Copyright John Stringer
Maidstone & District Motor Services Ltd
1956
AEC Regent V MD3RV
Park Royal L30/26RD
During the mid to late 1950’s a number of BET operators seemed to switch their double deck allegiance
to AEC Regent V’s. Though Maidstone & District had bought a number of AEC Regal single deckers before
and just after the Second World War, their preference in double deckers had been for Leyland TD’s,
Bristol K’s, then Leyland PD2’s and Guy Arab IV’s.
In 1956 they bought a number of VKR-registered
Park Royal-bodied Regent V MD3RV’s, with the smaller AV470 engine, synchromesh gearbox and vacuum
brakes. Some were highbridge, some lowbridge - all with platform doors.
I recall when I was a
child in the late 1950’s one of the highbridge variety used to appear each year in my home town of
Halifax - parked on the spare ground off Broad Street opposite the then new Crossfield Bus Station - on
a countrywide tour promoting holidays in Kent.
This lowbridge example was snapped on 13th July
1970 in Bexhill-on-Sea whilst I was on a family holiday staying in Pevensey. It had originally been
numbered DL35, but by this time was renumbered 6735.
A couple of years later my own local operator
Calderdale Joint Omnibus Committee surprised everyone by acquiring four of these Mk. V’s - lowbridge VKR
36 & 37 and highbridge VKR 472 & 479 - to temporarily augment the fleet after the merger with Todmorden
J.O.C. All retained their M&D livery, the lowbridge pair being allocated to Todmorden where their livery
fitted in reasonably well. Sadly the last survivor - VKR 479 - was withdrawn just as I passed my PSV
Test so I never got to drive it. A pity - the sound effects were wonderful!
Photograph and Copy contributed by John Stringer
A full list of Regent V codes can be seen here.
08/02/13 - 13:24
Lovely shot, John. As AEC’s biggest fan, I have never been a fan of medium
weights (particularly deckers) nor a big fan of the troublesome wet-liners but M & D’s vehicles
always looked magnificent in their superb, dignified traditional livery. Some people stuck very
happily with (heavy) Guys but M & D and East Kent moved, initially, to medium weight AECs - although
both graduated to heavy weight AECs - as did Aldershot and District from Dennis to AEC. Was the
initial move part of the paranoid race to medium/light weights in the ’50s only to accidentally
discover the delights and benefits of AECs?
David Oldfield
09/02/13 - 07:09
The reason East Kent moved from Guy to AEC was that their Chief Engineer
thought that the 6LW engine was not powerful enough for 30 feet double deckers. In typical Gardner
fashion they neglected to take their customers into their confidence and let them know they were
developing the more powerful 6LX. Guy did not know this and neither did East Kent and so AECs were
ordered.
All is revealed in an article by John Aldridge in Buses Annual 1980.
Paragon
09/02/13 - 07:10
Many years ago at Sandtoft trolleybus museum, preserved VKR 37 was present at
an event. I can’t remember why, but I was invited to drive it with a full load of visiting
enthusiasts on a circuit of the place and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. It was of course
reminiscent of the identical chassis of the six Samuel Ledgard Regent Vs (1949 - 1954) in which I’d
driven and conducted many thousands of miles - each - and was a happy case of "deja
vu."
Chris Youhill
09/02/13 - 12:16
Thanks Paragon.
David Oldfield
10/02/13 - 07:49
I have always found the AV470 and AH470 to be remarkably potent for their
size. "Perky" is the word I’d use. Devon General’s Regent Vs in particular seemed to take
everything in their stride - and they had a lot to take!
Peter Williamson
10/02/13 - 07:50
At the time this photo was taken I was working for Southdown at Eastbourne,
the destination of the 99 route, but I have to confess I was totally unaware that any of the
lowbridge Regent V’s ever operated from M&D’s Hastings or Bexhill garages although several of the
highbridge version were operated especially when they were new in 1956. I always thought that they
were amongst the best looking buses around at the time as I immediately liked the AEC full front and
the elegantly proportioned Park Royal bodywork finished in the superb livery was near perfection.
As a point of interest the 99 route did not require low height buses, coincidentally one of
the areas low bridges under the Hastings to Eastbourne railway line known as Sackville arch is to
the right of the picture and the junction the bus has just crossed
Diesel Dave
10/02/13 - 10:57
I agree Peter W about the valiant "perkiness" of the AV470 engines -
but with one important proviso !! Their performance depended on the fuel policy and settings of the
particular operator. I personally had quite a comprehensive experience of the engines with many
operators. Samuel Ledgard, Wallace Arnold and others rightly believed in running them on adequate
supplies of diesel and on other favourable settings - the same applied to the ex South Wales Regent
Vs bought by Ledgard and those particular four had a phenomenal and delightfully noisy performance.
In contrast the one hundred and fifty "light" Mark Vs bought by Leeds City Transport were
just impossible - seemingly running on an even greater proportion of fresh air than LCT’s usual
policy of "cutting down" they were a frustrating embarrassment and time keeping with them
was impossible. On a good day the odd one might be capable of slightly exceeding 30 mph and on any
kind of gradient, heavily laden in particular, they were the personification of that famous little
saying "Wouldn’t pull the skin off a rice pudding." Throughout my career I was always
happy to see the good points of any model but as an exception I have to say that I loathed 760 -
909, especially the last fifteen which were eight feet wide and it showed in every way.
Just
in case this prolonged rant has given the wrong impression may I just reiterate that the 470 engine
was a fine power unit in general and when properly treated, which fortunately it usually was.
