Bradford Corporation Transport 
1961
AEC Regent V
MCW H39/31F

After my lengthy piece re the Routemaster yesterday I will keep the information on today’s bus to the point. It is a straight forward AEC Regent V with an AEC 9.6 litre engine, monocontrol four speed direct selection gearbox and air brakes, nothing controversial there unless you can come up with something, leave a comment if you do.

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

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

———

I lived in Eldwick in the 60s. The village was originally served by the West Yorkshire services 62/62A from the forecourt of Bingley railway station. At some time these routs were extended through to Bradford and became jointly operated with the municipality. West Yorkshire ran its trusty FS Lodekkas and Bradford Corporation its Regents. The Service runs up the side of the Aire Valley escarpment to Eldwick on gradients of varying severity. The Lodekkas had vastly superior hill climbing qualities to the Regents. When Bradford dual sourced Daimlers and PD3s the Neepsend bodied Daimler CVG6LXs were a far better proposition for this service in respect to the hill climbing potential afforded by the Gardener engine.

Charles in Australia

———

Charles, greetings!

I lived in Eldwick from 1957 until 1983 and have fond memories of the 62/62A service, which for many years terminated in the car park at the Acorn Inn.  In time this had to move to Spring Lane where buses had to undertake a very tricky reversing manoeuvre.
When West Yorkshire made application to extend the service to Bradford the Bradford Corporation sought licence for a rival service to the village.  Eventually joint operation was agreed and I remember vividly the Bradford City Transport AEC Regents appearing in the village on driver route familiarisation duties.  They made very heavy weather of the climb from Beck Bottom towards Dick Hudson’s.
When the joint service began on 6 March 1966 the Bradford City Transport used Regents (which were housed at Saltaire Depot).  The period of Regent operation was quite brief as in the autumn of 1966 the Corporation received a batch of 15 Daimler CVG6/30 with East Lancashire (Neepsend) bodywork. As you say, they were a far better proposition for the Eldwick route.  The first seven of the batch 226-233 (EAK 226-233D) were allocated to Saltaire Depot, the rest 234-240 (EAK 234-240D) going to Ludlam Street and later finishing their BCT-days at Horton Bank Top Depot where they were used on the 9/10/12 Buttershaw-Stanningly and 76/77 Bradford-Halifax services.
I was the last Junior Traffic Clerk to be employed by Bradford City Transport joining the undertaking on 1 October 1973.  As I recall the Corporation’s Monday to Friday vehicle allocation to the Eldwick route was 2 buses (0625 out of Saltaire Depot and 0645).  Saturday may have been different but Sunday was 1 bus (1005 out of Saltaire Depot).
The other interesting aspect about the Eldwick route that I recall is that prior to joint operation with Bradford City Transport the West Yorkshire allocation would often be a Keighley-West Yorkshire Lodekka.
In fact I recollect that in the autumn of 1966 not only did we have the new BCT CVGs but new Keighley-West Yorkshire Lodekkas (KDX 224-227).

Kevin Hey

———

15/08/11 – 13:32

This is No 123 one of the second batch of Monocontrol Mk V’s 121-125 which had the noisier dry liner AV590 engine rather than the previous A208 unit as used on the Mk III. They were reputed to be very thirsty and were outlasted by the previous 1959 batch of Monocontrol Mk V’s 106-120. With the arrival of new manager Wake from St Helens huge batches of St Helens spec synchromesh Mk V were ordered 126-225 to replace the trolleybuses. Bradford hills and ex trolleybus drivers made a lethal clutch destroying team and things got so bad two (224 225) were expensively fitted with Monocontrol and AV691 engines but with AEC fitting the heavy Mammoth Major clutch, things settled down and no more were done. Truly horrid things.

Kev

———

15/08/11 – 21:54

Well Kev, you have answered a question which has puzzled me for years, namely as to why the UKY batch were withdrawn before the PKY. Now I know!
I always thought the PKY series were much better quality vehicles than the later batches. They certainly gave that impression, and I was a regular Regent V customer. I well remember 224 and 225 being fitted with Monocontrol, and thought they were thereby improved, but, as a BCT enthusiast, the mark V Regents are, to me, probably best forgotten!

