Old Bus Photos

Eastbourne Corporation – AEC Regent V – HJK 156 – 56

Eastbourne Corporation - AEC Regent V - HJK 156 - 56

Eastbourne Corporation
1961
AEC Regent V 2D3RV
East Lancashire H32/28R

Having been a satisfied user of the AEC Regent III in its 9613A crash gearbox form, in 1956 Eastbourne Corporation turned to the Regent V D3RV with the dry liner A218 9.6 litre engine, synchromesh gearbox and vacuum brakes. DHC 649-655 had H30/26R bodies from the Corporation’s long favoured supplier, East Lancashire Coachbuilders, but these bodies were equipped with Auster window ventilation throughout. The next Eastbourne Regent V deliveries were of the 30 ft 2D3RV version, now with the wet liner AV590 engine. HJK 156-160 were fitted with East Lancs H32/28R bodies, and again had Auster window vents. The first of this batch, HJK 156, fleet number 56, is seen at the entrance to Eastbourne pier, and the impeccable standard of presentation of the bus ten years after its 1961 delivery is of great credit to the Corporation. This batch of five Regent Vs was withdrawn between 1978 and 1981, No.56 surviving to the end after some twenty years of service.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Roger Cox


28/03/21 – 17:25

Are you sure it was 30′ long? I had thought that all of Eastbourne’s Regent Vs were of the shorter variety; and the seating capacity would tend to support that assumption. Southampton also had short Regent Vs with East Lancs bodies (numbered 343-372), and these seated 66; so the Eastbourne vehicles would have provided very generous leg room if they were 30′ long!

Is the location correct – Bournemouth Pier? The adjacent vehicle also appears to have an Eastbourne registration.

Nigel Frampton


29/03/21 – 07:39

The Eastbourne Regent V’s were all 27ft long. The ‘2’ in the designation means a later model of the D3RV not necessarily 30ft long.

Philip Halstead


30/03/21 – 05:26

My mistake. I stand corrected; thank you gentlemen.

Roger Cox


30/03/21 – 05:27

I can certainly confirm that the setting of the photo is Eastbourne Pier which was the starting point of the Town Tour.
As Philip says all Eastbourne’s Regent V’s were 27ft long as for the designation the number 3 indicates that they were synchromesh manual gearboxes, if the designation had a 2 in that position they would have been the semi automatic Monocontrol gearbox. The 2 in the 2D3RV indicates the later AV590 engine and other changes to update the model, the R indicates right hand drive and the V vacuum brakes.

David Lennard


 

Quick links to the  -  Comments Page  -  Contact Page  -  Home Page

 


 

Huddersfield Corporation – AEC Regent V – PVH 992 – 192

Huddersfield Corporation - AEC Regent V - PVH 992 - 192

Huddersfield Corporation
1960
AEC Regent V 2D2RA
East Lancs. H37/28R

192 (PVH 992) was an AEC Regent V 2D2RA with East Lancs. H37/28R bodywork, one of a pair (192/3) added to the Huddersfield Joint Omnibus Committee fleet on 1st February 1960. They had the AV590 engine and Monocontrol semi-automatic gearboxes. The traditional exposed radiator arrangement had remained an option for the Mk. V and the JOC had taken eight Roe-bodied examples (182-189) a couple of years previously, but this pair must have been amongst the last examples before the option was withdrawn. With their sturdy and well finished East Lancs bodies they were in my opinion the most handsome of buses, so typical of the Huddersfield fleet in that period – oozing real quality.
The Corporation/JOC system at Huddersfield had worked in a different way to the one at neighbouring Halifax, not being based on whether the services operated outside the borough or not, but on what type of vehicles were used. Tram and then trolleybus routes had all been run by the Corporation whilst all motorbuses were the responsibility of the JOC. However when trolleybus abandonment in favour of motorbuses began in the early 1960’s the old arrangement would have eventually meant the JOC would have operated all the routes so a new agreement was reached such that former trolleybus routes would remain in Corporation hands and a separate fleet of buses was gradually built up carrying a more streamlined trolleybus-like livery and numbered from 101 upwards.
From the 1st October 1969 the Corporation took over the former railway company’s share of the JOC (by then owned by the NBC) as well as the local stage service of Hanson’s Buses, and from then until the formation of the West Yorkshire PTE in April 1974 all services were Corporation operated. 192 and 193 passed into the PTE fleet as 4192/4193 and were withdrawn shortly afterwards and scrapped.
193 is seen here in Huddersfield’s Manchester Street Bus Station in the latter all-Corporation days having just been treated to a magnificent repaint.

Photograph Peter Berry – Copy John Stringer


20/09/17 – 06:08

The exposed radiator AEC Regent V seemed to be very much a Yorkshire thing. In addition to the Huddersfield examples, Leeds, Doncaster and East Yorkshire also had them. The only non-Yorkshire examples I can recall were some for City of Oxford and Rhonda. As we’re talking Yorkshire here where the natives have a reputation for thrift, could it have been that the exposed radiator version was cheaper!