Chris Youhill
10/02/13 - 12:24
I can well understand, Chris Y, your frustration of driving a vehicle whose
normal lively performance you were fully aware of, but which was dumbed-down in the interests of
economy and possible maintenance advantages. But did those ‘advantages’ really come through,
if the engine had to be ‘flogged’ mercilessly to achieve any sort of acceptable
performance???
Chris Hebbron
10/02/13 - 13:22
I know what you mean Chris H, but in the case of the LCT batch (for batch read
enormous class) there was no possibility of flogging the engines - not that I ever would as I didn’t
believe in such abuse - as they were governed to such a degree. The misguided policy was nowhere
better demonstrated than with the huge number of air operated preselector Mark 3 Regents (9.6 litre)
that we had. The abuse of these by a large number of self opinionated and arrogant "fast
men" was heartbreaking to suffer. The standard practice of these twentieth century Luddites was
to leave the accelerator hard down at all times while slamming the gearchange pedal down and back at
full revs. Any, debatable, fuel saving was far outweighed by constant expensive damage to gearboxes,
prop shaft joints and diffs and bodywork by these dreadful and unpunished "drivers" many
of whom sported lapels full of "safe driving awards" - which in the case of those
individuals meant that they’d managed year after year to avoid hitting anything while slinging the
conductors and passengers around the bus like rag dolls. This state of affairs was in no way helped
by the practice of having regular crews who worked together all the time - while some were
conscientious there were far too many "Bonnie and Clyde" types who were expertly adept at
early running ("Time pinching") and every other variety of avoiding work. Not content with
this deplorable attitude, they reinforced their "championship status" by constantly loudly
sneering and jeering at any of us who were seen as "always late" - because of course we
were doing the job as properly as conditions allowed. Once, as a one man operator, I handed a bus
over several minutes late to one of the chief offenders who loudly bellowed "I thought they
must have altered the timetable Chris" - I replied, equally loudly, "I didn’t think you
knew what a timetable was" - a look of shocked silence was all he could manage to that !!
This may seem like dramatic exaggeration but I assure the reader that if anything its an
understatement.
Chris Youhill
10/02/13 - 14:32
A lot of the problems with rear engined buses with semi-automatic gearboxes
could be ascribed to the same gung-ho attitude that Chris mentions in respect of the Leeds
preselectors; it became far too easy to change gear without paying attention to engine revs. It also
coincided with a period when recruiting bus drivers was difficult, and the calibre of staff taken on
was distinctly lower than ideal.
On the question of timetable adherence, while I was at
Reading we had one (long-service) driver who was renowned for running late, in the hope that an
inspector would regulate him and provide him with an unscheduled break while waiting to resume
service at a correct time. Unfortunately, he also had the reputation of being able to catch up time
if necessary - he was never known to be late at the end of a shift - so he was generally left to his
own devices. The public of course suffered from an erratic timetable.
Alan Murray-Rust
11/02/13 - 07:06
I recall the Portsmouth Corp’n Daimler CWA6’s being abused by treating the
greachange pedal as a clutch, but suspect this was because only nine buses in the fleet were like
this and drivers were not trained on the unique vehicles.
In the late 1980’s, as an admin bod,
working for BT, I needed a side-loading van and all that was available was a Commer/Dodge 15cwt PA
van with a petrol low compression 1.7 litre engine, developing 49bhp. For half the day, it had a
full load, then was empty. Said to reach 70mph, but actually about 63, it never reached more than
53mph and my foot was on the floor all day. If you went round a bend at any speed, however, the
front wheels, which were closer together than the rear one, make the vehicle dig in, initially quite
scary. Fuel consumption was terrible. My son, also working for BT, asked if I would not park the
vehicle on our drive overnight as his mates would laugh at him! When I took the vehicle back the
next day, I asked the MT Workshop when it was last serviced - they said they’d done it especially
for me! They then asked me if I’d kindly park the vehicle in the scrap lane, a wise decision!
Chris Hebbron
11/02/13 - 07:07
Chris Y is correct about the Leeds lightwieght Regents which flattered to
deceive being quite attractive buses externally.
Not only did they have little or no pulling
power but from a passenger point of view were amongst the most uncomfortable buses to run in Leeds.
The seat squabs were wafer thin with little filling while the interiors were a monument to the
lets get as many as we can on it school of management.
As they aged the windows gave off a
most un-syncopated rattle when idling that made normal conversation next to impossible. Being
lightweight they had an alarming tendency to lean in the opposite direction to travel on corners in
at least one instance depositing me on the floor!
Chris Hough
11/02/13 - 10:14
Chris Hebbron - you are quite right in saying that abuse of the spring
operated gearboxes in Daimler CW vehicles was widespread. In the particular case of Portsmouth lack
of familiarity may well have been an acceptable explanation, but certainly not elsewhere. However,
as opposed to air operated gearboxes, the spring system had a "kick back" trick up its
sleeve - both metaphorically and mechanically !! Any wear in the linkages from the cab quadrant to
the gearbox, or failure to set the quadrant accurately, could and often did result in the pedal
flying back under full pressure to twice the normal "resting" position, causing painful
and often nasty foot and leg injuries. Nevertheless the "fast men" would still subject the
transmission and body components to the same abuse as suffered by the air models.
I never
drove a Commer/Dodge van. As a bystander though I often reflected on how attractive they looked, and
also on how the very obvious narrow front wheel track looked decidedly dubious !!
