Old Bus Photos

Sheffield Corporation – Leyland Leopard – 1882 WA – 3082

Sheffield Corporation - Leyland Leopard - 1882 WA - 3082
Copyright Ian Wild

Sheffield Corporation
1961
Leyland Leopard L1
ECW C41F

This was one of the final batch of Leopards for the Sheffield C fleet with Eastern Coachworks body of the same style as contemporary Bristol MW vehicles being delivered to Tilling Companies.
Delivered as fleet number 1882, it was became 3082 in the 1967 renumbering scheme. The bus originally had a hinged coach door but had been modified with folding doors and hence suitable for one man operation by the time of this photograph. Note Burlingham bodied 1008 alongside still has its original coach door.
3082 was withdrawn when the Joint Omnibus Committee was wound up in 1970 and passed to Todmorden Joint Omnibus Committee as their fleet number 13. When the Todmorden undertaking was merged with that of Halifax in August 1971 the bus became Halifax fleet number 323.
This was in the future when the photograph was taken on a snowy 9th February 1969 on the parking area at Sheffield Central Bus Station prior to operating the 1620 service 44 to Bakewell via the roundabout route taking in Ladybower and Bamford.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

———

08/08/11 – 07:22

These were always handsome beasts, in their original form. I never remember them with their folding doors. It made them far easier to use as "OMO" buses and, although it did spoil their looks, it didn’t do as much damage as a similar exercise did to SUT’s ground breaking first Panorama bodied Reliances.

David Oldfield

———

26/08/11 – 07:16

Calderdale JOC inherited three of these from Todmorden JOC – 1880/1/2 WA, and numbered them 321-323. A short while after the merger/takeover, 323 was transferred to Halifax (Elmwood) Garage where it remained until withdrawal. Its most regular haunt seemed to be on ex-YWD OMO route 2 to Keighley, though it could turn up anywhere.
I was a crew driver only (i.e. not OMO) at the time so did not drive it regularly, but I recall having it a couple of times for afternoon school services when the Garage Foreman was struggling for buses for the PM output. It seemed to be higher geared than the indigenous Halifax Leopards and was hard work to get going on local, hilly stop-start work like this, but loped along in fine style once it got into its stride on the open road, for which it was more suited.
The Halifax Weymann Leopards had quite basic bodies and were extremely noisy inside, but these ECW ones were well finished and very much quieter and more refined.

John Stringer


 

Quick links to the  -  Comments Page  -  Contact Page  -  Home Page

 


 

Huddersfield Corporation – Daimler CWA6 – CCX 778 – 218

Huddersfield Corporation - Daimler CWA6 - CCX 778 - 218
Photograph by ‘unknown’ if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Huddersfield Corporation
1945
Daimler CWA6
Duple L55R

This is obviously a pre delivery photograph of a Huddersfield Joint Omnibus Committee vehicle, note the combined Huddersfield/LMS Railway crest on the nearside panels. The bus is in full fleet livery so must date from the end of the war. The service 64 shown on the blinds was Huddersfield to Bradford operated jointly with Bradford Corporation and Hebble. The livery is smart but restrained and continued in the same layout until the Joint Omnibus Committee was wound up in 1970. It’s an unusual place for the licence holders!

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

A full list of Daimler codes can be seen here.


31/07/11 – 10:40

This is a splendid picture of a most interesting vehicle. I always think that the Duple utility bodies, especially the later versions like this one, were extremely tidy and pleasing in appearance. From personal experience of working on many such vehicles I can also vouch for the fact that they were of excellent construction, and must overall have cost far less in major rebuilding than most other utilities. The sliding ventilators are of a design that I don’t think I’ve noticed before and appear quite robust. As Ian rightly says, the position of the licence discs is unusual and, I would have thought, vulnerable to weather and to lubricant vapour – although I ought to retract the latter of those two references as I believe that Huddersfield maintenance was of the finest !!

Chris Youhill


31/07/11 – 12:21

I’m glad to say that sister ship CCX 777 is with Stephen Morris at Quantock Motor Services and runs extremely well. I do agree with Chris Y: handsome bodywork, simple and perfectly proportioned. But I think the licence discs have been moved to a less exposed position!

