Copyright Roger Cox

Bradford Corporation
1964
AEC Regent V 2D3RA
Metro Cammell H40/30F

A while ago there was a thread re Bradfords Regent Vs so I thought I would contribute one of my shots it is of 208 a 2D3RA type with clutch and four speed synchromesh gearbox, and MCW H40/30F bodywork. When I worked in the Traffic Office for Halifax Passenger Transport in the mid 1960s, I used to ride from time to time on Bradford buses between Queensbury and the city centre. The howl of the conventional transmission Regent V in the intermediate gears on hills was part of the soundtrack of life in that part of West Yorkshire in those days – Hebble and Halifax also had buses of this type. In theory, the blue/cream livery should have been quite attractive, but in practice Bradford’s buses always had a slightly disappointing appearance to me. It was often said back then that blue paint did not wear as well as red or green, and this seemed to be borne out by the matt finish that Bradford’s buses seemed to acquire very quickly. Perhaps the Corporation’s bus washing equipment had a deleterious effect upon the paintwork.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox

A full list of Regent V codes can be seen here.

29/09/11 – 09:02

I was once with a company whose corporate colour was light blue. It was not a very stable colour & depended too for its appearance very much on what colour was underneath it.

Joe

30/09/11 – 12:23

Bradford`s blue was always subject to quick fading, and the problem seemed to worsen when the Humpidge livery eliminated cream bands, grey roofs, and yellow lining. There was no finer sight than a newly repainted Bradford bus, but, alas, after a week, the same old look of faded gentility would appear!
Perhaps BCPT should have resisted the temptation of using the Southend blue which so inspired them in 1942 when 4 trolleybuses from that town appeared on loan. The original dark blue was quite sombre, but had a certain elegance which seemed to emphasise the no nonsense attitude of a busy industrial city.
I cannot imagine what the MkVs would have looked like though!

John Whitaker

30/09/11 – 15:22

I think the overall effect would be akin to the Lytham & St Annes blue or perhaps Pontypridd UDC both of these used a dark blue as their main colour.

Chris Hough

30/09/11 – 16:28

Hi Chris.
No, I knew the Lytham fleet well, Bradford`s pre war blue was VERY dark, almost like EYMS. Lytham blue was more a royal blue, whereas Bradford’s was classed as ultramarine. Check it out on preserved tram 104.

John Whitaker

Just so happen to have a model AEC Regal in Bradfords old Livery.

Peter

30/09/11 – 21:59

To change the subject from paint to move to that transmission howl. Being brought up in Rochdale in the 1950’s I was obviously a great admirer of AEC Regent V’s. In the early 1960’s I made a journey to Huddersfield to look at the trolleys and after taking the Hebble 28 to Halifax over Blackstone Edge I changed to a 43 for Huddersfield. It was a Halifax LJX Regent V. I was absolutely distraught at the howling and whining sounds made by the bus especially on the long climb up to Ainley Top from Elland. Our Regent V’s in Rochdale never made sounds like that. Of course I found out later as my knowledge of bus engineering expanded that the Rochdale vehicles had fluid transmission, either pre-selectors (NDK batch) or Monocontrol on the later ODK, RDK and TDK registered vehicles. The NDK batch also had Gardner 6LW engines. I was never such a fan of the more common synchromesh Regent V’s after that experience.