John Whitaker

———

15/08/11 – 22:02

Kev, the reliable AEC 9.6 litre engines up to A218 were all dry liner engines, and these were replaced from around 1958 by the wet liner AV590. All the Southall wet liner engines were a constant source of trouble, and AEC finally gave up the struggle with them and went back to dry liners with the AH505 and AV or AH691. When driving them, I always felt that AEC engines were inferior in the low speed torque area to Gardner and Leyland engines, yet the London RT was always a more lively performer on hills than the RTL. When some red RTLs were painted green and sent to the Country Area, they were quickly deemed to be unsatisfactory, and were sent back again to be replaced by RTs.

Roger Cox

———

16/08/11 – 09:00

I’m on record as acknowledging the weakness of the wet liner AH/AV590. However, I’m not aware of major problems with Sheffield’s series 2 Regent Vs. Bradford’s territory is no more punishing than Sheffield’s and I cannot comment whether they were nasty or not. Sheffield’s weren’t. Did Bradford lack the will to work with them (as LT did with more modern buses)? What were Bradford’s maintenance standards like? [I don’t know.]
Roger is correct about the characteristics of the three major engines. Noel Millier (respected PSV journalist of the ’60s and ’70s) calls the AECs the thoroughbreds, the Leylands and Gardners the reliable plodders. That is being realistically and honestly complementary to all three. OK, I am AEC man, but the PD2/3 is also one of my favourite buses. My experience with (albeit preserved) RTLs is that they move like slugs compared with RTs. Interestingly enough, experience driving RMs in service in Reading is quite the contrary. Reading Mainline’s Leyland powered RMs romped up Norcot Hill – so individual circumstances change constantly.

David Oldfield

———

17/08/11 – 07:21

Bradford were as good as anyone else at bus maintenance. The Mk Vs were purchased, I believe, as the cheapest option for mass trolleybus replacement. anyone connected with the City`s transport will tell you what horrors they were!
I too like AEC`s, David, but not from that generation!
They were noisy, juddering, rough riding and slow, and were hated by everyone in the City!

John Whitaker

———

17/08/11 – 07:24

David, it is a curious thing that London Transport always seemed to be the exception in proving any rule. The Fleetline debacle was probably the most extreme example, and much of the blame lay with the LT engineering system. Aldenham was designed to overhaul buses that could be dismantled like Meccano, and the RT/RTL/RTW, RF and RM classes were specifically designed to be taken to pieces and reconstructed accordingly. Other types like the Fleetline and Swift/Merlin, didn’t fit this bill. Yet LT, unlike many provincial operators, seemed to have very little trouble with the wet liner AV590 in the RM, though the story with the wet liner Reliance in LTE service was very different. The RW, RC and RP classes and their utilisation graphically demonstrated London Transport’s ability to waste public money.

Roger Cox

———

17/08/11 – 10:29

There is a clue in what John says. I recall, I think, that Bradford’s trolleybus withdrawal was not scheduled: do I remember that there was an accident- possibly a fatality- involving falling trolley booms and the Corporation took fright & withdrew the trolleys as quickly as possible? They may have then found that the plant- poles & wires- were in poor condition. This may have led to bargains being sought from manufacturers whose buses were going out of fashion? It would be typically Bradford not to embrace the "new" bustle buses, but look to tradition! Have I got my history right or are memories muddled?

Joe

———

17/08/11 – 13:22

Yes Joe, there was a trolley head fatality at Four Lane Ends which may have affected the abandonment schedule, but I think the main reason was the over hasty city centre redevelopment, most of which has itself now been demolished. BCT certainly utilised much second hand trolleybus equipment in the fifties and sixties, enabling it to last as long as it did, but events overtook them a bit, and they were faced with inflated motorbus demands.
AEC were probably the cheapest option, and the Mark Vs were very unpopular among the public, even amongst the "a bus is a bus" brigade. Letters were written to the Telegraph and Argus about Bradford’s latest monstrosities!
I am only an enthusiast, so cannot comment technically, and the Mark Vs did have some attraction to the enthusiast, even if it were just the unpopular aura which surrounded them! Were they really built by the same organisation who built the 1-40 batch some 12 years earlier?