Philip Halstead


20/09/17 – 08:22

But in Sheffield we had 86 Regent III with Regent V fronts!

David Oldfield


20/09/17 – 08:24

Thrift, nowt wrong wi that lad, after all, it is easy for anyone to identify a Yorkshire man abroad; he is the one at the till saying loudly "How Much"?
However, the real reason for the exposed radiators is some Yorkshireman appreciate beauty more than tin fronts (the manager in Bradford who bought hundreds of tin fronted Regents, was not, after all, a native thee knows).

Stuart Emmet


20/09/17 – 14:34

I suspect that it was more an accessibility issue. I can remember in my far off preservation days what an awkward and painful experience it was just trying to remove and refit the lift-pump on my AEC Renown, standing precariously on a step ladder slumped over the wing with the bonnet edge trying to crush my ribcage as I reached down into its innards. With the exposed radiator you just lifted the bonnet and there it all was, and if the job was a bit bigger you just unbolted the wing, lifted it off and you could get right in there and reach everything with ease.

John Stringer


20/09/17 – 14:36

Nottingham City Transport had a little matter of 65 exposed radiator Regent Vs – nos. 209-273 (UTV 209-238 and XTO 239-273). Park Royal 62 seat bodies. Delivered 1955-56.

Stephen Ford


20/09/17 – 14:37

Huddersfield also had two Guy Arab IV with exposed radiators, and nearby County Motors had four.

Don McKeown


20/09/17 – 14:42

A small correction to the caption – motorbus deliveries to the Corporation fleet were numbered 401 up, 101 being reserved (at that time) for JOC double-deckers.

David Call


22/09/17 – 07:20

Don’t forget the elegant Guy Arabs of Exeter Corporation which took delivery of 20, all with exposed radiator, between 1956 and 1960.Five had Park Royal bodies, five had MCW, but the best looking were the Massey-bodied ones – the first five and the last five. Fotunately number 50, TFJ 808, the first of the Masseys, survives in superb condition. It was chosen for preservation by Colin Shears as it was ‘the most musical’!

David Chapman


23/09/17 – 07:07

An exposed-radiator Mk.5 that is easy to overlook is the most individual one of all, Longwell Green bodied PWO783, number 9 in the fleet of Bedwas & Machen UDC.
Of the fleets that have been mentioned, only Doncaster and Nottingham failed to go on to buy concealed-radiator equivalents.

David Call


25/09/17 – 13:36

True, David: Doncaster returned to Daimler in the 60’s and had to buy concealed radiator CVG6’s but amongst its last half-cabs were some exposed radiator PD3s around 1963. I used to wonder if exposed radiators were seen as more macho in the Council Chamber- like Atkinson coal lorries or even Peterbilts. There was not a lot else Macho about a PD3 and Doncaster transport seemed to be about eking out, so cost was probably the answer: although making an exposed radiator look respectable cannot have been so cheap compared to a glass fibre moulding.

Joe


27/09/17 – 06:19

As John Stringer says the exposed radiator arrangement made it much easier to access the engine and its ancillaries than with a tin (fibreglass or aluminium) front. Also the view of the nearside kerb from the driver’s seat was better.
The big snag was, I suspect, the exposed radiator was deemed old fashioned in the eyes of the fashion police of the time. Plus the fact accident damage was probably easier to repair on a "tin" front with the use of plastic filler.

John Anderson


02/10/17 – 07:29

In Manchester the issues were certainly engine accessibility and driver sightlines, to the extent that, when Daimler refused to supply chassis with exposed radiators, Manchester worked with them to redesign the alternative.

Peter Williamson


 

Quick links to the  -  Comments Page  -  Contact Page  -  Home Page

 


 

Brutonian – Bristol RE – STC 928G – 28

Brutonian - Bristol RE - STC 928G - 28

Brutonian Bus Company
1969
Bristol RESL6G
East Lancs B47F

Bruton is a settlement on the River Brue. It is in Somerset, between Frome and Yeovil. STC 928G is a Bristol RESL6G, new to Accrington Corporation Transport in 1969. It has East Lancs B47F body and passed to Brutonian in 1982. The fleet number and Accrington livery were so near Brutonian’s requirements that neither was changed. The operator became part of the Cawlett Group and is now part of First. We see the bus parked in New Canal, Salisbury, on 17 April 1984, having come in on a market service.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies


19/02/17 – 16:22

STC 928G

4 vehicles were acquired by Brutonian in 1982 from Hyndburn as successor to Accrington CTD. The vehicles were reliable and popular and the livery was retained and looked attractive as can be seen from Pete’s photo in Salisbury. None were ever repainted and by 1987 the livery had deteriorated as can be seen from the attached taken in Dorchester.