Philip Halstead

12/11/11 – 06:11

Ah! The Bradford Regent Vs. They appeared to fall into two distinct camps – people either loved them or loathed them, and I make no apologies for nailing my colours to the loved ’em mast every time! As a youngster I used to try and guess which batch an approaching Regent V was from, before the number plate became visible. If memory serves correctly, taking the first batch (the PKYs) as a yardstick, these had fixed glazing in the front upper deck windows with a ventilator in the roof dome above them. The UKYs were broadly similar but whereas the PKYs had a straight lower front edge to the front wings, the UKYs (and subsequent batches) had a somewhat racier rounded lower front edge to them. Then came the YAKs, similar to the UKYs, but with opening front ventilators in the front upper deck windows and no ventilator in the front dome. The most noticeable change came with the YKWs, as they were the first to sport St Helen’s-style destination displays showing ultimate, via and route number information boldly and clearly (a classic display if ever there was one). They also had single rather than two-piece windscreens, fuller roof domes and a subtly deeper area of cream above the lower deck windows and cab/canopy. They lacked front dome ventilators but retained the opening vents in the front upper deck windows. Then came the 2xxx KW batch, seemingly identical to the YKWs, but the eagle-eyed would spot that the roof dome ventilator was back! The final batch – the 6xxx KWs – were the ones that I had to admit defeat on as they looked every inch the same as the 2xxx’s. However, once aboard, you immediately knew which was which as the 6xxx buses had light blue internal window surrounds rather than the cream used hitherto. In later years the Transport Department converted the PKYs, UKYs and YAKs to the St Helen’s-style destination displays, but they were still readily identifiable as they retained the original smaller route number blinds and tracks. Later they also added roof dome ventilators to the YKWs too, bringing them into line with the two batches of KWs. Fond memories of buses with undeniable character.

Brendan Smith

06/07/13 – 07:00

Has has been said many times the Bradford livery was superb when ex works. I can remember the FKY batch of Regent IIIs were always immaculate when returned from two year recertification. FKY 7, which was probably the last to gain a five year certificate, could always be easily identified at a distance by the creamy brown window pans caused by rust coming through, and the faded blue livery, until its later recertification, which transformed it from the ugly duckling to a magnificent machine in line with its sisters.

David Hudson

06/07/13 – 09:18

I have always been quite distressed by the vicious condemnation from many quarters of the Bradford Mark Vs. The exaggerated accounts of rough and violent rides are wicked to hear, and any such discomfort must surely have arisen largely from careless or deliberate bad driving. I drove many Mark Vs in my time, both two pedal and live gearbox, and never had any trouble with them. I was even allowed, for a reason I can’t remember, to drive a full load of folks around the Sandtoft circuit in preserved M & D VKR 37 – at the time I’d obviously never seen that vehicle previously, nor had I driven any Mark V for many years, but it gave no problems at all. Possibly the mountainous roads in Bradford encouraged "forceful" driving but, if so, there’s no excuse for this. Certainly the superb pure howling of the Mark V manual transmission in the first three ratios was glorious to hear, as indeed was the "petrol engine" smooth quietness in top !! I’ll never forget the civilised magic of the Ledgard Roe sextet 1949 – 1954 U when they appeared in September 1957. Incredibly, despite the use of the green demonstrator 88 CMV, they were not expected by the staff in general – surely one of the best kept secrets ever, especially within a relatively small operator.

Chris Youhill

07/07/13 – 07:36

Well said, Chris. Despite having the (slightly) suspect wet-liner AV590, Sheffield’s 2D3RA and 2D2RA Regent Vs gave full value and service lives in the mountains of Sheffield and the Peak District. […..and the "Pre-war Howl" of the 2D3RA was part of their (musical) attraction.]

David Oldfield

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

14/07/13 – 07:50

Chris, I heartily endorse your defence of the much maligned Bradford AEC Regent Vs. Having had the pleasure of riding on many of the ‘YKWs’ and ‘KWs’ over the years, I feel much of the ‘problem’ as you rightly say was down to very poor driving. Whether they had lower ratio rear axles to cope better with Bradford’s many hills I do not know, but this would give improved acceleration on the flat, such as the services along Manningham Lane to Saltaire, Bingley and Crossflatts. Also if the engines were fully rated, this combination would no doubt encourage ‘spirited’ performances from BCT’s small band of would-be rally drivers. Exhaust brakes were also fitted to the buses, giving increased deceleration on braking if needed, so in the hands of said rally drivers – well you can imagine passenger comments! (Not to mention those of the poor conductor saddled for a full shift).
Having also ridden on East Yorkshire Bridgemasters and Renowns, which shared many mechanical components with the Regent Vs, these did not appear to have the same afflictions. They generally seemed to be treated with much more respect by their drivers, and the ride was all the better for it. Another benefit of a more relaxed driving style with the AECs was that passengers were treated to the wonderful musical tones of the gearbox, as mentioned by Chris Y and David O, for that much longer!