John Whitaker

———

23/08/11 – 10:07

The Mark Vs in Bradford service had two major problems as far as I am aware. These were broken injector pipes, there being a fitter stationed at Forster Square to deal with these on a full time basis, and blown cylinder head gaskets probably caused by bad driving on steep hills where labouring the engine would cause this sort of problem. The injector pipe problem was of BCTs own making as the anti vibration clips were often not refitted at replacement. The problem was eventually cured by redesigning replacement pipes to something akin to a Gardner injector pipe so I was told by a gentleman who did this and later set up a business supplying pipes to Volvo for use on their engines. I have it on good authority from former chief engineer Bernard Browne that the difficulties in obtaining spares and the problems of day to day operation led to the later purchases of CVG6 and PD3A to enable replacement of early examples and provide more reliable motorbuses for the fleet

David Hudson

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

Blackpool Corporation
1959
Leyland Titan PD2/27
Metro Cammell Weymann FH35/28R

Blackpool were really into the full frontal look I think it was to make them look like the trams that Blackpool is famous for. Before these normal looking full frontal Titans they had other versions which they classed as ‘streamlined’. The bodies were built by Burlingham a local body builder, I think they were bought out by the better know company called Duple.
There is a photo of a ‘streamlined’ Blackpool Leyland Titan here.

A full list of Titan codes can be seen here.

This photo is clearly of 334 (PFR 334), not 344. Good pic, though. 334 was one of a batch of 30 numbered 331-350. The 1960 abc British Bus Fleets No.6 (Lancashire), shows the seating as 61, reduced to 59 in the summer (for increased luggage space?). Burlingham were based in Blackpool and after the Duple takeover, the factory was known as Duple (Northern).

A Woods

Thanks for that, new glasses required I think, I have altered the heading so it is now correct.

Does your 1960 abc book have the above vehicle as a PD2/27 as my 1965 version because the website ‘Bus Lists on the Web’ has it has a PD2/40?

The 1965 abc British Bus Fleets No.6 lists a batch of 50 as the following:-
301 – 310 PD2/21
311 – 350 PD2/27

The ‘Bus Lists on the Web’ site as the same batch of 50 as the following:-
301 – 310 PD2/21
311 – 330 PD2/27
331 – 350 PD2/40

Can anyone solve this anomaly.

Peter

There is certainly plenty of odd information about these buses. I quote from two sources:
In "Blackpool’s Buses", by David Dougill, the fleet list shows 301-305 as PD2/21 with Burlingham bodies, while 306-310 had MCW bodies. 311-350 were PD2/27 with MCW bodies. "Trams and Buses Around Blackpool" by the well-know duo Steve Palmer and Brian Turner gives the same detail. The only difference between 311-330 and 331-350 is that the earlier numbers were delivered in 1958 and the later ones arrived in 1959.

Pete Davies

The PD2/40 was an exposed radiator variant of the breed I would suggest that Blackpool had no exposed radiator buses delivered post war. Early ones had full font bodies to a Blackpool design by Burlingham while later examples both fully fronted and half cab had variations on the Leyland Titan tin front Some of Blackpools PD3s had an asymmetrical full front due to the revised "St Helens front" of concealed radiator PD3s

Chris Hough

Chris, I’m no Blackpool expert but do I recall in the murky recesses of the mind that sometimes "exposed" radiators with smaller blocks were provided for certain full-front applications? Does that clarify – or muddy – the waters?

David Oldfield

This bus survived longer than most of its classmates as, along with 337, it was converted for use a Permanent Way staff bus in which guise they were numbered 434/7 (346 also worked for the Electrical Services department).
From my time at Blackpool I have a 1978 fleet list which shows these as PD2/27s which entered service on 25th and 26th March 1959 respectively.