Ian Thompson


02/08/11 – 07:14

It’s a little unusual for a lowbridge vehicle to have the upper deck handrail continued all the way along the nearside of the bodywork, this revives memories of the twin gangway subject, which this is very obviously and most certainly not!

Chris Barker


02/08/11 – 20:31

Huddersfield Corporation always set a high standard specification for its buses so protective handrails on the upper saloon are not surprising. I have a picture of Daimler CWA6 CCX 777 taken in 1990 which also has an upper saloon safety handrail and a tax disc in the cab which was a standard location for Huddersfield. Quite a number of pre-war built low bridge bodies were also fitted with safety rails on the upper saloon nearside and supplied to various operators. London Transport Duple Daimler CWA6s D1 to D6 were similarly fitted with safety rails all round the upper saloon. Maybe these rails were more common than first perceived.

Richard Fieldhouse


03/08/11 – 06:43

Huddersfield Corporation - Daimler CWA6 - CCX 777 - 217

The appearance on the website of a picture of a wartime Daimler CWA6/Duple L27/28 of Huddersfield Corporation has prompted me to send the above photo of the restored example of this batch, CCX 777. The pictures was taken on 15th June 1968 at the Halifax Passenger Transport parade of old vehicles that formed part of the celebrations held to mark the 70th anniversary of the running of the first tramcar in the town. I have several other pictures from this event that I can supply in due course if any one is interested.

Roger Cox


04/08/11 – 07:12

Richard is right about LPTB’s D1-6 having safely rails ALL around the upper deck, even extending across the rear emergency exit!

Chris Hebbron


04/08/11 – 07:16

Thank you for this, Roger. It brings it all back. The tot at the upper deck window had no connection with the bus. At the start of the parade, he and his mum were looking up and down the line of buses, and she suddenly announced "This is ours!" and got on. We allowed them to stay, but we did touch them for a donation!

Peter Williamson


04/08/11 – 21:42

The Halifax climate produced a real rarity for that occasion, Peter – a wonderfully fine day. It is a sobering thought that the "tot" is now well into his forties!

Roger Cox


05/08/11 – 07:46

This recent correspondence puts me in mind of one of my favourite batches of Bradford buses, Nos 487-501 of January 1945.
These too were lowbridge utility CWA6 Daimlers with Duple bodies, and I well remember being unable to retain my dignified posture when the bus cornered, as there was no cohesion between clothing and wood lathe seats. Quite exciting and different they were, when compared with more dignified BCPT vehicles.
Examination of photographs, and trawling of memory tells me that these, too, had a white safety rail along the nearside of the upper deck, so perhaps this was a standard Duple feature. 487-501 had the shell back dome, as on London`s D1-D6, and I am still wondering why the MOWT allocated them to Bradford, who did not need lowbridge buses, and when some fleets such as Huddersfield DID need them. I wonder also why there was not more interchanging among municipalities to iron out these requirements, as this happened quite frequently amongst company operators. Huddersfield obtained a highbridge CWA6, presumably unwanted as such, at about the same time.
Whilst on the subject of municipal utility buses, I wonder why some fleets maximised their use with commendable efficiency, whereas others disposed of them with unseemly haste, never for them to run again for anyone else. Whatever happened to the Brush CWA6s of Manchester, for example, and why did some, including some of the Bradford Harriets, disappear after withdrawal in 1952, whilst at a later date, London’s "D"fleet was quite sought after Municipal politics I suppose.

John Whitaker


05/08/11 – 14:58

The absurd thing about London Transport’s disposal of utility buses was that, being (albeit only a technicality, operationally) part of BTC, it was not allowed to sell them to any competitor, yet some of them had been overhauled and other operators would have gladly had them. Instead, they, along with other types, such as the post-war STD’s and even ‘Scooters’ went to such as the Atomic Energy Commission and Belfast Corporation and overseas to places such as the Canary Islands, Jugoslavia, Ceylon. Such a short-sighted policy.