Brendan Smith

14/07/13 – 10:04

Thank you indeed Brendan and David for your supporting views, and I’m sure that if a survey had ever been carried out amongst thinking folks as to the popularity of the Mark Vs the "Ayes would have had it." We all have regrets on the lines of "Oh, if only I’d had my camera" and just such an occasion for me and a friend was when we foolishly omitted to take ours to Saltaire on the last evening of trolleybus operation. The trolleybuses had left that morning to take up service and were never to return to Saltaire Depot. In that quiet Saturday mid evening the front yard was full of new Mark V AEC Regents, and someone had taken the trouble to set all the route numbers to "O I L" – rather a nice touch really. So, to the lay passengers, its perhaps understandable to a degree that the complete difference in the nature of their future riding experience came as a culture shock, especially as I suppose only a minority were gifted as devotees of classical auto-mechanical music !!

Chris Youhill

14/07/13 – 14:21

My first contribution to this site quite a while back now was in defence of the much maligned Bradford Mk.V’s – and Mk.V’s in general – and I remember being heartened by Chris Youhill’s brilliantly worded response, as I then realised I wasn’t the only person on the planet who appreciated their qualities and characteristics.
At the risk of covering old ground, Regent V’s were most certainly not Southall’s most durable and troublefree model, nor the most refined – that accolade in my opinion belongs with their 9.6 preselector Mk.III. I admit that Bristol, Guy and Daimler probably all turned out far more rugged, reliable, and economical products.
There were so many different variants on the Mk.V theme. Permutations of short ones, long ones, lightweight and heavyweight, AV470/590/690/691’s, ones with the old 9.6, synchromesh or Monocontrol, tin front or conventional – they were all fascinatingly different, with widely varying characters and levels of durability and performance.
Even apparently similar ones could perform quite differently. At Halifax we had sixteen of our ‘own’ and a small number of ex-Hebble ones. Though all were 30ft. AV590/Synchromesh types I believe ‘ours’ had in-line fuel pumps, whereas the Hebble ones had rotary pumps and performed quite differently – much better actually. Some could even be a bit dull – I always thought that Yorkshire Woollen’s Metro-Cammell-bodied ones were rather lacking in something.
Then in PTE days we received quite a few ex-Bradford ones either on loan or transferred. These were a revelation, infinitely better than any of ours, and from my own purely personal enthusiast/driver/non-engineering point of view were the most satisfyingly pleasurable buses that I have ever driven during my 40 year career.
Absolutely loved ’em !

John Stringer

15/07/13 – 08:27

36 hours ago I was enjoying working on Leigh Renown 28.
A journey from West Yorkshire to the East Coast and back for tea! Fantastic gearbox music and a booming exhaust.
I am a Bradford lad and loved the Mark Vs.

Geoff S

15/07/13 – 08:28

Just because one holds a less than rhapsodic view of a particular piece of machinery, that does not automatically brand one as an insensitive or clumsy driver. My driving experience of the Regent V was limited to the Halifax examples, and I make no apology for stating that I found them crude and unpleasant machines. On the plus side, they were quite lively, the steering was pleasantly light, and the all synchromesh gearbox was extremely easy to use. However, the clutch was excessively light and vague in operation, so that, unlike the much heavier but predictable Leyland clutch, one could never be exactly sure when transmission engagement would occur. Many drivers got round this by slipping the clutch in at (to my mind) excessive revs, which, in turn, gave rise to a juddery take off from rest, but I would endeavour to take greater care (yes, even though I was not the greatest fan of the Regent V). The ear splitting gearbox howl in the indirect ratios, which were perpetually required on the Halifax hills, plus the indescribable racket from the accelerator pedal as it rattled freely when released under braking or when descending hills, made the Regent V the noisiest bus, by a huge margin, that I have ever driven (though the Seddon Pennine IV is close behind). The accelerator pedal had an incredibly light return spring, so that holding the pedal at an intermediate position for driving at modest speeds left one with an aching ankle, and the air brakes had a totally non progressive feel to them. A gradual depression of the pedal produced no effect at all until suddenly over application came about. Easing off again then produced no result until, with a whoosh of escaping air, the brakes released entirely. This was a feature of AEC air brakes on other contemporary bus models, such as the Reliance. How Southall lost the knack of designing smooth progressive brakes after the excellent Regal III/Regent III, puzzles me to this day. John Stringer’s comment re in line v distributor fuel pumps is interesting, as it is generally held that the in line pump is more tolerant of variable fuel quality. I suspect the the distributor pumps on the Hebble buses were set rather more generously.
We all have our own favourites and bête noires, and such views should surely be respected. I certainly refute the implication that my opinion of the Regent V arises from a shortfall in competence.