Chris Hough - how very well you put the situation of the lightweight Leeds
Mark V Regents. In the list of their awful shortcomings I’d forgotten about the dreadful seat
"cushions." The behaviour of the buses on corners and roundabouts was terrifying to any
level headed driver - for in addition to passenger discomfort there was no proper seat for the
driver either !! If I remember rightly - its a long time ago - the seat cushion was adjustable fore
and aft, but not for height?, and the meagre "backrest" was permanently fixed on the cab
rear bulkhead. I’m not narrow minded, but the front nine passengers in the lower saloon were
subjected to what amounted to an obscene (must have been JUST legal I suppose) lack of knee room.
The rearward facing seat for five and the front two forward facing seats compelled occupants to
"interlock" their knees to an unacceptable extent - mind you, this at least meant that
they could all sway as a solid congregation - "safety in numbers" - on the bad corners and
cambers. Perhaps the worst site of all may have been Westgate roundabout on the Park Lane junction -
this roundabout was dangerously wrongly cambered for all vehicles, and it was common for the
"Toy Mark Vs" when in whatever hurry they could muster to scrape first the platform edge
followed after a terrifying lurch by the offside rear corner panel.
I remain convinced, as do
many others, that the dreadful October 1969 accident in Harehills would not have occurred with any
other type of bus. The vehicle was descending the gently sloped Stoney Rock Lane with a full load of
68 souls when the nearside front wheel caught up a "Road Works" "A" board which
had blown down in the wind. The wheel jammed the board into the mudguard and - this awful scenario
takes some imagining - the vehicle immediately turned sharp left 90 degrees into a side street of
terrace houses, attempted to overturn, and did so by slithering down the front walls of the houses,
crushing the top deck to half height on the way. I believe that every passenger was injured, many
seriously. This type of incident just shows how potentially dangerous were the old uncovered light
bulbs which protruded into the saloons. Once again, this topic has veered away considerably from the
Maidstone and District subject, but justifiably I hope in a general discussion of the model’s
various versions.
Chris Youhill
14/02/13 - 10:49
Here is the highbridge version VKR 479 masquerading as Calderdale J.O.C. 362.
Still in its former owner’s livery and looking rather down at heel - especially with its adverts
ripped off like that - it it seen parked up at the bottom of the old Cross Field Bus Station in the
Spring of 1973, not long before its withdrawal from service. These were not at all popular with
conductors because of the platform doors which had to be operated by them by a button above, and so
required them to be there at every stop - as of course they were supposed to be according to the
rules, but rarely were in practice !
John Stringer
15/02/13 - 05:54
I’m a bit surprised about the door controls John, on the PMT Daimlers of the
same year, the driver controlled the doors from the cab although there was a set of door controls on
the platform for the conductor to use if necessary.
Ian Wild
15/02/13 - 08:42
Any doubledeck bus with a Manual set of Rear Platform doors would also require
the conductor to be present on the platform at each stop, or am I missing something here
Andrew Beever
15/02/13 - 12:02
As I said in my original caption, I obtained my PSV licence (both Driver’s and
Conductor’s) just after these had been withdrawn so never actually worked with one, and cannot say
whether there were controls for the doors in the cab or not. It was just what others told me. All
Halifax’s back loaders had been open platformed, and maybe in the interests of safety and legality
there may well have been a notice posted forbidding drivers to operate the doors, and insisting that
only the conductor should operate them from the platform. (I’m just clutching at straws here really)
The trouble is now that amazingly there is hardly anyone to ask who was driving at that time - there
are only to my knowledge three drivers with longer continuous service now than me. Phew, that’s a
frightening thought !
What Andrew is ‘missing’ is perhaps an appreciation of the
difference between what the law required, and the reality of what many employees actually thought
should happen !
John Stringer
15/02/13 - 13:22
Picking up on Johns point of the difference between law and what actually
happens. Not long after I started at Percy Main we had an industrial dispute. It was decided we would
work to rule, so this meant an overtime ban, and you then have to work within two sometimes
conflicting sets of rules, i.e, Company and Road Traffic Act, but where there may be a conflict the
RTA takes precedence. The RTA states that the conductor can only give the driver the signal to start
from the platform, whereas the company would expect them to do it from any convenient bell push on the
vehicle. Working to rule, if the conductor is upstairs, he/she would then have to return to the
platform before they can give the signal to start, once on the platform, the company would then expect
them to look out for intending passengers, so does that little old lady just leaving the shop want to
board my bus? I’d better wait and see, result? chaos and timetables completely out of the window.
Ronnie Hoye
15/02/13 - 13:23
This is just anecdotal since I had no first hand experience but I think on
some half-cabs with platform doors there was a switch to open them from the cab when the vehicle had
stopped but the conductor had to close them.
David Oldfield
15/02/13 - 17:58
Dredging my memory after almost half a century, I seem to recall that the rear
(electric sliding) passenger door on the Aldershot and District Loline I was operated from the
driver’s cab, and duplicate buttons were installed on the platform for conductor operation as
necessary.
Roger Cox
16/02/13 - 07:21
The rear platform doors on the preserved South Yorkshire Albion could be
operated by either the driver or conductor. The master switch for them however was in the cab well
out of reach of the conductor
Andrew Beever
16/02/13 - 11:20
Ronnie, the sensible RTA ruling on starting signals was, to all intents and
purposes, universally ignored out of sheer necessity. To obey the ruling would have resulted, as you
rightly say, in scheduled timings being completely unachievable even at quiet times - and passengers
would soon have become tired of being bashed about as conductors strove to reach the platform at
each stop. The only times where, as a driver, I NEVER pulled away when a conductor rapped on the cab
rear window with a coin or, even worse stamped on the cab roof from the front of the top deck. I was
occasionally treated to abuse or sulkiness by those who tried this practice, but as far as I was
concerned they could put their foot through the floor and it would have made no difference - just
think of the size of the witness audience in the event of a platform accident !!