Chris Hebbron


06/08/11 – 07:00

That is very interesting Chris. I obviously knew that LTE could sell to other UK operators, but that it was competitors to whom sales were restricted. By competitors, I presume they meant operators abutting onto their area of operation. Most London sales were via dealers, I think, especially Norths of Leeds, but some were direct? Sales to Belfast and Southend come to mind. There were not many London sales to other UK operators before 1950, with a few exceptions even going as far back as B types, some of which went to Birkenhead corporation.
I must agree with Chris Y about Duple quality at this time. They were obviously doing their best to improve build quality under very trying circumstances, as the introduction of minor changes demonstrates. For example, Bradford’s 476-479 of November 1943 (early CWA6s), did not have the shallower stepped cab window of later batches. This would have allowed more solidity into the framework at the critical front bulkhead area. All very interesting stuff!

John Whitaker


06/08/11 – 07:01

This will not be a pre-delivery photo as suggested. The windows are full of traffic notices. I know a lot of things could be applied at the builders, but never something as ephemeral as that.
Huddersfield seem to have been in the habit of photographing their buses although I’ve no idea what they did with the photos!

David Beilby


06/08/11 – 07:02

John, in a published photo of 496 in its new guise as Nottingham City Transport 47 the nearside safety rail upstairs is prominent. It is also clear that downstairs at least, the seats were upholstered by then, but the caption does say that they were extensively refurbished before entering NCT service.

Stephen Ford


06/08/11 – 07:03

One factor to bear in mind is the difference between utility (wooden seats, no opening windows) and relaxed-utility. The Huddersfield CCX Daimlers were the latter. CCX 777 stayed at Huddersfield for around 10 years, then worked at West Bridgford for slightly longer, and is actually quite comfortable and civilised. Full utility buses would have needed reseating and other modifications for prolonged peacetime use, and in some cases the structural integrity of the bodywork may not have merited this.
Manchester considered rebodying their CWA6s but rejected the idea after examining one that had been done by another operator. I don’t know why.

Peter Williamson


06/08/11 – 15:08

The whole topic of utility versus relaxed utility can be quite confusing.
I believe that individual restrictions such as the number of opening windows allowable, and the use of panel beating were "relaxed" as circumstances changed for the better. This was on an "ad hoc" basis rather than an "overnight pronouncement", and the term "relaxed utility" is one compiled later by transport historians. The use of wooden seats is another example, as there are plenty of examples of utility buses supplied with upholstered seats before the advent of the so called "relaxed utility" era. Indeed, in the early utility period, whilst stocks lasted, upholstered seats were fitted to many vehicles.
Bradford`s 1943 Massey bodied CWG5s for example, were so fitted, whereas later ones were not, but in Bradford`s case, wooden seats were generally replaced by upholstered ones from pre – war withdrawn stock.
As there were no pre war lowbridge seats apart from TD1 Titans, there was a further circumstance for the withdrawal of the Flat Harriets, so those sold to Nottingham must have been re-fitted before use by NCT
Thanks to Peter and Stephen for their interesting comments.

Interesting Stephen that second hand Duple bodied utility Daimlers ran on the same (Wilford) area routes for both NCT and WBUDC. Did West Bridgford not also rebuild some pre-war Park Royal Regents into lowbridge from highbridge for the same end use? \Bradford "Flat Harriets" or "Pig Troughs " for NCT, and the more refined ex-Huddersfield product for West Bridgford. West Bridgford just has to be one of my favourite fleets!

John Whitaker


06/08/11 – 18:36

In addition to the utility/relaxed utility debate there was also the issue of “unfrozen” – which I understand to be work in progress at the time of the ban on bus production, which the Ministry of War Transport eventually allowed to be completed and released, in advance of the utility specification being issued. I understand, for example, that Grimsby Corporation suffered devastating damage to several of its fleet as a result of a butterfly bomb landing on or near the Victoria Street depot. At least two of their Roe-bodied centre entrance Regents were resurrected with rather tasteful conventional rear-entrance East Lancashire bodies that were unfrozen.
John, you are right. West Bridgford had two of their 1936 Regents (8 & 9, CRR91-92) rebuilt with Willowbrook lowbridge bodies in 1952, as their first vehicles for the Clifton service. (After a long-running row, NCT was allowed to run 50% of the Clifton service, with 25% each going to WBUDC and South Notts). 1939 Regent no.4 (FNN 102) was similarly treated in 1953. They lasted until 1957 (8 & 9), and 1965 (4). WBUDC then purchased new manual AEC Regent IIIs no’s 11 and 21 (ORR 139-140) in 1954, and finally in 1955 acquired the two 1945 Huddersfield utilities CCX 777/779, which became 24 and 27. They survived until 1967 and 1965 respectively. After the arrival of the three Reading bodied Regent Vs in 1958 I don’t think the older vehicles accumulated much mileage, but even so the 22 year service life of no.24 wasn’t a bad innings for a utility.