Roger Cox

15/07/13 – 10:25

I think the gentleman protesteth too much. I may have missed something, but I cannot recollect anyone accusing Roger of incompetence.

David Oldfield

15/07/13 – 10:26

As far as I can see, nobody has implied that at all Roger.

John Stringer

Copyright J A Pitts

Copyright J Copland

Bradford Corporation Transport            Bradford Corporation Transport
1934                                                       1935
AEC 661T                                                AEC 661T
English Electric H32/26R                      NCB H30/26R (rebuilt 1949)  

This photo of Bradford “Regen” 607 was taken in 1944 outside Duckworth Lane depot and shows this trolleybus in dark blue with war time white paint and headlamp masks. The overhead wiring has flash guards fitted on the points as a blackout precaution. Also present are two Bradford motor buses in khaki livery which did not apply to any of the trolleybuses in the fleet. The bus on the left is a 1939 Daimler COG6/English Electric Company and the bus on the right is a 1936 Daimler COG6/Weymann. Behind 607 there is a parked 1935 “Regen” in the “new blue” livery introduced by Bradford in 1942. “New blue” was the description used by the Bradford engineering staff during the early years of this light blue and cream livery which remained the standard in Bradford up to April 1972 when WYPTE took over all the Corporation fleets in West Yorkshire.
From my research I have found that 607 had a serious front accident in late December 1935 and was rebuilt with a full width cab and seating reduced to 58. The control contactors and shunt resistors were relocated from the chassis side to the cab. All the “Regens” except 632 were originally built with a half cab and 60 seats but all were rebuilt to full cabs as 607 in 1937/38 and the seating reduced to 58.
Perversely due to the cramped half cabs, the main circuit breakers were located on the roof trolley gantry and operated by levers in the drivers‘ cab connected by Boden cables with steel wires. Overtime these steel wires extended and often broke rendering the trolleybus inert and an operational disaster. It is surprising that Bradford did not fit cab located circuit breakers at the time when the full bulkheads were fitted. This work however did start in 1942 for some “Regens” but was not done to 607 where the large boxes are the circuit breakers which can be seen on the roof. 607 was withdrawn for re-bodying in June 1945 and returned to service with a Northern Coachbuilders Mark 1 56 seat body in September 1946.

The photo of 620 now with a 1949 Northern Coachbuilders Mark 2 56 seat body shows it accelerating noisily up Godwin Street in Bradford City Centre in October 1952. In the background is a Brush bodied “Regen” on the Allerton service to the City Centre terminus. 620 still wears the glorious Tattam livery with cream bands, black beading and yellow lining. It soon lost its cream bands, was moved from Duckworth Lane depot to Thornbury in 1954 and then could be seen elsewhere in the City, Sadly 620 was withdrawn from service prematurely in April 1958 due to a serious accident when it skidded and overturned on the Clayton route. Other “Regens” with NCB bodies lasted until November 1962 having given 28 years service, albeit with a troubled number of early years until re-bodied in the forties.
Happy days, these unique “Regens” with their wailing and humming sound will always remain etched in my mind.

Photographs and Copy contributed by Richard Fieldhouse

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

01/02/11 – 18:41

What a treat to see the 2 "Regen" Bradford trolleybuses, and thanks to Richard for the technical data concerning the circuit breakers and full cab rebuilding.
It all goes to emphasise the points I made about the severe problems with these early EEC metal bodies, mentioned in my own "Regen" post.
In their rebodied form, I spent hours travelling in them, and, like Richard, will never forget their distinctive wailing sound. Also of interest is the rear of the EEC bodied COG6. My recent article on English Electric Bus Bodies mentions the 1937 re-design, and the well rounded rear dome of this bus illustrates this very well. There were very few takers for this design. I can only think of TD5s at Barrow, and lowbridge "Regents" at Southend. Anyone know of any more? The previous design had a very upright dome as can be seen on the "new blue" AAK "Regen" to the left of 607.
My home was about a mile and a Half from Duckworth Lane depot, shown here, and I was about five when the photo was taken!