Chris Youhill
20/02/13 - 13:28
My memory as a passenger on many front engined vehicles with power doors
(including M and D, Southdown, East Kent, as well as the Green Line RMCs and RCLs is that two sets
of equipment to open and close the doors was always provided: in the cab and on the platform.
Irrespective of any legal niceties, normal operation in practice, as I remember it, was for the
driver to operate them almost all of the time to both open and close, with conductor operation being
a rarity. The only exception to this in my experince was the Green Line vehicles where with much
less changeover of passengers and thus less ticket work for the conductors, they often did operate
the doors.
Gordon Mackley
15/04/13 - 07:32
DL35 and DL40 were sent to Hastings to work the increased 99 summer frequency
(from one and a half hourly to half hourly) of 1970. I lived in Bexhill at this time. These vehicles
were pretty rare to find, the crews disliked them and they were often ‘defected’ or whatever.
I only managed to get a short town journey on one of them. They arrived in July and were only in
service for barely a few weeks, if that. DL40 was being used as a training bus in the August. Other
vehicles were received to work the 99. The photographer was fortunate to snap this picture
considering the small amount of use these two had on this route. I got a rear view after one was
defected at Bexhill garage and parked in the car park of the West Station opposite.
Roy Simmons
15/04/13 - 08:36
I am somewhat puzzled as to why the crews should dislike these vehicles
sufficiently to invent defects in order to have them substituted. I have come across this immature
conduct at most places where I’ve worked and I just don’t understand it. We all presumably have our
favourites, mine being the Leyland PD1, but provided that there is no real operational or safety
defect with any vehicle then un-necessary changeovers should not be tolerated.
Chris Youhill
15/04/13 - 10:53
I agree Chris. I hate Mk 1 Nationals, Bedford YRTs and Dennis Javelins - but I
drove them without demur when I was allocated…..
David Oldfield
11/05/13 - 08:19
There are lots of derisory comments about fast drivers, I was considered a
fast driver and being a ex conductor new all about rough drivers, there is a difference between fast
and rough. Conductors always enjoyed having me as there driver and there were lots of good comment’s
from my passengers about my time keeping as well as my standard of driving.
Michael Crofts
11/05/13 - 08:56
True, Michael. Fast and bad are not necessarily the same thing.
David Oldfield
12/05/13 - 07:03
As a former part-time bus and coach driver I agree that fast and bad aren’t
the same thing: the key "things" are to be good (safe/smooth) and on-schedule. But really
"fast" (or "slow") just shouldn’t even come into it - maintain the schedule and
do it safely/smoothly. Unfortunately, I think some of today’s demands (and I’m thinking of two very
recent trips on Blackpool-Preston route 75) in terms of timing/scheduling/recovery-time mean that to
keep schedule involves overly-fast driving to an unacceptable degree - and that is a shameful
position in which to put drivers (I couldn’t have got through gaps at speeds which those chaps on
the 75 did - mind you, I learned on a PD3, and perhaps Solos have better brakes).
Philip Rushworth
12/05/13 - 09:04
Couldn’t agree more, Philip. As another part-timer, I refused to drive a route
for a friend who ran a tendered service for county which had ridiculous timings - and specified
vehicles far to large for the rural roads. [Yesterday, I saw the operator who now runs the route
using an even bigger (12m) vehicles. Madness.]
I’m now off to drive an RML at the Slough
running day. Now that WILL be fun.
David Oldfield
12/05/13 - 11:35
I agree entirely with all these mature comments about "fast"
driving. Sadly, there exists a very strong ethic that the ONLY criteria of good driving is to be on
time, or early, no matter how unreasonable the schedules, the traffic and - someone has to dare to
say it - the sabotage (intentional or otherwise) of any possibility of punctual running by a
sizeable proportion of the passengers. Like many of our friends here I always totally refused to
drive badly or to abuse the vehicles (even the odd ones which I loathed) and was therefore
"always late" - but I was not a slow driver at all.
Many "honourable and
customer concerned" operators are hypocritical to a criminal degree, and as a result of the
ethic I mentioned are able to take advantage of drivers who dare not stand up and say "Its
unsafe and it simply cannot be achieved with safe and legal driving."
Just two examples I can give from many hundreds in my own experience :-
At one time it was necessary, for engineering reasons, to close Crown Point
Bridge in Leeds for around eighteen months. The bridge was on the main route from the south into
Leeds bus station. On our services 410/411 from Doncaster to Leeds the running time from Pontefract
to Leeds (14 miles and extremely busy) was a ridiculous an inadequate forty minutes. The road
closure however meant an extra mile each way right through the entire centre of the congested City -
this could easily take fifteen minutes at peak times. SYRT was still a private concern at the time,
and the other main operator over the Bridge was the Caldaire Group (West Riding). Friends, please
don’t try to guess how much extra running/recovery time was granted but let me astonish you - not
one second, and not one extra vehicle !!!! This scandal was enjoyed with glee no doubt by the
hypocritical operators and was, of course, facilitated by the glorious and very misguided "fast
men." We’d better say nothing about all the "ring the bell once and remain seated until
the vehicle has stopped" and all the other desirable but impractical measures.
