:
Apesar de ser escolhida como a Palavra do Ano de 2016, a xenofobia não deve ser celebrada. Pelo contrário, é uma palavra para refletir profundamente à luz dos acontecimentos do passado recente.
A palavra cúmplice surgiu em conversas em 2017 sobre aqueles que se manifestaram contra figuras e instituições poderosas e sobre aqueles que permaneceram em silêncio. Foi um ano de verdadeiro despertar para a cumplicidade em vários setores da sociedade, da política à cultura pop. De nosso anúncio de Palavra do Ano de 2017:
Nossa escolha para Palavra do Ano é tanto sobre o que é visível quanto sobre o que não é. É uma palavra que nos lembra que até a inação é um tipo de ação. A aceitação silenciosa do erro é como chegamos a esse ponto. Não devemos deixar que isso continue a ser a norma. Se fizermos isso, então somos todos cúmplices.

Railway system - no repaint indicator trading system free download

London Transport Wheel Trims.
In the 1950s the whole London fleet (7000 buses?) sported full rear-wheel nave-plates which tidied up their side view and must have made for easy cleaning. Suddenly they were gone – porque?
And do modern restorers seek them out, for a finishing touch?
And – whilst on wheels – how different (and awful) are/were AECs and Leylands running without their nuts-rings on the front wheels! It made them look like contractor buses.
Perhaps because they have? mileometers on the rear hubs and those yellow nut indicators on the front – and rear? With the covers it was harder to see if the wheel(s) was falling off. Elf and safety yer knowas.
I seem to remember reading somewhere (though please correct me if I’m wrong) that a rear wheel trim disc once came off an LT bus whilst at speed and caused someone a serious injury, resulting in their immediate removal from the entire fleet.
Victor, I cant speak for LT, but I suspect it could all be part of the same couldn’t care less syndrome that effected BET and BTH companies when NCB came about. From 1967 to 1975, I worked at NGT’s Percy Main Depot ‘Tynemouth & Wakefields’ like most depots within the group they set themselves very high standards, vehicles were meticulously maintained, and after their weekly checks they were thoroughly cleaned from top to toe, this was in addition to the nightly excursion through the wash and the overnight sweep out. Pride in the fleet was still something to be encouraged, and this was reflected in the vehicle turn out, minor damage was repaired quickly, and wheel trims were always replaced after maintenance checks. Then came the new broom of NBC, like many other depots, vehicles were swapped between fleets, with some going from one end of the country to the other, to slightly misquote Oscar Wilde, the accountants "knew the price of everything and the value of nothing" corners were cut to try and save money, I. e. bright trim and badges were painted over, or simply not replaced if bodywork was required, wheel trims started to disappear, and all in all the fleet started to look ramshackle and neglected. NBC became an acronym for No Body Cares. Unfortunately PTE’s seemed to be little better, in fairness, Go Ahead seem to make an effort, and their vehicles are better presented than those of another company of Scottish origin, but I’m afraid that apart from a handful of smaller companies, the glory days are long gone.
I like the acronym Ronnie has posted, NBC = No Body Cares. A slightly different one – unprintable in ‘family’ circumstances – was in a trade magazine which crossed my desk some years ago. Fortunately the hierarchy realised in time, and decided not to use NBG after all!
Manchester was one of a number of undertakings that for a period specified rear wheel trims. Much to the annoyance of Head Office, certain depots removed them as soon as possible with the regular excuse of ‘lost in service’. Other depots kept them up until the mid 1960s. The real reasons for removal was brake overheating, time in removing and replacing them when wheels had to be changed and, most importantly, the need to regularly check wheel nuts for tightness which later became a mandatory regular check and, as I understand it, it was at that time that the London wheel trims disappeared in short order.
I had heard the same story as John Stringer. They all seemed to disappear from buses almost overnight. So an edict from upstairs would seem reasonable. This was, of course long before the days of wheel nut indicators or hubometers, so the ‘falling off’ incident sounds eminently plausible.
I used to travel daily on Country Bus RTs from Godstone and East Grinstead and they all had the plain green discs, except one particular bus (don’t ask me which one). This had the raised circle, mid way between the middle and the perimeter picked out in polished aluminium. Compared with all the plain green ones, this one looked very smart. I doubt that few passengers ever noticed the difference, but I did!
I think that they might have been delivered new in this style, but normally were repainted without relief.
As to how/where preservationists find them now, that’s a mystery. Unless some garages stockpiled a quantity for use as dustbin lids!
It seems odd to me that after over twenty years and millions of miles in service a wheel trim should come off in such a way as to injure someone and trigger a mass removal. The trims were attached by a u shaped bracket bolted at each end to the hub. A spring clip in the centre of the bracket passed through a slot in the centre of the trim and secured the trim under pressure. The trims were a tight fit around the wheel rim so if the spring failed the disk would initially stay in place by centrifugal force. A change in speed or an uneven road surface would, eventually, dislodge the trim but with LT’s vehicles engines governed to low speeds and, even in the country areas, slow traffic, I just wonder what speeds could be attained to have the trim fly off so as to cause injury. More likely this was a maintenance edict issued by a management rethink. Whilst it was a long while before wheel nut indicators etc., instances of loose wheels on large vehicles were not uncommon – I saw three trucks lose wheels on the M1 in a two month period in 1967 – and a stricter inspection regime than previously was put into place by many operators of large vehicles.
I’ve just had a look through Ken Blacker’s book ‘RT’ (Capital Transport,1979) and he states that ‘in November 1971 the order went out to garages to remove the discs. and their retaining brackets from the rear wheels of all vehicles…..the reason given was economy…..Some garages complied immediately and dealt with their entire fleet within a matter of days; others were more lethargic. The last two garages, Wood Green and Palmwrs Green gradually removed the discs from their RT’s and RM’s during the early part of 1972’. So it seems that I may have got my wires crossed with my previous suggestion.
I confess to have not thought about this feature before, but I cannot recall ever noting a bus of the RF, RT or RM family in service without those smart rear wheel trims. As far as I know, they were never fitted to the later “off the peg” designs operated in London. A quick look through my own slides and negatives reveals no RF/RT/RM family example without the trims, but, on the internet, I have spotted one picture of an RT lacking these fittings whilst still in LT service. The postulated 1971 date of the decree stipulating the removal of the trims fits with the fact that, from 1st January 1970, London Transport came “under new management” when the Central Buses and Underground operations were transferred to the Greater London Council. In the 10th June 1969 House of Lords debate on the proposed Transport London Bill, it was dismissively stated that “London Transport management is very weak”, this from a Tory politician whose career had been mostly in agriculture. Thus the Broadway/Chiswick dynasty that had effectively reigned since the days of the General came to an abrupt end. All new brooms like to be seen to sweep clean, even if some of the items thus discarded are of benefit. No doubt wheel trims were seen as a superfluous irrelevance. The Country Bus and Coach department, which was handed over to the National Bus Company, had no obligation to follow the same path. All my pictures of the ex LT LCBS fleet show the trims in place, and I worked at the Reigate HQ during that time. Indeed, this was the period when the Stokes (mis)led British Leyland found itself unable to supply new vehicles and spares to the bus industry nationwide. Spares for the ex LT designs became particularly scarce, and such items as did become available were immediately snapped up by the GLC controlled London Transport. LCBS suffered severely in consequence. NBC drafted such vehicles as it could muster into LCBS, and buses were hired in from Southend and Maidstone to help plug the gaps. Determined to reduce the size of the problem, LCBS sold as many RT/RMC/RML/RCL buses as possible to the GLC controlled London Transport Executive. I am pretty sure that the residual LCBS fleet of ex LT types retained their wheel trims to the end. There is one small point in Phil’s comprehensive comment that I would question. The engines in London Transport buses were de-rated, not governed down. Nevertheless, the Country Bus and Coach dept. fleet were fitted with higher geared differentials when 40 mph became the legal limit. I can assure him that a Country RT on a rural section such as that from Chelsham garage to Westerham on the 403 (later 483) certainly didn’t hang about when circumstances so demanded, and there were plenty of other similar route examples.
Thanks Roger for picking me up on the point about the engines being governed. Somewhere in the recesses of my ageing brain I seem to remember reading that LT’s vehicles had governers but it may well be whoever wrote that used the term wrongly in lieu of derating.
As to the removal of the trims, I regularly visited London up until early 1970 for work and never saw an RT, RF, RLH in service without the trims. My next visit was late in 1971 and I was taken aback by the number of vehicles sans trims.
Absolutely, Roger: Hillman Imps with those beautiful but trouble prone aluminium engines had special anti freeze. They didn’t need power steering - you could twirl easily from lock to lock.
I confess that I’ve never liked wheel trims of any kind, especially those awful wobbling cheapo chromed things used on 1960s lightweight (and even, shamefully) some heavyweight coaches. Apart from the thoroughly practical points of nut access, brake cooling and so on already mentioned, I like to see the hubs, which often reveal the make of chassis. Even when bought-in axles such as Kirkstall are found on more than one make of bus, they have an honest dignity that needs no concealment.
Your post on LCBS v GLC-controlled Central is very interesting and enlightening, Roger; THX. As for the NBC influence, this also extended to Northern General’s RMF’s, whose rear and front wheel trims disappeared with the advent of NBC.
In defence of NBC, I can remember very few instructions of the type mentioned above. Most decisions were made locally, probably under the stress of ever reducing income and the need to make economies in maintaining increasingly complicated machinery in increasingly difficult operating traffic conditions! This could be at Company, area or garage level!
The fitment of wheel trims to Bristol buses was an instruction from Tilling Group (I think it was before NBC) to BCV but it was more likely the whim of the local Chief Engineer or even garage engineers whether to maintain them. I liked the look of them but would never have inflicted the process of removal and replacement for every wheel nut check on hard pressed maintenance staff.
The only NBC dictates that I can remember were:
NBC corporate livery! (Some companies covered the cream with white in one go, others kept the two separate liveries intact until full repaint – How long did Ambleside depot manage to keep the last coach in Ribble livery away from National white?)
On the Leyland National, the circular Leyland sign was de-specified (why should NBC advertise Leyland? – Same reasoning as older vehicles having the makers name replaced by company plates. Most fleets removed them at the next appropriate occasion, perhaps at repaint. [As another aside, when I was about 11, I went to Blackpool and saw obvious Leylands sporting a Ribble radiator plate, so when I went home to Bristol, I assumed all the Bristols were Leylands as well!]
The white waist band was de-specified because Leyland were charging too much to add it to the one-colour spray-painted vehicle. Some fleets deleted it on the rest of the fleet (especially those who were spray-painting), I had it added to all Nationals at UCOC (because we were still hand-painting) before they hit the road and how much nicer they looked!
As I said in my opening salvo Geoff, NBC accountants knew the price of everything and the value of nothing. Your comments verify that.
I think that Geoff’s basic message was that, in the early days of NBC, a great deal of discretion was allowed to individual companies. When the politburo mentality and dead hand of the Freddie Wood era arrived then absolute, bland, suffocating conformity became the order of the day (after day, after day).
Greater Manchester Buses.
I have recently been looking at some pictures of old Greater Manchester buses from 1986 to 1988 and I came across a couple of pictures that showed buses with the prefix FK before the bus number. These were usually the depot the bus belonged to ie OM Oldham, PS Princess Road.
Can anyone please shed some light on the FK prefix and where it was etc etc.
FK was the code for Frederick Road. This was formerly the HQ of Salford City Transport.
FK was the depot code for Frederick Rd, Salford, the former HQ and works for Salford City Transport.
Does anyone know of a bus or coach named after Jack Harrison, VC, MC in Hull.
Jack was awarded a posthumous Victoria Cross in 1917 and I believe a bus or coach was named after him.
Thanks for any leads you can give.
There was a Kingston-upon-Hull coach, number 40 (B40UAG) that was named "John Harrison VC".
It was a Dennis Dorchester with Plaxton Paramount 3200 (C50Ft) body.
It was new in July or August 1984 with Kingstonian fleet names.
I photographed it on 18/09/1984 at the International Garden Festival in Liverpool, but it had no visible name.
An Ian Allan fleetbook correct to January 1985 gives it as carrying its name.
If you Google "B40UAG", the first result should give you a photo by the late Roy Marshall taken in Hull in 1986 and shows the name being carried between the windscreen wipers.
How far down Holderness Road in Hull did the trolleybuses run? Is that a remaining green gantry pole opposite Kingston Vets on the same side as the Apollo pub near the roundabout?
Hi Brenda. To the best of my knowledge, trolleybuses did not extend beyond Ings Road on the Holderness Road route after they directly replace the trams on this route in 1940. The green traction pole you refer to at Diadem Grove roundabout does indeed look like a former trolleybus pole. I suspect this was one of many to be re-planted at various locations for street lighting purposes following the withdrawal of trolleybuses in Hull in 1964. It begs the question as to why it is still there, apparently serving no purpose.
The Holderness Road trolleybuses terminated just short of Ings Road. Hull’s traction poles were of six different types so it would be useful to have a photograph to try to identify the pole.
Many poles were retained for lighting purposes but they were transferred to the City Engineer’s Department so it is possible that some were re-used.
Malcolm, here is a link to the street view showing the pole in question. Your identification of which type it is would be interesting. Click here to view.
That doesn’t look like a traction pole to me at all, but instead a sewer vent, the fluted top is an indicator of its function, instead of having a finial as was normal with traction poles. I must say I haven’t noticed a sewer vent anywhere for some time.
That photo looks more like a sewer vent pipe than a traction pole.
Many thanks, David and Phil, for identifying it as a sewage vent. I never knew such things existed on a public road. It certainly looks to have dated from the trolleybus era, so Brenda was right to ask the question. Mystery solved, and something new learned.
Have just seen the photograph and I am certain that it is not a traction pole.
The other point that works against it being a trolleybus traction pole is that the vent pipe looks to be vertical, straight and true. Trolleybus poles were, I was always led to believe erected with an outward lean, so that once the overhead wires were installed and tensioned, the poles would assume an upright ‘true’ vertical. This was certainly borne out by the poles that remained along the Sutton Road in Maidstone, which were kept as lamp standards long after the trolleybuses finished. Without the wires, they all relaxed to a decidedly ‘outward-leaning’ stance.
Again, I was told by an old timer that this pre-tensioned design was very much more pronounced for trolleybus standards than tramway poles, because of the extra weight of copper wiring.
Plaxton Body Style on Bedford J2 Chassis.
The first bodies built by Plaxton on the Bedford J2 chassis from 1961 were the ‘Consort’ style 7ft 6in wide with the wrap around 2 piece windscreen and 3 piece rear.
In 1965 this changed to the wider ‘Embassy’ style 8ft wide with one piece screens same front & rear.
But there were 2 coaches built in 1969 in the older style for Bradford Ambulance Service, These being LAK 118G and 119G.
My question is why did Plaxton revert to the earlier style for these two coaches?
I attach photos of LAK 118G and also ABC 330K of the later style for comparison.
John, I can’t imagine that a firm like Plaxton would have built two of the older style bodies for the sheer fun of doing so. My guess would be that the client specified the pattern. Perhaps, being for Bradford’s Ambulance Service, they wanted vehicles with the same ‘footprint’ as an ambulance.
Pete, I am sure you are correct, presumably Bradford Ambulance Service required the narrower 7ft 6in so as to make them more accessible to narrow urban streets. The J2’s would have been used presumably as welfare buses to transport the elderly & disabled to outpatient appointments at local hospitals & clinics.
Bradford Ambulance also had two more in the batch LAK 120/121G, so four in total, which I suppose made it worthwhile to resurrect the earlier design.
Only LAK 118G & LAK 119G survive, 118 as a catering vehicle, and 119 as a motor home.
I am a bus/coach anorak and wonder whether any full fronted Burlingham Sun Saloon coaches still exist. My reason being is that I asked Oxford Diecast if they could produce a model in 1:76 as they already do in their smaller scale models but was told none exist in "real life " Thank you for your assistance.
Why should no 1:1 examples matter?
According to Wiki it is only 4 to 5 yrs since they made the 1:148, surely they still have the drawings and other reference materials they used then.
After typing my last comment I noticed that Paragon Kits advertise a 1:76 Sun Saloon body. paragonkits/
Peter Bourne and I seem to be getting different messages about Oxford Diecast products. They told me a couple of years ago that they research very carefully when planning a new model, including copious views of a vehicle in the suggested livery. I had suggested a model of MTD 235 in either Pennine or Leyland Demonstrator livery. How can they then tell Peter that they can’t produce a model in 1/76 when they produce it in 1/148 for British N scale? Perhaps they should have a word with the people at Bachmann, who model in one scale and enlarge or shrink to the other!
No, Peter, I’m not aware of any of that style of body still ‘alive’ in real terms.
A few years ago somebody in Bus & Coach Preservation’s classifieds was offering a Guy Arab III for sale which had been fitted with a Sunsaloon body from another vehicle (donor not specified in the ad). I can’t find the ad without going through 100s of back copies, so more details may be a while in coming! I seem to remember that the vehicle was located on mainland Europe at the time it was advertised, and that the asking price was well over the odds.
Why should no 1:1 examples matter?