John Whitaker

01/02/11 – 18:47

Fascinating submission. This is not the first one which mentions noisy trolleybuses, yet I cannot ever recall hearing more than the odd whine and swish from them, and I must have visited and travelled on them in some 10 towns which operated them. Any reason for the noise?.
I must confess that noise would have given individuality to an otherwise usually rather bland form of travel.
Even so, I was always impressed by their 0-60 acceleration and indeed used to ride on the last trolleybus from Croydon to Mitcham which went flat out across the common (about 60) silently, bar the singing of the poles/wires and the vibration from a far from new class of trolleys. On reflection, I wonder if I saw the girlfriend, who gave me this routine, for longer than I might, simply for the trolleybus experience!!

Chris Hebbron

02/02/11 – 06:14

Chris, I think the noise was generated by the double reduction gears in the rear axle differential that were straight cut teeth. Similar to tram motor gearing so a similar noise. I am pleased you found these Regens pictures interesting.

Richard Fieldhouse

05/02/11 – 16:07

Glasgow must have had very quiet trolleybuses. My dad can remember them being almost silent to pedestrians and they became known as ‘the silent death’. I hadn’t ever heard this mentioned anywhere else but reading Ken Houstin’s excellent ‘The Corporation Bus’ (Grosvenor House, £9.99 from Waterstones) lastnight I came across mention of one Dionne Warwick vs Glasgow Corporation. It seems the singer left the Glasgow Odeon after a concert using the back door on to West Nile Street. This being shrouded in thick fog, she didn’t hear or see a trolleybus and was struck by it and an out-of-court settlement smoothed things over!

Scott Anderson

29/04/11 – 06:49

One of the class lasted until 1965 having become trainer no. 060 in 1962. This was the former 597 with an NCB (mk2) body. I photographed it in this role outside Thornbury depot in July 1963. On withdrawal in 1965 it had achieved almost 31 years of service.
No. 603 was repainted in the 1911 style livery to celebrate Bradford’s Golden Jubilee in 1961. According to Stanley King no. 603 attained 1 million miles in service on 24 April 1962.

Malcolm Wells

26/03/12 – 07:53

I have just put together a gallery to commemorate 40 years since the end of Bradford trolleybuses. This incorporates over 500 photos including a section on the ‘Regens’ which I hope will shed some new light on the issues they experienced. Richard Fieldhouse has given me some useful information which has helped to interpret the photos, a lot of which relate to the structure of the body.
There is also route-by-route coverage. The gallery can be found at: //davidbeilby.zenfolio.com/  
Hope you enjoy it!

David Beilby

26/03/12 – 13:21

David, the Bradford additions to your gallery are absolutely superb. Many thanks for your efforts, and particularly the EEC views, which to us Bradford enthusiasts are unbelievable. We would never have believed that such a wonderful archive even existed, let alone become available.
The Regens have always been my main transport "love", as I grew up with them, and have previously said on a 606 posting, they were "personal friends" in the way that true transport enthusiasts will readily understand.

John Whitaker

27/03/12 – 07:17

Thx, David B, for putting Bradford’s trolleybuses on your website. Interestingly, the range 597-632 is virtually identical to (2)16-(2)24 (and especially (2)24 in Portsmouth Corporation’s fleet. Bradford re-bodied them around the end of the war, but Pompey’s carried their original bodies until they were scrapped, mainly in the 1957-8 period.
What was news to me were the five AEC ‘Q’ trolleybuses, presumably all with English Electric bodies, although whoever built the ‘Q’ (trolley)bus bodies, usually seemed to make them all look very similar. Bradford’s ‘Q’, 633, had a relatively short life (1934-1942). To withdraw a vehicle in mid-war would seem to indicate a really serious deficiency somewhere. The clue might lie with Southend’s ‘Q’ trolleybus No. 123, originally on hire from AEC Ltd., from 1934. It was rebuilt by Sunny Dawes in 1943 and again by Beale in 1945, finally being withdrawn in 1949. Intriguingly, Peter Gould’s website shows this vehicle as being a lowbridge example.

