Lower deck facing forward

Lower deck facing rearward

Upper deck facing forward

Upper deck facing rearward

Ideal Service (R Taylor & Sons)
1959
Leyland Titan PD2 (on older Tiger PS1 chassis)
Roe L27/28R

My thanks to Robert Gomersall for these excellent internal shots of a newly delivered Roe bodied Titan to R Taylor & Sons of Cudworth near Barnsley who along with H Wray & Sons of Hoyle Mill operated under the name of Ideal Service. Roberts mother was the daughter of R H Taylor who took over operations from his father R Taylor who started the business. Robert would like to know when R Taylor actually started the business, if you know please leave a comment.
The lower deck is of a normal layout for a rear entrance double decker, but as this is a lowbridge vehicle it as a sunken gangway on the right hand side of the upper deck which can be seen quite clearly in the upper deck shot.
The seats as can be seen are just two normal two seat units put side by side, looking closely at the shot it looks as if the right hand pair is set back a little, probably to aid passengers getting past from the left hand seats. I am not sure if there was ever a one piece four seat unit, if you know please leave a comment. The sunken gangway can also be seen upper left in the 2nd lower deck shot and people sitting in the seats underneath it had to be careful when getting up as you could quite easily end up with a nasty bump on the head.
I think these shots are extremely good as there is a lot of people who will of never seen a lowbridge vehicle seating layout, thanks again Robert. 

Photographs contributed by Robert Gomersall

———

Born and bred in lowbridge country, I imagined till the age of eight that a central aisle upstairs was for trolleybuses only. A family trip to London taught me otherwise, but I continue to defend the lowbridge design against all its critics: it survived in production for over forty years essentially to Leyland’s 1927 design. Reading Corporation’s two batches (1956-57) of Regent IIIs originally had 27 seats upstairs (six fours and a three) but were later upseated to 31 on top, with all the fours now staggered just as in the R. Taylor PD2. I think the main point was to discourage generously-upholstered mortals from claiming more than their allotted 17 inches of seat-width.
Last week I was (silently) grumbling that lowbridge Roe-bodied buses never turn up at Southern rallies, as I wanted to see the internal details, and here we have Robert G’s superb shots! A prayer answered.

Ian Thompson

———

These buses look unusually uncluttered and spacious, minus stanchions. As for bench seats in the upper saloons of lowbridge buses, London Transport inherited six ST’s with bodies by Short Bros. of Rochester. These had a sunken gangway EITHER side and bench seats for THREE. It also had the Godstone STL’s which had one sunken gangway, but seats in alternate rows of THREE and FOUR. I never travelled on them, and, although they had rounded tops to the seats, I don’t know whether they were bench seats or not. LT’s few lowbridge D’s (Daimler CWA6′s) had a sunken gangway with bench seats for FOUR. The first batch came with austerity wooden slatted seats, which would have caused some instability in passengers when going around corners. Even on similar double seats, one rode by the seat of one’s pants (so to speak) around corners, I recall!

Chris Hebbron

———

Another operator sadly missed! I was fortunate enough to travel on the Ideal Service in the early 70′s although by then it was being operated by H Wray alone. These photos are interesting because I hadn’t realised that a new double decker had been purchased as late as 1959. Logically it should still have been operating in 1970 although I don’t believe Wray took over any of Taylors vehicles when they decided to cease operating. I remember walking down to Hoyle Mill from Barnsley a few times to have a look at Wray’s operation and it was seemingly just an open yard with an inspection pit, I don’t recall seeing any covered accommodation! I think at the end, Wray had 3 or 4 double deckers, (perhaps always so) I remember travelling on a lowbridge AEC Regent V/Park Royal (ex Western Welsh?) an early Lodekka (ex W Yorks) and the last vehicle purchased, a Dennis Loline/Alexander, this giving the service a (fairly) modern image at last but unfortunately not for long! I’m not sure but I think that Wray, unlike Taylor, never purchased a new vehicle, and in the last few years tried to make sure their buses were from ‘red’ fleets to avoid the cost of re-painting! I’d love to know what became of YWT 572 because I’m sure there would have been plenty of miles left in it when Taylor sold up.