According to Wiki it is only 4 to 5 yrs since they made the 1:148, surely they still have the drawings and other reference materials they used then.
Perhaps I’m being thick. I thought I was riding on a Burlingham Sun Saloon last week – Steve Morris’s ex Bournemouth PS2. (One of three which I thought were all in preservation.)
I’ve just seen David Oldfield’s comment of 23 August. The sun saloon as modelled in 1:148 which is wanted in 1:76 is shown as a Paragon kit in that link provided by John Lomas. That and the ‘Bournemouth’ are not the same.
For David Oldfield’s benefit, the Burlingham bodied PS2s of Bornemouth have an exposed radiator and are essentially a version of the half-canopy coach with a full width cab. The Sunsaloon was a style with concealed radiator and low-mounted stylised headlamp bezels, mainly supplied to Walter Alexander & Sons on Leyland PS1.
Compare and contrast with the Bournemouth design.
I’m writing in the hope that you can help with a query regarding luxury coaches from the 1930’s, in particular the Gilford.
Did these coaches originally have art-deco interior mirrors intended for use by passengers? If you have any information or images regarding these mirrors and the interiors in general that you are able to share I’d be very appreciative.
Gilford and all the other builders of coach chassis provided a self supporting driveable frame that was most often then fitted with a coach-built body by a separate company. The interior design in the 1930s was at the discretion of the customer specifying the body. Interior mirrors were often fitted and these were the product of suppliers to the coachbuilders, these same firms would provide similar items for contemporary luxury car bodies.
Can anyone tell me where there is or give me a short history of Banarbys Coachbuilders.
"The ABC of British Bus Bodies" by James Taylor states that it was founded in 1870 as a blacksmith/wheelwright. It became B Barnaby & Sons in 1926 and, from 1937, Barnaby’s Bus Bodies (Hull) Ltd, with premises in Neptune and Ropery Street. The company was sold in 1960 and finally wound up in 1974, latterly building hearses. Most customers hailed from Yorkshire, Early bus bodies included charabancs and in the 1930’s it was building single-deck bodies on chassis such as Leyland Cheetahs and Tigers. In the late 1940’s, it built bodies on Dennis Lancets/Tigers and Bedford OB’s. It also re-bodied some chassis, too. It also built a few double-deck bodies.
Barnabys built bodies for Everingham Brothers of Pocklington, some of which passed to East Yorkshire Motor Services.
The Carnegie Centre in Hull has a couple of photo albums of Barnaby’s products but I don’t know if they have any other information.
Barnaby was a most fascinating bodybuilder – in later years conservative in style, and in the early days up to the 1930s their products were unashamedly old fashioned in appearance and delightful for it. At all times, however, the construction was sound and with good materials. At Ledgard’s we had two "Light lions" and one Cheetah, all acquired with the business of G. F.Tate of Leeds when he sadly died in 1943.
Fascinating, Chris Y. Do you have photos of any of the three?
Booth & Fisher, Halfway, had three Bedford OBs bodied by Barnaby in 1948. They were registered LRB 749/50/1 and I assume this was the same Barnaby.
You’ve done us proud, Roger, finding that extensive number of photos. How sad the first bus, the TD3, looks in its final days as a contractor’s bus, with the upstairs front side window blanked out with boarding! If David Aston comes back to visit his post, he should be pleased at what we’ve belatedly come up with three years after his enquiry!
Barnaby also constructed many van and ambulance commercial bodies. The ‘Needlers’ once famous chocolate/sweet company of Hull being one.
Interesting comment re quality because my understanding their early 1950s quality was so poor that York Pullman asked for a replacement for a 3 year old or so vehicle-hence the late bodying of JVY 516.
York Pullman’s JVY 516 was their last Barnaby bodied coach but, as far as I know, the body still fitted was the original. If the chassis was 3 years old when registered then it is more likely down to York Pullman’s conservative purchasing policy (unless I have missed something).
The Barnaby bodies on FVY 410/11 certainly did fail in the early 1960s, resulting in them receiving new Roe bodies.
Can any of you knowledgeable chaps come to my assistance?
As some of you will be aware from my postings on this site, between 1967 and 75, I was a driver at NGT’s Percy Main Depot, Tynemouth and Wakefields as it was then. Mainly to satisfy my own curiosity, I have been trying to compile a history of T&W up to them becoming part of NBC. I have sourced a great deal of information from North Tyneside Library Archives, about how the company started with trams and subsequently became part of the BET group. The first bus was a 1914 ‘B’ type Daimler, and came from Northern in 1921, ‘J 2551’ numbered D1 later T1 in T&W fleet, but here is where I have some glaring gaps in what I can dig up. I’m looking for general information about vehicles with the following fleet numbers 2/38 – 43/81 – 87/9 – 111/17. Some may well have been utilities, whilst other pre war vehicles were rebodied in the late 40’s, although those that were retained their original fleet numbers. Some information I have about vehicles between 118 & 156 is also incomplete, e. g. some would have carried the Wakefields name; obviously, several batches would come within those number groupings, and not all with the same chassis or body builder, but I would appreciate any assistance anyone can give me.
You should try to get hold of a copy of the PSV Circle/ Omnibus society fleet history of Tynemouth – it also covers Tyneside and Venture. It is about 40 years old so now rather dated, but nevertheless, for anyone interested in Tynemouth and Wakefields, it is invaluable. As your post is three years old, I don’t know if you are still after this information, but if you like I can summarise what it has to say.
Bus Image from 1930s Northumberland.
I’m looking for a photograph of the type of bus that would have been in service between Blyth, Northumberland and Newcastle upon Tyne in the 1930s. The image is for use in a community art project to go along with the reminiscences of a lady, now aged 98, who was a bus conductress at that time. Can anyone help me to source such a photograph please?
The most obvious operator on the Blyth to Newcastle service was United Automobile Services Limited.
United was one of the big territorial company operators whose bus service network stretched from Berwick-upon-Tweed down to Scarborough/Bridlington so the availability of some historical photographs of their buses is quite possible.
United opened a garage in Blyth circa 1919 and built up a network of services as well as acquiring smaller companies. United acquired the business of Thomas Allen of Blyth in 1933 who also operated a service from Blyth into Newcastle.
I have a magazine that includes a photograph of a circa 1929 Leyland TD1 double decker operated by United which has Newcastle and Newbiggin on the destination screen (‘Buses Extra 7’ published in 1977/1978). If it is double decker buses the lady recalls then this type is quite possibly a type she might recognise. (Copyright restrictions prevent the article being uploaded on this site but I am willing to email a copy to Michele if my email addressed is passed on to her).
This link leads to a photograph of a similar style bus operated by Wilts and Dorset, a big company similar to United: busmanjohn. files. wordpress.
This link leads to a photograph of a United single decker bus new in 1934 (United LH165 (HN 9765), a Bristol H with Eastern Counties bodywork): sct61.uk/ualh165.
Meanwhile I will see if anything turns up in what books I have.
Does anyone know which company supplied the Hastings Tramways Company with its first tram, in April 1906, please?
John, according to the excellent LRTA handbook "The Tramways of the South Coast", Hastings’ first trams (1-30) were built by ER&TCW (The Electric Railway & Tramway Carriage Works Ltd) in 1905.
The tramway opened on 31 July 1905 and was replaced by trolleybuses on 15 May 1929.
The system was interesting in that, because of objections to the use of overhead wires along the Promenade, it used the Dolter surface contact power supply section from 1907. Because of safety and efficiency problems, in 1914 some trams were fitted with Tilling Stevens petrol-electric motors to cover this section until overhead wires were finally erected in 1920.
As an aside, I recall that Blackpool started with the conduit system (at least on the seafront) and suffered endless problems with sand and seawater clogging up and flooding ‘down below’ until it was abandoned!
Going even further ‘aside’ than Chris Hebbron’s comment, Wolverhampton used a stud contact system which had among its features a common failure for the stud (raised by magnetism via a ‘skate’ under the tram) to return to the lower position. Thus, it remained live. The local horses found it quite shocking!
Indeed, Pete, the surface contact system had problems wherever it was used. Indeed, it was reported that in one city (Lincoln?) young boys were paid to "test" the studs! I suspect that tales of near fatalities have become exaggerated over the years, but one major flaw was that trams would become stranded between two non-working studs and have to be pushed by passengers.
Blackpool’s conduit system referred to by Chris was obviously not suited to seaside operation, but of course numerous cities used it successfully for many years (eg. London and Washington).
Today we have a development of the stud system being built and operated as we speak, namely the French "ground-level power" system which collects power from a central third-rail activated by two collector shoes under each tram. This system is by no means infallible and only time will tell if the French develop it further.
Another early adopter of the ‘Dolter’ stud contact system was Mexborough & Swinton. It wasn’t just the horses that were energised by the faulty studs, the local miners with steel sets in their boots were also frequent bright sparks. Just to prove the adage what goes around comes around have you noticed the posh new trams at the Rio Olympics?, they have the Aps system which stands for something like Alimentation par sol, fed through the soil (?)
Mention of London Transport’s conduit pickup system reminds me of this colour photo I’ve had for some years of plough ejection/insertion taken by my uncle just before the trams were scrapped. It was taken between Tooting Broadway and Colliers Wood in South London. The trams never stopped either way, with the conductors raising/lowering the roof pole whilst walking along and the plough being manually inserted as seen here, being put into the inverted ‘U’ between the trucks of this E1. The plough automatically slid out by following the slot coming into the centre and joining into a common slot, ready for a plough to go out again – see bottom right for slot coming in. The change to overhead power here was necessitated by a railway bridge, whereby trains would have fouled any U/G feed equipment under the road. I admired these guys, who worked in the open in all extremes of weather, yet were always smartly uniformed! I never passed by on foot without watching this operation for 30 mins at least and sometimes rode in the trams, too!.
Pedant’s Corner: the metal protectors you put on your pit booits were actually “Segs", Andrew: I had to say that because it’s such a lovely word and conjures up images of cobbler’s shops reeking of leather and glue with cards of these segs for sale: Blakey’s segs have a website I see!
With regard to the Rio trams (I know that there is usually a fair bit of movement from the original topic on this site, but change of mode and country is unusual – not that I have any objection). I only speak a few words of Portuguese (picked up on a wonderful Railway Holiday) but ‘Alimentation par sol’ looks like ‘Solar powered’. No doubt one of the readers has the necessary expertise to confirm or refute this.
Andy, the French system APS (Alimentation par le Sol) is translated as "feeding via the ground". It was first used in Bordeaux in 2003 but has since been used in Reims, Anger, Orlean, Tours and Dubai.
There have been operating problems and many in the industry are sceptical of its long-term potential. However, for use within historic or visually-sensitive city centres it offers a useful option.
I also spent many a fascinating half hour or so watching the shoes entering or leaving the trams near the Common end of Streatham High Road on the old A 23.
I’m going back to 1971. I got a place at De la Salle teacher training college in Middleton. Because said college only had campus accommodation for years 2, and 3, first years lived ‘out’. I was in Glen Avenue, Blackley. I used to get the number 60 to visit girlfriend students at Sedgley Park. (Now a police training college) What was the exact route of this service? I used to get on at the ‘tram office’ on Rochdale Road in the ‘dip’ just further towards Middleton from Glen Ave.
I have an undated SELNEC bus map which would have been published sometime just after the time of the formation of the PTE (November 1969 so perhaps published during 1970).
In the list on the map it refers to service 60 as ‘Cannon Street-Blackley Circular via Cheetham Hill or Rochdale Road’. There were clockwise and anti-clockwise circular services that both carried the same service number 60.
Following the map the anti-clockwise service ran via the following route: Cannon Street, High Street, Shudehill, Rochdale Road, (Blackley tram office), Rochdale Road, Victoria Avenue, Middleton Road, Cheetham Hill Road, Corporation Street, Cannon Street.
The clockwise service appears to leave from Cannon Street travelling via High Street, Shudehill, Withy Grove and Corporation Street. The route after that is clearer travelling via Cheetham Hill Road, Middleton Road, Victoria Avenue, Rochdale Road, (Blackley tram office), Rochdale Road, Shudehill, Withy Grove, Corporation Street then Cannon Street.
The ‘tram office’ Mike refers to stood in the ‘v’ of the junction of Middleton Old Road and Rochdale Road. The building can be made out on Google Streetview.
There is an older photo of the building at: pinterest/
I wonder if you could help, we are wondering why Coach Companies often have the ending ‘tonian’ por exemplo. Altonian/Bedfordian?
Brutonian in Somerset spring to mind…
It is to show allegiance to a place, generally the operational centre;
Brutonian, means native to Bruton, just as Glaswegian means native to Glasgow.
That wonderful thing called wikipedia tells me that this word ending is a demonym. It is a term for residents of or associated with a particular place. There are several types, and include "Chinese" for the people of China, "English" for the people of England, etc. For the ending in question the site notes "Prestonian" for Preston, Lancs, and "Torontonian" for Toronto. I guess all those coach companies have taken their place name and added this suffix to indicate their place of origin. This just goes to show that coaches must have a personality, as the suffix is meant to apply to people!
Barfordian Coaches once of Great Barford near Bedford but now with a Bedford address. barfordiancoaches. co. uk/  
Truronian of Truro (according to Wikipedia: Truronian was formed in September 1987 by former Western National managers….in April 2008, Truroninan was purchased by FirstGroup….in March 2012, the trading name was sold to Newell’s Travel).
Many of these only added the IAN as in the Alton-ian and Bedford-ian examples.
This idea was also used by Duple in developing their Hendon-ian body.
Windsorian is another.
You can’t do it with all names, though: I find the following imaginary ones unconvincing:
Yr Wyddgrugian—the English version of which would sound distinctly mildewy.
As "-ian" is from Latin, I suppose we shouldn’t expect our earthy Saxon, Danish and Celtic place names to fit into the pattern. Salopia Saloon Coaches has no final "-n" and sounds quite happy, but only because the Romans couldn’t pronounce words beginning with "Shr-".
Just remembered my Oxfordshire days . . . and Heyfordian – still going I believe.
I think we can all understand why there are no Isle of Wight coach companies called Caulkhead-ian!
There’s one not far from Bedford – Barfordian Coaches. I believe it was originally based in Great Barford, but is now in Bedford itself.
Kingston upon Hull City Transport’s coaching section was named "Kingstonian".
Can anyone help me please with history of this coach a Bedford SB new to Watsons of Strood in 1-1952. with a Duple body C24F. a description describes it as a luxury coach. This coach was later in the fleet of Redby Coaches of Roker, Sunderland date unknown I would be grateful of any help in tracing any change of ownership after Watsons and again after Redby. Whilst with Redby it was regularly used by Sunderland football club, their ground being in Roker close by to Redby’s garage.
There’s a mention of OKJ 210 on the ‘Buses On Screen’ local na rede Internet.
Private Coach (1953, British Pathe News) OKJ210, Bedford SB/Duple of Watson, Strood – a luxury coach with hostess service, radio message service and toilet providing free travel to London, seen leaving Aylesbury. It’s the idea of car dealer Raymond Way to bring potential customers to his car showroom in Kilburn! (Thanks Martin Ingle)
After Watsons. 1952, this coach is known to have gone to Scott Greys of Darlington before going on to Redby Coaches of Sunderland.
I ask can anyone be able to help with change of ownership dates also after Redby’s would be of interest to me. The Scott Greys information just been forth coming to me 5/2/17.
Buses in Manchester Circa 1940 – 1945.
This seems to be the best place to aid my search.
My grandfather, Daniel Francis Kelly, was a bus driver in early 1940’s in Manchester.
All I know for certain is that he moved back to Ireland in 1945, so that would be when his service ended.
I’m trying to find out what kind of bus he would have driven. Presumably it would have been Manchester Corporation? I’ve had a quick search and some names have come up like a Streamliner and Daimler Utility.
Ultimately I’d like to find out what route he also drove, however I feel this will be highly unlikely – still worth a shot!.
During the late thirties, Manchester Corporation had a standard design of bus body which was built on Crossley, Leyland and Daimler chassis, the bodies being built by Metro-Cammell, Crossley, Leyland and English Electric, so your grandfather might have driven any of these, they were probably the most common buses in Manchester during the war. The Daimler Utilities were only a small part of the fleet and were not built until late in the war. It is also possible that he could have worked for North Western, which had a depot in Manchester.
When you say he drove buses in Manchester, he could of course have driven for any of the surrounding Municiple Undertakings, all of which worked in to Manchester.
These being Ashton under Lyne, SHMD, Stockport, Oldham, Salford, Bolton, and Rochdale.
North Western Road Car Company has already been mentioned, and there was also Lancashire United Transport, and of course Maynes, the only independent operator to run Stage services in Manchester.
I know it slightly blurrs the boundaries for you, but Manchester Corporation Transport Department ran more route miles outside the City limits than it did in it.
Good luck in your quest.
"Streamliner" was the name of the standard design that Don described, and this link shows what it looked like: flic. kr/p/qxRGjh.