Chris Hebbron

27/03/12 – 15:47

Chris. Bradfords Regens were the first EEC metal framed trolleybus bodies. Like their BCN Leyland TD3 cousins, the bodies were literally shaken to pieces after 10 years, due to body weakness, cobbled streets, and the double reduction drive. EEC had learnt a few lessons by the time PCT received their’s, and there was a redesign in 1937, as exemplified by 635 etc in the BCPT fleet.
the Q ("Queenie", No 633) was sold to South Shields in 1942, where she ran until c.1950. She was non standard in Bradford, regarded as draughty, and there were problems with the front overhang. A MOWT directive instructed BCPT to sell earlier 6 wheelers, and 633, South Shields and Newcastle being the recipients in 1942, and 1945.
Bradford had, of course, received 10 Sunbeam MF2s in 1942 under MOWT directive, which enabled these transactions to proceed. I refer to the "Joburghs", 693-702.
We could write paragraphs on the "Regens", so I will leave it there!

John Whitaker

28/03/12 – 08:31

Thanks, John, for filling in the gaps. We tend to forget cobbled streets and the effect they had on vehicles of the time, and probably to a lesser extent now as well. I sometimes wonder if East End of London cobbles were a prime reason for London Transport’s chassisless bodies coming into service. Although one or two small orders had their weaknesses, most survived the punishment well, although a large maintenance workforce would have helped.

Chris Hebbron

28/03/12 – 18:23

It has always amazed me Chris, that the LPTB chassisless trolleys performed as well as they did, and that the concept was not followed up apart from, I suppose, the RM input. Interesting point!
Re. Bradford`s Q trolley, I think an identical, or near identical body was fitted to the Halifax Motorbus Q. Have a look on David`s site. Most Q motorbuses had MCW bodies as did Bradford`s.
As you say, Southend`s EEC Q was lowbridge, as were the earlier 661Ts! What a fascinating fleet that was!
re. Portsmouth, I am assuming that their EE bodied 5 bay AEC 661T trolleys were metal framed, as I always assumed, perhaps wrongly, that they were. The earlier 6bay EEC bodies, and their 6 wheel equivalents were definitely composite, as the BCPT ones, delivered from November 1934, were definitely the first trolleys from EEC with metal framing.The Burnley C and N Titans were their first all metal motorbus bodies, and caused horrendous problems, as has been stated before. What a great hobby interest we share!!

John Whitaker

02/12/14 – 16:14

I always thought these Bradford Corporation AEC 661Ts 597 to 632 (built 1934/35) with double-reduction differential rear axle drives were unique. This belief was wrong as I have now found details in the recently published Portsmouth Trolleybus book by David R H Bowler that their AEC 661Ts 16 to 24 were also fitted with double-reduction drives and also made a loud noise when running. These Portsmouth trolleybuses with English Electric bodies were built in 1935 and followed the Bradford order and were similar in appearance. By 1936 I believe a worm drive with stronger bearings had emerged from AEC, no doubt due to London Transport influence, and future orders by Bradford and Portsmouth were for AEC 661Ts with worm drives which were much quieter in their operation.

Richard Fieldhouse

03/12/14 – 05:39

Nice to hear from you again, Richard. If you go to ‘More Pages’ on this website, then Old Bus Sounds, the first item is a Portsmouth trolleybus of the later type, but still with a noisy rear axle, albeit because it was worn, perhaps, near the end of its days! It’s certainly not a silent one! I confess that I never heard one of the 16-24 type, to my knowledge. They didn’t possess battery power movement and were usually relegated to peak time workings and were scrapped earlier than would otherwise have been the case. They also had a neglected air about them, with faded paintwork. Sad, because I always thought they had the most attractive bodies of all of Pompey’s trolleybus fleet.