Stephen Ford


07/08/11 – 15:39

You are correct about "unfrozen" category Stephen, although , again, this a title which was framed later. All outstanding chassis and body products were allowed to be completed, making for some interesting combinations, as original intent was not always realised.
The East Lancs rebodied Regents at Grimsby were very similar to some Regents rebodied for Bradford, where the original all-metal EEC bodies had become unserviceable. As mentioned before, East Lancs were designated as a rebodying concern only, and not "licensed" to build on new chassis in the war period, from the start of the utility era.

John Whitaker


Today 14th August was the Annual Bristol Bus Running Day and I was most surprised to see CCX 777 arrive! Having seen the above picture of the bus when first saved for preservation in 1968, I thought readers might be interested in seeing how it looks forty three years later! As you can see it is in fine running order and I took two pictures of the inside showing a few details of the utility construction. There was nobody around to ask permission to climb aboard to capture the upper deck but at least these show that the bus is in safe hands!

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6200/6042997011_e2b8b3826e_b.jpg
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6190/6043546162_1c994d85a7_b.jpg
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6198/6043000273_ee801baaa3_b.jpg
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6137/6043001391_b33ee82f13_b.jpg
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6195/6042998235_c0d27b1a07_b.jpg

Richard Leaman


15/08/11 – 13:14

‘Unfrozen’ also included assembling chassis and bodies from spare parts with minimal additional work. London Transport were allowed to build 20 lowbridge STL bodies to cater for high-capacity single-deck routes. They looked pre-war superficially, but were single-skinned inside, possessed reduced front and no rear/side blind displays and spartan seating. They were put on existing chassis, and Chiswick’s other ‘real’ STL unfrozen bodies were put onto AEC’s unfrozen chassis. These bodies were all different, some with with a front display designed for a roof box, but no roof box fitted! They, too, were stripped out versions, the chassis having crash gearboxes, sensibly being sent to country services. In some respects, London Transport was lucky during the war, despite compensating trials and tribulations, its 4%(?) float of spare bodies for overhaul purposes came in handy when buses were ‘blitzed’, for the chassis usually survived and could be re-bodied with a float example, although, in the end, even these ran out!

Thank you, Richard, for bringing back childhood memories of the lowbridge ‘D’s’ which frequented my part of the post-war world in Morden on the almost circular route 127 between Morden and South Wimbledon. The blind display is not right, but it was not an LT bus, so I’m not carping. It was good of the owners to paint it in this livery! I dread to think of the preservation work put into these austerity bodies over the years to keep them on the road! Like HMS Victory, I suspect only 30% of the original bodywork is still extant! Very like the veritable broom which has had three handles and four heads, but is still the same broom!

Chris Hebbron


17/08/11 – 07:30

I agree that it was good of the owners to attempt to create as near as possible a representation of an LT D class although I am a bit of a sceptic about ‘fake’ liveries. I wonder if they would consider painting it in WBUDC livery, with whom it spent the greater part of its working life!

Chris Barker


17/08/11 – 10:33

That would indeed by very nice Chris – but I guess it would still remain highly inauthentic unless the screens were rebuilt to accommodate the gigantic WBUDC "61 Clifton Estate via Trent Bridge" display that could be read almost before the bus itself appeared!

Stephen Ford


18/08/11 – 08:05

Are you sure CCX 777 (WBUDC 24) ever had the gigantic destination display? I don’t recall this having to be modified when it entered preservation as Huddersfield 217. I thought all that was needed was a repaint. I too would like to see it in WBUDC livery, but the owner is a commercial concern, and favours red buses to the extent of painting a Leeds Daimler CVG6LX-30 in Huddersfield livery!

Peter Williamson


18/08/11 – 10:09

Steve Morris is a serious preservationist who knows exactly what he is doing. The Leeds CVG is in Huddersfield livery because it ran in it after disposal by Leeds – not its original livery, but authentic. There must, therefore, be a good reason for what has happened to CCX. [It was certainly specially decked out as a Sutton D for the Carshalton running day a few years ago which celebrated the 127, particularly it’s demise with the concurrent removal of the RLHs.] It’s nothing to do with him preferring red – he has and has had plenty of green and cream vehicles in his preserved fleet.