The Greater Manchester Transport Society archive at the Museum of Transport, Boyle St in Manchester, is the custodian of payroll records for MCTD, including those from the wartime years. It might be a laborious search (and, realistically, you’d have to do it for yourself!), but the records are there and we’re a friendly bunch. A phone call to George Turnbull, the Museum’s archivist, on 0161-205-2122 (Wednesdays are the best days to catch him)would give you some idea of what might be discovered.
Well first of all thank you all for your replies – some very useful info there.
I’ve been able to get some more info too. My grandmother, who met my grandfather on the bus route lived in Salford, Broughton area.
In that area, the current bus routes and operators in the area are as follows.
Stage Coach Manchester.
151, Hollinwood, Morrisons – Mandley Park.
294, Langley – Trafford Park.
First Greater Manchester.
42, East Didsbury Parrs Wood – North Manchester General Hospital.
52, Salford Shopping Centre – Failsworth.
59, Rush croft – Manchester Piccadilly.
135, Bury - Manchester Piccadilly.
I have no doubt that the routes are different as are the numbers. But hopefully this narrows down which operators were in that area circa 1943.
I’ll make my way down to to the museum and speak to George Turnbul and see if I can have a look through the archives.
Thanks all for your help so far.
Living in Broughton, which was in the Salford City Transport area, the probability was that your Grandfather drove for that Corporation. The majority of the fleet at that time comprised Leyland Titan TD4 & 5s and AEC Regents 8.8 litre (Manchester Museum of Transport has a splendid preserved example of one these). There were other marques still in use during that period including a few Dennis’ acquired in 1932 and Crossley Mancunians dating from 1934 and 1938. Most of the bus fleet at the outbreak of war was less than 5 years old but by the end of the war it was in a deplorable state due to poor maintenance and management. One bus route in the area that does date back to that era is the 135, then the 35 Manchester to Bury route which was a joint service between Bury, Manchester and Salford Corporations.
If your Grandfather lived in Broughton it is also conceivable that he worked at Manchester’s Queens Rd garage in Cheetham Hill as it is not far from Broughton and, if so, experienced driving the Leyland and Crossley Streamliners. Buses from that garage served a wide area of North Manchester up to Rochdale, Oldham and beyond plus several cross city services.
James, your grandfather would not have been confined to a single route. He would have worked from a depot, and most likely would have worked in rotation on all the routes that that depot operated. If one of those routes went through Broughton then I think the operator would be Salford, as Manchester didn’t operate in that area until later, unless anyone else knows different.
Orla has given a very comprehensive and accurate answer. All I would add is that, in the 1930s, up until around 1938, both Manchester and Salford gave job priority to people living within their own boundaries wherever possible due to high levels of unemployment. Had your grandfather been employed before 1938, living in Broughton would have almost certainly precluded his employment by MCTD as the occupation of driver was not hard to fill from within the Manchester boundary. By 1940, with large numbers of eligible men having been recruited to the forces or priority industries, the restrictions were ignored if not lifted.
Arthur Hustwitt (Memorial) Collection. Copyright NA3T.
Does anyone know if Albion Victor FT39N Duple C31F which was new to Cronshaw of Hendon 1950 still survives in preservation?
According to PSVC Preserved Buses it has been listed with Leary, Pilsley for a number of years but does not appear on the rally scene, nor on the DVLA web site. Previous to Leary it was listed with Simpson, Killamarsh circa 1999. Photo above shows it at Wembley in 1952.
Below are two views of CCB 300 owned by Cadman of Thorne taken by me in their yard at Thorne. Date unknown.
Also a photo of another vehicle there which may be of interest 571 BWT.
I’ve been hoping someone might have remarked on why it is registered in Blackburn.
Cronshaw coaches were registered in Blackburn until 1959. At one time the company did apparently have an operation there, but it’s my recollection that registration of the coaches in Blackburn continued even when the bulk, at least, of the operation was in London. This was a time when I didn’t have the same interest in coaches as buses, and I’m sure others will be able to elaborate on this story.
In 1928, Lewis Cronshaw ran an hourly Blackburn to Manchester service.
He was established in Blackburn, then started a business in Hendon, but registered some coaches in Blackburn.
At some stage it was merged into Valliant-Cronshaw, which later merged with Silverline.
Cronshaw had a second Albion CCB 301.
CCB 301 An FT39 72869B Du 54035 C31F 1950 Cronshaw, NW4.
I came across CCB 300 less than ten years ago under a tarpaulin at a preservation storage site in Derbyshire. It wasn’t in a usable state, and didn’t appear to have any work being done on it. I haven’t heard anything about it since.
Peter, Pilsley the address of Leary the recorded owner is in Derbyshire so looks like its still owned by him. Amazing the people pay rent on storage year on year but never do any restoration. Hopefully it may find a new owner before it gets beyond restoration.
Interesting submission from John W, there. I’d been aware of the listing of CCB 301 on BLOTW (but no sign of CCB 300) so I had assumed there was only the one vehicle, and BLOTW was in error. CCB 300 has now appeared on BLOTW, I’m inclined to suppose after intervention by John. Could I ask, does the additional information come from a PSVC chassis list? I notice that the vehicle is quoted in the caption as an FT39N, while BLOTW gives FT39. There was also an FT39AN model, I seem to recall. Could someone possibly remind me of the differences between the various models? I recollect that differing lengths/wheelbases was in it somewhere.
Also, I see that CCB 300 is consistently given as C31F, rather than FC31F. This is something else which I’m sure has been discussed before, IIRC some models of Albion were not regarded as full-front since they had never appeared as half-cab, despite being front vertical-engined. Here again, could someone remind?
Dear David, When I read your request for information on which Albion chassis were built with a full-front structure I was at home and had a copy of Albion of Scotstoun by Adams and Milligan to hand. So here is, as far as I can see, the information you are requesting. You are correct that some Albion PSV models with front vertical engines and axles mounted at the front of the chassis were designed to take full-fronted bodywork, having the same cab floor and dash structure as related lorries: these were the Viking CX41 and HD61/73, and the Victor FT and VT.
The Viking was a full-sized bus for unpaved road markets although one was given a 37-seat Thurgood body and registered (NJH150) in the UK. BLOTW has it as FC37F despite the above.
The Victor FT was a smaller model, part of the lightweight FT (under 2-tons unladen, 6 ½ ton Payload) series of goods chassis current from 1939-59; the last of the previous PH series Victors had been built in 1939 and the first of the new series was the petrol powered FT3AB announced in 1947. The engine was a six-cylinder unit initially EN277 of 4.25 litres but from 1949 EN282 of 4.6 litres. Like the Viking it was lorry-derived with a straight frame. By the end of 1948 the FT39 version was in production, this had the four-cylinder 4.88 litre EN286 engine as did the FT37 Chieftain lorry, as the earlier type had been the passenger version of the FT3, major differences being confined to longer springs and dampers all round. A five-speed gearbox with crawler first was fitted to the FT39 as opposed to the four-speed on petrol versions.
The A suffix from 1952 indicated a number of driveline and suspension revisions, a change to spring mountings causing a slight lengthening of offered wheelbases. Overall lengths remained constant being coded N for25ft nominal bodied length, L for 27ft 6in and LX for 30ft.
The K revisions producing the FT39KAN, KAL and KALX entailed a larger EN287 5.5 litre engine and heavier duty front springs. In all over two thousand FT series Victors were built until 1958 over forty are listed as preserved/surviving in 1999. The VT series was derived from the CH Chieftain and built from 1959 until 1966.
Further to what John Wakefield was saying, I am in close proximity to bus preservationists on a weekly basis and have been for a number of years. Often work gets done only when time money and inclination come together; for instance: a friend got his Derwent II bodied YRT ready for its MoT over a period of years on that basis. Sadly the first time he was to take it out for public display at the Riverside Museum just under a year ago he suffered a low speed traffic accident at Glasgow Green; this, though, has been the spur to get previous in-service damage to the lower body frame repaired and over the last year Scott, a GVVT member who is a time served coachbuilder and who has a real flair for composite bodies has renewed much of the frame below the waist-rail including re-instating a boot that fell out over twenty five years ago. Conversely there are other buses and coaches at Bridgeton that have either never been restored, such as a 1971 ex Glasgow J-Type Atlantean; some are currently half restored and have been for a decade (these include an ex-Guernsey Victor lacking seats, glazing and panels) or were once fully restored and then left out in the open to moulder away. The owner of one such here, a pre-war Alexander Bluebird Tiger, will do nothing to re-restore it but will only sell for a price that will recompense him for the work he once did. Thus, it exists critical (previous neglect in the open) but stable (under cover and dry for a few years) and unlikely to be a candidate for rehabilitation while the current owner lives.
P. S. Does anyone reading this have a set of BMAC rear lights of 1960s/1970s pattern suitable for a Plaxton Derwent II?
To Stephen’s comments about inactive preservation I would add that it isn’t always safe to assume that rent is being paid year after year. If an enthusiast is running a storage site and the rent on a vehicle stops coming in, what is he going to do? I remember the late Norman Myers, when he was running a site in Bolton, selling the same vehicle three times without ever buying it. On each occasion the owner agreed to give him the vehicle in lieu of unpaid rent!
Leeds City Transport Fleet List.
Does anyone know of a Leeds City Transport fleet list? 1930’s until it’s demise.
The PSV Circle published a fleet history of Leeds City Transport circa 1969. I don’t know of any update of this history.
Another source of information on Leeds buses is the series of books published by the Leeds Transport Historical Society under the title Leeds Transport. There are five volumes in the series and have comprehensive details of Leeds buses. The books are quite expensive averaging about £35 each.
There now appears to be an attempt to clear stocks of the ‘Leeds Transport’ série de livros. Last year I invested in four of them from MDS Books priced at £25 each, and I noticed last week on a visit to Otley (the Yorkshire one) that a discount bookshop there had them in their window at the same price. This is still of course far too much to spend just for the fleet list aspect, but they are superb books and well worth it at this reduced price.
I was wondering if anyone might know what number bus in 1973 travelled from Sheffield to Doncaster (via the Steelworks district) and what bus station in Doncaster it arrived at. Also, how long would the journey have taken and was it a double decker bus.
Many thanks in advance for your help with this matter.
Service 77 ran from Pond Street Sheffield through the east end to Rotherham and then via Conisborough to Waterdale Doncaster or later the southern (or only?) bus station. It was operated by the three municipalities and took I think an hour. For many years it was single deck operated but changes of route or bridges in the ?50s made double deck working possible. In the mid sixties Doncaster used newish front entrance PD3s or CVG6s and Rotherham older CVG6s. Corrections and improvements please!
Further rootings (or routings): Single deck working of route 77 (the only Doncaster CT route number ever displayed) seems to have ceased in 1958, when Doncaster 22 23 & 24 ,1953 AEC Regal III 9.6 half cabs were stood down. 22 now belongs to DOLRS and is preserved at Sandtoft. The Sheffield third was not of course the “municipality” but SJOC, who at one time used PD2/30’s. … and there was once a Southern Bus Station, probably as daunting as the “Northern’- now no more.
This is an enlargement from a Valentine’s postcard in my collection taken in Commercial Street, Halifax in the mid-1930s. It shows a pair of Halifax Corporation AEC Regents with what I believe were Short Brothers open-staircase bodies with their distinctive "camel-roof".
Mention has been made of this style of bodywork on other Old Bus Photo threads before, but I think this is the first illustration of them on this site. Sadly, on enlargement, exact identification of them has not been possible.
The "camel-roof" bodies were designed to allow head-room for upper-deck passengers along the central gangway. I understand this was a failed attempt to compete with Leyland’s early "lowbridge" bodies. With the hump, they look to be normal height so the question is – what apparent advantage or benefit did they offer over normal highbridge bodies?
Thx, Paul, for posting this photo – views of these buses are certainly rare. You pose the question that many of us enthusiasts have asked over the years. To me, they would only be useful in a Beverley Bar situation, rarer even than photos of these buses!
If the Leyland system was patented, how was it that it became so common – did other bodybuilders pay a royalty to Leyland for building their product?
Presumably camel back buses were more Beverley Bar than Leyland “L". Many old rail bridges were arched and the bus would just have to clear a more narrow central span. Like Beverley, it would have required a greater degree of precision! The arched rail overbridge at Woodlesford near Leeds has an “optional" single central lane marked on the highway and I’m sure there are others - perhaps in Elland, which may have something to do with these. Maybe our Halifax panel will know how this worked in practice… The Leyland patent was more desperation than comfort, trapped (not literally) between bridges of the railway boom and length restrictions for single decks. Access was difficult, capacity restricted by spreading passengers and the limited height did not help to ventilate the cig smoke. Then there was the lower saloon stoop.
Surely they would lessen the chances of a bridge strike at any arched bridge.
Perhaps Halifax had a preponderance of those and thought this design could be a cost cutter.
Halifax’s ‘Camel Roofed’ Regents came from three different bodybuilders – the first ones from Short Bros., the second ones from Hoyal and the later ones from English Electric. There were recognisable differences between all these and both the vehicles in the photo are from the later batches with English Electric bodies. The one in the foreground appears to be in the CP 94xx series (116-120, CP 9442-9446). The one in the background looks to have just two or three numbers in its registration number, which would make it one of 2-6 (JX 321-325), 103-105 (JX 46-48) or 133-136 (JX 331-334).
Chris, I believe I have read somewhere that Leyland’s patent for the lowbridge side-gangway layout only required a payment when used by others for a limited number of years – perhaps five? During that time, such alternatives as these hump back roofs, and double side gangway upstairs were used to avoid paying a royalty to Leyland. Once the patent royalty fee period had expired, the other designs seem to have been rapidly dropped in favour of Leyland’s design. I cannot recall where I read this, but someone else may be able to pinpoint the source or veracity of this.
The information following is from the late Alan Townsin’s book on AEC Regents published by TPC and correspondence in the PDF copies of Leyland Torque.
Leyland did have a patent on the Titan style body; it was purchased from General Motors, who had several us patents on double deck body design but had only extended the one by the Fifth Avenue coach Company to other territories. It expired prior to world war 2.
Notably the Yellow Coach/ Rackham US patent is different to the patent Leyland bought.
The purpose of the Camel-Roof body (an AEC registered design) was cosmetic, to make a highbridge bus look as low as a titan from the viewpoint of a pedestrian. This mattered in areas were double deck buses were novel and in areas where Titans were seen as safe and the previous generation of double decks such as the Leyland G7 and the AEC PS not.
Thanks, Gentlemen, for your thoughts and logical suggestions of the design being an early "Beverley Bar" idea to negotiate arched railway bridges. (Was it this design which led EYMS to take the next step?)
Many thanks also to John S, for your local knowledge.
Your reply opens up more questions and conundrums.
Why did these come from three body builders and over what period? Did Short Bros and Hoyal (who??) decline to make any more because of an AEC royalty demand?
Their fleet numbers and registrations also raise an eyebrow in their lack of sequence. Did they take the fleet numbers of withdrawn buses? Being from a city where fleet numbers and registrations followed a fairly logical and sequential pattern (Leeds) it seems strange that fleet numbers 2-6 should have higher registration numbers than 103-105 etc.
Similarly, for the Halifax prefix CP registrations to be well up into the 9000s in the early 1930s seems remarkable. Perversely, for the prefix JX to have only two or three numbers during this same period seems equally incredible.
John, please can you give us more fleet details of all three batches of these remarkable buses?
Thx, Michael H for some background info about the Leyland patent. As for the Hoyal Body Corporation, they were a shortlived bus body builder (single and double deck) working out from Weybridge between 1922 and 1931, when they went into voluntary liquidation.
It is possible that in those early days these Regents may have been ordered from AEC as complete vehicles and then the bodywork subcontracted out by them to various bodybuilders in the south-east. Leyland offered a complete standard vehicle at the time and AEC’s Chief Designer John Rackham was keen to have a similar arrangement for the Regent.
Hoyal had its origins as Chalmer & Hoyer Ltd., registered at 41 Charing Cross Road, London. They were the first company to take out the patent rights to build the Weymann flexible framed car body design, and became prolific builders of car bodywork – particularly for Morris. They also were early builders of motor boats at premises near Poole in Dorset. By 1927 Chalmer had left and H. W. Allingham was sales manager. Taking the ‘Hoy’ of Hoyer and the ‘al’ of Allingham the company became The Hoyal Body Corporation, and around this time they began diversifying into bus and charabanc bodywork, but this only appears to have lasted for about four years or so.
I have tried to put together a list of the camel-roofed Regents but it doesn’t really help to explain things to be honest – not without having the entire fleet history before you. There seems to have been some initial indecision at first as to whether to have separate number series for the two fleets or not. Buses were allocated fleet numbers upon being ordered, but some were changed upon or just after delivery to fill gaps, and they weren’t necessarily delivered or put into service in the order they were ordered in. Also in between the Regents there were Regal single deckers too.
As for the numbering of the Halifax fleet – well, where do I start ?
The numbering system started straight forwardly enough with the three original Daimler CC types nos. 1-3 of 1912/13 and continued onwards up to ex-demonstrator Regent 57 in 1930, with just six Karriers 1-6 reusing vacated numbers. 53-56 were the first ‘Camel Roofed’ Regents.
