Rochdale Corporation
1969
AEC Swift MP2R
Seddon B46F

My Thanks to Ian Beswick for contributing the above excellent shot of this Rochdale Corporation AEC Swift with its Seddon body who also supplied bus bodies under the name of Pennine.
The Swift was AECs move into the rear engined single decker market. It first appeared at the 1964 commercial motor show and there were two versions a low frame for bus work and a high frame for coach operations. Operators also had the choice of either the 16ft 6in wheelbase for a vehicle length of 33ft or 18ft 6in for a 36ft vehicle. The high frame version allowed for luggage to be stored in underfloor side lockers due to the fact that the rear of the vehicle housed the horizontal six cylinder diesel engine. Yet again there was a choice of two engines the AH505 ?? litre or the AH691 11·3 litre. London transport acquired several 36 ft 11·3 litre Swifts which they called Merlings (MB) for some reason best known to them, but the manoeuvrability was poor so the shorter version (SM) were acquired but due to the shorter length they had to have the AH508 8·2 litre engine which rendered them well under powered.

Photograph contributed by Ian Beswick

When AEC first announced its rear-engined single deckers, there were to be two models, the medium-weight Swift with the AH505 engine (33ft or 36ft), and the heavy-duty Merlin with the AH691 (36ft only). London Transport ordered their Merlins at that stage.
By the time the two models went into production, they had been harmonised to such a degree that AEC renamed them Swift 505 and Swift 691. But LT always persisted with the original names.

Peter Williamson

Can someone give technical information on the Swift Chassis, like its length, weight, width and other information?

Charlie

The Swift was the first joint production with Leyland after the 1962 "merger".
The main chassis frame, and other components, were common to the Swift and the Panther. The engines and axles were unique to each respective model.
There was a 32’6" (AH505) model (Leyland was the Panther Cub with 0.400 engine). There was a 36’0" long (AH505 or AH691) model (Leyland was the 0.600 Panther).
All were 8’2½" wide. There was the most common bus version with a lower front frame and the high frame model intended for coach work. In the event, no AEC Swifts were built with high frames but there were a number of high frame Panthers, some with 0.680 engines.

David Oldfield

Does anybody by chance know the weight of the AEC SWIFT AH505 Chassis?

Charlie

13/02/12 – 07:18

I once worked with a former London Transport engineer, who told me how Merlins were constantly being reported for defective engine stops. Quite often the true explanation turned out to be that the awful engine had worn its cylinder bores oval, so the bus was actually burning its own sump oil which was leaking past the piston rings! No good cutting off the diesel if that isn’t what’s burning…!
And, I once attended a Traffic Commissioner’s hearing in Southampton where Bill Lewis, then General Manager, responded to a question about the Southampton Swifts by saying: "If only someone would make me an offer for them!". Not one of AEC’s best efforts!

David Jones

21/04/12 – 11:38

I had a couple of holidays in South Australia in the mid 90s where I saw many ex Adelaide Swifts in various guises. Their were some in a yard at Port Adelaide being converted for further use. In Port Pirie the local bus company had about 6 in use. There was one on town service in Port Lincoln. One at Port Kenny as a caravan which had a Hino engine a popular conversion with mobile home conversions. A further mobile home in North Adelaide. Another in Woolaston near Gawler. In a Marina at Port Adelaide I found one in use as a support vehicle for a film company who had four more in stock for the same purpose all still with their AEC engines, one of which had just returned from filming a documentary in the out back doing many miles off road. I read a couple of years ago the some Swifts had been refurbished and sold to a mining company on an island in Indonesia for staff transport. All this info suggests that the poor reputation of the Swifts might be unjustified.