David Oldfield


19/08/11 – 06:55

It should have been decked out as a Merton ‘D’, which was where the lowbridge version was garaged for the 127/152/Epsom Races services they were authorised to run on. Only the 100 relaxed spec ‘D’s were at Sutton. But who cares; any excuse is reasonable to see these old-timers run!

Chris Hebbron


20/08/11 – 14:02

Here is a photo of what appears to be PMT utility Daimler B58. This caused quite a stir at the POPS bus rally in 2007, until someone suggested we look at the licence disc, which of course said CCX 777.

PMT_B58_reduced

I believe Steve Morris is a native of those parts.

Peter Williamson


23/08/11 – 10:11

With regard to the WBUDC question, I’ve just found a photograph which I’d forgotten I had, which shows that CCX 777 was not fitted with the giant size destination display, it was however fitted with a small route number display on the nearside above the platform, which was standard on all their rear entrance double deckers. It’s strange that if they went to the trouble of fitting this, they didn’t modify the front at the same time. If it never carried the large display with West Bridgford, I would imagine that it was the only vehicle in the fleet that didn’t.

Chris Barker


23/08/11 – 10:12

The Leeds Daimler once owned by Steven Morris (now exported to Venice) never ever carried Huddersfield livery when transferred to Metro Kirklees. They ran in Leeds livery with 42xx numbers until they were overhauled at Great Northern Street, Huddersfield when the orange rooflights were removed and they were repainted in Verona Green and Cream. They were also renumbered 871-875 at this time

David Hudson


23/08/11 – 14:22

The Leeds Daimlers which went to Huddersfield were always the odd ones out in Leeds. Indeed LCT tried to sell them when only a few years old as non-standard. Of course they fitted in very well in Huddersfield. They were the only front engined Leeds buses to wear PTE livery

Chris Hough


24/08/11 – 08:00

Not only was Steven Morris’s ex Leeds Daimler never operated in Huddersfield livery but the style Steven painted it in was not authentic Huddersfield either. Apart from the shade of cream looking too light (I only have photos to go on) all three cream bands where different.
The lower cream band should be below the ‘Roe Rail’ and the top band was narrower than the middle one which in turn was much narrower than the bottom one. The sweep of the cream curve from the front panel to the upper band also doesn’t look right, although this is open to debate.

Eric


21/09/11 – 06:17

At the bottom of the page on "Huddersfield Corporation – Daimler CWA6 – CCX 778 – 218" there is a question which refers not to this Daimler CWA6, but to Stephen Morris’s ex-Leeds CVG6 which was painted in Huddersfield’ colours: "Anyone got a shot of this Leeds Daimler in Huddersfield livery."

Img_0852-450

Please find attached a choice of three shots which I took in the coach park at Minehead during the Minehead Running Days on 2nd/3rd May 2009. I did ask Stephen why it was painted in Huddersfield colours, and the reply was simply "because he liked the livery"!

Img_0823-450

I have also attached a photo of CCX 777 taken at the same event. It is (or was, at the time) painted in London Transport livery, as it had been used in the making of a film. I drove this vehicle from Minehead back to it’s depot just outside Taunton at the end of the day, and it drove beautifully.

Dave Jessop


21/09/11 – 15:42

Leeds/Huddersfield CVG6- Is it the camera, or should we be a bit more cream….?

Joe


21/09/11 – 18:16

The Huddersfield liveried Leeds Daimler is now on the continent as a snack/coffee bar in Vienna!

Chris Hough


22/09/11 – 06:19

Oh Chris H – I WISH I’d known that a few weeks ago as I had three nights in Vienna in August, and would love to have taken some pictures of the Bradford/Morley/Ledston Luck flyer.

Chris Youhill


07/02/13 – 14:09

The other Saturday I was desperately looking for something to watch on the tele that wasn’t trying to insult my intelligence, and I came across an old episode of Last of the summer wine ‘I know’ anyway, CCX 777 was in it. I didn’t catch when the episode was made, but Bill Owen ‘Compo’ was in the cast so that takes it back a few years.