David Beilby

Blackpool 334 was a PD2/27 as David Beilby confirms. To answer David Oldfield, Leyland supplied the ‘exposed radiator’ version of the Titan for full front designs where the front grille was part of the body design rather than being one of Leyland’s standard fronts. Examples are Ribble’s PD3’s with Burlingham and MCW bodies and the Southdown ‘Queen Mary’ Northern Counties bodied PD3’s. They were PD3/4 and PD3/5’s. As Blackpool used both the standard Leyland BMMO and St Helens style bonnets in their full fronts these Titans were the concealed front chassis types, PD2/21,PD2/27,PD3/1 and finally PD3A/1. The latter had the asymmetrical front windows with the nearside windscreen ‘drooping’ down to follow the shape of the St Helens style bonnet. This arrangement was also used on PD3A/2’s operated by Bolton Corporation with both East Lancs and MCW forward entrance bodies.

Philip Halstead

02/02/11 – 10:00

I was the last driver of PFR 339, one of the buses mentioned in the above article. It was being used as a play bus for the Wisbech area and survived in a working state until 1982. It used to move from one school to another in this area to provide a base for play schools in village where none existed. Gradually these village were able to form their own playgroups in accommodation of their own so PFR 339 worked at achieving it’s own demise. Eventually in 1982 it stayed in one school for a few years as a permanent base, but was eventually replaced by a more suitable form of accommodation. Clement Freud and his wife Jill were instrumental in setting it up in the first place.

Peter Thatcher

04/11/18 – 07:21

When I were a nipper as the saying goes me, my sister took a day trip to Blackpool. We went by Ribble X61, a DP Leyland Leopard out and a White Lady Atlantean (RRN reg) back to Liverpool.
We had a ride on a Balloon tram (two 1s, two 6d). We kept the ticket for years,it was a TIM issue. From the tram ticket we got the date 8th August, 1968.
Note the date. I spotted a BRAND NEW gleaming Leyland Titan PD3A, which could only have been LFR 538/9/40G when a week old. Sadly they were Blackpool’s last such buses but they gave good service unlike many mid-late 1960s back loader of which only the Routemaster had a long life
In my opinion the St Helens bonnet didn’t suit a full front, which Blackpool Corporation recognised by specifying half cabs for 381-399 and 500-540. The 1950s Leyland Titans would have looked better with a Ribble style grille, but I guess BCT wanted to be different! .

Paul Mason

J Fishwick & Sons
1951
Leyland Olympic
Metro Cammell Weymann B44F

I took this photo as I have previously said on a trip to the Fishwick depot at Leyland in Lancashire considering there location it is hardly surprising what vehicles they favoured. There livery was and probable still is a Moss Green and Dark Green which was different but quite nice. Practically all there service routes are local and either start, finish or go through Leyland I think the longer distance routes in the area will be handled by Stagecoach Ribble.
I have read somewhere that the Leyland Olympic and the Royal Tiger more or less began the end of the vertical front engine single decker bus, as the AEC Reliance came along three years later then the article could have a point. The Olympic was built in conjunction with the body builder Metro Cammell Weymann and I think most of them went overseas rather than the home market.
I actually e-mailed J Fishwick & Sons for any information of the above bus, as the company is one of a very few original operators still in existence, and they would have information going back to year dot. They did not even acknowledge receipt of my mail never mind supply information, shame really. The days must have gone when you could write and ask an operator for a fleet list and by return of post it arrived along with a sample set of bus tickets an the odd photo of there latest arrival. The credit crunch must be squeezing quite tight up in Leyland.

Hi, came across this picture searching around for Fishwick bus photo’s, I am from the Leyland area and although I can’t shed any light on this bus, I do have a picture of an almost identical Fishwicks bus taken last week at a bus rally in Leyland. As for the company, I am quite surprised you received no response from your email, Fishwicks seem to be quite keen on the history and tradition and always send a number of buses to local rallies and have a downloadable fleet list on their website. Anyway thanks for the picture.

Graham Rutherford

When I was a lad of 16 years, I was an apprentice to the Jamaica Omnibus Company in Kingston Jamaica. This was in 1968 and the outgoing busses on the fleet at the time were the Leyland Olympic A, B, and C the "C" being the long chassis version. They were replaced with the "G" Busses. These were clutchless with pneumatic shift levers. This photo certainly brings back memories.