Ron Stringer

21/07/12 – 12:19

As an enthusiastic operator of AEC’s Swift. I find it difficult to imagine how a few operators apparently had so much trouble with them. From working for an independent who acquired nine of them second hand … and with more to put into service had he not passed away, to running four of my own, I found them excellent, reliable and economical work-horses. Any mechanical maladies were easily attended to as everything was practically laid out in typical AEC fashion. There are few more challenging bus operating areas than North Staffordshire with it’s mix of dense urban environment and steep hills. All ours were 505 powered which generally allowed 10mpg on service and any feeling of being underpowered was usually attributable to a stretched accelerator cable in my experience. Were I still operating today, I’d have no hesitation in having one around as a spare bus … indeed I share a preserved one. (ps. The 505 was generally regarded as being just under 8.2 litres swept volume and had power outputs up to about 160bhp)

Martyn Hearson

20/03/14 – 17:37

Happened on this site purely by accident. In no way consider myself a bus enthusiast. Rootes Classic cars are my scene.
But many of the photos on this site have stirred up some vivid childhood memories from growing up in Alkrington, Middleton on the 17 Manchester / Rochdale route.
Like – how immaculate the Rochdale buses on this route always were. Loved the blue/cream livery and the deep blue seats. AND on this route were Lady Conductors! Unheard of in Manchester. As a 10 yo I developed a hopeless crush on one particularly pretty chatty girl and it was a thrill when she came along to issue the ticket.
I’m pretty sure that this route 17 and the 24 to Rochdale via Broadway/Royton are two of very few to have retained their original route numbers to the present day since WW2 and maybe before. The 17 was certainly the tram route number way back when (not that I remember that far back!)

Paul Blackwell

21/03/14 – 17:58

Yes, the 17 has a very long history and as a bus service it has the longest possible history of using the same number in Manchester, as it dates from the introduction of route numbering in 1930 although at that point it was an express service from Bacup to Flixton. It took its current form in 1932.
Whilst there are several routes that have remained essentially the same for many years, the 17 has avoided being renumbered in all that time. The 24, by contrast, is a comparative youngster, as it dates from the acquisition of the Yelloway service from Manchester to Rochdale at that time.

David Beilby

22/03/14 – 08:20

Another route 17 (and 18) is that of Portsmouth Corporation (and successors’) tennis racquet-shaped route from Dockyard-Eastney-Dockyard. It lasted, unchanged, for about 82 years, until a major re-arrangement of services brought its demise last year.
Here is a trolleybus on the route- www.old-bus-photos.co.uk/

Chris Hebbron

05/12/15 – 06:53

I used to live in Rochdale & remember the 17 that ran to Manchester, both Manchester Corporation "Red" & Rochdale Corporation "Blue Bus". The buses had a peculiar idle sound, where the engine would rev up then coast, never settling at a constant speed until driven off.
Can anyone tell me what this was? Was this a design feature or a worn engine? Also what make were they? I seem to recall "AEC" & "Leyland" on the driver’s steering wheel but I’m not sure if these were the type of buses in question. I’ve heard sound samples of Routemasters (the only type I’ve identified recently) but they seem to have a normal idle sound.
I live overseas now so can’t research this in person. Thanks in advance.

Mike

07/12/15 – 06:18

Mike, I think that the distinctive engine sound you heard probably relates to Leyland buses of the late 40s/50s. Leyland engines of the period often had pneumatic rather than mechanical governors fitted to their fuel injection pumps (usually supplied by CAV or Simms and both offering a choice of governor type). The fitting of a pneumatic governor gave rise to the characteristic ‘hunting’ at tickover, and other vehicles with this fitment and idling characteristic which spring to mind are the 4-cylinder Ford Thames Trader, and 4-cylinder underfloor-engined Albion Claymore lightweight trucks. The Claymore’s Albion EN250H engine was also fitted to the Albion Nimbus and Bristol SU psv chassis. Personally I found the ‘rise and fall’ tickover quite endearing, especially on Bradford City Transport’s Leyland Titan PD2s, which gave the impression of "contented mechanical purring" when idling.

Brendan Smith

07/12/15 – 17:12

I don’t know how these Pennine bodies fared on the AEC Swift chassis (or on the Lancashire streets) but we had two almost identical bodies on 33ft Fleetline chassis, also G registered, at Halifax which fell to pieces.