Then in 1929 the Joint Committee came into being, though its effect numberwise took a year or so to take effect. A considerable number of former Corporation vehicles were transferred to the JOC fleet, but retained their original numbers. The fleet of George Garrard of West Vale was taken over by the JOC and their vehicles became 60-65. Four more ‘Camel Roofed’ Regents for the JOC became 66-69. Thirteen vehicles from the Hebble fleet became 70-82, and an unknown number of LMS Railway vehicles were briefly operated, the only known ones being 83/84 but is is believed that there were probably many more taking numbers maybe to around 100 or so.
The next new Corporation buses ‘jumped over’ the JOC numbers and started at 107, continuing to 124, whilst lots of new JOC vehicles flooded in to replace the older and second hand ones taking their vacated numbers and continuing up to 105, then ‘jumped over’ the Corporation numbers and continued from 125. The next Corporation deliveries then reverted back to a new series starting from 2 (the original Karrier no. 1 still being in service).
From here Corporation buses ran in a series from 2 up to 88 by 1940, and JOC buses continued from 125 and reached 208 by 1939.
After the war JOC buses continued the prewar series from 209, eventually reaching 293 by 1954. A new series for postwar Corporation buses began at 301 and reached 360 by 1951. By 1954 there were just 25 prewar Regents remaining (all from the Corporation fleet) so the entire Corporation fleet was put into registration number order and renumbered from 11 to 86, though a solitary batch of manual gearbox PD2’s were kept separate as 100-108. A further batch of new CVG6 followed on as 87-98. From 1958, new GM Richard Le Fevre commenced new series for both fleets, Corporation buses starting from 1, and JOC buses from 201. They were numbered in neat blocks with gaps between e. g. 1-9, 11-18, 21-28 etc, and equivalent buses for the two fleets had matching numbers e. g. Regent V’s 11-18 (Corp.) and 211-218 (JOC). Later many of the earlier JOC buses were renumbered into the 300’s to make way for future deliveries.
Then in 1963 Geoffrey Hilditch took over, and…..well….. The system went totally astray after that !
My word, John – many thanks for a fantastic reply.
I’m very grateful that you took the trouble to respond to my rather presumptuous request for further information.
What a complex and fascinating history Halifax Tramways/Corporation had. Until now, I’d only given attention to their wonderful tramway where, in the early days, no far-flung outpost was seemingly off limits, regardless of their potential traffic earnings. Sorry, John – another question:
Could these "camel-roof" Regents also have been the first to wear the "Glasgow" colour scheme?
Yes, the first ‘Camel Roofed’ Regents were also the first to carry the green, orange and cream livery. The first buses of 1912/13 had varnished wood bodies with the bonnets and other bits painted in the current tram style dark blue. With the arrival of manager Ben Hall, as the trams changed to a dark red and cream (not neccessarily the correct terms) so the buses became cream and the same dark red, with the later Karrier WL6’s and the one-off experimental Karrier Chaser, Dennis EV and Leyland Tiger painted in allover dark red.
The prototype AEC Regent(chassis no. 661001) with Short ‘Camel Roofed’ body was put into service by them as a demonstrator on 13th February 1929, registered MT 2114 and in the current AEC demonstration livery of off white with blue relief. It paid an early visit to Halifax in that year where it impressed sufficiently to result in an immediate order for some similar buses. By November 1929 it was repainted into Glasgow’s green, orange and cream livery for demonstration in that city, resulting also in an order from them. It has often been said that the inspiration for Halifax adopting a similar livery was due to its demonstration here in the Glasgow livery, but a reliable authority on the subject insists that he has photographic evidence that it was still in the original off-white and blue at the time. It is still fairly certain that at some point after its visit to Halifax, and after repaint into Glasgow livery, some local councillors saw it – probably at a show, or maybe it even stopped off locally on its way to Scotland – and they made their minds up then. The first three Halifax Regents (53-55, CP 8009-8011) were delivered in November 1929, The official AEC photograph of Halifax Regent 53 was apparently taken almost immediately after the one of MT 2114 after repaint into Glasgow livery so the whole process of seeing the Glasgow livery, deciding to adopt it, having Short’s paint them and getting them them into service seems to have happened impossibly quickly.
Alan Townsin in his TPC book ‘Best of British Buses – AEC Regents 1929-1942’ confirms that designer John Rackham wanted to offer a standard body to complement his Regent chassis, and was responsible for the ‘Camel Roofed’ design and, having no bodybuilding department of their own, he had Short Bros. build a number of bodies on the first few chassis. The demonstrator was the first one, and Halifax took nine, others going to the National Omnibus Co., Wallasey Corporation and two went to Cornish Buses Ltd.(later taken over by Western National).
The initial Halifax livery was very similar to the Glasgow one in layout, with orange lower panels, cream from a band below the lower deck windows to the cantrail (and including the bonnet top), green upper panels, a cream band below the upper deck windows, green around the upper deck windows, and a silver roof.
After a short time this was modified so that the lower deck window pillars and surrounds were also green (as was the bonnet top), with just cream bands above and below, giving a ‘three-banded’ layout.
From the mid-1930’s this was changed again such that the upper deck window pillars and surrounds became cream, and roofs became green instead of silver.
With all the above liveries there was extensive use of black lining separating the different colours. For the record, further minor changes were made after the war with a reduction in some of the black lining. GM Roderick McKenzie introduced a simplified non-banded livery with the arrival of the CVG6’s in 1954, and then applied this to many of the existing vehicles, but there was a quick reversion to the previous style inbetween his leaving and his successor arriving – thanks to some underhand dealings by the body shop ! Once again, under Geoffrey Hilditch’s tenure the livery variations were many and varied.
Many thanks again, John, for your comprehensive reply which gives me more insight into the origin of the Glasgow livery in Halifax. I never realised that there were so many variations of it. Fascinante.
A further point which comes to mind after reading Alan Townsin`s book is that the camel roof design was simply a device to avoid the Leyland lowbridge patent whilst making the bus look like the popular TD1, even though it was essentially a highbridge bus. Leyland introduced the Highbridge body for the TD1 about 1930, so did the patent then elapse, as the standard lowbridge\highbridge concept seems to have been adopted by most body builders by this time?
Not really anything to do with "Beverley Bar" type ideas!
So the ‘camel roof’ double-decker was an AEC design to avoid making ‘lowbridge’ patent payments. I’ll bet that gave Leyland the hump…… (Well someone had to say it!)
John’s comprehensive historical knowledge of the Halifax transport scene never ceases to amaze me. OBP is privileged indeed to include him as a valued contributor. On the subject of the camel roof concept, this, as John Whitaker states, was devised entirely for cosmetic reasons, the appearance from ground level being similar to that of the low built patented Leyland lowbridge (single offside upper saloon gangway) design. The Leyland lowbridge concept originated in the United States, where, between 1922 and 1926, G. J. Rackham had worked for The Yellow Coach Manufacturing Company, later to become the bus manufacturing arm of General Motors. On being appointed as Chief Engineer to Leyland in the summer of 1926, Rackham brought back with him the idea of using the US lowbridge arrangement in his new double deck design, and negotiated the patent rights accordingly. With its lowered height, the new Titan looked supremely stable against much of the tall, ungainly double deck competition, and this undoubtedly contributed to the initial sales success. On moving to AEC to create the even more modern Regent, Rackham was prevented by patent rights from emulating the Leyland lowbridge concept, though, as I understand it, the lowbridge double gangway upper deck design was still available to use, albeit at a penalty in passenger accommodation. Instead, Rackham fell back on another American idea. In the USA at that time, some double deck bodies were constructed with the lowered headroom over the upper saloon seats, but the central gangway was open to the elements. Rackham adapted this to meet the vagaries of the British climate by humping the roof to give adequate gangway headroom, and the camel roof was born. As public acceptance quickly grew of the stability of the highbridge double decker – ‘normal’ height Leyland Titans and Regents began appearing from 1929 – the camel roof thankfully faded away into history. It would seem, also, that the Leyland lowbridge patent lapsed after about five years.
As John has described, in its brief existence between 1921 and 1931, Chalmer and Hoyer, who became, from 1928, The Hoyal Body Corporation of Weybridge, was preoccupied mainly with car bodywork manufacture on the patented lightweight Weymann principle. This employed a (very) lightweight wooden frame with metal inserts at all the joints to preclude timber to timber contact. The whole thing was held together with straining wires and then covered with a layer of muslin stretched over chicken wire, which in turn received a cosmetic layer of leathercloth as a final finish. Internally, seats and fittings were bolted directly to the chassis. The end result was extraordinarily light and reasonably rigid – even some upmarket cars like Rolls Royces had Weymann patent bodies – but one shudders to think how such a flimsy construction would stand up to accident impact. The designer was Charles Terres Weymann, who, despite the German sounding name, was born in Haiti of an American father and Haitian mother, and thus held dual American/ French nationality. He was a pioneer aviator from 1909 and flew during WW1, and his lightweight construction ideas were clearly based upon early aircraft manufacturing principles. He set up a factory in Paris and another in Indianapolis, and licensed his car bodywork design to a number of British manufacturers – Gurney Nutting, Harrington, Mann Egerton, Mulliner, Plaxton and Rover are names that will be familiar to OBP aficionados. Obviously gratified with the success of this venture, Weymann himself then set up a British manufacturing facility, initially in Putney in 1923 before moving to the old Bleriot aeroplane works in Addlestone in 1925, only a short distance from the Hoyal business in Weybridge. By the end of the 1920s the Weymann car body method was losing popularity in favour of metal panel construction and the fortunes of several of the licencees faded likewise, with several moving into other product areas such as bus and coach bodywork. Hoyal became bus builders, but the depression took its toll on many in the motor industries, and the firm folded in 1931, not helped, one imagines, by the more successful presence of the Weymann business just down the road. Indeed, the Weymann factories in Paris and Indianapolis themselves closed in 1930 and 1931 respectively, but the Addlestone business prospered right through its MCW phase from 1932 until closure, after a lengthy strike, in 1966. The Hoyal bus bodies would seem to have been quite soundly constructed, and the firm was well regarded by the local Brooklands motor racing circuit for its speedy, last minute repairs and modifications to the racing cars. Here is a link to a picture of the last Hoyal bus body to enter the Halifax Corporation fleet. AEC Regent No.115, CP 9078, was placed in service on 24 July 1931, but three more entered the Joint Committee fleet after that date, the last, CP 9439, not entering service until 13 January 1932, well past the final creditors meeting of the Hoyal business which was held on 28 August 1931 to wind up the business voluntarily. One wonders where CP 9439 had spent the last four months of 1931. Perhaps it became embroiled in the scramble for assets by the creditors. nonsequitur. freeforums/
Moving on to the subject of the Halifax fleet numbering ‘system’ under Geoffrey Hilditch, this was something that totally bemused me during my two years as a Traffic Clerk at Skircoat Road. As an example, the OBP entry for Halifax Corporation – AEC Regal – BCP 544 – 258 tells of the strange, idiosyncratic approach. This bus was originally JOC number 269 before briefly passing to the Corporation fleet as number 99. It then went back again as JOC number 269, but was then renumbered 268, a number borne by an identical Regal that was withdrawn in 1964. Finally, this bus became number 258, a number previously carried by Albion Nimbus RJX 258, which was the first of these unloved machines to be sold off (to Warrington) in 1965. 268 was then given to a new dual purpose Leopard, and 258 was later awarded to the rebodied ex Bourne and Balmer Reliance NRK 350. Were fleet numbers subject to a rationing scheme in Halifax? The whole merry dance seemed utterly pointless to my simple southern senses. Other buses moved into and out of the 300 series of numbers under a ‘system’ that would have surely baffled the boffins at Bletchley Park.
To add to John’s detailed descriptions of the various Halifax liveries, perhaps one should add the two experimental efforts. The first was applied to a Regent III in February 1955, which had unpainted aluminium panels below the lower saloon waistline instead of orange paint. Curiously, in his book ‘Halifax Passenger Transport 1887 to 1963’ GGH describes this episode in a caption to a picture of bus number 381/281, BCP 675, yet gives the identity of the vehicle as number 282, BCP 676; perhaps John might be able to clarify the matter. The other experiment involved Daimler CVG6 number 285, DCP 844 which had the areas of orange and green reversed, green at the bottom, orange at the top. This was entirely sensible, for, besides being subject to severe fading, orange is a peculiarly difficult colour to match. Green is far less troublesome. During my own time with HPTD it was quite common to witness buses with the lower repaired panels displaying an unsightly chequerboard appearance in varying hues of orange. Legend tells us that the reversed livery provoked a storm of outraged protest, though I cannot understand why this should have been the case, unless it emanated from an attitude in certain quarters of inbuilt intransigence towards intelligent progress that I myself noted during my (thankfully brief) sojourn at Skircoat Road. That livery would have resembled the old Chatham & District scheme which had green at the bottom and brown above. A Halifax version would have surely adopted black mudguards and bolder lining out to beneficial effect. Ah well, it’s all down to personal taste, I suppose. s622.photobucket/
Thanks for your kind comment, Roger.
There were one or two errors in Hilditch’s book, and the caption to the photo of 381 is an example. I’m sure I have a photo of the Regent/Park Royal to which he refers which was in standard livery save for the lower panels being in an unpainted stucco form. I can’t lay my hands on it for some reason but I’m fairly sure it was 282 (BCP 676). The one depicted in the photo in the book is of 381 (formerly 281, BCP 675), which was repainted in the 1950’s/1960’s Glasgow style ‘half and half’ style with all orange below the upper deck floor level, all green above, with a single cream band separating the two. He had obviously got his wires crossed a liitle there. I don’t remember seeing 282 with the unpainted panels, but I do remember 381 and it looked absolutely dreadful. It is surprising how just rearranging the same colours into different proportions and layouts can actually make the shades themselves look different.
I also remember the CVG6/MCCW 285 (DCP 844) in its ‘reversed’ livery. It wasn’t an exact reversal of the standard orange and green livery. The green lower area extended unrelieved right up to the top of the lower deck windows, there was the a cream band above the windows, orange upper deck panels to just below the upper deck windows, cream just below and around those windows, then a green roof. I was only very young at the time but I do remember everyone who saw it saying how awful it looked. I do have two photographs showing it in this short-lived scheme and the green colour looks a very different shade altogether – much paler – but being taken from an old 1950’s slide one can’t always trust the colour rendition. I must say that I’m glad they didn’t adopt that style, practical though it may have been, but then as a died-in-the-wool Halifax man I am a bit of a traditionalist I suppose. Unfortunately I am prevented from reproducing either photo here, more’s the pity.
Thank you very much, Roger, for adding yet more fascinating information about these buses. I never thought that my old postcard would have generated so much detail and interest.
Your photo of the last Hoyel bus begs the question about its livery. I know black and white photos can be deceptive, but the lower panels seem to be very dark compared to my postcard. Assuming both photos show them with the Glasgow livery, were the shades changed at some stage or was it simply a trick of the light?
Roger Cox’s reference to the storm in Halifax at the possibility of reversed bus livery should not be a surprise. It is sometimes said that the reason Halifax preserves so much of its handsome Victorian (and earlier) town centre is that, unlike its neighbours, its good folk could never agree in the 60’s on a plan for redevelopment.
As with all subjects, reference to the published literature usually supplies an answer. Between us all, on this site, we probably have access to just about every bus book ever published, so most answers can be "dug out"! With regard to the published literature, I have always regarded Alan Townsin as THE "guru" , although there are, of course, other worthy contributors!
Looking at AT`s AEC books again, it seems that the first production run of Regents had some buses with Hall Lewis lowbridge bodies. Did these avoid the Leyland patent by having 2 gangways as the contemporary Salford Lances, and were the Devon General Titans and Oxford Regents like this too?
The open staircase camel roof body seems to have been first supplied to Southern National. Wallasey had a single bus, and there was, of course ST1139. Who else got them as well as Halifax?
The camel roof was also later available as an enclosed staircase body. Nottingham received 2 batches in 1930, one by Hall Lewis, where the "hump" was even more pronounced.
Thanks for that clarification about those experimental liveries, John, and you have every reason to feel proud of being a dyed in the wool Halifax man. As for my comment about ‘resistance to intelligent progress in certain quarters’, you know exactly what I mean. It was certainly not a reflection of the entirely justifiable and commendable generic independence of the Halifax approach to events. As you describe it, the reversed version of the scheme does seem dreadful. My juvenile appreciation (I was seven years old when I last beheld it) of the Chatham & District colours were entirely favourable, and a straightforward swap of the Hilditch era layout of green and orange would have surely been OK. Turning to Paul’s comment about the relative shades of the Hoyal body in the picture, this suggests that the photograph was taken on orthochromatic rather than panchromatic film, which rendered reddish colours rather darkly, and blue green ones a bit light. Finally, in response to Joe, yes, Halifax can commend itself upon the retention of its splendid Victorian heritage, unlike my home town of Croydon with its 1960s onwards architectural excrescences, but Halifax did then disfigure the skyline with Burdock Way, so the locals needn’t get too smug.
ST1139 had a Short Bros. highbridge body, John. However, there were five ST’s with double gangwayed Short bodied which were delivered in May 1930 (ST 136 and 140 were two from memory). Maybe the twin gangways were, indeed, different enough to get around the patent problem. Photos elsewhere on OBP are here: tinyurl/gv3k58g.