The second
case which beggars belief was in my coaching days for a highly respected concern in Leeds. At the
time the speed limit for coaches was 40 mph anywhere, and there were no motorways and few bypasses
and, crucially, no M25. I did a tour from Leeds to Eastbourne involving three meal stops - coffee,
lunch and afternoon tea. The latter was thirty minutes in St. Alban’s including discharging and
reloading 40 passengers in the middle of the town and their consumption of their tea and their
comfort visits - and no parking facilities for the coach - I had to pay a dear old chap 2/6d to park
in the yard of the London Transport garage nearby - and of course no tea for me. Now to the crux of
this incredible saga - which will be all the more astonishing to those who know the Greater London
area. Assuming prompt departure from St. Albans (quite impossible of course) the time allowed to
reach the Sea Front hotel in Eastbourne was TWO HOURS via Central London. Luckily I knew the area
from personal experience - pity any driver who didn’t and I had had no route learning or warning at
all - but nevertheless arrived over two hours late to face the understandable wrath of the
Proprietress - a splendid lady who ran an immaculate establishment with Swiss watch efficiency.
I could write a series of books about these scandals which, since 1986 De-regulation, have
become increasingly widespread particularly in the local bus service sphere - all of course in the
interests of "greater choice and quality for the customer."
Chris Youhill
13/05/13 - 07:26
Chris, just write a book . . . any bloody book! I’ve read so many of these
"busman’s books", and they’ve all been fascinating . . . but I just feel that yours would
be something special. Can I take issue with one point raised in previous submissions to this thread?
Running late on a high-frequency urban service (which I know must have been your experience at LCT)
is quite different - from the passenger’s perspective (my perspective in the context of my previous
comment) - when running (15+) minutes late on an hourly service . . . "is it coming, isn’t
it?". (And I won’t even tell you what fun I had just trying to work out from where in Blackpool
the 75 left from - and we wonder why passengers deserted buses . . . )
David: I’ve just noticed your post - I trust you had fun. I’ve only once
driven an RMC [sic]: at the Chiswick open day in 1984(?) - whilst the cab was basic everything
seemed just properly "set up", a real "driver’s bus". God! what a shock Midland
Fox’s ex-Harper PD3 was - though not as much a shock as their ex-LT DM/Ss were . . . nice high
driving position, but a manual parking brake in 1972? and that suspension? but it would never have
occurred to me to "fault" any bus. But it was a hobby, fun - if I’d had to do it
day-in-day-out would I? although clearly Chris Youhill would have.
Philip Rushworth
13/05/13 - 11:21
Yes, Philip, its was fun, running on networks of routes from the 1950s and
’60s. Slough on a Sunday in 2013 is like Monday to Friday rush hour in the ’60s (and you didn’t have
to allow for photo opportunities then). I just ploughed on at a safe speed. One journey I picked up
at each stop into Slough, the next I made up time with no-one between Slough and Langley. Then to
Beaconsfield where I was meant to connect with another vehicles. He was over 15 minutes late and we
left 10 minutes late - but again made up time on the open road to Slough. It was meant to replicate
the ’50s and ’60s with a fully timetabled network of routes. It certainly does. All credit to Peter
Cartwright and his team for yet another successful day.
David Oldfield
14/05/13 - 17:20
Thanks indeed Philip for that humbling vote of literary confidence - I often
thought of writing the book you suggest, would love to have done so and should have done - but it
would be a lot to take on, timewise, now at "this stage in the ageing game !! However I did
help my friend Don Bate with his ten year exhaustive research which culminated in his superb book
"Beer and blue buses" about Samuel Ledgard. Don being on the engineering side of the Firm
I was able to provide him with much information about the traffic and public side of the operation,
and to compose many of the captions for the pictures.
I can well understand how you feel about
whether or not you would have done the job as a regular occupation - you are of course spot on in
stressing that I wouldn’t have had any doubts, and I didn’t.
Although my knees were knocking
with terror and stage fright, I would gladly go back to that Friday teatime at 4.43pm when I stood
in Burley in Wharfedale waiting to take over my first ever double deck service bus for a busy late
turn - I was sure that all the passengers would know full well that I was on my first trip and would
be waiting for me to make a hash of it. As the bus arrived, an unavoidable ten minutes late due to
the Leeds traffic etc, my mixture of fear and excitement mounted - I had two minutes in which to
travel three busy miles to Ilkley, turn round, and set off for the peak period in Leeds. Always a
PD1 devotee I shall always be so thankful to ex Bristol ECW bodied LAE 12 - it must have known my
predicament and pulled out all the stops to save the day, performing even better than its usual
commendable speed and pulling power - and the gearbox was like silk. After the two hour round trip,
during which we (the bus, me, and the conductor as a team) pulled back all the deficit we arrived in
Ilkley on time for our meal break. My life’s ambition had been achieved and I doubt if I’ll ever be
as happy again.
Chris Youhill
15/05/13 - 07:35
Chris, from what I can work out you’ve been: conductor, WYRCC; conductor,
Ledgard; driver, Ledgard; driver, LCT; Inspector, LCT; then I don’t read much from you - was it all
too painful? - so, I’m guessing, Inspector, WYPTE; then to South Yorks, driver; and finally Arriva,
driver. What a journey! Your passion as both an enthusiast as a professional shines through your
every contribution, as does your ability to write. If you haven’t got the time to write it all down
then just dictate your thoughts into a "Dictafone" (showing my own age here) and somebody
will knock them out. Whenever I drove a bus the thoughts going through my mind were: the brakes are
poor/the brakes are fierce/where are the gears?/I can find the gears and stop nicely! and
bonus… nobody is drunk/threatening to hit me. That’d be about the limit of my book -
everything else just got lost amongst the fug of keeping going/stopping/staying alive. I’m a
teacher: what attracted me into teaching? - "Please Sir" (yes, really). What attracted me
to buses . . . you’ve worked this out: "On the Buses". LWT has a lot to answer for.