Ian Wild

08/12/15 – 05:50

Portsmouth had 12 Pennine single-deck bodies on double-deck Leyland PDR2/1 Atlantean chassis, delivered in 1971/72. This followed deliveries of 26 Leyland Panther Cubs and 12 AEC Swifts, with a mixture of Marshall and MCCW bodies. At that time I was only an occasional visitor to Portsmouth, but I remember the Panther Cubs and Swifts as sometimes seeming rather sluggish in pulling away, but the Atlantean saloons being strong performers. However, the bodies really shook, rattled and rolled! It is of interest, though, that after the MAP project in 1981, the Corporation withdrew all the remaining Panther Cubs, all 12 Swifts, and 14 newer Leyland Nationals (new 1976). These Seddon-bodied Atlanteans continued their shaking ratttling movements for several more years. Their numbers dwindled slowly with the last going c.1986/87. So the Corporation must have been satisfied enough to persevere with these, in spite of any faults that there may have been.

Michael Hampton

08/12/15 – 13:53

I travelled on the single-deck Atlanteans a few times up until 1976, when I left Pompey. The bodies rattled and rolled after about two years service, even on the more sturdy double-deck chassis. They were certainly lively vehicles, but one wonders why they were ever purchased for the virtually flat terrain of Portsea Island, save for Fratton and Copnor Bridges, which crossed the railway lines and were hardly vertiginous!
This does raise the thought of who else bought single deck Atlanteans, I recall Great Yarmouth and Glasgow, if memory serves, not hilly places, either!

Chris Hebbron

09/12/15 – 06:18

The early rear underfloor engined single deckers suffered from structural problems, particularly the longer 36′ types, but this probably affected the shorter versions, such as those in Portsmouth, to some extent as well. The Panther Cub used the Leyland 400 engine, and was, I believe, generally regarded as underpowered, and not particularly satisfactory in other respects as well.
So it is perhaps not so surprising that Portsmouth looked for something different for the next batch, and single deck Atlanteans would have offered the additional benefit of standardisation with the double deck fleet. The 33′ Atlanteans had a short rear overhang, so the structural problems should have been less. When it came to the later clearing out of some of the single deckers, I would imagine that the fuel consumption counted against the Leyland Nationals – although the potential ease of selling the Nationals against the "oddball" single deck Atlanteans might also have been a factor.
I think that Glasgow’s single deck Atlantean was rebuilt from a fire-damaged double decker, and not purchased new as such. On the other hand, Merseyside PTE had two s/d Atlanteans, that had been ordered by Birkenhead, with Northern Counties bodies. In later years, a number of operators had old Atlantean chassis fitted with new single deck bodies, including the Southampton East Lancs bodied "Sprints". As I understand it, their performance in this form did not live up to the name!

Nigel Frampton

18/12/20 – 07:05

Regarding the rear engined AEC swifts a friend of mine who was a Senior Foreman in the workshops at Mellor Street, told me that after they had been in service for a short while complaints from drivers that they lacked power started to be logged. The engineers at first could not find any problems when they were trying to determine the problem from the rear engine compartment, but then on road test they lacked power. Further investigation found the problem to be stretched accelerator cables. The engine was not getting full throttle opening. The cables were over 30 foot long and ran the full length of the bus from front to back!

David Newton

19/12/20 – 06:16

History repeats itself, but the lessons seem not always to be learned. The early Dennis Darts suffered from exactly the same cable stretch problem, and the cable adjustment provision was totally inadequate to take up the excessive slack.

Roger Cox

19/12/20 – 14:02

Seems as if the maxim about history repeating itself applies here as well. Cables are/were an expedient but also a two edged sword – as many pros as cons. DAF made excellent buses and coaches. ZF make excellent gearboxes, especially the old 6 speed fitted to many coaches of various manufacture. The Achilles heel in the DAF was the cable connection in the gear shift. A new and/or well set up cable connection was a delight to drive but, when the cables stretched, the coach became an absolute pig to drive. [As a part-time/occasional driver, I noticed this over a period of time with one of my favourite steeds – a 6 speed ZF DAF coach.]