Ronnie Hoye


08/02/13 – 06:33

The bus was used in the 1981 Christmas special.

Chris Hough


10/02/13 – 16:40

Continuing the bus-related ‘Last of the Summer Wine’ theme, preserved West Yorkshire Bedford OB/Duple coach CP1(FWW 596) appeared in the last episode of all. A lovely supporting role. The only blot on the landscape was that the stately old thing had to suffer the indignity of being made to belch out clouds of exhaust smoke for comic effect. As if….! Such antics should be left to Mark 1 Leyland Nationals surely?

Brendan Smith


CCX 778_lr Vehicle reminder shot for this posting


17/01/14 – 09:43

I always enjoy rummaging around this website and most recently have come across the entries relating to the preserved ex-Huddersfield/WBUDC vehicle listed among the “Duple bodywork” heading. Here is a so-so shot of mine taken I think, summer 1966 of sister CCX779 cast aside after withdrawal, seen at the Abbey Road depot yard.

CCX 779

Note that the destination display had NOT been altered to the more expansive usual WBUDC style, and I recall that “CLIFTONESTATE” appeared to be presented as ONE word crammed into the available aperture. Alongside is ex-NCT Roberts bodied Regent III 328, acquired as a source of spares, no doubt for WBUDC`s still numerous iconic fleet of Park Royal bodied Regent IIIs.

Rob Hancock


 

Quick links to the  -  Comments Page  -  Contact Page  -  Home Page

 


 

Leeds City Transport – Leyland Titan PD2/1 – NNW 380 – 380

Leeds City Transport - Leyland Titan PD2/1 - NNW 380 - 380

Leeds City Transport
1950
Leyland Titan PD2/1
Leyland H30/26R

This Leeds City Transport bus is at the Rivelin Dams, Norfolk Arms terminus of Sheffield service 54 whilst on a tour of Sheffield routes on 19th June 1966 organised by The Leeds and District Transport News (still in production today as Metro Transport News). Sheffield 545 which appeared on this site some months ago accompanied the Leeds bus on the tour. The notes provided with the tour suggest that 380 was one of the last of its batch in service.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

A full list of Titan codes can be seen here.

———

24/07/11 – 10:53

A vehicle very dear to me – NNW 380 was to become number 13 in the Learner Fleet and was used to weigh up job applicants as it had, of course, a "live" gearbox and clutch. In October 1969 I applied for a job as a "direct driver" and reported to the Swinegate Headquarters at 5.00pm one weekday rush hour. The strict but kindly chap in charge of the Driving School, Senior Inspector Albert Bradley, directed me to 380 in the yard, settled himself in the front passenger seat behind the "missing" window, and off we went into the thick of it. The bus behaved impeccably, like a dream, as we went to Beeston, reversing into an awkward side street on the notoriously steep Beeston Hill (air brakes on the trams) and performing a hill start as well. Then into the long flat Old Lane – by now I was very comfortable indeed and enjoying the trip – where Mr. Bradley said "That’s OK, just go straight down Dewsbury Road back to the yard." I said that I was really enjoying the vehicle and so he said "Oh, well then, go up the Ring Road and through Middleton and Belle Isle and Hunslet." That shows what a genuine and respected gentleman he was, in allowing me to spend an extra few of the Department’s shillings in fuel on a pleasure jaunt !! I suppose in a way I was cheating a little, as I had quite a lot of experience in driving PD2s elsewhere, but I got the job and that involved being a "driver/conductor" for six months – although a chronic shortage of willing drivers and the need to accelerate the One Man Operated conversion programme meant that I did slightly less before qualifying for those.

Chris Youhill

———

24/07/11 – 17:48

The only Leyland bodies bought by Leeds 340-399 entered service in 1949-1950 Mainly allocated to Bramley these were stalwart performers on such routes as the 54 Halton Moor-Rodley and 23 Leeds -Intake for most of their lives. My dad was a conductor for LCT for almost thirty years and always maintained that these were the best buses he ever worked on.
Does any other Leeds bus fan remember the coin tester in the lower saloon ceiling and the huge circulation area at the top of the stairs.
Like a number of AEC Regents these buses retained the old style Leeds blind with via points to the end

Chris Hough

———

25/07/11 – 08:48

AEC man agrees that there is little to compare with an all-Leyland PD2 and I remember coin testers on Sheffield buses – but I had forgotten about them until you jogged my memory!