Albert Walker

I have tried to email J Fishwick & Sons with regard to the single decker Leyland Olympian twice. I have been ignored by the company on both occasions. Apart from being amazingly ignorant or perhaps not very good at email can anybody tell me anything about them and especially the single decker Leyland Olympian 521 CTF. Do they still have the bus, is it still running? What do you know?

Edward Cambridge

Edward, this is a video of the actual Leyland Olympian 521 CTF.

Terry Malloy

You may be able to get more info from:-
Leyland Commercial Vehicle Museum.
King Street
Leyland
Nr Preston
Lancashire
PR25 2LE

Keith

I went to school on Fishwick’s buses 1959-1961, usually coming home on the 4.30PM Preston Fox Street to "Seven Stars via Croston Rosd" (actually service 115 but Fishwicks had no number displays in them days. It was regularly no.13, NTC 232 on the 4.30, usually full especially on market days, with a standing load, and people left behind. Passengers for Croston Road were rightly annoyed when Penwortham passengers were on, as they had the frequent "Earnshaw Bridge" bus (111). All other Croston Road buses were double deckers, but never this one.
Fishwicks had 8 Olympics, and 6 Olympians at this time, mostly for the Chorley routes under Pack Saddle Bridge, and the Bamber Bridge route along Shady Lane.
I could go on….

Bernard Parkinson

Apologies for digressing slightly but where did Bamber Bridge Motor Services fit into this picture? Was their route from Preston to Bamber Bridge exactly same as Fishwicks and if so was there a co-ordinated timetable? Did BBMS operate one route only?

Chris Barker

Fishwick’s Bamber Bridge route was today’s service 117, but ran every 90 minutes then, all day incl evenings and Sundays, but went via Shady Lane before Clayton Brook village was expanded by Central Lancs New Town. As today it ran via Brownedge Road, so did not compete with BBMS. This service always displayed simply "Bamber Bridge" whichever way it was going, despite its destination being Preston or Leyland (Earnshaw Bridge).
BBMS just ran one service direct Preston (Starch House Square)-Bamber Bridge (Hob Inn), plus works services to Leyland and Lostock Hall, In its latter years one service deviated via Duddle Lane (service D), while the direct route became service P (via Pear Tree).

Bernard Parkinson

Olympian 521 CTF is preserved and appears at rallies, not sure who owns it.
Spent most of its life working 109 and 119 routes, but also worked regularly the Sunday morning Croston Road service, (115), 10.12 and 11.12 from Moss Side (Black Bull) to Preston (Fox Street), 10.43 and 11.43 return (Seven Stars via Croston Road), which service actually went beyond Seven Stars up Slater Lane terminating at the Black Bull, then back along Dunkirk Lane to Preston. There was no 12.12 service on a Sunday, but the 1.12PM service resumed with the regular Croston Road bus no.23, LTD 445, a PD2/1, and worked this run every hour until 11.0pm.
The last Olympic to survive was no 17, NTC 234, which was 21 years old when withdrawn, its regular job in its last days was the Vernons Mill to Earnshaw Bridge service, which needed a single decker to get through Factory Lane tunnel under the railway. In earlier days two Olympics together worked this job, such was demand, one just to Lostock Hall,the other working through to Earnshaw Bridge, as shown in the 111 timetable of the day.

Bernard Parkinson

29/01/12 – 11:14

521 CTF Leyland Olympian Single Decker was sold by Fishwick to a man called M.Hayes, Mark Hayes I believe.
He apparently has a private bus collection and does exhibit the bus. Does anybody know anything about him?

E. Cambridge

29/01/12 – 16:30

Yorkshire Woollen had a number of these buses. My wife was a clippie at Frost Hill at Liversedge and remembers these buses being on service 36 between Leeds and Elland. On one occasion a driver drove through very deep flood water quite fast and the water came up through the inspection floor boards.

Philip Carlton

06/03/12 – 12:10

I Found the 521 CTF Bus. It is in the British Commercial Vehicle Museum. I shall visit it this Spring. Thank You All.

Edward Cambridge

25/10/15 – 06:23

It has been reported in the local media that the company went into administration Tuesday and the last service on the 111 route will be today.
A sad ending to a company that had high standards and delighted many of us over the years with the one off and unusual Buses that they operated.
The end of an era and a sad day for the Town of Leyland.