David Oldfield

20/12/20 – 06:41

I can remember, when cables on our older cars stretched so far that the outer cable adjuster was no longer sufficient, we used to fit this sort of auxiliary adjuster. www.oldclassiccar.co.uk/cable-adjusters.htm

John Lomas

Photograph by ‘unknown’ if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Provincial (Gosport & Fareham Omnibus Co)
1937
AEC Regent I
Craven H56R

Here is another of the four ex Nottingham Regents that Provincial acquired in 1954 it was fleet number 220 in the Nottingham fleet. According to Stephen Didymus this vehicle was partially rebuilt during the late 1950s and ended up with a front destination layout to Provincial’s standard design of the time. Craven bodybuilders were located at Sheffield their main business appeared to be railway carriages but they also made tram and bus bodies. During the war they apparently made the wings for the "Horsa" troop carrying gliders, and components for the Lancaster bombers. They also built 120 AEC RT type vehicles for London Transport but they were not built to the same specification as the rest having five bay bodies instead of four is one example. Not being to the same specification also meant that their bodies would not be interchangeable with others RTs built by other bodybuilders so they did not last long with London Transport and were soon sold off.

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

———

Sheffield Transport’s 15 1948 Regent IIIs and the RTs were probably Cravens’ swansong before they concentrated on production of trams and then railway rolling stock – especially DMUs.
What isn’t widely known is that Cravens bought East Lancs in the early sixties, after a chance meeting of the chairmen of both companies. At the same time, they tried to expand by opening Neepsend Coachworks in that same district of Sheffield. Although Neepsend closed after only four years, both it and East Lancs were subsidiaries of Cravens – Neepsend was never owned by East Lancs. Cravens soon sold out to the bigger John Brown Group – a steel manufacturer in Sheffield – who eventually sold East Lancs on to Dawson Williams and Drawlane (which became British Bus and, eventually, Arriva).

David Oldfield

———

Nostalgic picture. I can recall the pre-war Regents working in Nottingham in the early 50s. 50 of this Cravens bodied version were supplied about 1938 (DAU451-500, running numbers 72-76 and 214-258). Metro-Cammell supplied a total of 93 (I think) during 1936-37, and Northern Counties 35 in 1935. From the sound, I would judge that they were all pre-selectors. I think that all varieties were originally built with narrow upstairs front windows flanking a central route number box, but most were subsequently rebuilt in the style shown on the photo. The Cravens had a slightly glowering appearance, and the Northern Counties had a more rounded dome and less steeply raked front. Internally, the three series were similar. Lighting was by naked bulbs in oval "volcano" fittings – except for the Northern Counties which had big circular "volcanos". The Cravens and MCs had plunger bells instead of "push once" buttons. Nearly all were displaced from front line service by the 1953-55 deliveries of Park Royal Regent IIIs (OTV127-198 with running numbers matching the registration). It was this that released various of them for sale to Provincial around 1954. Click here to see one in Nottingham about 1948.

Stephen Ford

Birmingham City Transport
1947
AEC Regent III RT
Park Royal H54R

Having sent some bus ticket shots to the ‘Old Bus Tickets’ website I was looking at the ‘Old Bus Photo’ section (again) and thought you might like to add a picture of probably my all time favourite bus of my youth. The Birmingham Corporation Transport Park Royal bodied Regent III (RT type) GOE 631 Fleet number 1631. There were only 15 (GOE 631-645) purchased in 1947 and most of them did sterling work until withdrawal in 1963/4. Sadly none were saved for preservation, this is from an original publicity photo I own, and shows the very attractive lines of this vehicle – at its best just after introduction into service.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Nigel Edwards

Why, I wondered, such an old fashioned body design?
It’s not, except for…. that raked back windscreen, the high-level driver’s door, the narrow lower deck windows and that funny mid-band a foot higher than it should be..then there’s those wobbly-looking front wheels and the lop-sided headlamps: If the "dipped" one is on the left, why is it higher than the right one? No doubt that’s how we always did it…

Joe

It’s not so much an old-fashioned design as the lack of "joined up thinking".
The standard London Transport RT was designed as a whole vehicle but when provincial bodies were fitted, what was standard in the provinces didn’t properly marry with a chassis not generally available outside London and, indeed, designed specifically for London.
For the most part, the Birmingham body would not look out of place on a provincial Regent III – and would have looked more modern than the standard Birmingham body on more usual Crossley, Daimler or Guy chassis which originated pre WW II.