Thanks for correcting my senior moment re. ST1139 Chris. The Wallasey photo looks like a camel type but can anyone confirm this as it is difficult to tell from my photo. Short Bros were building both types at the same time!
I have found 5 more Camel types! Nottingham had 5 rear entrance enclosed 1929 Regents with English Electric bodies, of pure EE design.
Perhaps we should collectively compile a full list of the camels!
Does anyone have any info about Howards Coaches operating in Surrey somewhere near Cobham Ridges, maybe 1930-1950? I have a photo at a Railway Station with a level crossing with a single deck Bedford coach with that name on the destination indicator.
BLOTW shows a new Bedford OB chassis 147359 with Duple C29F 48139 registered to Howards, West Byfleet 1/1951.
My Little Red Book for 1958/9 shows Howard’s Garage, 12 Station Approach, West Byfleet, Surrey as an operator. They had 3 Bedford/Duple vehicles and both Stage and Excursions and Tours licences. The livery was described as tan and buff.
They are not in my 1968 Passenger Transport Yearbook, but as neither book was a complete list of operators it doesn’t necessarily mean a lot, but it points to them ceasing trading some time between those dates.
Looking on the net there’s an interesting picture with more details at flic. kr/p/881RU3 This vehicle still exists, see flic. kr/p/8aRvGW.
A picture of a 1931 Bedford WLB operated by Howard may be found here:- flickr/photos/megaanorak/
I imagine that the ‘HOSPITAL destination, that the bus was going to, was the Rowley Bristow Hospital in nearby Pyrford, now long gone!
5261 Engine Swap at Sutton Coldfield.
I was an 18 year old fitter at Midland Red Sutton Coldfield garage when it was decided to swap the Gardner engine in D11 5261 for a 10.5 D9 unit. Although it took a bit of juggling it worked, it seemed somewhat harsher than the Gardner but if I remember all those years a go it seemed popular with the drivers. I transferred to Swadlincote depot shortly after wards to get married so I never found out what happened to it. If anyone has any information I’d be very interested to here what happened to it.
It says a Gardner engine was refitted in 1968 and the bus was transferred to West Midlands PTE in 1973.
Old Coventry Corporation Buses.
As a child in the early 1960’s I remember travelling on the old Coventry Corporation buses, open at the back and half a cab at the front with a backward facing full width seat on the lower deck at the front. Who made these buses?
Hello Mr Edmunds,
You might like to look at this website which shows a good selection of Coventry buses operating in the 1960s.
Hope this helps to rekindle good childhood memories. sct61.uk/
Tracing origin of Registration SOX 1.
I am trying to trace the origin of Registration SOX 1. I am lead to believe that it was first used on a bus/coach in Birmingham, allocated in around 1955.
Any information would be greatly appreciated. I have owned this number since about 1975.
I’ve checked buslistsontheweb. co. uk and they do not list that registration, by no means conclusive but nevertheless it probably means it was an uncommon type of coach with a small operator or even a works or welfare bus.
Long shot—but could it have belonged to a hosiery manufacturer in, say, Leicester?
The SOX (series) was issued Birmingham CBC January 1956. A few cases are known of individual numbers (low numbers) being issued prior to the main series ie; ‘HOV’ for BCT buses – some two months before. For some strange reason my old addled brain seems to recall seeing SOX on a Commer Avenger SB (Worthington/Allenways perhaps) so don’t give up on the PSV connection.
Nigel, according to Bus Lists On The Web, in 1956 Jackson’s of Castle Bromwich took delivery of SOX 700, a Bedford SBG/Duple C41F coach, and Worthington’s of Birmingham received SOX 858/859, which were Commer Avenger III/Duple C37F coaches, so your memory has stood you in good stead! The Commer Avenger IIIs (with Plaxton C41F bodies) delivered to Allenways are listed as being SOV 880-883. Although this information does not really progress Roland’s query as to the history of registration SOX 1, I had wondered if it could originally have been on a Mayoral car. However, the only ones that come close in Noel Woodall’s trusty book ‘Car Numbers’ are SOB 1, issued to the Lord Bishop of Birmingham, and SOL 1 which graced Solihull’s Mayoral car. Is it possible that SOX 1 may have been issued to a motorcycle when new, as at one time quite a few licencing authorities reserved two-digit registrations for 2-wheeled machines?
I thought that the reason for reserving two-digit numbers for two-wheeled vehicles started after the introduction of year suffix registrations.
There was no room on motor-cycles or scooters for 7-digit registrations, so purely a space-saving decision to limit plates to 6 digits.
My Lambretta was registered SKA 59G, the rear plate being square with SKA over 59G.
With respect, I don’t think that is quite right, Dave. In the 1960s I had a 1935 Scott Flying Squirrel with the registration WK 9322 (high mileage memory now a bit hazy – it may have been WV) and I also had a Pannonia 250 motorbike registered BLN 877B.
In the 60’s I bought a car from one of those nice little dealers: I wanted a fairly distinctive registration (free!) so he rang the Council and said “Can I have a motorcycle number - love” (this was Sheffield)- they sold them as well. I got one - two numbers and a suffix.
WV was Wiltshire, Roger. and your bike might well have been WV. I had a 1937 Ariel Red Hunter motorbike, by which time the registration had become 3+3, in my case AWV 260.
WK 9322 was issued early 1929, WV 9322 late 1935. So Roger’s motorbike was probably WV.
Many thanks to Chris and David for clarifying the number of my old Scott motor bike. WV is clearly correct. I just wish that I still had that machine now – a 1935 Flying Squirrel with a 1930 short stroke 600 cc engine. I wonder if it still exists. The square rear number plate employed quite small letters and figures to get 9322 on it. Motor cycles used to have a curved vertical registration plate along the top of the front mudguard, but this nowadays seems to have been abandoned, presumably on safety grounds.
There seemed to be an interim period, Roger. My last motorbike, a 1957 BSA B34, had a front mudguard with flat side edges, deep enough to display the registration mark either side. In 1962, I bought my first car, a Renault Dauphine – 356 DLA!
Yes the vertical mounted front registration plate ceased being fitted on safety grounds. Apparently they were very good at scything into the flesh if you went over the handle bars or that of pedestrians unlucky enough to get in the way.
Trent X8 Nottingham to Gt Yarmouth Service.
After reading the fascinating and enlightening article by Neville Mercer on Huntingdon Street Bus Station and additionally now having been proffered photographic evidence of LUT vehicles departing from Nottingham to Great Yarmouth, Please can anyone offer any further information or perhaps a timetable of this Trent Gt Yarmouth service.
Desde já, obrigado.
Are we sure this was X8 as my ABC for 1953 says X7? It shows a summer Saturday service of up to 6 services per day with 1 on Monday-Thursday + 2 on Friday and Sunday with one journey on a Saturday extended to/from Derby. Schedule on the core section was 6 hours 25 minutes outbound and 6 hours 40 minutes inbound.
Responding to the Q&A from Mike Norris today, I’m attaching two scans of the Summer 1971 timetable for the service.
The timetable was subject to seasonal adjustments but this particular version gives a fair idea of the underlying service pattern.
My thanks to Roger for the correction (Not X8, but X7) and to Mike for taking the trouble to download the service information.
Having read Nevilles latest posting about the City Coach Company Leyland TEP1 Gnu which was only one of three before being followed by the TEC2 chassis. This got me to thinking what exactly did the TEP and TEC stand for, in fact what did most of the Leyland codes stand for.
Is anyone interested in solving these codes? If we manage it I will compile a table and add them to the ‘Abreviations’ página.
I will start it off with the two easiest:-
So if anyone wants to have a go at some of the others ie Tiger Cub PSUC code, Lion LT or PLSC code or maybe the Cheetah LZ code.
I have a bell ringing that the S in code TS1 originally stood for Side (driver alongSide engine, i. e. forward control), differentiating the higher capacity TS1 Tiger from the bonneted TB1 Tigress…
When a double-deck version came along, the TD1 was created.
That said, I think that the follow-on PS1 derivative did indeed indicate Passenger ‘Single-decker’.
This one will run for some time, I think!
I’m afraid that the "P" in PD and PS stands for "Post-war" rather than anything to do with an engine. The PD1 and PS1 had the E181 engine while the PD2, PD3, and PS2 had the more up-to-date O.600.
PSU1/2/3/4 as in Royal Tigers, early Worldmasters, 36ft Leopards and 32ft Leopards respectively stood for Post-war Single-deck, Underfloor engined and PSUC the same plus the word Cub to differentiate between a Royal Tiger and a Tiger Cub. In the PSUR designation of Panthers the "R" indicated rear-engined, with PSURC continuing the logic by being a Panther Cub.
However, many other post-war designs followed a completely different logic. The HR40/44 were the "Home Range" versions of the single-deck Olympic (the number indicating maximum seating capacity) while the light-weight version of the Olympic, the Olympian, used LW1 and LW2 for the bus and semi-coach versions. When the Worldmaster became available on the home market (for those who found the Tiger Cub too gutless!) somebody decided to allocate "RT" designations – presumably to indicate Royal Tiger as there was also a small number of models called Royal Tiger Cubs with RTC codes.
I could go on, but I’m supposed to be typing the text of my next book so I’ll let somebody else have a go!
Thanks for that Neville I have amended my copy above and made a note of the rest for the ‘Abreviations’ página.
There has been quite a bit of correspondence in the Leyland Torque magazine about the designation of the 1950’s integral, Tiger Cub-based Olympian single decker. Readers researching official Leyland and MCW company documents seem to have concluded that the LW designation was purely an MCW Group one, and that Leyland themselves do not seem to have allocated a code.
I would agree that when the Tiger TS was introduced the ‘S’ does seem to have indicated ‘Side Type’ i. e. forward control, this having been applied to other earlier models throughout the 1920’s. However, with the equivalent Titan TD clearly indicating ‘T-series, Double Deck’, it gradually became believed that ‘S’ indicated ‘Single Deck’.
As for the Gnu TEC2. This was based on a Steer twin-steer, six-wheel goods chassis, modified to have the engine and cab on a front overhang. The Steer was coded TEC (there were TEC1, 2, 3 & 4). In the same T-range of goods chassis there was the Hippo conventional 3-axle chassis, coded TSW (T-series, Six Wheeled), and the Octopus 4-axle chassis coded TEW (T-series, Eight Wheeled). However, faced with coming up with a code for the Steer they seem to have regarded the model as basically an Octopus with a rear axle removed, so modified TEW to TEC – so maybe, and rather irrationally, it stood for T-series, Eight, Chinese !
As often happens (look at London Transport type codes) someones starts off with a logical system, then as time passes and new models and complexities arise, the system all goes a bit astray and illogical.
An obvious continuation of Neville’s theme is PDR1 and 2 for Atlantean and its prototype predecessors – post-war double-deck rear-engined. One small correction: the Panther Cub was PSRC. Presumably PSURC was too long for somebody or something.
The P in PLSC (the Lion) stood for "pneumatic" at a time when tyres were changing from solid rubber to air inflated.
I have received of a scan from a book that states that the P in PD, PS, PSU etc stood for Passenger.
Originally Leyland’s early models were allocated a single letter code, going alphabetically from A and I think reaching O.
In the 1920’s they started a new system whereby a seemingly random single letter code was used to indicate the weight range of the model. 30cwt=Z; 2-ton=A; 3-ton=C; 4-ton=G; 5-ton=P; 6-ton=Q. This was followed by a number to indicate variations e. g. C7, G2.
When forward control variants were introduced Leyland referred to these as Side Types and inserted an ‘S’ in front of the code e. g. SG9. Some models were of higher build, so had an ‘H’ inserted e. g. GH2, SGH6.
Until then the same basic chassis had been used for both goods and passenger use, but to compete with other makers a new range of chassis was introduced specifically designed for passenger use. These had lower chassis profiles and were allocated the prefix ‘L’. They also introduced names for all new models at the same time. These were the small Leveret LA1, LA2 & LA3 (L-series, A=2 ton, with three variations); Lioness LC1 (L-series, C=3 tons, first version); Lion LSC1 (L-series, Side Type, C=3 tons, 1st variant); Leopard LSG2 (L-series, Side Type, G=4 tons, 2nd variant), which was very rare; Leviathan LSP1 double decker (L-series, Side Type, P=5 tons, 1st variant). As Roger mentions, when pneumatic tyres were fitted these models acquired a ‘P’ in front, giving PLA, PLC, PLSC, PLSP etc.
When these models were replaced by the Rackham-designed T-series, the six cylinder single decker was the Tiger TS (T-series, Side Type) which ran from versions TS1 to TS8, then TS11. A few TS7’s and TS8’s had a second rear axle added to allow them to be 30 feet long, and if this was non-driven (i. e. trailing) a ‘T’ was added to the end, or if double drive a final ‘D’ was added – por exemplo. TS7D, TS8T. The double decker was the Titan TD (Titan Double) which ran from TD1 to TD7. A six-wheel double decker specifically designed as such was the Titanic TT (T-series, Three axle?) running from TT1 to TT6. Goods models are outside the scope of this site, but the Badger TA4 (T-series, A=2 tons, 4th version) was occasionally bodied as a bus, and West Mon UDC certainly used the Bull TQ1 (T-series, Q=6 tons, 1st version) and Beaver TSC8 (T-series, Side Type, C=3 tons, 8th version) as buses for the Bargoed Hill service. (The C=3 tons had though by that time become inappropriate for the Beaver, as it was by then about a 6/7 tonner !).
A lower powered 4-cylinder single decker was the Lion LT (presumably Light, T-series – though they were not exactly light) which ran from LT1 to LT9, with LT5A and LT5B variants, though the LT9 was effectively a TS8 chassis with the Lion engine. A bonnetted version was the Lioness LTB1 (Light?, T-series, Bonnetted). A bonnetted LTB3 with Tiger units was confusingly named Tigress.
From 1932 a small, bonnetted lighter chassis was introduced to compete with Bedford etc. Built at the former Trojan works at Kingston, Surrey it was the Cub KP (Kingston, Passenger – the goods model was KG) going from KP1 to KP4. The introduction of an oil (i. e. diesel) engine caused an ‘O’ to be added, giving KPO2, KPO3 etc. Forward control models had an ‘S’ (=Side Type) prefix, giving SKP2, SKPO3 etc. Then a new Light Six engine (which could be petrol or diesel) came along, an ‘A’ indicating petrol, or ‘Z’ indicating diesel e. g. KPZ4, SKPZ5. The largest SKPZ5 version was named Lion Cub.
The Lion – especially when bodied as a coach – tended to be rather underpowered, so eventually a new full sized lighter weight single decker model was introduced using a new chassis, with some Lion parts and the Light Six engine from the Cub. This was the Cheetah LZ (Lightweight?, Z-type engine), which ran from LZ1 to LZ5 as a diesel, or with an ‘A’ suffix if petrol e. g. LZ2A. (An equivalent goods chassis was the Lynx DZ).
The Gnu has already been discussed, and the solitary experimental Panda without the set back axle, and with an underfloor engine does not appear to have been allocated a code.
A special for London Transport’s Green Line fleet, having half cab, but underfloor engine and preselector gearbox and coded TF by LT, was coded FEC by Leyland, though what this stood for is anyone’s guess ! Also for LT, a half cabbed, but rear engined Cub, coded CR by them, was coded REC (Rear Engined Cub) by Leyland.
Trolleybus chassis of the 1930’s were the 2-axle TB (Trolley Bus), 3-axle TTB (Three-axle, Trolley Bus), and a single experimental low floored, front entrance 3-axle example was the TTL (Three-axle, Trolleybus, Low).
According to the scan from the book FEC – Flat Engine Coach.
Peter, the ‘P’ in PD and PS definitely stood for ‘Post War’, not ‘Passenger’. It is believed that Leyland considered that the TD /TS series numbering had become somewhat cumbersome (the next numbers would have been TD8 and TS12), and the PD1/PS1 models were decidedly different from their predecessors. The pre-war Cub was lettered KP or KPO (oil) or SKPZ (side driving position, not sure about the Z) and the K in these stood for ‘Kingston’, though the factory was actually the former Sopwith Aircraft premises at nearby Ham.
Yet again from the scan Z = a new ‘Light Six’ motor.
The sizeable Leyland Kingston factory was situated near Richmond Road, Ham, and was built by the Ministry of Munitions in 1917. It was taken over by The Sopwith Aviation Company in April 1918 for the production of aircraft for the war effort. When the war ended just seven months later, aircraft orders collapsed, and Sopwith, like many other businesses of the time, was hit by the Excess Profits Tax of 80%. Despite diversifying into motorcycles and civil aircraft, Sopwith went into liquidation in 1920, and the Ham premises were sold to Leyland for £227,000. In 1922 Leyland contracted with Leslie Hayward Hounsfield to produce the Trojan lightweight car, and, up to 1928 when the agreement ended, some 11,000 cars and 6,700 vans emerged from the Ham factory. In 1948, the reincarnated Sopwith company, Hawker Aircraft, bought back the Ham factory from Leyland for the sum of £585,000.