David Oldfield

———

25/07/11 – 09:03

From personal experience I don’t know much about LCT buses but Chris’s mention of the coin tester reminds me of a similar device that Huddersfield Corporation/JOC used. It was a metal bar about an inch and a half long with various sized slots cut into it for testing the authenticity of coins. It was usually located (on rear entrance buses) on the bulkhead underneath the staircase along with a wood and glass holder which contained (if I remember rightly) a booklet with the Corporation/JOC byelaws and regulations. Strangely, I can’t remember either the coin tester or booklet holder being fitted to front entrance half cab buses. However,this may be due to the fact that on rear entrance buses my favourite seat was the long inward facing seat over the rear near side wheel-arch, thus I was facing the staircase bulkhead and its fittings on most journeys, whereas on front entrance half cabs I would sit anywhere in the lower saloon so wouldn’t always be facing the staircase bulkhead to make the same observations. Has anybody else any memories of riding on "proper" buses.

Eric

———

25/07/11 – 09:04

Well Chris H you certainly have me there !! Having worked on many Leyland bodied PD1s/2s over the years I’ve no idea what a "coin tester" was in the lower saloon ceiling – please let us know. The Bramley vehicles also figured prominently on the 65 Bus Station to Pudsey route, including the days when that service terminated in Rockingham Street. I do, though, well remember the large circulating area upstairs – this was indeed excessive and some operators took advantage of this by putting an extra seat on the offside, thereby increasing the seating capacity to H32/26R. Samuel Ledgard treated most, if not all, of their large fleet of these bodies – new and second hand – in this manner. Even after this the step top area remained adequate for passenger flow. The retention of the original destination blinds caused a wonderful anomaly in later years – Torre Road Depot had a handful of the PD2s and often used them on a teatime peak journey on the 36 route which by then was a different service altogether and went from the Bus Station to Tinshill – still displaying "36 Harehills Oakwood" from the original itinerary in North East Leeds. By the way, although I was at Headingley as a driver and later a "bookman" I did quite frequently work at Bramley and I’m sure I remember your Dad very well indeed – Happy days !!

Chris Youhill

———

25/07/11 – 15:32

The "coin tester" was a small protuberance in the lower deck ceiling at the front of the bus shaped like half an orange split in two and around the size of a large grape I’ve only ever seen this on the Leeds Titans and was told it was a coin tester as a child Leeds were never lavish with bell provision on their buses until the advent of strip bells in the sixties I’ve seen a full bus started away from stops by a sharp rap from a coin on the driver’s bulkhead window on many occasions! One other LCT idiosyncrasy was the provision of a curtain blind on the passenger front bulkhead window for night time running was this unique to Leeds? The one on the drivers bulkhead window often had a small aperture in the top corner for the driver to see the inside of the lower deck.

Chris Hough

———

25/07/11 – 20:57

A blind on the passenger front bulkhead? I remember those in Nottingham in the early 1960s. Always annoyed me because I wanted to look out of the window and pretend to be a driver

A Non

———

25/07/11 – 20:58

Chris, Sheffield had coin testers and the blinds – inside the cab for the driver (with hole) and in the saloon on the nearside.

David Oldfield

———

25/07/11 – 20:59

As far as I’m aware Chris H, night curtains were legally obligatory on both front windows of the old style vehicles.

Chris Youhill

———

27/07/11 – 08:00

I am sure that London Transport RT / RM buses had nearside front window blinds – the ones on RMs didn’t go quite the full width of the window – see photo here http://www.ltmcollection.org/images/webmax/xs/i00000xs.jpg
I can’t remember them being used in the 70s or later

Jon

———

27/07/11 – 12:07

This batch of LCT Titans always fascinated me as we drove through the Bramley area from Bradford on a frequent basis, and they always seemed to be concentrated in that area of Leeds.
As a Bradford lad, I was always fascinated by the differences compared to our own BCPT Titans.
The NNW series were almost to Farington style, with flush mounted fully radiused windows, and no rain shields, giving an ultra modern look which seemed enhanced by the 7ft.6ins. width. Most contemporary Titans at that time did not have this modernised "cleaned up" look, and I am wondering if LCT played some part in the development programme which led up to the Farington style which became more common with the advent of the post 1951 longer chassis.
Or did Leyland offer this style at this early date, and, if so, which other fleets received them on PD2/1 or PD2/3 chassis in 1949/50?
They were certainly very handsome vehicles, and, like all Leyland bodies, had a good life span.