Chris Barker

———

What magnificent pictures these are and greatly appreciated. The vehicle is obviously assembled from the same Roe components as Samuel Ledgard’s six AEC Regent Mark Vs in 1957 - the panels, windows and frames, seats etc being identical. The only differences appear to be, obviously, the lowbridge layout and the rather luxurious light fittings. Good naturedly though, I must contest Ian’s praise of the lowbridge layout - while it undoubtedly solved the problem of height clearances such vehicles were very difficult for conductors, especially tall ones like me, and tended to roll alarmingly to the nearside if heavily laden and on badly cambered roads. By the way, West Yorkshire Road Car Co Ltd also experimented briefly in the 1950s with staggered upper saloon seating on lowbridge ECW Bristol KSWs.

Chris Youhill

———

I was fortunate enough, at the weekend, to combine a family gathering with a visit to the Sheffield Rally. In turn I was able to travel on STD 1156 (PD2/30) bodied by my beloved C H Roe. It was superb, albeit highbridge, but in every other respect, bar one, like these interior shots. [It has platform doors and an emergency door.]
The Leyland design was patented and could not originally be copied without buying a licence. Although, at that time, AEC did not have their own bodyworks, the blessed Mr Rackham had strong ideas about body design leading to certain stipulations for pre-war bodywork on AECs. Qs, therefore, like LTPB RTs after them, had very similar bodies regardless of Coachbuilder or operator. Likewise, Regents had the "Camel Hump" body for low-bridge operations. This was achieved by having gangways on both sides, three seats in a row and - conveniently - avoiding any infringement of the Leyland patent.

David Oldfield

———

Robert Taylor & Sons (Ideal Services) was taken over by the Yorkshire Traction. The Estate account shows Goodwill was £5700; Motor Vehicles £3025. Unfortunately it doesn’t itemise the vehicles sold.

Robert Gomersall

———

Just a couple of further points, a photograph of this vehicle in service appears on the Huddersfield Passenger Transport Group website, Buses in Barnsley section. It is not a PD2 but a re-bodied PS1. H Wray had one re-bodied in 1956 with a Roe body of Park Royal appearance which became KHE 528 and Taylor had this one done in 1959, both previously had Wilkes & Meade coach bodies. The earlier one was probably tagged on to a batch being done for Yorkshire Traction at the time. All of them were re-registered, maybe the Yorkshire Traffic Area was strict about such matters!
Apparently this vehicle passed to H Wray in 1967 so presumably this was the year that Taylor ceased operation.

Chris Barker

———

I read somewhere that the staggered upstairs seating was a standard ECW option towards the end of traditional lowbridge vehicles (mainly KSWs I think). It was said to improve access, but I would have thought the reverse - inside passengers having to jiggle round the S-bend as well as clambering over the knees of the outside passengers (or more likely asking them to move out).

Stephen Ford

——— Top of this posting ———

 

Photographs copyright G Walker.

Rawtenstall Corporation
1953
Leyland Titan PD2/12
Leyland H31/26R

This Titan had a Leyland Metal frame Highbridge body which I think was the ultimate in half cab double deckers especially on a PD 2/12. The first shot shows the vehicle when I had repainted it back to its original Rawtenstall Corporation livery whilst the second shows the bus ready to attend the 1976 Trans Pennine Rally in Rossendale livery basically the result of a good wash and polish a few months after I acquired it.