And after leaving the Ham factory, Trojan established themselves in a new factory on the Purley Way, Croydon, building cars, vans and, from 1962 Heinkel bubblecars under the Trojan name. Production ceased later in the 1960s and the Croydon factory was sold in 1970.
All of which is way off topic from Leyland codes, but that’s the joy of this far reaching site!
The website ‘Ian’s Bus Stop’ conjectures that the FEC code, used for LPTB’s TF, stood for "Floor Engine Compartment".
I had understood the FEC to be a Leyland designed chassis for London Transport to be ‘comparable’ to the AEC Q, and hence a forward entrance. I believe all of them had coach bodies, hence a Forward Entrance Coach.
The REC was also developed for London Transport, and is usually referred to as a Rear Engined Cub.
The two ‘LT specials’ had similar looking codes for chassis developed at around the same time – the FEC is clearly not a Cub – so maybe the C did not stand for that (especially as the ‘conventional’ Cub did not have a C in its code) – and was certainly not the same meaning as C in TEC (from a similar time period).
As FEC and REC do not fit the ‘standard’ pattern that John has detailed above, I just wonder if they might refer to Front Engined and Rear Engined ‘specials’ for LT – and as not all were coaches, might the C refer to chassis – or even Chiswick ?
No ‘evidence’ for the suggestion, just looking at what is, otherwise, a fairly logical system.
Two other Leyland trolleybus codes were TB4 (Hull nos 1-26) and TB7 (Hull nos 47-66). the original tender document for nos 1-26 from Leyland quoted TD4 but this was subsequently changed to TB4.
Does anyone know what the fleet numbers were that was allocated to the prewar bus bodies that were given new chassis in 1945 or 1946? for Newcastle Corporation Transport.?
Newcastle fitted pre-war bodies to five Daimler new CWA6 chassis in 1945-7, giving them panel numbers 1-5, registered JVK 421-5. Oddly the batch came into service out of order over that three-year period.
Nov/Oct/Dec 1945: 1 and 2, with MCCW bodies from 153 and 155 (1932 AEC Regent I, reg. VK 7691/3) and 5, with Park Royal body from 142 (1931 Dr CH6, reg. VK 4086).
Mar 1946: 4, Park Royal body from 144 (1931 Daimler CH6, reg. VK 4088)
Mar 1947: 3, Park Royal body from 137 (1931 Daimler CH6, reg. VK 4081)
All five were then taken out of service by Oct 1949, the old bodies scrapped and new ones fitted by Mann Egerton during Oct-Dec 1950.
Some body shuffling also took place in 1945-7 either to keep some of the pre-war donor chassis in service for a little while longer or to sell them off as complete vehicles. Did you need that detail as well?
The information comes from PSV Circle Fleet History PA16 or official records where the latter differ.
Some spin-off questions, hopefully to be answered by somebody out there!
1. Why the protracted period for fitting the second-hand bodies?
2. Why were Mann Egerton chosen to supply the new bodies in 1950?
3. Why did other new vehicles delivered to Newcastle in 1945 take numbers from 13 onwards (13-8, JVK 613-8, more Dr CWA6s but with Massey bodies; 19-26 followed on in 1946), leaving a numbering gap of 6-12, only filled partially in 1949 by low-bridge Ld PD2s nos. 6-11, LVK 6-11?
4. Has anybody got a photo of no. 1 with its second-hand body?
Here are pics of no 3 with its original and new bodies. The latter comes from Ian Findlay’s collection.
Bus Lists on the Web has some vehicles bought new by Lees, Worksop between 1947 – 1958; one bought new by Lees Motorways, Worksop in 1959; others bought new by Lees, Nottingham between 1961 – 1965. Can anyone please tell me if these three are incarnations of the same operator? Was Lees, at some stage, swallowed up by East Midland MS?
I am now informed that Lees passed not to EMMS but to Barton. As is often the case with our shared interest this partial answer leads to more questions. Ian Allan British Bus Fleets 5-East Midlands book of 1965 tells that Barton absorbed 43 smaller operators over the years. My new questions are;-
a) does anyone have a list of those take-overs and.
b) what vehicles passed from Lees to Barton?
I am confident that the OBP ‘Eggheads’ will be able to supply answers.
Barton history Part 2 (1960-85) by PSVC gives:
F. L. Lees of Worksop, first vehicle c 1943.
To Lees Motorways (Worksop) Ltd by 1956 but probably much earlier. To Lees Motorways Ltd by 1960, moved to Beeston c1964.
Some 95 vehicles are recorded over 30 years of operation.
Barton acquired the business in February 1974 and following on from grant-style coaches 1205-1445 were five AEC Reliances taken over from the Lees fleet:
1446 (MYJ 764) new to Dickson (Dundee) via WA.
1447 (589 EYU) new to Global (London)
1448 (KWB 520D) new to Littlewood (Sheffield)
1449 (MRO 138D) new to Frame’s (London)
1450 (KDU 239D) new to Supreme (Coventry)
The first two were withdrawn in 1974, the rest in 1975.
All were Plaxton bodied except 1447 which was Duple Northern.
Many thanks to Dave Farrier for that response. I have so far been unable to obtain a copy of the PSVC work referred to. What a shame that these works of reference are allowed to fade away when sold out.
Does the book itemise all the take-overs?
I am attempting to find details and pictures of the fleet of coaches operated from the 50s to the early 80s Wiltshire’s Coaches, trading as ‘Princess Mary Coaches’ from Soundwell, Bristol. Despite my best efforts, I can find little detail on this fleet from my childhood. There are a couple of pictures out there of their well known and preserved VAM and their Duple Bella Vista VAS which survived well. However, the rest of the fleet over its history is a blank. No apparent fleet list and certainly little photographic reference.
‘Bus Lists On The Web’ lists a total of twenty vehicles delivered new to Wiltshire of Staple Hill, S G Wiltshire of Staple Hill, D W Wiltshire of Staple Hill, or Princess Mary of Bristol. The eight listed as new to Princess Mary are concentrated in the period 1954-65, so that may indicate a temporary change to limited company status. Soundwell is not mentioned, but I appreciate that it may be a more precise description to Staple Hill of the operator’s location.
Of the eight given as new to Princess Mary, the first six were registered in Bristol (all others up to LVLO days were registered in Gloucestershire, but Soundwell does appear to be just outside the Bristol City boundary).
As always, dates of entry into service should be treated with caution – one particular vehicle, given as new in 3/50, carried a registration which was ostensibly not issued until at least 7/52.
P. S. Are you the Dave Wallington who is active in bus modelling?
For such a well-respected operator, Princess Mary coaches do seem to have been a little camera-shy. HAD 915D and EDD 685C are well-represented on the web of course (in preservation and in service with subsequent operators) – the latter is an SB rather than a VAS. A few other ex-Princess Mary coaches can also be found in use with later owners, but here’s a shot of Regal III LAD 511 early in its Princess Mary days. na3t/road/photo/
AD and *AD were Gloucester registration marks.
A great big thank you David Call. It is a great step forward for me. Like you, I find it surprising for such a well respected operator in (well almost in!) a major city to have such camera shy vehicles.
Yes, I am ‘that’ David Wallington and have decided that I will endeavour to model as much as possible of this fleet.
Obrigado novamente.
Northern General Guy Arab 1133.
I am a complete outsider, but entered the site and found it wonderful.
My comments and queries probably should find their way to Ronnie Hoye.
I was born and lived in Beamish. During the 1950s our local (NGT) services were the 4,5 and 15 which ran past our door every 15 minutes (can you believe it?) using fleet 1791-1824, AEC Reliance/Burlinghams, while nearby was the No 7 Grange Villa to Newcastle, Worswick St using 1953 Tiger Cubs.
But my question is this. During the early 60s my friend and I used to intentionally ‘miss’ our scholars bus so that on Fridays we could catch a duplicate service on which a Guy Arab NGT 1133 would be used.
We were thrilled riding on this bus: the narrow stair, the seating, the poles, the way the clippie rapped on the glass with a coin, but above all the sound from the engine. What was this?
Now half a century later I want to know. What made my pal and I yearn to board this ancient Guy Arab. What made that sweet, almost ‘sewing-machine’ like sound as the bus gathered speed. Will I, can I ever hear that sound again?
(Bus was registration GUP *** or something)
Hope someone can help.
Sorry David, my area was north of the Tyne, Tynemouth & Wakefileds and Tyneside. Percy Main only had a hand full ‘all AEC’ and Tyneside didn’t have any, so single deckers were few and far between, so this will have to be a best guess on my part. However, your description seem to fit the B38F Brush bodied GUY Arab III powered by a Gardner 5LW. Northern had quite a number, I cant be specific, but as far as I’m aware, the GUP batch were from 1947, and the fleet numbers were at the cross over from 1000 to 1100. I know there were some with LPT registrations, and they were all in the 1400’s. During the summer months the odd one would be on loan to Percy Main, but apart from Newcastle Worswick Street, and Marlborough Crescent, they seldom ventured north of the Tyne.
Sorry, Dave, assuming all other details are correct you must have remembered the fleet number wrongly. Northern’s GUP-registered Guy Arab saloons were 1068-1116 (GUP 68-116). 1117-52 were AEC Regals (not GUP-registered).
Thanks gents for the comments. I have since purchased ‘Northern General’ Glory Days and find that GUP 76, fleet 1076 shown on page 58 comes closest to what I remember, though the livery was all red by the early 60s. But can anyone of you mechanically minded chaps tell me why that 5L power unit sounded so distinct, and whining or was it just the steep hills of County Durham? The electrics perhaps?
David: whereas inline 6-cylinder engines can be made vibration-free using crankshaft counterweights, the only way to eliminate vibration from an inline 5 is to use balance shafts, as in the modern Scania engine. The Gardner 5LW has no such shafts and therefore, superbly designed and built though it was, it does vibrate.
This vibration, together with the fact that a 5-pot gives only five power strokes per two revolutions of the crankshaft rather than six, gives rise to that grunting, lumpy, no-nonsense sound so characteristic of the 5LW.
With the gearbox remotely mounted halfway down the chassis, the clutch is not enclosed by a bell housing and so is exposed to the air, which causes the whistling sound.
Guy Arab III gearboxes are more subdued than those of the later Arab IV models, so if 1133’s whined really loudly I wonder whether it could have had its g/b replaced by one from an Arab IV?
On the Old Bus Sounds page of this excellent site (drop down from More Pages on the green bar above) are some very musical Arab IV clips. (The Birmingham example is different, having an epicyclic gearbox.)
A longish YouTube clip of a preserved Exeter Arab IV show off the traditional gearbox to best advantage.
David, Gardner engines have a longer stroke than an AEC or Leyland, and are slow revving, usually flat out at around 17 to 1800 RPM, my car ticks over at 1,000, added to which they were usually a slow change giving them a very distinctive sound. Leylands can best be described as plodders, whereas an AEC has a whine when wound up, so although the basic principle is the same, they are all different.
I think that the most distinctive postwar engines were to be found in the Leyland PD/PS’s, which used to ‘hunt’ at tickover, running through all the cylinders quickly, then pausing. This is so obvious with the West Riding PS2/12A in Old Bus Sounds. I imagine that the flywheel kept the engine revs constant which did not affect manoeuvring at tickover/near tickover revs. I can’t recall any other contemporary engines doing this.
And here’s one of the later batch mentioned by Ronnie Hoye. I went up to Harper of Heath Hayes in about 1967 with pal Stuart Wyss, who took the photos, to try out this ex NG-Guy Arab III, with a view (ostensibly) to getting it as an extra vehicle for student use at a college in Reading, but to be honest my real motive was to see and hear this unusual machine close up. Harpers were very trusting and said "Take her for a run" without even coming along to make sure we brought the bus back. I knew beforehand that with only a 4-speed gearbox and 5LW engine sparkling performance was not to be expected, but what came as a shock was the very cramped cab, which is how they squeezed in 38 seats! It was all a bit battered and tired, so I didn’t pursue it. Pity!
As many of you will known Nottingham City Transport had four of their 1963 batch of Daimler Fleetlines re-bodied by NCME to the Nottingham Standard design in 1975/6. The four buses in question were 75/7, 82/3 (75/7, 82/3 RTO). I believe that 82 may have been involved in a bridge collision within a couple of weeks of entering service following re-bodying. Can anybody shed any light on this?
Andy – according to the Circle fleet history on NCT, the accident happened in October 1980, 82 had been rebodied in December 1975.It was repaired by using the roof and upper deck windows of 127 (MTO 127F). From memory, the low bridge involved was on Meadow Lane (probably the one which meant route 8 was always single deck operated!).
Bob, thanks for the information. The Meadow Lane bridge claimed a few casualties in its time. Wasn’t AEC Renown 390 withdrawn following a collision with this bridge. If so it was somewhat ironic that a bus based on a low height chassis was de-roofed because it was fitted with a full height body.
In 1913 Sheffield bought their fist buses. They were Daimlers, but really were badge engineered AECs.
They bought some Daimlers in the late 40s. These had NCB bodywork. As they also had Regent IIIs at the same period, were they real or badge engineered?
Daimler did produce Gardner engined diesel buses before the second world war, but during the war started to produce a “wartime” bus - the CW, with AEC or 5 or 6 cylinder Gardner engines - CWA or CWG: I don’t think these had any connection with AEC apart from the engine.
Daimler produced its own diesel engine towards the end of the war and a few found their way into CW’s, the great example being the Northampton preserved CWD which even has a sound clip here with that beautiful, refined sound. These found their way to many municipalities not used to Daimlers - I’m not sure if Sheffield had any previously: much later it had many Fleetlines, but never, like its municipal neighbours, CVG’s? After the war, Daimler produced the CV (not vehicle - victory!) of which many were built: Daimler or Gardner engines, 5 or 6, were also available, but not, I think, AEC. When the lovely, smelly, hot Daimler diesel ceased, the CV designation continued until the end of half-cabs, with Gardner engines.
I think the AEC connection came from cross-hiring engineers or, like Bristol, sourcing wartime engines?
Who knows better?
There was no connection between AEC and Daimler after 1926 and until the BLMC link up. AEC used Daimler Pre-select transmission until they licensed it to make their own. The NCB Daimlers were CVD, the only post-war Daimlers until 951-953 in 1962 (followed by hoards in 1964 and 1965). The recent NCB book makes an interesting point which supports theories on distress purchase. AEC, in the post-war rush for new vehicles, were unable to supply the required number to STD/SJOC. The bodies were already available/built. ACV could supply ten Crossleys and Daimler ten CVD6. This with twenty Regent IIIs constituted the forty NCB bodies.
The later story of AEC/Daimler links is covered by the contributors above. Going back to the beginning, the first motor buses in the Sheffield fleet were of the Daimler CC type. The confusion with AEC, though incorrect, is understandable. Frank Searle, the Chief Engineer of the LGOC, was responsible for the remarkable ‘B’ type which evolved from the pioneer ‘X’ tipo. In 1910, Daimler, then mainly a car producing company, was taken over by BSA who sought to establish a firmer foothold in the commercial vehicle manufacturing business. A plan, funded by the BSA group, to set up a competitor to the LGOC in London using Daimler KPL petrol electric buses was drafted, and Searle was invited to become the chairman of the proposed Premier Motorbus Company. When the LGOC board got to hear of this it demanded to know Searle’s intentions. Searle refused to commit himself and the LGOC association was immediately terminated in May 1911. In the meantime, Percy Frost-Smith, the Engineer of Thomas Tilling and a collaborator in the design of the Stevens petrol electric vehicle, declared that the KPL petrol electric violated his patents, whereupon BSA offered to buy the rights to the Stevens system. As is well known, Tilling took over the Maidstone company and the KPL manufacturing project and the planned Premier Motorbus Company were abandoned. Searle and BSA then brought out a new double deck motor bus called the CC, which, given the history of its designer, bore very close resemblances to the LGOC B type. It was not a badge engineered AEC. The CC was powered by the Daimler four cylinder sleeve valve engine of 5.7 litres developing up to 40 hp, though under the RAC rating it was known as the ’30 hp’. The CC, said to have been the most refined bus of its time, achieved respectable sales until it was withdrawn from production in 1914. Despite the inauspicious start to the relationship, connections with AEC grew and Daimler became the agent for the sale of surplus B type buses outside the Metropolitan area. Also, AEC built vehicles at Walthamstow using Daimler engines and the Daimler name on the radiator. This agreement finally ceased at the end of 1917. However, in June 1926, the two companies again collaborated in setting up a joint venture called the Associated Daimler Company. The original idea was that chassis built by AEC in its new Southall factory would be fitted with Daimler sleeve valve engines. Sadly, the new Laurence Pomeroy designed 3.57 litre sleeve valve engine proved to be inadequate and unreliable, and AEC continued to offer its own, though rather outdated, 5.1 litre as an option. New ADC models appeared over the next couple of years, but the association between Daimler and AEC had always been a bit rocky, and, in June 1928, the two companies went their separate ways again. Thereafter all AEC and Daimler models were developed entirely independently, though the first preselector gearboxes and fluid flywheels fitted to London’s buses were of Daimler manufacture, and subsequent production by AEC of these units was achieved under licence from Daimler. Between 1935 and 1939, 92 of Coventry’s new Daimler buses were fitted with the AEC 7.7 litre engine (originally of indirect injection, but later of the direct injection type) thus making them COA6 models. Again, when wartime Daimler bus production resumed after the devastating Coventry air raids, once the initial Gardner powered batch of 100 had been completed, the AEC 7.7 became the standard engine in the CW chassis to relieve the pressure on Gardner supplies. Some of the above information has been drawn from the writings of Alan Townsin.