Chris Hebbron

03/12/14 – 10:26

Many thanks Chris for your kind words and advice on the Bus Sound section for the sound of a Portsmouth AEC 661T/Craven trolleybus. I believe the General Manager Mr Ben Hall of Portsmouth was very wise to specify at a late stage Battery Traction availability for the large AEC 661T/Craven order. With the damage due to bombing during World War II, the trolleybuses in Portsmouth were still able to operate by using temporary turning points on battery power. Regarding trolleybus noise, this was also common in Bradford with some of their AEC 661Ts with worn worm drives adding to the "music". It made every trolleybus seem to be a character. Interestingly the Karrier E4s (677 to 692; built 1938) used to make a more growling noise even when newly overhauled. Perhaps these were the bass section.

Richard Fieldhouse

R F Mack

Bradford Corporation Transport
1935
AEC 661T
English Electric H32/26R

We all have our personal favourites as far as buses are concerned, and I have to confess that mine are, (or were), trolleybuses.
Amongst my earliest memories were the late war years in Bradford, where I so clearly recall the sight, and sound, of Bradford`s “Regen” trolleybuses.
These were AEC 661T types based at my home depot of Duckworth Lane, and were unlike any trolleybuses anywhere else, as they made a NOISE. Their mournful wail could be heard for miles about, especially when braking, and this was due to the double reduction rear axle and full regenerative control. How Bradfordians distinguished them from the Air Raid “all clear” signal I shall never know!
They were new in 2 batches, in 1934 (597-617  KY 8200-8220) and 1935 (618-632  AAK 420-434), and carried early examples of English Electric metal framed bodies, which recent research has discovered, were extremely troublesome right from the off. English Electric metal bodies at that time did not benefit from the expertise demonstrated in the products of Metro Cammel. Having said that, the situation was not helped by tight and hilly schedules, the aforesaid unusual double reduction rear axles, and the fully regenerative control, such that these bodies were virtually shaken to bits after a troublesome 10 year life on Bradford`s granite setts.
Failures were occurring at an alarming rate by the war years, and BCT received permission to rebody 9 of them with Brush utility bodies in 1944, during which process, the regenerative control was reduced. The remainder were rebodied by Northern Coachbuilders in 2 styles, between 1946 and 1949, the last of the English Electric all metal bodies being consigned to scrap in 1947, and these trolleybuses, with their composite bodies, then settled down to a “second life” which was to last into the 1960s.
They still made plenty of noise in their new guise and being a regular rider to school, each one developed its own character for me, and they became firm friends. Sad, I know!

I attach a poor quality Brownie Box photo of 606, one of the Brush rebodies, and always my favourites, taken on a quiet 1953 Sunday morning. This photograph is full of nostalgia for me, especially as it was one of the last to carry the older Tattam livery with cream bands and rear dome.
Happy Days! If only I could ride on one again at Sandtoft!

Photographs and Copy contributed by John Whitaker

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

———

Not sad at all – some vehicles, just like people, have characters and the more eccentric ones get recalled the most! How amazing that permission was given to re-body vehicles while the war was on, something I’ve not previously heard of.
I always had a soft spot for the London United Tramways (later LT) A1 and A2 class ‘Diddler’ trolleybuses, unique and also frail bodywise!

Chris Hebbron

———

Fear not John, as Chris H rightly says there’s nothing sad in being fortunate enough to be able to recognise the characteristics of vehicles. It is a fact that, even in large batches of brand new ones, individual machines very quickly display their own particular "natures." As a teenager on frequent visits to relations in South London I was also totally fascinated by the "Diddlers" on outings to Hampton Court and the area.

Chris Youhill

———

Thanks Chris H and Chris Y for the reassuring remarks about my deceased friends!! Good to know that other enthusiasts are just as moved as myself when referring to man-made inanimate objects !!

Thanks for comments about London "Diddlers" from Chris Y and Chris H. I too was fascinated by them, but never saw them "in the flesh". I hold my very fleeting memories of Bradfords EEC 6 wheelers, and single deckers in the same light, as I can only just remember them. It would be great to hear about other trolleybus interests from fellow enthusiasts, as my enthusiasm is for anything old in the psv line, including trams!

But I wont go there!