Here is a brief history of Rawtenstall No 18.
First registered new to Rawtenstall Corporation on 23rd October 1953 and transferred to the Rossendale undertaking in 1974 on government reorganisation when Rawtenstall merged with Haslingden Corporation.
Withdrawn in October 1974 after covering 585,860 miles in service and sold to Bingorama of Bellshill, Lanarkshire in 1974 and run on services around Motherwell and Hamilton etc taking people to a bingo hall in Bellshill.
Purchased by Gerald Walker, Wigton, Cumbria in April 1976 and restored to former Rawtenstall livery.
The bus was sold back to Rossendale Borough on the last day of Half Cab operation in November 1982.
After a few years it was sold to Brian Crowther of Black Prince, Morley, Leeds. No restoration was carried out and consequently the bus was sold to Carl Ireland, Hull who sold the bus on to a preservationist in Norfolk. Here again the bus did not have any work carried out on it in the six or so years it was at this location. In October 2009 Steve Morris the well known preservationist accompanied by a coach operator friend went to collect the bus with a recovery vehicle with the intention of towing it back to Taunton having recently purchased the bus. However when they got to Norfolk the bus had been started and was running, after checking all systems over apart from a minor easily rectified electrical fault it was decided to drive back. After an hour at the wheel Steve changed over to my AEC fanatic friend and once he got hold of this superb Leyland was reluctant to changeover later on driving almost all the way back. (He has now changed his opinions of Leylands a fact I have been trying to persuade him for some years). This journey is no mean feat for an elderly bus fully restored but No 18 had not turned a wheel for about 6 years and was 57 years old. Work is now progressing on a full restoration and I understand from Steve that a considerable amount of welding work has to be carried out on the rear chassis frame. but generally the body is in fairly good condition. I am looking forward to the day when the bus takes to the road again which will not be too far into the future I hope.

There are more shots of No 18, interior and exterior to be seen here.

A full list of Leyland Titan codes can be seen here.

Photographs and Copy contributed by Gerald Walker

———

What a brilliant set of pictures of such a classic vehicle.

Some of today’s body builders could learn a few lessons on how to style a bus and build it in such a way that body panels stay on the bus without pop rivets every other week.

Terry Malloy

———

Indeed Terry, and it is exactly the same inside and out as Samuel Ledgard’s 1952 trio - PNW 91/2/3, the last vehicles the grand old man bought before his death in April of that year.

Chris Youhill

———

Rode on this back in its Rawtenstall days and hope to see it somewhere in the north-west soon alongside the two superb Rawtenstall single-deckers which are already doing the rally circuit. Where would we be without hard-working preservationists? Nice one Gerald!

Neville Mercer

———

Thanks for the compliment Neville, No 18 was a lovely bus both to drive, ride on and as Terry says above todays designers could learn a lot from this lovely workmanlike but pleasing to the eye double decker.

Gerald Walker

———

Chris seem to recall that Sammy refused to pay Leyland the price requested to paint these buses (PNW 91/92/93)and had them delivered unpainted so he could save a few quid and paint them at Armley.

Terry Malloy

———

That’s quite right Terry and I really can’t understand why he did that - excellent though his own craftsmen were at repaints I have to say that they didn’t do justice to these three fine brand new vehicles. Sadly they also had pretty unsatisfactory "home made" destination blinds at first.

Chris Youhill

———

As an AEC man I have always also been a big Leyland fan. Among my all time favourites were Sheffield Transport’s 656 - 667, 1952 equivalents to this superb example. I fully concur with the opinion that Leyland made one of the best and, simply, stylish bodies on the market and that this, final, version was the finest.
656 et al were delivered in an experimental green livery but soon repainted when there was uproar from the good burgers of Sheffield. [Other existing buses and trams received repaints in green and were, similarly, swiftly returned to cream and blue.]
Early metal framed Leylands were a structural disaster. Leyland then enticed Colin Bailey away from MCCW - who arguably had the best metal frame designs. Leyland never had problems from that time onwards.