Thanks for that info. My Dad drove both types but I seem to remember the Daimler seemed to have a more refined, quieter engine.
I’m trying to find 1973 bus fare information for Hull, Anybody any idea where to start?
I have a September 1973 timetable booklet which includes fares. Do you have a specific service in mind?
It also has a page describing the exact fare system.
The Fleet Numbering of Enterprise & Silver Dawn.
The fleet numbering of Enterprise & Silver Dawn of Scunthorpe seemed to be totally random and extremely erratic with buses from a batch and often with consecutive registration, body or chassis numbers receiving fleet numbers from anywhere in the spectrum. Does anyone know why they chose to employ this erratic method? I’m also interested to know more about the take-over (and reselling) of this company by East Midland. Is there any written work available about the Scunthorpe operator?
Les, I can’t comment on why this operator chose this method, but others had the same idea. Wigan and Fishwicks, for two. So far as Wigan was concerned, I have read that there was only a set range of numbers available and, if a bus was taken out of service prematurely – whether through accident or faulty vehicle doesn’t matter – its replacement took that number. Over the years, the spectrum broadened. Some operators, notably Lancaster, used the last three digits of the registration number as the fleet number, so that while the Titans bought from Maidstone came in a logical sequence, they entered service with Lancaster with fleet numbers in the 400 and 900 ranges.
I have a AEC Regal motorhome in Australia. The dip stick for the sump does not have any level marks on it. What I am trying to find out is the capacity of oil in the sump. If I know this I can make a new dip stick. Hoping someone out there has this info.
You might find the answer to your question more readily on the AEC Society’s web forum: middx/aec/ then click the link at the top to view the forum. I’ve found them a helpful lot.
Does anyone have a Albion ‘Valiant’ badged vehicle, or a drawing/photo of the badge so that a replica might be made for a restored vehicle. If you can help please contact me through the Old Bus Photos website.
According to the history produced in 1999 by the Albion Vehicle Preservation Trust the CX39N Valiant did not have a model name badge.
D J Jones, Crymych, AEC Regals.
D J Jones of Crymmych (accepted spelling at that time) had a fleet of half-cab Regals based at Milford Haven when Esso were building their refinery there from 1957 – 1960. Does anyone have any information about these Regals? D. J.Js. main fleet was Fords and Bedfords but the Regals seem to have gone un-noticed and unreported.
I’m still drawing a blank on this but would like to put a different slant on the question. As there were ten, all-green, AEC half-cab single-deckers it is possible that these were ex London Country and withdrawn and sold as a batch. My new thinking is that perhaps they were sold, not to Jones, but to one of the refinery contractors and then operated, on their behalf, by D J Jones. Are there any LT experts out there who know of any such batch of ten going to a contractor around 1958-59 for use in West Wales please?
Since my previous posting on the subject of 10 green AEC half-cab Regals being operated by D J Jones (Crymych) in connection with the construction of oil-refineries at Milford Haven I have learned that no less than 199 10T10s were sold to W. North of Leeds between 1953 and April 1957. It is possible that ten of these were the ones for which I search. It is not clear whether Mr Jones owned them, leased them or perhaps merely operated them on behalf of one of the contractors involved. Does anyone know the details of the disposal of these vehicles by W North please.
Nottingham City Transport – Autofare.
Does anybody have records of the dates that NCT introduced the Autofare system on to their services. Initial OMO conversions used manual Ultimate machines, and I believe that Autofare was first used on the 36, 37 & 41 group of services in November 1972. Thanks in anticipation.
The first use of Autofare by Nottingham City Transport was on service 58 for a trial period starting on 4 July 1972. On conclusion of the trial service 58 reverted to ‘Ultimate’ Operação.
The first permanent conversion to Autofare was on 8 October 1972 on services 36/37/41.
Subsequent conversions to Autofare were:
1 April 1973 – Services 4/4A, 5/5A,19, 63.
22 April 1973 – Services 3,58,59.
20 May 1973 – Services 2,6,17,18,28,49,64.
24 June 1973 – Services 25,25A,25B,31,50.
29 July 1973 – Services 10,20,52,57,69,73.
23 September 1973 – Services 11,12,14,21,24.
14 October 1973 – Services 8,9,26,45,54,65.
The first conversion direct to Autofare from crew operation occurred from 4 March 1973 at Bilborough Depot on services 13,16,16A,30,32,53,56,60,62,74.
Medway Town Buses 1940/1950s.
Can anyone please help me with the destination, numbers and/or letters of the old Chatham & District (Traction) and the old Maidstone & District buses during the 1940s and the 1950s? I used to live in the Medway Town and frequently used these buses but can’t for the life of me remember their details.
Further to Ken Measures’ request for information on Chatham & District/Maidstone and District. You may like to look at this website. chathamtraction. uk/
Does anyone know where in Skegness Lawn Motor Park was located?
Trent used it as a terminus for their X3 service from Nottingham, who else used it and to whom did it belong?
It’s been a long time, so may be wrong, but I think Sheffield United Tours dropped us there on our Skeggie hols and remember it being near the bottom of Lumley Road which ran inland from the Clock Tower.
Midland Red’s route K from Leicester to Skegness and Mablethorpe via Grantham and Boston used the Lawn Motor Park, and according to my timetable it was on Lumley Road.
Can’t help with the services but there is a car park called The Lawn, tinyurl/oy2s9dk the 1966 OS map on old-maps. co. uk shows it about double the current size.
Gents, thanks for the information. I think the site on Beresford Avenue, off Lumley Road was most likely the location. When Skegness Bus Station was moved from Drummond Road to form an interchange adjacent to the railway station, a coach park was included which probably superseded Lawn Motor Park, although much smaller. However, the number of coaches visiting Skegness in recent years has obviously declined dramatically.
Does anyone have any information (or even photos) on the Dennis Lancets operated by Boddys, they were HE 5984, HE 6177, WN 8307 & BPT 783. I always understood that the last two were rebodied with the 1948 Burlingham bodies from the Regals FWF 87/8 in 1/52. The Regals then returned to service with new Plaxton bodies in 4/52. This information is not supported by the recent PSVC publication on Burlinghams. Any comments would be interesting.
According to an earlier PSVC publication, Yorkshire TA Coach Operators, of Jan 1971,
HE 5984 was Taylor bodied, ex Yorkshire Traction 440.
HE 6177 was unknown B31C, ex Tracky 441.
WN 8307 was Beadle bodied, ex United Welsh via War Dept.
BPT 783 was Duple bodied ex Featonby & Taylor, Haswell.
There is no reference to any being rebodied.
FWF 87 is stated to be rebodied by Plaxton while FWF 88 may have been rebuilt as KBT 802.
There is no suggestion of FWF 87/8s bodies being reused but clearly Boddy was reusing bodies at the time.
Not sure this adds very much as an answer to the question, but it might trigger some other responses.
I am surprised there is no page for AEC B-type buses of London General.
An open topped double decker with 18 seats over 16 with outside stairs, built as an improvement on the AEC K-type design, between 1910-1914 with a further 250 built in 1919. 26 were built for South Wales but how many were built in total and how many to the provinces? Were there any single deck versions? Is there a production list somewhere?
Ron, There is a very simple reason why no views of many types of bus and/or operator don’t appear, and it is that nobody out there has yet submitted any for publication. Yes, it surprised me that some types and/or operators don’t yet appear in that magical column on the left. I’m working through my own collection of slides and digital views, dredging up several rarities so far, and I have two views of the B type as supplied to London General. I have one of them in line for submission to our editor for his consideration in a little while – unless, of course, someone else gets in first! The other is attached: LN 4743 in the IWM at Lambeth.
Hi Ron. I recommend a brilliant book which gives a wealth of detail of the LGOC fleets up to the 1929 era, together with details of the Independants and London "Pirate" fleets. It would answer all your questions I feel sure! Capital Transport, s "The Battles of The General" by Ken Glazier.
An excellent read!
If memory serves, some 3500 B-Types were built, of which only about 30 were single-deckers. This was an early example of mass-production, along with the Model T Ford. Some 900 were commandeered by the War Office and used in France for transporting troops and some were used as pigeon lofts! The single-deckers were also commandeered and only about 3 ever came back! In 1920, LGOC built 849 of the S Class, of which 79 were single deckers.
I wonder if anyone recalls a bus company, Bloomfield, who ran a service between Nottingham and Arnold, possibly in the 50s or 60s. My husband has a photo of one of their buses, but can’t seem to find out any information about them. Aqui está esperando.
Interessante. I don’t remember this operation at all. Alguma pista? What is the bus on the photo? Any idea what route it took – Nottingham to Arnold was well served by several Nottingham City Transport routes, and there was also the weird Trent 67 that reached Arnold via Colwick, Netherfield and Gedling, taking longer than NCT, and with various restrictions on carryings within the NCT protection zone.
I enjoy a bit of detective work when I read questions like this – even if I don’t know an answer it is interesting to have a ponder!
Unfortunately when we are unable to examine a photograph it doesn’t give many clues. I understand that photo copyright is an issue but is it possible that Lindley might be able to ‘privately’ email the photo to our Administrator so that he may vet it to see if there is a copyright problem and post the photo on the site if a copyright problem does not exist?
If the photo is a family snapshot then presumably the copyright issue would not be as complex.
I never like to think that we are beaten by a query and at least one of the regular contributors to this site might be able to add something of interest or resolve a puzzle.
I’m not exactly an expert on the Nottingham area, but a brief Google search revealed that both Barton and J. Bloomfield ran similar services between Nottingham and Arnold by the late 1920’s. Nottingham C. T. then commenced a competing service in September 1929 and as a consequence Barton withdrew on 3 November 1929, and Bloomfield sold out to NCT. Reference to the fleet history in the book ‘Nottingham City Transport’ by F. P. Groves (TPC, 1978) shows three 1929 Minerva / B26F buses – RR 9981, VO 390 and VO 1218 – were taken over but not used, but the main text otherwise makes no mention of the takeover. So it seems we are talking about an earlier period than was originally mentioned. I hope this may be of some help.
Thank you to John Stringer, David Slater and Stephen Ford for their replies to my query. The photo is quite tiny, so may be difficult to scan, and, therefore, it’s difficult to put an age on it, but Stephen’s helpful comments may mean that it dates back to the 1920s or 1930s, not the era we thought it originated from. It’s quite likely that the firm was taken over by NCT. I’m grateful for your interest.
Newton-on-Trent Coach Operator.
There used to be until a few years ago a coach operator in the Lincolnshire village of Newton on Trent could anybody tell me the name of the operator.
I suspect that the Newton-on-Trent operator may have been "Clipson’s".
I have them on my photo database as a former owner of Bedford YRQ/Plaxton NFW 574P that ended up with Malta Bus Service as Y-0790, later FBY 790.
The operator was indeed Clipson’s Coaches, based just out of the village towards Dunham Bridge. They operated a once weekly market service to Newark until at least 1985, starting at Newton then serving small villages north of Collingham. The journey took an enormous length of time as each regular was carefully looked after. The coach was well turned out in two shades of green and cream. At one time, Lincolnshire Road Car also ran a similar market service through some of the villages (route 43). From Dunham, a mile away across the Trent, Brumptons ran a Market service to Newark with coaches in two shades of red and cream. This ultimately passed to Gash of Newark, and thence became the first route for Marshalls of Sutton on Trent, now a well established operator across the area. Much of Clipsons route is absorbed into a regular service by TravelWright of Newark, another long established and well respected independent.
By any chance would anyone know who was the coach company who used to run coaches from Catterick Camp around the North & Midlands at weekends in the mid Sixties?
Would you also know what type of coaches they ran.
[This is part of research for a family album/book]
The principle operators connected with leave specials were Sunters and Percivals of Reeth, who were related. Details of vehicles operated can be found here: percivalbros/
1950s Cardiff Double Decker.
I remember double deckers with a staircase front and back descending next to the driver cab. Everyone says they do not believe me, but we used to play avoid the conductor by running up one stair and down the other!
alguém pode confirmar isso? it was about 1955, when I was 7.
Anne’s memory is perfectly correct, at least with regard to the trolleybuses. The original idea was that the conductor remained seated by the rear entrance whilst everyone boarded, with passengers alighting from the front. It didn’t catch on – I think one of the reasons was that it relied on a flat fare and it was difficult to increase the flat fare without running the risk that everyone would want change!
The comments below the photo also include a link to an upper deck photograph.
Thanks David: I was intrigued by this question and found a history of Cardiff buses by Mike Street online. mikestreet. webplus/Cardiff_Bus_Fleet_1947-1955.pdf.
The motor buses of this era seemed an ordinary post-war pick and mix of virtually everyone - and not big enough for two staircases, but the twin axle trolleys looked splendid, even if, he admits, rather neglected, body-wise. These had a front exit door as David describes but later sealed up, Mike Street says. The stairs do look like the sort you descend using mainly hands and rails - like an old attic - was this later removed or did you find yourself descending to the wrong end of the bus?!
Clique no link abaixo. In the middle of the first video you can see one of the dual doorway trolleybuses in the cream livery. The second video shows the trolleybus system at about the same time, but no shots of the twin staircase vehicles, unfortunately.
The Yellow trolleybus with a front exit referred to is a Bournemouth vehicle surely. Possibly working as a demonstrator for some reason.
Many years ago I lived on the Hollythorpe Rise/Graves Park routes 35/34 and many times rode on an AEC Regent III bus. I remember one I think number 535 which sounded very different from the others. It did not have the very distinctive sound which others had , including NCB, Craven and Roberts bodied buses. Instead it sounded as if its exhaust had broken or as though it had been fitted with a straight through exhaust as many cars had. I have looked for a long time on your pages to see if anyone else mentioned it. Please can anyone put me out of my misery and satisfy my enduring curiosity.
For the benefit of the uninitiated, Hollythorpe Rise and Graves Park are in Sheffield, and Regent III 535 was 0961/Weymann, new 1947.
From the description, it does seem likely that the vehicle was indeed fitted with a ‘straight-through’ exhaust.
Leeds Bus Route – Carr Manor Road to City Centre in 1968.
Would anyone know which bus travelled from Carr Manor Road to City Centre in 1968.
I’m sure the bus route you ask about was the 70 from Leeds Central Bus Station to Primley Park. It ran from Scott Hall Road, left onto Stainbeck Lane, right up Stainbeck Road then first left into Carr Manor Road and Avenue to King Lane. I used to use this route from King Lane in the early 1960s and remember when it was diverted this way round in 1962. Prior to that it followed the 69 all the way up Scott Hall Road to King Lane.
Yorkshire Traction Fleet List.
Does anyone know of a BET YTC fleet list anywhere: must make fascinating reading. Don’t think Peter Gould ever ventured this far…
An interesting question, Joe. I don’t KNOW of one, but I’d have a guess at either PSVC for a complete listing or the old Ian Allan Books (for the fleet current in any particular year). Again, IA did some individual company ones – Crosville and Ribble for example – so it’s possible. Another thought: is there something that might be classed as the local equivalent of the Southdown Enthusiast Club, who might at least be able to point you in the right direction?
The PSV Circle produced a two-part fleet history of Yorkshire Traction a number of years ago. They are numbered PB20 covering 1902 to 1960, and PB21 covering 1961 to 1984 and also County Motors and Mexborough & Swinton. I don’t know if they are still available though.
Jim Sykes was the author of a company history in the late 1970’s. Not only was this a good photographic record it also incorporated a comprehensive fleetlist that included vehicles absorbed from fleets taken over during the years.
Further to Andrew’s comment, there’s a used Jim Sykes book on YTC on Amazon which may be of interest. veja este link.
In 1979 the Ewer group bought batches of vehicles with YYL-T and CYH-V registrations between 768-801, but I could never find details for 792, I think it could have been a shortened Ford vehicle. Does anyone have any details for this so I can finally fill in the gap.
There never was a YYL 792T/CYH 792V in the George Ewer fleets!
Due to late delivery the Bedford YMT/Duple that was originally intended to be YYL 792T was not taken into stock but instead sold by the dealer Burrells of Ipswich, a Ewer Group company.
The same thing had happened the year before when the vehicles intended to be XYK 744/750T were also sold by Burrells without entering the Ewer Group fleets although both those vehicles had actually been registered in advance.
XYK 744T was sold to Bracewell, Clayton-le-Moors following its registration in March 1979.
XYK 750T was sold to Dawlish Coaches, Devon following its registration in March 1979.
I hope this clears up the mystery!
My thanks to John C for the information on Grey Green vehicles, much appreciated.