David Oldfield

08/03/11 – 15:22

I have to admit that until now it had not occurred to me that these 15 vehicles looked ‘wrong’. Certainly they looked seriously different to the rest of Birmingham’s post-war fleet but to me they were all the more likeable because of it! One possible reason for the odd looking front-end is that at the time Birmingham were very much into the idea of sloping windscreens to reduce internal reflection (an idea much favoured by Midland Red at the time) – although I don’t quite see the truth of that in a half-cab vehicle with the blinds lowered behind the driver at night.
It is worth noting that when Park Royal supplied a further 50 bodies, this time on Leyland PD2/1 chassis (2181-2230, JOJ 181-230), the raked windscreen was gone and the result was a joy to behold. They looked right!

5055HA

26/08/11 – 07:08

The correct title of the undertaking, was Birmingham City Transport, I remember these buses well, on short workings of route 11 the Outer Circle, between the Fox and Goose at Ward End and the Bull at Stechford on the way to school. These buses I believe were originally ordered for delivery in 1941/2 but received after the war ended.
I disagree with David Oldfield, these buses always looked dated compared to the rest of the post war fleet especially the new look ones. These buses were built to BCT specifications, the other Park Royal bodied buses, Leyland PD2s with flat screens were bought off the shelf to the body builders standard specs! These were magnificent vehicles. One survives fleet number 2222 (JOJ 222) and is currently being restored at the Aston Manor Transport Museum in Birmingham.
The Regents spent virtually all their lives at Acocks Green garage, and were non-standard with air brakes, air gear changes and wind up windows plus other unusual features. I believe 3 of the batch worked out of Barford Street depot early on in their lives on route 8 the Inner Circle.
Like all BCT buses these were kept spotlessly clean and excellently maintained, never a dented panel in sight, shame the operators of today do not value their buses so highly!
This is a great site and I will send some photos of that other great operator from my childhood in Birmingham – Midland Red.

Robert Hayles

26/08/11 – 18:07

It might be the LATE Aston Manor Transport Museum, since it has just closed after an interminable wrangle over high rent for the buildings and an exorbitant price the council have quoted for the purchase of it.
Let’s hope the matter can be resolved. Were the museum to continue with the rental option, it would have to charge £8 a time for entry! If it’s not resolved, they have to be out by end-December.

Chris Hebbron

03/12/11 – 07:05

1631-1645 were very different from the standard Birmingham bus and were reputably bought as replacements for AEC Regents that were going to be ordered, but never were for delivery in 1941. RT 19 was demonstrated to BCT between 7/6/41 and 7/7/41 and these RTs were the result. They spent their lives at Acocks Green garage, although the last four were allocated to Barford Street in 1948 for a rather unsuccessful stint on the busy Inner Circle route. The bodies were more or less the standard four-bay Park Royal thin pillared body of the time but were heavily modified with BCT fixtures and fittings. The RT chassis had air-brakes which BCT engineers did not like and the braking standards on the batch were always dubious. This resulted in the buses having a wide range of brake modifications including being fitted with disc brakes. They were lovely to ride-in but a lot of Acocks Green drivers did not like them because of their poor stopping performance. By the time they were taken out of service, no two of the fifteen buses were the same with experiments with exhauster brakes, sealed radiators, Monocontrol gearboxes and straight through exhaust pipes. They were used on the 44 and 31 and 32 routes, but were only used on short workings on the Outer Circle 11 route as i, they had none-standard staircases which were not considered safe for passengers not already used to them and ii, if drivers had to be relieved by one from another garage which worked on the 11 route, the chances were that they were not passed to drive the RTs! Curiously enough the last one to be withdrawn, 1641, was the only postwar bus to be withdrawn by BCT on Leap Year Day, in this case in 1964.

David Harvey

03/12/11 – 14:31

Thx, David, for that fascinating background information. The braking shortcomings are intriguing, since London traffic conditions was equally as challenging as Birmingham’s, if not more. I wonder if the bodies were heavier than London Transport’s 7.5 tons. Although the 8′ wide RTW’s were heavier, I am not aware that their brakes were beefed up! A mystery indeed.

Chris Hebbron

03/12/11 – 16:40

Strange – I am sure I read somewhere that contemporary Daimlers, of which Birmingham had many, were notoriously weak in the braking department. On the other hand, AEC Regent IIIs (whether RT or the provincial type) seemed to find very wide acceptance throughout the land. Many municipal operators went back again and again for repeat orders. To a mere user, they always seemed utterly competent.