Philip Rushworth
19/05/13 - 12:06
Well Philip, you won’t be surprised to hear that I can remember my whole
career "On the buses" quite clearly, so here it is in full.
SAMUEL LEDGARD Conductor
WYRCC Conductor
MURGATROYD’S Coach driver (a few weeks only by mutual arrangement)
SAMUEL LEDGARD Conductor and driver.
WALLACE ARNOLD Bus, coach and tour driver and
Traffic office.
LCT later WYPTE Driver (crew and OPO) Inspector (Road and garage)
SOUTH
YORKSHIRE OPO and COACH DRIVER (all one rota)
CALDAIRE (WRAC)
BRITISH BUS
COWIE
ARRIVA (These five operators all owning Pontefract depot in rapid succession of course)
The above were all full time jobs, but in addition I did much part time contract, private hire
and tour work for Independent Coachways of Horsforth, which was founded by a close friend of mine -
with a Ledgard Reliance/Burlingham Seagull UUA 791 and considerable support from former Ledgard
clients - my friend had worked at SL before the closure of the Company.
Chris Youhill
20/05/13 - 07:11
Chris, your storey now seems even more interesting: if you don’t share it with
us, just share one thing for now - where exactly (by today’s building plan) was Ledgard’s
"Moorfield" depot, and where was the WYRCC depot. OK that’s two things!
So. AEC
produced a medium-weight Regent. What set it apart from the "heavy" Regent? for how long
did it last? and why did it "fade away"? . . . and why didn’t Leyland produce a
medium-weight Titan, or - for that matter - Daimler a medium weight CV/CC/CS?
Philip Rushworth
20/05/13 - 09:03
At the risk of treading on Chris’s toes. The MD2/3RA medium Regent had the
AV479 (7.58 litre) engine; the heavies were successively the D2/3RV with the 9.6 litre A218 engine,
the 2D2/3RA with the 9.6 litre AV590 and the 3D2/3RA the 11.3 litre AV691 engine.
David Oldfield
20/05/13 - 11:33
PS: Why didn’t Leyland or Daimler build a medium weight? The devil in me says
they had more sense - but I’ve always preferred the heavy option. [Low stress on mechanical parts
and long service intervals.] Mind you, strictly speaking Daimler did produce a medium weight. The
CV5G wasn’t common. but there were enough around. I never went for the medium weight options on
Bristols and Guys either - far better the Bristol engines or the 6LW or even 6LX, never 5LW. I
thought that was false economy. Leyland’s medium weights were single deckers like the Tiger Cub
whose engine was admired, but noisy, but lacked torque and long life. It became better when it
gained the 0.600 and morphed into the Leopard L1/2.
David Oldfield
20/05/13 - 16:38
Philip, I haven’t totally ruled out the possibility of a book, but I do face
the fact that time has gone by and that if I am to tackle the project I shall have to move quickly,
and clear a lot of other pressing matters out of the way first. It is something I have always felt
that I’d like to accomplish I must admit.
The Ledgard depot at Yeadon was at the head of a
very short and narrow thoroughfare - little more than an access lane really - called Moorfield
Drive. The facility was taken over when the Moorfield Omnibus Company was purchased in 1934, and the
name remained in use officially but not publicly right to the end of the Ledgard operation in 1967.
The original Moorfield largely wooden premises succumbed to a severe gale in 1947 and were replaced
by a new brick building, The site is now occupied by the inevitable "desirable
residences". Moorfield Drive is still so called, and is off the A 658 Bradford to Harrogate
road close to the junction with Yeadon High Street.
The West Yorkshire Yeadon depot was bought
in 1929 with the bus business of the Yeadon Transport Company and remained in use until 1957 when it
was closed and sold to the Council. It was not purpose built and was located in some rather
incongruous (for WYRCC) former mill premises, just off the upper eastern side of the High Street and
adjoining the lovely Yeadon tarn - hence its name "Waterside Garage." Incidentally my
conducting days with WYRCC were at Ilkley depot, on the site of which to the inch is now a superb
Wetherspoon’s pub/restaurant - my occasional enjoyment of refreshments in there is enhanced by happy
memories of how the depot was in every detail - I’ve seen other customers looking my way as if to
say "That poor old soul’s not with it, he’s on another planet" - well they’re quite right
of course.
I’ll really surprise them one day by ordering Bristol broth, followed by Lodekka
lasagne, and finishing off with Tilling trifle.
David, no need my friend to worry about
"treading on toes" as I’ve been wearing steel toecaps for years, and don’t mind at all as
any information from kindred spirits is always very welcome.
Chris Youhill
20/05/13 - 16:39
Gentlemen Daimler did try a light weight version of the CV this was the CLG
variant which was tried by PMT and Birmingham at least This used a 5 cylinder engine and was given a
special light weight MCW body.
The comment about medium weight Regents fading away would
certainly refer to their less than sparkling performance on gradients were they struggled. Leeds
bought 150 of them and they were probably the worst AEC Regents in the fleet.