Cyril Aston

26/10/15 – 06:49

Very sad news about Fishwick & Sons. Another old-established and well-respected operator ceases to trade. Is there any indication about what happens to their services, most of which were run in conjunction with Ribble?

Pete Davies

26/10/15 – 06:50

Philip – how interesting to read that your good lady was on the 36 route – in the early 1950s I used to travel on the nearly new Olympics from Leeds to the top of Wide Lane at Morley to visit a friend. That they were of "semi integral" or "chassisless" construction was obvious from the moment the driver pressed the starter as everything from floors to luggage racks and windows began to rattle and thud and the journeys were very uncomfortable – a great shame because they were handsome and lively vehicles, but there we are.

Cyril – what an awful piece of news you’ve had to break to us. Being a traditionalist myself, but fully accepting changes in the Industry, I have always held Fishwick’s in the very highest esteem. Their colours, criticised by many as "dour", "drab" etc, are a tribute to unashamed dignity and smartness and the demise of the Company is a very sad loss indeed. Presumably and hopefully any staff so wishing will be accommodated by other operators in the area, while those sadly wanting to call it a day will be able to do so voluntarily.

Chris Youhill

26/10/15 – 16:14

I understand from the "Lancashire Evening Post" that Stagecoach are taking over the 111 service, but that the others will be subject to the tendering process.

Pete Davies

27/10/15 – 06:38

Just picking up on a couple of points above.
Bernard P – it may have been that Fishwick’s were not authorised to carry through passengers on the 117 service. Such restrictions were rife in the decades following Road Service Licensing (1930) and only began to be seriously eliminated with the so-called County Council ‘agency agreements’ of the late 1970s. Or Fishwicks may have found that it caused less confusion to passengers to do things the way they did.
Are you sure there didn’t come a point on the route where the destination was changed to ‘Earnshaw Bridge’ or ‘Preston’?

Pete D – I think you’ll find that in recent decades the only route which was operated by both Fishwicks and Ribble (to a co-ordinated timetable) was the 109. The fact that most of the other routes were numbered in the Ribble series was a leftover from pre-deregulation days when services were technically ‘joint’ with Ribble (i.e. operated under a joint licence) even though Ribble may have never actually operated on particular routes.
This is how Pennine’s Skipton to Malham service was service 211, in pre-deregulation days the services was ‘joint’ with Ribble, even though I don’t think Ribble ever provided any vehicles. Funny thing is, I don’t think Pennine vehicles carried route numbers until well after deregulation anyway!
There were lots and lots of services where Ribble had a stake, but didn’t provide any vehicles, e.g. the 39 from ‘Manchester’ (actually Salford) to Liverpool, which was mainly (perhaps entirely) operated by LUT.
The converse applied too, the 130 (Bolton-Morecambe) was joint Ribble/Bolton Corporation, but Bolton didn’t operate, instead they did the 122 (Bolton-Southport).

David Call

28/10/15 – 13:25

Further to the above, further reflection seems to say that the Malham service was 210, rather than 211.

David Call

29/10/15 – 16:40

A real shame to hear that Fishwick has gone under. There will be no question of Stagecoach maintaining the brand name, unlike the situation in Nottingham where the South Notts and Pathfinder brands continue in use as a positive marketing feature.

Alan Murray-Rust

22/10/18 – 06:12

Birmingham City Transport also ran 5 Leyland Olympics. 4 where based at Selly Oak Depot, and one JOJ 261 was used on the Hall of Memory/Birmingham Airport service. This one was based near the city centre.
They were Leylands first under floor engined chassisless single deckers. I believe only 23 were built.
I remember being amazed at seeing a engine on its side apparently suspended in mid air as the lack of a conventional chassis gave the impression the engine/gearbox were not attached to anything,
They where very high floored not easy to board for the elderly or disabled.
They where known to as Geeps by the staff at Selly Oak. I loved them, they were very lively and my first speeding caution was in one of them.

John Hipkins

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

09/04/21 – 07:25

The bus in question is a integrated body with a Leyland engine fitted to a Albion box it is in a private collection cause my mates owns it.

Aidy Burrows