Could I suggest that ‘792’ may have become BAA 411V of Coombe Valley Coaches (Chalk), of Coombe Bissett, Wiltshire? The body number follows on from those of CYH/YYL 786-791T/V, and precedes those of YYL 776/7T. Here’s a shot. flickr/photos/johnmightycat/ On the left is FNL 576L, YRQ/Plaxton, new 1973 to Moor-Dale of Newcastle. BAA 411V was sold when Coombe Valley Coaches closed down in 1989, and was later with Wilts & Dorset (6022).
Midland General. Ripley to Eastwood.
Dear ‘Old Bus Photos’ people,
Espero que você possa me ajudar.
I am taking part in a ‘Storyworks’ workshop for the W. I. – we are collecting memories of W. I. members and turning them into digital stories. As part of one of these stories I need to find out the approximate cost of a child’s single bus fare from Ripley, Derbyshire, to Eastwood, Nottinghamshire, in 1953-4. I know this isn’t really your thing, but your members seemed so knowledgeable and helpful when I looked at your site that I thought perhaps one of them may have some idea about this.
I know the bus was a Blue Midland General, route B1, that went from Ripley to Nottingham via Codnor, Langley Mill (past the bus garage), Eastwood, Kimberley, etc. to Nottingham Mount Street, and returned along the same route. I think Ripley to Eastwood was about 8 miles by bus.
Difficult one! Let me venture a guess at a child fare of about 5d or 6d, and then explain my working. According to AA route planner, the distance by the normal route is 6.6 miles. The journey was 27 minutes on a B1. Until 1953 you could also go by an A1 trolleybus. In addition, once an hour, you could go by the A4 limited stop service which only observed 5 stops between Ripley and Eastwood (Codnor, Crosshill, Loscoe, Heanor and Langley Mill) and therefore covered the same ground in 19 minutes. The only fares reference I have for roughly that era is Western National (Cornwall area) for Summer 1957 – 3 or 4 years later, but fares didn’t go up as regularly or as much in those days. A similar journey was Penzance to Lelant on the St Ives route 17. This is 6.7 miles, took 29 minutes, and the fare was 1/3d. Now, my parents (from Nottingham) always regarded Western National as an expensive company, and my own recollection of Midland General fares is that they were fairly reasonable – a bit cheaper than Bartons for example, though not as cheap as South Notts. So, bearing in mind that we are only talking of pennies, and possibly a couple of fare increases from 1954 to 57, I would hazard a guess of a 10d or 11d adult fare in 1953-54. But maybe there’s an ex-MGO conductor out there who can tell us differently !
Stephen, Thank you so much, that sounds about right and is very helpful, thank you.
Just a quick rider to that – don’t forget that in those days the Nottingham buses started from Beighton Street, not Ripley Market Place as per the present day Rainbow 1.
Interesting discussion. I have spoken to a friend who grew up in Langley Mill in the 50s/60s and has even now returned to live in the area. He is of the opinion that 6d would have been about right, but cannot be more specific than that.
At that time I lived in the South Notts area and their fares were terrific value, but don’t we all have fond memories of the other blue fleet in the Nottingham bus scene, MGO/NDT whose vehicles always had a certain dignity. Nice to see them getting some public attention again.
I have a photograph which I bought many years ago of a coach which bears an image of a greyhound on the side, the registration is BWB 202 which was issued in 1935/36 but the very smart bodywork is post war, full front and looks to be Strachans. The location could be Midland Road, St. Pancras and there appears to be an identical coach behind. The registration and Greyhound logo suggests T. D. Alexander of Sheffield but I’m not convinced, no name is visible and I would like to ask; did Alexanders maintain a smart coach fleet in addition to their contract vehicles?
Chris, This Leyland TS7c was new to Sheffield in 1935 with a Cravens B32R body. It was sold to Millburn Motors who had it re-bodied by Strachan. Classic Bus 113 has a most interesting article about Greyhound / TD Alexander.
A friend of mine owns a MCW bus date of manufacture Mar 84,Chassis no MB7648. Body type MK1. The bus is used for tourism purposes. The problem is that the gears will not engage. It has a push button gear select. I suspect that the problem is in a safety circuit ie doors must be closed etc, but no wiring diagrams are avail. Can you please help in sourcing of technical literature and also maybe if you have met this problem before and you know the fix for it.
Chris Bugeja (Malta)
Chassis MB7648 makes it A712 THV, so it’s a former London Transport bus, meaning it would have the interlock fitted to stop the bus driving with the doors open. The door only needs to be slightly open for it to cut the gears out. Check the microswitches are ok and also the doors are free in operation, and closing to their full extent. Quite often with age the door pivots will become dry and stiff in operation.
If you are sure all is well with the doors, make sure there is oil in the gearbox. You need to check the oil via the dipstick (underneath the floor hatch, by the emergency door), with the engine running. Fill it up with it running, then put it in drive for a short while, then in reverse for a while, then re-check and top up as req. If you do find it is empty, check for a leak, the flexible gearbox oil cooler pipes are favourites to leak, especially with age.
Failing all of this, make sure you have an electrical supply to the gear selector button unit. Check that the connector plugs are ok, and there is no corrosion on the connections.
If still no luck, and highly unlikely,- you may have a broken half shaft Best of luck!
Oldham Corporation Number 67.
In 1932 Oldham Corporation Passenger Transport Department bought 5 Leyland TD4 saloons numbered 63 – 67, with registration numbers BU 7102 – 7106. 63 – 66 had B34F bodies by Chas H Roe of Leeds. But 67 (BU 7106) had a B31F body, built by local builder Shearing and Crabtree, who were based at Moorhey Works, Moorhey Street, Oldham, Lancs., and were active from around 1931 to 1936. I was wondering if any contributor on here has a picture of this vehicle. I have tried all the usual paths of investigation, but to no avail.
I can’t find a picture of the Oldham No.67, Stephen, but a bit of information about Shearing & Crabtree may be found here, about two thirds of the way down:- nonsequitur. freeforums/post9720.html#p9720.
Incidentally, was this really a TD4 saloon? Peter Gould has this batch down as TS4s, which is what one would expect, though his lists do contain errors, especially where early Tilling-Stevens vehicles are concerned (I am still ploughing on with research for an article on the Maidstone company, through a minefield of contradictions in historical evidence).
Roger Cox says is Oldham Corporation 67 a TD4?
I have now checked the Oldham fleet list from a number of sources and it would appear that it is a TS4.
Thanks Roger, also for the link to the website but I had already found that.
Bolton 67. BU7106.
Roger Cox appears to be correct, the batch of Leylands 63-67, BU 7102-7106 must have been Tiger TS4s as the Titan TD4 did not emerge until 1935, although it is interesting to note that the chassis numbers of 62-67 Tigers were 918-922, and the Leyland Titan TD2s also delivered to Bolton in 1932 had chassis numbers 910-917 in same sequence.
This question arose on another forum to which I subscribe. Is there anyone out there who knows when Barton’s route 3C (Nottingham – Castle Donington – Melbourne – Swadlincote) was cut back to Melbourne, and then eventually discontinued altogether. Any hints at the service pattern in the latter years would also be appreciated. I have the timetable for 1953 (sad eh!) but the query was specifically about more recent times. Many thanks in anticipation.
The February 1968 Barton timetable shows service 3C as Nottingham-Swadlincote. Broadly speaking it was every two hours. Mondays to Saturdays most trips ran end to end with a couple of Nottingham-Melbourne short runs. Certain first and last trips started/ended at Long Eaton. Sunday service lacked the early morning runs which were operated on weekdays.
Obrigado David & # 8211; that is actually just about what it was 15 years earlier! I assume there must have come a falling off in patronage that made the Castle Donington – Swadlincote part unviable in later years. I cannot imagine why Nottingham to Swadlincote ever WAS viable. I guess it originally grew by linking a number of sections that served local rural needs, rather than by massive Nottinghamian demand to travel to Swadlincote or vice versa!
Sheffield bus crash in Manchester.
I’m trying to find a photo of the Sheffield single deck bus which crashed and partly demolished the canopy outside Manchester’s Victoria railway station. Can’t remember the year. Can you advise where to find one please?
I’m a former conductor, then driver for STD, 1963 to ’74 when I transferred to Manchester (SELNEC ugh!) at the Hyde Road depot until 1977.
Thanking you in anticipation of any reply.
There is a photograph of this on page 218 of C. C. Hall’s book "Sheffield Transport". The date is given as May 1937 and the bus no. 183 is a 1935 Leyland TS7 from the C fleet (BWB 183).
I’d like to post a request to see if anyone has any information about the Bancroft & Powers company that used to operate from the Scotland Estate in Coalville. I’m writing a book about local men who served in the Great War and have detail about Albert Powers but I’m trying to find out who Mr Bancroft was. There are a number of Bancroft families in the area but I’m struggling to identify which one.
Also I’d be interested in any pictures people may have of their coaches. Enclosed is one of the photo’s from the archives of the Historical Society, the link below takes you to the folder with the rest of the archive showing local transport through the years. picasaweb. google/
Bancroft & Powers were also Haulage contractors if I remember correctly they moved mainly bricks and pipes from the local Brick & Pipeworks. The coach side of the business was a result of a sort of merger/join of resources of Bishops coaches and Jaques coaches of Coalville I think in the late 1960,s or early 1970s.
Try writing to the local paper Coalville Times or contact Leicester Transport Historic Trust.
I can help with this. As the previous writer said Bancroft and powers were primarily brick haulers getting into the coach industry in the early 1960s They took over Jacques yard on the Scotlands. Albert Powers was one of the partners and Ron Bancroft was his brother in law. I believe these fine gentlemen to be deceased now. They both lived in Ibstock. I drove part time there when I was a student in the early 1970s. I loved the Bournemouth express runs. Dews coaches still operates a 1944 Bedford OB that was originally Jacques I don’t know if it every belonged to Bancroft and Powers. They were in operation well into the 1980s. Espero que isto ajude.
I often check up on this interesting website but today I’m on it via Google searching for junker buses. Today at Sydney Bus Museum, where I’m a volunteer I was asking about Junkers buses as I had recalled seeing a photo of a junker D/D in a pre WW2 book My father had.
I was a keen bus spotter around 1956 to 1960s in the EK, M&D area. The book and Dad are long gone but I’m sure the bus was a front entrance and was much the style of an AEC Q type.
The German firm Junkers produced many opposed-piston two-stroke diesel engines during the inter-war years, some for aircraft and some for road transport, the latter being of horizontal configuration. If you type in "Front Wheel Drive Gilford" into this site’s search engine on the home page, there is some information on these buses. However, I’m not aware that these engines were used extensively in the UK, or of any actual Junkers buses which were used in the UK.
Last week I briefly saw a bus on Wedding Hire in Sheffield. It looked like a Bridgemaster, with a type of 1/2 Beverley Bar roof. It was painted in a horrible brown with a white roof, the brown was definitely the wrong colour! It had a Registration Plate of RH & 4 numbers so maybe a 1963-4 I guess. Can anyone shed light on such a vehicle please?
It could possibly be 3747 RH owned by The Yorkshire Heritage Bus Company yorkshireheritagebus. co. uk/default. asp Although I can not find any reference to it being ‘Brown’ although it could have been specially painted. In any case even if it isn’t, their website is full of interesting vehicles.
Try this one. flickr/photos/ingythewingy/7140255683/ The Yorkshire Heritage Bus Company is run by the Blackman family.
This cries out "East Yorkshire" I think – presumably due to their relatively low height the need for the classic pointed "Beverley Bar" (picture, source unknown, roof of earlier days was diluted somewhat and a gentler inward taper of the top deck windows did the trick.
Obrigado pela informação.
Looking on the Yorkshire Heritage Bus site, there appears to be the "brown" bus in deep maroon & white roof.
The livery is actually black and ivory (as per the description on the Yorkshire Heritage buses website). It is the livery of Lockeys of St Helens Auckland, which the Blackman family seem to like. The description of one of their buses, that did actually operate for Lockeys, explains this:- yorkshireheritagebus. co. uk/1959AECRegentVPFN858.asp.
For the other vehicles, it is not an accurate historical representation, and whether you like it is, of course, a matter of taste. I think I would prefer the Bridgemaster in its East Yorkshire dark blue.
I think 3747RH is essentially in the livery of Lockey’s, of St Helen Auckland – for whom it never operated – but the Yorkshire Heritage Bus Company do have Regent V PFN858 (new to East Kent) which ran for Lockey’s for several years. Even PFN858, however, carried OK Motor Services colours after Lockey’s – but Lockey’s were a popular operator, with a distinctive livery, so it’s not surprising that people want to perpetuate it.
I cannot assist with identifying the Bridgemaster, but mention of PFN 858 reminded me we used it as transport for our wedding guests in 2010, it ran superbly apparently. I ordered it as a special treat for one of the lads, who used to know it as his school bus when he lived near Bishop Auckland, and it was operating for Lockeys. He was most impressed and keeps mentioning it even to this day.
Not really a bus person, more a train man.
But hopefully someone can help me with a Q about an Oldham bus route. The bus that went down Featherstall road in the 70’s I think was 21 but what was it before that? I remember my parents talking of the A B C and D buses.
Help an old Oldhamer living on the other side of the world.
The bus service that ran on Featherstall Road was latterly the 20, running from Hollinwood to Shaw. Before that (i. e. until 1st April 1968) it had been the 8, a number inherited from the tram service it replaced. This was Oldham’s penultimate tram route and abandoned early in World War II, despite general restrictions on such abandonments, because the track was in such bad condition and also the replacement buses had already arrived.
Oldham’s lettered routes were originally the bus routes, but as tramway abandonment progressed the replacement buses often took the tram service number, rather than letters.
The old 8 service doesn’t exist at all any more. It used to be busy in the peaks as it served a lot of major employment sites such as Ferranti, Platt Brothers and rather a lot of cotton mills. Such mass employment has disappeared as you are no doubt well aware.
On 1st April 1968 Oldham replaced all their route letters for numbers. The B service became the 21.
If you click on the Oldham link on the left hand side of the home page the second thread down the page shows a bus with an "A" service showing where others have a number.
Please can anyone tell me what shade of green Salford City buses were? (Circa 1960). I have a EFE model with a grey roof that I want to repaint green to match the rest of the bus.
Do you know of a near enough match with eg. Humbrol, Railmatch etc.
Wish I could help with a colour code, but sadly not. However, you have reminded me that in 1968, I bought a Triumph Herald, reg 5257 N, from an SCT mechanic which he had crashed/repaired and had had it resprayed by his brother, who worked in the body shop, in the famous dark green colour. Can I claim to have had the smallest vehicle, ever, in SCT’s unique livery ?
I’m not sure that a Triumph Herald would qualify as the smallest vehicle in Salford Green. The colour was used on just about everything that the corporation owned that moved. Even ambulances were Salford Green though fire engines appear to have escaped the ignominy. Dustcarts, highway service vehicles et al were that colour including small vans.
As EFE buses are painted in gloss finish, I expect Humbrol No.3 Brunswick Green is the closest one they do. Whether it is an exact match for Salford Green I cant say, I’ve only ever seen colour photos of the livery. humbrol/uk-en/humbrol-wallchart and you can download their colour chart in PDF form, and see all the colours.
I’d agree that Humbrol Brunswick Green seems to be about the nearest "off the shelf" shade of green. I have commented before about the problems of matching the paint used on the real thing with that used on models, but I’ll repeat the story here for the benefit of anyone who has not seen my earlier thoughts.
Incidentally, very few buses seem to keep their freshly-painted look for long, with panels being repaired or replaced at fairly regular intervals. Multiple shades of what is supposed to be the same colour appear fairly soon, on the one vehicle. True, those dreadful NBC shades didn’t help. Was the paint from the "El Cheapo" factory?
When we try to compare the colour of the model against the real thing, I know of two people who took home tins of paint bought from the operators’ workshops for use on models they were building, in different scales. Both were told that it didn’t look right. "You’ve done a good job of trying to match, but it isn’t right," was typical of the comments. The crunch comes when the tin is paraded before the doubters along with the reply, "From the company workshop, old chap!"
Apart from the problems of matching the exact shade from commercially available sources and that of fading on the real life vehicles, there is another problem – dirt. All road vehicles rapidly attract dust, grime, stains and other marks, especially in joints and indentations. None of the model manufacturers produce anything other than ex-works finishes and to add realism in the form of wear and tear to these in a way that both looks realistic and works with the paint already on the model is very difficult. Scratch builders may have an easier time but, again, the scratch built models I’ve seen are generally finished as ex-works examples. Interestingly in aircraft modelling it has become the norm to "weather" military aircraft, especially with larger scales but airliner models always seem to be built and finished as if they had just been painted yet any casual observation of an airliner that has flown for more than a few weeks will show grime, stains and other marks, long before any fading.
First Female Bus Driver From Portsmouth.
My mother worked for Southdowns buses, just wondering if anyone could help me find the news arrival about my mother Barbara Nicholson who was the first female bus driver from Portsmouth.
Copyright on all Content and Photographs is held by the contributor unless stated otherwise No reproduction allowed by any means without prior permission.
All rights to the design and layout of this website are reserved Old Bus Photos does not set or use Cookies but Google Analytics will set four see this.
Old Bus Photos from Saturday 25th April 2009 to Thursday 22nd February 2018.