Chris Hough
20/05/13 - 17:57
You’re so very right Chris H - its not like me to loathe a model per se, but I
have to admit that I couldn’t stand the 150 to which you refer. The first 135 7′ 6" ones
were bad enough, and frighteningly unstable as well as being lifeless, but the final 15 which were
8′ 0" wide were even number mind you at least they were slightly less terrifying on
corners etc. Its only fair to AEC to say though that the pathetic performance was the fault of LCT
to a large extent - they seemed to think that buses would run economically on fresh air, which they
won’t, and paid the price heavily in "hidden" abuse of major components, very particularly
with the preselector Mark III Regents. The modus operandi of many of the worst drivers, with both
models, was to set off in first gear and to leave the accelerator wide open continuously until the
bus was at full speed in top gear - passengers, conductors and loose coinage were flung up an down
the saloons mercilessly by the self styled "fast men" who were proud of being "always
on time." Many’s the uniform lapel I’ve seen festooned with annual "safe" driving
award bars - worn by some of the worst drivers simply because they’d never actually hit anything !!
Just to recap, and to balance the discussion, there was little wrong with the 7.7 AEC engine’s
performance provided it was given enough "oats and water" by its owners.
Chris Youhill
21/05/13 - 07:34
On the subject of fast drivers, the instructor who got me through my PSV test
‘three weeks after my twenty first birthday’ used to tell all his pupils that "you don’t
have to be a slow driver to be a careful one, but speed for its own sake belongs on a race
track" as for time keeping, our chief inspector used to say "there are a thousand and one
reasons why you can be running late, but there is no excuse for being early"
Ronnie Hoye
21/05/13 - 10:31
Hebble, after buying 13 of the 9.6 engined Regent V between 1956 and 1960,
inexplicably opted for four of the mediumweight MD3RV model in 1962. These were nice looking buses
with Northern Counties forward entrance bodies with very pleasant interiors, and they sounded really
well, though the earlier growling exhausts were a thing of the past by then. Unfortunately - though
I would have thought, predictably - they were completely useless at hill climbing, something that
Hebble buses were required to undertake rather a lot. After a while they tended to be used as much
as possible on the Halifax-Leeds service which, once they had tackled the first three miles to
Shelf, was less severe and once on the flat they could motor along quite reasonably. But why on
earth they bought them in the first place I’ll never understand. They quickly reverted to the AV590
version after that.
John Stringer
22/05/13 - 11:05
I used to drive VKR 480 on a school contract before I went to school myself (I
was a teacher!). It had been bought by John Lewis Coaches, Morriston, Swansea from Roslyn Coaches in
Parr, Cornwall for a specific girls school contract. It was the first double decker John Lewis
owned. It had door controls in the cab. I had no attendant on the school contract. After the last
bus stop, I would close the doors until I reached the school. It was a dream to drive and have very
fond memories of that vehicle!
Mike
23/05/13 - 07:47
Ronnie, my late father would have agreed with your sentiments. For quite a
number of years he was a driver at West Yorkshire’s Harrogate depot, and took great pride in his
driving and time-keeping. He used to say something similar about running late, but said if you were
going to run early, you may as well not have bothered running the service in the first place. On the
subject of time-keeping, I remember some years ago waiting for a West Yorkshire Harrogate 36 bus at
the side of Lewis’s department store in Leeds. A young woman came up to the adjoining stop and
looked at the timetable for her WYPTE bus. On then looking at her watch, a ‘Leeds Loiner’
waiting in the queue said "Ah wun’t waste yer time lookin’ at that love - tha’d be better off
wi’ a calendar!"
Brendan Smith
26/05/13 - 07:58
The Daimler CLG5 lightweight wasn’t quite the dead end that it may appear from
the fact that only two buses so designated were ever built. Some of the lightweight features were
then incorporated into subsequent CVGs, sometimes (for example Manchester CVG5 4490) to the extent
that these were mistaken for CLG5s. Having experienced the Birmingham CLG5 as a passenger, I get the
impression that, rather than a prototype for an intended production model, it was more of an
experiment in pushing boundaries, to see what they could get away with and how much weight could be
saved.
Peter Williamson
28/05/13 - 07:33
Re Following on from John S. and the Hebble 7.7 Mk Vs, they also had in 1965 a
batch of Reliance/Park Royal DP39F buses used mainly on local services with ZF 6 speed constant mesh
boxes. Another unusual purchase.
Geoff S
28/05/13 - 09:00
Sorry Geoff. We’ve rehearsed this argument elsewhere before but the 6 speed
constant mesh box in medium weights was an AEC unit, not a ZF - which was synchromesh and only used
in the heavyweights.
David Oldfield
15/07/13 - 08:20
The M&D Regents were quite sprightly, but then they were quite low geared.
Being only just over 7 tons they always seemed quite quick. When Roselyn coaches of Par had them
Leslie Eade fitted high ratio diffs, which made them quicker at the expense of hill climbing,
especially with a load up. From the cab you can’t see the platform very well…let alone hear
the yells from anyone stuck in the doors!
Bob Cornford
25/08/13 - 14:51
As a student in 1962 I went hop-picking on a farm between Horsmonden and
Goudhurst. Arriving at Tunbridge Wells by steam train from Lewes, I boarded one of the 8 AEC
Lowbridge Regents (VKR 35-42) which operated service 97 from Tunbridge Wells to Ashford. These
beautiful vehicles were part of the Wealden landscape as they trundled through delightful villages
such as Brenchly, Horsmonden, Goudhurst, Cranbrook and Tenterden.