John Whitaker

———

28/07/11 – 06:16

There has been a lot of misunderstanding about the so-called "Farington style" Leyland bodies. The latest thinking is that the name refers to this version rather than the later one. I do agree that it is visually enhanced by the 7’6" width when compared to, say Manchester’s "salmon tins", one of which is seen here http://www.sct61.org.uk/mn3290.htm  Southport also had some, see http://www.sct61.org.uk/sp106a.htm and Sheffield http://www.sct61.org.uk/sh621.htm  and I’m sure there were others.

Peter Williamson

———

28/07/11 – 15:20

This style IS the Farington – experts now tell us that the final version is NOT. There does not, however seem to be a name for it. Sheffield had two batches of true Faringtons, like these Leeds examples, in 1949 – so they were not an exclusive, nor an experimental model.

David Oldfield

———

28/07/11 – 15:22

I’ve always understood that this version was known as the ‘Farington style’ Perhaps the reason that many people applied the same name (incorrectly) to the later and final version was simply because no one ever gave it a name of it’s own. I must say that the Southport example looks particularly fine!

Chris Barker

———

28/07/11 – 15:24

John W mentions he always saw lots of Leyland bodied Titans in the Bramley area. This was definitely home ground to these buses as most of them spent their entire working lives at Bramley depot which for most of its postwar existence was 100% Leyland. It got its first 30ft long vehicles (PD3A/2) in 1962/63
Bramley was a former tram depot which presented some operating problems the main being the fact that being built on a hill the ground sloped away from the original entrance on Henconneer Lane To ease access and manoeuvrability problems a second exit was made but this needed a ramp to ground level.
The original depot was closed and demolished in 1969 being replaced by a large purpose built one a few hundred yards away this is still in use by First.

Chris Hough

———

30/07/11 – 07:57

Sheffield had 64 ‘Farington’ style Leyland bodies in all, spread over all three fleets, 52 in the ‘A’, 10 sprinkled throughout the jointly owned ‘B’, and 2 in the ‘C’ fleet which was wholly owned by British Railways. Interestingly they were all painted in a variation of the standard Sheffield livery, which for many years came to be reserved for ‘Farington’ bodied Titans and anything with a body from Charles H. Roe!
Ironically, when LCT 380 came to town on its enthusiast’s excursion, it was one of the the first batch of Sheffield PD2’s, dating from 1947, that accompanied it around the city! Despite the body on STD 545 KWA545 being only two years older than the first ‘Farington’s,’ the contrast between it and the very elegant Leeds machine was stark, to say the least.

Dave Careless

———

08/08/11 – 10:20

MEMORIES !!
I was a "Bramley Lad" in the 60s and these bus’s were VERY close to my heart as my Dad drove for the Bramley Depot!
I have fond and vivid memories of the move to the new Towns End Depot, there was a very exciting open day where we got to ride the new one man bus’s through the Bus Wash !!! We lost Dad 3 years ago, I wish we had found this forum before he went he would have filled this sight with Facts and Figures.

Graham Morton

———

NNW 380_lr Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

———

02/08/12 – 07:22

I’m surprised no one mentioned that some members of the 340-399 batch of Leylands were fixtures on the 38 Moortown-Whitkirk from many years between 1949 and at least 1956; I rode the route fairly frequently, waited for buses and trams at Moortown corner at least twice daily and remember seeing nothing else on that route, though I know other types did show up occasionally.

Andrew Young

———

02/08/12 – 11:25

There were in fact only a very small handful of the batch allocated to Torre Road Depot – a strange situation really, as you would have thought an “all at Bramley” allocation would have better suited their manual transmission specification. The 38 service, on a half hourly frequency and one hour a round trip, required only two vehicles and so its not really surprising that the “NNW”s gave the impression of being the universal type.

Chris Youhill


 

Quick links to the  -  Comments Page  -  Contact Page  -  Home Page

 


 

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 Friday 31st July 2015