David Oldfield

——— Top ———

Photograph taken by Stuart Wyss

Smiths Luxury Coaches (Reading) Ltd
1946
Leyland Titan PD1
Roe H31/25R

When I started at Smiths Coaches, Reading, in May 1964 we had 4 batches of double-deckers and a solitary unroofed tree-lopper. More on the others later, but JUG 623 was one of half a dozen ex-Leeds Corporation Leyland PD1s dating from 1946 but with 1945 chassis numbers—so only just postwar. They were used on contracts carrying schoolkids, AWRE Aldermaston employees and the 95% Irish workforce building the Road Research Laboratory at Crowthorne. Although the Guv’nor, Alf Smith, once told me he thought the JUGs had been a "bad buy", I couldn’t have agreed less. The perfectly-proportioned Roe bodies were getting a bit rattly round the window frames but were thoroughly sound and the safety staircase was ideal for youngsters; the steering was relatively light with no hint of stiffness, and it self-centred nicely, never needing correction on uneven country roads; the vacuum brakes were gentle but well up to the job; the clutches were pretty judder-free and the driving position was very comfortable. Most of the other younger drivers disliked them: the smallish 7.4-litre engine had to be worked hard, the noise in the cab was deafening, and the heavy flywheel, unforgiving constant-mesh gearbox and hard-to-use clutch stop made gear changing a little challenging for the novice. They were geared to do about 37mph in top at 1,800rpm, so if you were in a contract convoy on a narrow road you frustrated the Reliance driver behind you.

The JUGs had illuminated "Limited Stop" boxes at the front, which helped you to fool yourself into thinking you were doing 60.

"My" bus for a long time was JUG 630, of which a photo by and by. How I wish I’d made some effort to save it from scrap.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Thompson

———

I agree fully Ian that the honourable Mr. Smith was way off the mark altogether. As for your complimentary remarks about the PD1s, well, they could easily have been written by me to the last letter. The PD1 was a totally predictable and  wholly reliable vehicle which was a tribute to the manufacturer - in my fairly wide experience it had no vices at all. I recall when they were new - the six Samuel Ledgard ones, JUM 373 - 8, the engines did admittedly have a very heavy "diesel knock" but I think there were two reasons for this. Firstly, I imagine that poor quality fuel may well have been a factor, but more importantly the vast difference in sound effects from the silky smooth pre-war 8.6 litre engine was bound to arouse surprise. This said, however, I found that as the engines became better tuned most of the PD1s (and PS1s) began to run very smoothly and acceptably quietly. Certainly all the PD/PS1s we had at Ledgard’s ran splendidly and, despite the slightly small engines, put up a very creditable performance on our extremely busy routes. When the Firm sold to THC (West Yorkshire) in 1967 many were twenty years old and without a squeak or rattle in their bodywork, whether by Leyland (and Alexander or Salmesbury under contract) ECW or BBW.
One Saturday afternoon, at the start of a late turn, I suffered a rear puncture with one of the Mark V Regents. The fitter arrived at White Cross (Harry Ramsden’s famous fish shop) very apologetic with JUM 376 and promised to return the Regent suitably re-shod within the hour - dear old Bert knew well of my enthusiasm and was not surprised when I said "leave this one on please until the end of the night - I love it."  So I enjoyed a whole late turn listening to the glorious melodious tones of the pre-war designed gearbox and particularly quiet and powerful engine - I remain surprised though to this day that the keen management didn’t demand to know, on Monday, why I had roamed happily around all evening on a busy Saturday, or any other day, with 58 seats instead of the prescribed 65 !! Very happy days - if only I could do it all again.
By the way - this is in no way any reflection on the worthy AEC Mk V which received an unexpected Saturday evening in "watching the telly !!