John Templeton
18/11/13 - 05:11
I never travelled on the lowbridge version but remember two trips on
Highbridges. One was a Sunday school outing to Chessington Zoo, when the driver nearly made an
instant open-topper when someone on board noticed this bridge!
The other occasion was when I
did the full journey Gravesend-Hastings! Four hours! They seemed odd due to the synchromesh gearbox.
I was used to pre-select on double decks.
John Resker
18/11/13 - 16:38
Geoff, David is correct about the six speed constant mesh gearbox in the
Reliance. I, too, was under the misapprehension for years that the six speed unit in the Aldershot
and District 36 foot Reliances was a ZF product. In fact it was a Thornycroft design - AEC took over
Thornycroft in 1961. All the contemporary ZF boxes were synchromesh.
Roger Cox
24/04/14 - 09:25
Used to travel regularly on the lowbridge Regent Vs from school in Tunbridge
Wells to M&Ds depot in Tonbridge(now gone). Six or seven deckers would be lined up 2 or 3 being
lowbridge deckers it always seemed they had more than they needed for the limited service
requirements.As well as the 97 to Ashford the only other route was the 101 to Leigh. The Regents
performed ok but seemed to have a very flat exhaust note as if the timing was retarded. Fastest run
to Tonbridge were often achieved by the rebodied K6As which flew once on the downhill. A friend even
travelled to Brighton on one rather than the usual PD2. There was one K6A preserved by the M&D &
East Kent Bus Club which I went to Brighton on to the HCVC run.
Patrick
17/05/15 - 06:26
We moved to Hastings in 1973 and our local route 75 was regularly worked by
these vehicles. The route was one of few Hastings town services worked from Hastings depot rather
than Silverhill, and as such had the same types of vehicles as on the country routes which ran from
Hastings. I remember Leyland and MCW bodied PD2s appearing from time to time, a pre-war OT
open-topper operating on one afternoon, and in winter even coaches which seemed to be favoured in
snowy conditions, maybe for better road-holding. The route had steep hills at both ends of the town
where the distinctive exhaust sound was heard to great effect.
Although it was very much a
town service a few times a day the 75 went on to the village of Crowhurst, negotiating some pretty
narrow country lanes on the way, where the double deckers looked rather too large for the roads.
In the morning the 08:18 departure from Wishing Tree was invariably Atlantean DH630 (nearly
the last Atlantean numerically). I think the vehicle went on to the 15 service later on in the day.
Another curiosity of the route was the extra departure from the Wishing Tree in the afternoon,
put on for pupils of The Grove School. This was invariably operated by a Southdown Guy Arab,
presumably on lay-over in Hastings from the Heathfield group of services.
Later on the AECs
were replaced by new Willowbrook bodied Leyland Panthers (still crew-operated) and both single and
dual-door versions of the Strachans bodied Panthers. By then the extra afternoon journey would often
be a Southdown Marshall bodied Leopard.
After London where we saw nothing but RTs for years
the variety was fascinating!
Andrew Newland
28/10/15 - 06:53
I was really interested to see the photo of the M&D low bridge bus VKR 35.
As a boy I lived in Horsmonden in the early 60’s and not only made a study of all of these
type of bus, all with the DL number linked to the reg no.
The route was the 97 Tunbridge Wells
to Hawkhurst and Ashford.
They were:
VKR 35 TW
VKR 36
VKR 37 TW Always a bit
scruffy
VKR 38 A Used mainly as a school bus - the smartest by far
VKR 39 HH
VKR
40
VKR 41
VKR 42 A
The buses were allocated to garages with little circular plates
fitted to the rear of the buses donating which one, e.g. A - Ashford, TW- Tunbridge Wells.
At
the time I noted some had mesh grills, some slatted, some were updated with indicators, they looked
sleek, and smart, and could get a good lick on! I travelled on all of them going to school!
Geoff Radford
12/09/16 - 16:46
I learned to drive on an AEC with Maidstone & District in about 1975. I
remember the number plate was VKR ??.
This weekend I saw a beautifully restored VKR 39 in
Tenterden in M&D colours and discussion with the owner suggested it was not the bus in question.
Would anyone know which AEC Regent VKR ?? was the driver training bus (instructor - the long
suffering Jock Chisholm)
David B
Vehicle reminder shot for this posting
03/10/16 - 05:44
David, as the owner of VKR 39 I recall the conversation we had. The trainer
Regent in question was VKR 469, by then P3 in the fleet but originally DH 477 and in computer days
5477. I recall last seeing it in a breakers yard on South Yorkshire. P1 and P2 were the Leyland
PD2’s that survived for service vehicle use, I had a hand in saving P2 (NKT 878) from the Wallace
School of Motoring around 1982 when it was offered to me for £250…..but already had a vehicle,
fortunately a quick appeal and it was saved. I have both the "VKR" Regents that survive
from the M & D fleet and standing together they make an interesting comparison. Having restored them
it has been great to hear the many positive comments like yours, many thanks, and to take VKR 39
along its former route, the 97, in its Ashford to East Grinstead form (which the VKR’s worked for
around 2 years until the East Grinstead to Tunbridge Wells section was withdrawn) was a long day (4
hours or so on the timetable)! We were able to pass under the remaining "low bridge" on
that route at Ashurst (Uckfield line), signed at 13 foot 3 inches, without trouble. Literature of
the day states that these vehicles were 13 foot 2 inches in height, so that seems to be borne out!
(and I had measured it beforehand…..two years earlier I took my other low bridge Regent XAL
784, Barton 784 under there, much to the consternation of some passengers as we approached
it!).
Paul Baker