Stephen Ford

04/12/11 – 07:42

Birmingham’s Guys were the ones which suffered from brake fade especially on the Bristol Road routes operated by Selly Oak. It was for this reason that eventually all new look front buses had their front wings shortened. The buses with the best brakes were Crossleys, but these could have very heavy steering if it wasn’t greased properly. The braking on Daimler CVG6 et al were considered to be good, though the exposed radiator ones always seemed to be sharper on the brakes that the new look front ones. We thought at the time that it was just a more sophisticated system!
The AEC Regent 0961 RTs weighed 7 tons 16 cwt but brakes were always a problem.

David Harvey

30/03/12 – 07:11

Re Birmingham RTs – A friend who drove them says that the brakes were fine. Early on they had a problem with RP automatic adjusters causing the brakes to stick on but the problem was solved with a slight adjustment to brake shoe clearances. A similar problem cropped up with the Halifax examples but apparently St Helens reported no problems.

Alan Bond

13/06/12 – 17:02

When I worked in Birmingham from 1961 to 1963, I lodged at Hall Green. These were my favourite buses at the time, especially when 1632, or 1643 with its lovely roaring sound, were on the last 32 departure from town in the evening. They were very comfortable, and had an excellent turn of speed on the uphill stretches. Such a pity that none survive, or that a model is not available. The model of 1632 which has been produced is a travesty!

Harold Blythe

05/07/12 – 17:49

They were always my favourites too, and I often travelled on them on the No 1 route. When I was little, I especially liked the front downstairs passenger window, because it was lower than on all the other buses, so I could see out straight ahead over the bonnet.

Richard

28/01/13 – 13:31

As a schoolboy in 1957 I remember asking why these ungainly, gaunt, older looking buses were only on the (short) 1A route to Acocks Green and I was told that they had small fuel tanks. Maybe just a jarn to shut me up.

David Grove

29/01/13 – 15:22

David, These ‘RT’ types were "confined" to Acocks Green Garage because only their drivers were ‘passed-out’ to drive them. They were occasionally to be seen on the Outer Circle 11 route but usually only on ‘Service Extra’ at busy times and short turns that did not require driver changeovers from other garages.

Nigel Edwards

31/01/13 – 06:07

I think I have only ever seen one of these in service so I can’t comments on their ride ect but I do find it odd that they had brake problems since they were air braked. At this time BCT and BMMO for that matter had a fixation with reflections in wind screens and both operators had sloping windows fitted which in the case of BCT tended to make their buses look older than they were, the exception being the "tin fronts" which had a sloping screen but inset into the body and having vertical screen pillars. Whilst on the subject of Daimler CV brakes I am currently involved with the restoration of GEA 174, an ex West Bromwich Daimler based at and owned by the Black Country Living Museum, some of our group members have made several references to West Bromwich having problems with the brakes on these when they were new yet another contributor rightly points out that BCT had problems with their Guys in the braking department but not with their Daimlers, odd don’t you think?

William Parker

21/07/13 – 14:55

I worked out of Acocks Green Garage as a bus driver from 1959 till 1978 and drove these Buses many times. They were quicker BUT with Air brakes were much harder to stop. I remember driving down Olton Boulevard West and Trying to stop before turning into Gospel Lane but finished up by Warwick Road 100 Yards further on. I was young and impulsive in those days.

Maurice (MOSS) Leather

10/03/15 – 16:35

I remember these buses as I was an apprentice engineer with BCT from 1950 to 1956 and a fitter in 1957-1960 after doing service in the RAF National service. When I was doing my training on the engine bench I remember building an AEC 9.6 diesel engine and I was really impressed by all the running gear, it was a well built in line diesel engine. In 1959 I remember a problem with the chassis on one bus as it had to have a special plate welded either side which I made up for the job and it was inspected by the works Superintendent Mr Fred Keyes.

Reg Humpage

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

25/12/15 – 08:08

Apparently, the fifteen "Regents" were BCTs only postwar double-deckers to have their bodies lifted. This was to replace AEC chassis bolts with the standard BCT style!!!

David Harvey