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

Rotherham Corporation
1941
Bristol L5G
East Lancs B32C

Here’s a nice old one, probable one of the oldest buses in my collection.
I obviously didn’t take this picture as the bus was withdrawn in 1957 I did not start taking bus photos till 1965.
This bus has a center entrance, can somebody tell me what advantage there was in having a center entrance. They would have to lose two pairs of seats to make way for the entrance but then they could put in a 5 seat bench seat at the back of the bus so they gain one seat. But if the only gain is one seat was it worth it. Another query I have which maybe you can help me with is what is the purpose of the box under the front window on the opposite side to the cab it looks as if it contains oil could it be an automatic oiling system or something.

A full list of Bristol codes can be seen here.

———

The box on the nearside, below the saloon window in an ‘Autovac’ they were used on early Leyland and Bristol half cabs. They were to do with the braking system I believe.

Paul Ellender

———

Re the ‘Autovac’ query this is a form of fuel supply, the square tank holding a reservoir of fuel drawn up from the main tank by vacuum.

Trevor Haigh

———

Many vehicles in this area were of the centre entrance configuration, in addition to several batches of Bristols Rotherham also had centre entrance single deck trolleybuses as did Mexborough and Swinton (who ran jointly with Rotherham on some routes).
West Riding had large numbers of centre door Regent double decks on Wakefield routes.
The advantage of this layout was quicker boarding and alighting times with both ends of the bus able to leave at the same time.
It should be remembered that this was long before a large scale move to one man operation and the necessary front entrance position so these buses were conductor operated.
The last similar vehicles were withdrawn by Rotherham in the late ’60s. There were some withdrawn ones there at the same time that their first Fleetline chassis were delivered before despatch to Roe

Andrew

———

Darlington Corporation had centre-entrance single-deck Guy Arabs right through the ’60s and before that, centre-entrance S/D trolley buses. Sunderland Corporation and, I believe, Hartlepool, too, had centre-entrance double-deckers.

Bill Taylor

———

Leeds had centre entrance saloons in the Fifties on underfloor engined chassis they had 2 Tiger Cubs 2 Guy Arab LUFs and 5 Reliances all with Roe bodywork seating 34 + up to 20 standees. They had the steepest steps I’ve ever seen on a bus. The stair well was inside the bus with the doors flush with the side panelling

Chris Hough

———

The Leeds vehicles were regarded as an experiment and were built on a mix of AEC Reliance, Leyland Tiger Cub and Guy Arab UF chassis. Three of the vehicles survive in a scrapyard – if you google ‘the wakefield files’ you’ll find them.

Andrew

———

Grimsby Corporation had quite a number of centre-entrance AEC/Roe double-deckers in the 1930s, as well as a unique fleet of ten 6-wheel AEC/Roe centre-entrance trolleybuses. They also had one of the very few AEC "Q" double-deckers with a Roe centre-entrance body, built in 1933 and still running in 1956. Since the engine was at the side, under the central staircase, there were lower deck seats beside the driver. I remember seeing this vehicle in service.
The biggest disadvantage of the centre-entrance design was the split staircase which took up a lot of space on the top deck, giving fewer seats on the top deck than the bottom. "Provincial Bus and Tram Album" by J. Joyce (1968) shows a 1931 Grimsby example as having only 48 seats, while the "Q" is listed as having 56 seats (H29/27C); the side engine didn’t take up passenger space.
Wakey Models makes resin kits of several variants of this type of vehicle, which can be seen at this link.

Martin S

———

The centre-entrance layout was greatly favoured by the Rotherham general manager who was in charge of the municipal transport department for many years, the redoubtable Tom Percy Sykes.
The bus shown in the picture happens to be one of the wartime Bristol chassis that was fitted with a post-war body removed from one of nine Bristol L6B’s that were rebodied as double-deckers not long after being delivered as 32-seat centre-entrance saloons. In the photo, although still in Rotherham livery, the bus is in second-owner service; I don’t have the information directly in front of me, but believe this was one of several similar ex-Rotherham single-deckers that ended their lives with Cosy Coaches, an independent operating in Meadowfield, County Durham. The blinds it is fitted with in the picture are not Rotherham ones, and the legal lettering on the nearside is not that of Rotherham Corporation.

Dave Careless

——— Top of this posting ———

United Automobile Services
1965
Bristol MW6G
ECW B45F

This is the Bristol MW version with what I think has a very good looking front I think they got the idea from the SUL and improved on it. In all the time I have been on the web researching other buses I have never seen a photo of a similar looking ‘Bristol’ with any other operator, if you know of one please let me know.
Other single deck buses were beginning to switch over to a single piece windscreens in 1965 as the previous ‘Roadliner’. I do not think ECWs ever stopped having split windscreens having seen a photo of a 1974 West Yorkshire Road Car RE which still had a split windscreen.

A full list of Bristol codes can be seen here.

A full list of United codes can be seen here.

———

This particular type of MW front was unique to United and appeared in the mid-sixties towards the end of MW production. Some of them may have been operated by Ribble, following transfer of United’s depot at Carlisle to Ribble in the early days of NBC. Regarding ECW windscreens, they remained split no doubt to minimise the expense of replacement units. My old employee (West Yorkshire Road Car) had problems with cracking on some RELL buses fitted with BET screens. They were quite costly to replace (especially the electrically heated ones), but a one-piece job would have been even more so. Even the later designs such as the Olympian and B51 coaches had split screens, as did such exotica as the bodies on tri-axle Olympian chassis for Gray Linetours in the US, and Hong Kong citybus. Looks like the last ECW bodies were as practical as the first.

Brendan Smith

———

03/04/11 – 08:57

As regards BL55/56 these two buses worked out of Darlington on service Darlington/Newcastle which was number 46 and changed to 721/722 when it was NBC, as I drove these on many a shift. They were never on any other route.

Brian Whitaker

United Automobile Services
1959
Bristol MW5G
ECW B45F

This is the bus version of a 1959 Bristol MW as apposed to the dual purpose one 6 buses ago, there is quick link to it here. This bus version has a 5 cylinder Gardner engine where the DP version had a 6 cylinder engine probable because of the long routes it was used on. The bus version also seats six more people than the DP version so not as comfy but then the journeys are not as long. Coming up in the next few days is a 1965 version of the MW with a very nice radiator grill design.

A full list of Bristol codes can be seen here.

A full list of United codes can be seen here.

———

One of the unsung heroes of the bus and coach world, the MW just got on with the job and did it splendidly and without much fuss. Whereas the Lodekka drew attention with its step-free lowheight layout, and the RE in bus and coach form stole the limelight with its sheer size and elegance, the MW always seemed like an unassuming, reliable workhorse plodding away in the background. They were quiet and comfortable vehicles to ride in, especially when fitted with coach seats, and their Gardner engines ensured reliability and excellent fuel economy. Who could forget seeing United’s versions parked en masse in front of Richmond’s fine castle. A fine sight and sound indeed.

Brendan Smith

———

I have very happy memories of countless journeys to Hull and Bridlington from Leeds in these fine vehicles of the West Yorkshire Road Car Co.Ltd. The routes , 44/45/46, were jointly operated with East Yorkshire and so one was guaranteed a treat no matter which operator’s steed was on duty at the particular time.

Chris Youhill