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

Samuel Ledgard Ltd
1948
AEC Regent III
Roberts H30/26R

This bus started life with another independent operator, Felix Motors of Hatfield near Doncaster and was number 26 in there fleet, it was new to them in 1948 and was sold on to Samuel Ledgard in 1962.
Samuel Ledgard were different to other bus operators in the fact that they did not have fleet numbers, I don’t know why, maybe you do? if you do please leave a comment.
If you want to know what the livery of Samuel Ledgard looked like there is a colour shot here
This bus has a Roberts body of which I know absolutely nothing, and the only thing that comes up on ‘Google’ is as quoted below which is from the Lincolnshire Vintage Vehicle Society website regarding Colchester Corporation Daimler CVD6 No. 4, if you know anything about Roberts bodies please leave a comment.

“Roberts were an unusual choice of bus body builder – they were more commonly associated with railway vehicles and occasional trams. The body is unusually heavy – weighing about half a ton more than most buses of similar size. This affected the fuel consumption of these vehicles and may have been a factor in the decision to cancel the second batch of five”
To see more regarding the above quote go here

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

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

———

Charles Roberts of Wakefield built this and many other bodies, including Sheffield’s last trams and Blackpool’s Coronation cars.

John Hibbert

———

“It is no wonder that the Roberts bodies were so heavy as the quality, both in structure and in fittings, was of the very highest. They also managed to present a comforting vintage appearance and ambience but without looking "old fashioned." Superb varnished woodwork was everywhere, and the top quality heavy leather seats were of the best. GWY 157 was a fine machine but ended its Ledgard career rather strangely allocated to Yeadon Depot – normally a lowbridge stronghold – and therefore only realistically available for school journeys avoiding Henshaw Lane.
Why there was never a fleet numbering scheme I have no idea, but certainly the firm managed very well without one. Any confusion was normally avoided by allocating vehicles with similar registrations to different depots – there were quite a few cases of this over the years. However, in the run up to the West Yorkshire takeover most of the fleet were allocated fleet numbers before the last minute decision was taken to re-licence many of West Yorkshire’s own withdrawn vehicles instead. For example, PNW 91/2/3 were to be DLW 1/2/3, the RTs were to be DA 1-34 etc etc. What a shame this never came to be!!

Chris Youhill

———

New 1/9/48
AEC Regent III 0961
Chassis No: 1684
Entered Ledgard fleet 19/01/62

Terry Malloy

———

Although it was unusual for a bus company not to use fleet numbers, I seem to recall that East Kent Road Car also managed to operate successfully without them. Presumably staff simply referred to their buses by the digits on the registration plates?

Brendan Smith

———

26/03/11 – 07:25

Burton upon Trent Corporation operated 6 Guy Arab 111 5LW’s with lowbridge Roberts bodies, delivered 1947. See photograph on p51 May 2009 issue of Vintage Roadscene.
These vehicles also had heavy leather seating and varnished interior timber trim – painted over by the Corporation mid 50’s. They developed a sagging roofline quite early in their lives.

Clive Baker

Hanson
1956
AEC/Hanson Regent
Roe H37/28R

This bus was originally a 1938 AEC Regal coach registration ACX903 fleet number 113 and it had a Plaxton C32F body. It was then rebodied by Duple in 1949 to a front entrance bus with 35 seats and renumbered 284. In 1956 the Duple Body was transferred to an ex Bottomleys Motors 1946 Maudslay Marathon lll chassis and numbered 305 with Hanson, a photo of which is here. The chassis was then rebodied by C.H. Roe and numbered 347 with a registration of KVH 889 and classed as a AEC/Hanson Regent H37/28R. On every picture I have seen of this bus the engine side panel is not fitting correctly, I wonder if it ever did.
My thanks go to the Hanson section of the website belonging to Huddersfield Passenger Transport Group for all the information.

———

18/05/12 – 12:20

Maybe the ill-fitting bonnet cover was caused by chassis sag, especially as it was a double-deck AEC Regal!
The unrelieved red does the vehicle no favours.

Chris Hebbron

———

19/05/12 – 07:37

The chassis of 347 was actually built up from components of two pre-war Regal chassis, 113 as stated above and ex Chapman’s Regal Burlingham coach VH 9101 of 1936 which was withdrawn in 1954 after an accident.
It was the first of twenty two AEC’s to get rebuilt by Hanson’s over the next ten years and was the only one, apart from fire victim 1964 Reliance rebuild 384, not to pass to Huddersfield Corporation in 1969.
347 is far from being unique for pre war style AEC’s running with the bonnet side hanging off. For example, there are several photos around of Tom Burrows, Barnsley, very similar bodied Regents with the same problem. I’m sure I’ve seen a picture of one of Burrows Regents even running with an ex STL bonnet side in the same position.
Even though it is forty six years since 347 was scrapped, and it was well passed it’s sell by date by then, I have fond memories of riding on it and listening to that melodious prewar manual gearbox.

Eric Bawden

———

19/05/12 – 09:16

Extant pictures of SUT Regals approaching (or beyond) withdrawal also show the dropped panel effect. Why? That I can’t say.

David Oldfield

———

19/05/12 – 09:17

These complex rebuilds are indeed really fascinating. At Samuel Ledgard’s we had a magnificent (I loved it) AEC "Regal" coach with Burlingham body – I wonder how many of its merry passengers knew that it was a Birmingham Corporation 1930 Regent 1 double decker !! As Eric says about the Hanson vehicle, its powerful engine and wonderful gearbox, perfectly serviceable but delightfully worn to a lovely tune, were a joy. Incredibly, as it was definitely a "one off", it was the subject of a Corgi model – a good model if you can forgive the Duple body instead of Burlingham and the registration number incorrect – FWJ 938, should be FJW 938 – ah well, better than nothing I suppose.

Chris Youhill

———

19/05/12 – 15:21

While I can’t recall seeing any ill-fitting bonnet sides like that shown, I can recall lots of London Transport’s veterans buses, in my childhood, which had unsecured bonnet sides propped up only by the nearside mudguard! Maybe this was to keep worn-out engines from over-heating!

Chris Hebbron

———

20/05/12 – 07:59

I always thought CVD6’s were meant to look like that!

Joe

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 ———