Chris Youhill

———

I’m glad that you liked the PD1s, Chris! On the topic of combustion noise I’d like to add that-probably because of their numerous visits to the workshop over their 24-year life-no two Smith’s JUG-registered PD1s sounded the same, though when you took your foot off the throttle and the pneumatic governor butterfly closed you had blissful combustion silence and a lovely high-pitched whistle. Nor was there any engine vibration at all. I still wish that Leyland had given them a five-speed box…

Ian Thompson

———

What a fine idea Ian - a five speed gearbox would have been quite an asset. Two things spring to mind though - five speed (or four speed plus overdrive) were fairly uncommon in PD1 days, and although I’m not an engineer it is possible that there may have been torque difficulties ?? By the way, I’m just wiping the egg off my face after enthusing about the beautiful tones of the PREWAR designed gearbox - the identical symphony led me to believe that this was the case. I’ve just consulted "The Leyland Bus" by Doug Jack and find that the box was actually developed for the new model. The high pitched whistle which you remember was magical wasn’t it ?? In the few weeks while I was waiting to upgrade my single deck licence a really splendid mature driver at our depot gave me constant instruction on his theory that the whistle was a completely reliable aid to immaculate gear changing - I was taught to recognise from the downward change of note as the engine slowed so as to be able to quietly engage the next gear "like putting a knife into butter." Despite this one to one tuition I kept telling him that I was still terrified of making a hash of it. The Ministry examiner at the time was a most frightening man to the extent that if "her indoors" had not boiled his eggs to perfection that morning, then failure for even tinkling a gear was a certainty. I can still remember dear Norman’s constant reassurances - "Oh I’m sure you’re worrying unduly." - He was right, bless him, and I’ll never forget the kindness of such genuine guys - the World is short of them !!

Chris Youhill

———

This reminds me of very youthful travel on Yorkshire Traction. Unlike the Doncaster Daimler CVD6′s which had a certain style (changing down for deceleration on a bend with a pre-selector was interesting: it sometimes felt as if the engine was trying to get upstairs) the Tracky Leylands  struggled: they were driven with short bursts of "acceleration" and would then see how far they could get before the next one. On the only hills- railway bridges- it was an early lesson in how far you could labour a diesel engine without stalling or changing down. I only remember that they had early HE registrations and one may have been no 722. Were they PD1′s?  The idea of five speeds is amazing: one seemed too much.

Joe

———

My word Joe, what a commendable memory you have !!  The first postwar Leylands for "Tracky" were five handsome PD1s with Roe bodies. They were numbers 722 - 726,  AHE 159 - 163.

Chris Youhill

———

One of Tracky’s PD1/Roe still exists AHE163 The bus is privately owned and lives in the Lincolnshire Vintage Vehicle Museum. There are several shots of it on the Society web site here. 

Chris Hough

———

The Smiths buses would come to our school and take the kids doing their swimming lessons for the test- whatever it was called -probably "Swimming Proficiency"- from memory they were all a sort of battleship grey- extremely drab looking. I think by my time they were AEC Regent IIIs from Oxford (COMS) plus a solitary RT- RT45 as the AWRE bought their own fleet of Regent Vs so the Smith’s fleet was reduced, accordingly. I didn’t go swimming, so I never travelled on these buses. When I was younger I can remember that on our bus route- Emmer Green-Chalgrove Way- which usually had the RCT PRV Regent IIIs- I was always pleased if I saw No 1 or No 100 (kids are sometimes easily pleased!) from time to time a Smith’s utility Bedford OB would arrive with "Relief" showing as its destination. As kids we found these buses definitely infra dig and felt cheated of the upper deck! That was my experience of Smith’s other than the odd trip out on one of their many Bedford coaches.

Nick Ratnieks

———

Nick: I don’t think Smith’s ever regularly ran buses in battleship grey. I can only ever remember blue and deep orange (their normal livery for both buses and coaches) and from about 1966-7 onwards an uninspiring overall red for the ex-Rhondda Regent IIIs and ex-South Wales Regent Vs. The OFC-registered 1949 Oxford Regent III-Weymanns (of which a photo soon) were always in blue and orange—at least in my day.
Despite their poorish visibility and mediocre steering I too had a soft spot for the musical little Bedford OBs, the last of which must have gone by about 1967, but as for the SBs, and in particular the Super Vega-bodied ones—well, I’d better shut up before I lose a lot of friends.

Ian Thompson

——— Top ———