John Whitaker

———

Chris Hebbron raises an interesting point re. re-bodying of vehicles during WW2. The MOWT (Ministry of War Transport) controlled all allocations of chassis and body manufacture, and supply to customers. I doubt whether operators had much say in most cases; Body builders were allocated orders in batches, and hence Pickering, for example, built small numbers of utility bodies in 1942/3 on unfrozen, and early Guy Arabs, (including a minority on Mk2 chassis), they disappeared again until late 1945, when they were allocated a contract for relaxed single deck utility bodies on Albion chassis, for Scottish operators.
East Lancs were used for re-bodying only, several fleets receiving all metal bodies on reconditioned chassis (mainly AEC) to almost peacetime standard. Brush were unusual, but not unique, in being used for new and reconditioned chassis, viz the Bradford trolleybuses and early AEC Regents for Birmingham. Bradford had 10 AEC Regents with all metal English Electric bodies which dated from 1935/6, and these were just as worn out as their trolleybus cousins by 1944, such that 7 were given new East Lancs bodies that year. I intend to look at the English Electric situation as far as metal framed bodies are concerned, as there were other disasters, notably with a batch of TD3/TD3c buses for Burnley Colne and Nelson JTC. I will submit a post on the subject if there is sufficient interest.

John Whitaker

———

I was delighted to see the Bradford AEC 661T "Regens" 620 and 606 posted on this web site by my best friend John. These were my favourite group of trolleybuses as they made a loud noise and had regenerative braking. Over the last few years I have been doing research into the early years of these trolleybuses 597 to 632 built 1934/35. My findings have been published in the Journal of the Bradford Trolleybus Association "Trackless" 200 to 205 inc. and 211. I can confirm the double reduction differential rear axle drive and the fierce regenerative braking were the main contributory factors leading to the failure of their EEC metal-framed bodies. The noise and vibration made it impossible for passengers to have a conversation inside these trolleybuses when running at speed, such as from Springhead Road to Bell Dean Road on the Thornton route. This leads me to ponder why Bradford specified a double reduction differential drive when a single worm drive differential was working quietly and efficiently on a very similar AEC 661T/EEC in London, namely LTPB 63 delivered some months earlier.

Richard Fieldhouse

———

This site has certainly brought back some memories.
I served an apprenticeship with the English Electric Co. at the Thornbury works in Bradford in the late 50’s. The Trolleybus motors kept the Traction Department busy for many years.
I recall working on the motors in both production and refurbishment and for it’s output it was very compact, good for it’s purpose, but a pain to work on. A common fault with motors returned for Overhaul was the "Square Commutator" Not really square but appearing so due to abnormal wear on opposite sides. Caused it turned out by slightly eccentric brake drums on some vehicles resulting in the motors always stopping and starting at the same point in it’s rotation.

Phil Johnson

———

Amazing the sort of problems which crop up – I should think it required some thinking about to identify THAT problem!

Chris Hebbron

———

I found Phils’ comments and experience at the English Electric Co at Thornbury most interesting and wonder which type of trolleybus traction motors were being overhauled and who were the regular customers. Can I assume Bradford City Transport was a regular as it was a loyal supporter of English Electric traction equipment?

Richard Fieldhouse

———

19/04/11 – 19:20

In the comments on the page for Bradford Corporation AEC661T trolleybuses, some correspondents mention the LUT "Diddler" trolleybuses. In 1962 the last trolleybuses were withdrawn in London and living in a road near the last trolleybus route to close I took my 18 month old son to see the last trolleybus from Hammersmith to the depot at Fulwell. In the event the modern bus was preceded by a "Diddler" from the London Transport Museum decorated with bunting, etc. as for its opening day. Alas, my son does not recall the sight.
For those of you who are interested, if you log on to the "You Tube" website and type in the Search Box "Twickenham Trolleybuses" (without the quotes) there is a film of the first day of operation of the diddlers taken in 1932. It is in black and white and, originally, was silent but a sound track of 1930’s band music has been added.
If you look carefully you will notice that they do not have headlights but it was shortly afterwards at the insistence of the police that a single headlight was put in the centre of the panel replacing the radiator on a IC engined bus.

Phi Jones

——— Top of this posting ———