Keith Newton


19/02/17 – 16:23

It wasn’t in such good condition three years later see link www.sct61.org.uk/ac28a

Keith Clark


20/02/17 – 07:09

Keith and Keith, Your photos suggest that this vehicle was on its way to a breaker, rather than in service. Given what became of Brutonian, one might wonder if it’s a ‘practice’ for the Barbie livery!

Pete Davies


20/02/17 – 13:26

Perhaps we should have a section for the worst presented buses- "battered buses"? Even on the original photo, you can see the untreated deterioration around the "peak" and front wheel arch. The grille was starting to go on the first pic, and then… Brutal!

Joe


21/02/17 – 07:06

How could a vehicle so neglected be allowed to operate? What about the vehicle examiners and the traffic commissioners? I don’t think I have ever seen a bus operating in such a sad state, and the final shot was hopefully before scrapping – it would have been a mercy killing.
Brutonian, with the emphasis on the ‘brute’.
Thank goodness for operators like Safeguard at Guildford.

David Wragg


21/02/17 – 16:15

David, I agree with what you say about the appearance, but the condition of the paintwork is not a criteria for a vehicle test. However, the body is, so presumably it must have been up to standard or it would not have been granted a C.O.F. There is of course the reverse of the coin that a coat of paint hides a multitude of sins

Ronnie Hoye


21/02/17 – 16:16

To be fair – maybe – things were different then in particular the powers that be were more concerned with de-regulation and local authorities had to ensure non-commercial services would continue. The owner of Brutonian had agreed to sell to a local businessman whose interests included a travel agency and the transfer was delayed until de-reg ie end of October 1986. As well as existing routes and new commercial ones , the new company had gained additional tenders – not least the trunk route 6 between Sherborne and Dorchester. Despite the poor external appearances , the REs were apparently mechanically sound and reliable and the additional work probably extended their lives. Unfortunately the 6 passed County Hall and comments were apparently made therein !! No 28 was withdrawn soon after the photo was taken and continued concern saw the tender itself subsequently transferred the following year to another local operator.

STC 928G _2

Attached is another photo taken in May 1985 in Castle Cary on the Saturday evening Bingo service and is probably how these fine vehicles should be remembered.
A new book on Brutonian concentrating on the routes and operations is to be published soon through the Omnibus Society.

Keith Newton


22/02/17 – 07:11

I think ‘the ugly face of de-regulation’ is a term that sums up this situation. A similar thing happened in the North West where the once proud Yelloway having been asset stripped by new owners secured a tendered service into Manchester formerly run by the PTE. They used very unsavoury looking cast-off Bristol VRT/ECW vehicles in worn out ex NBC liveries with no fleetnames and paper stickers in the windscreens as a destination display. It was a disgrace. Fortunately the powers that be stepped in fairly quickly and terminated the arrangement with the service being re-tendered. Not the British bus industry’s finest hour.

Philip Halstead


22/02/17 – 07:12

I have read that Brutonian only repainted vehicles when they were in for other maintenance, resulting in the most unreliable ones being repainted first and vice versa. So looking at the state of this one, Keith’s comment about its mechanical soundness rings true!

Peter Williamson


27/02/17 – 07:49

Chris Knubley the owner of Brutonian never really had much money. There was an injection of money into the business in 79 when he bought his first RE (GAX 5C – a great bus!) and CYA 181J (survices) along with WYD 928H from H&C, the latter was never painted. Generally the most reliable buses were painted 217 UYC and 497 ALH for example, while others ran in a range of former operators colours 8087 TE and TET 166, for example. Not creating consistency was something he had done from 1972! There was clearly something wrong with the last paint job done by Hyndburn on MTJ 926/927G and STC 928/928G. Alternatively the guy who replaced me washing them down from Sep 82 was using the pressure washer incorrectly, or it had been inadvertently fitted with the sandblasting nozzle! 27 became the donor to the others although lasted until a few years ago along with 26 and 29 in Shobdon before final scrapping. 28, in the picture, I understand was in fact the most reliable and went onto be repainted and see further service with Metrowest (the only one of the four). It was indeed different times…I now own the only bus to carry the Brutonian colours which is OVL494, an identical bus to Brutonian’s OVL 495, which was scrapped after an attempt to convert it to a half cab. All other survivors are in original operator colours or in CYA 181J’s case, awaiting restoration.

Paul Welling


08/10/17 – 08:04

Yes deregulation did the bus industry no favours and we are still seeing the repercussions over 30 years later. Fishwick’s and Pennine spring to mind.

Mr Anon


24/11/17 – 07:34

Much information about Brutonian may be found here:- //www.countrybus.com/Brutonian/BrutonianPart1.htm  Scroll to the bottom for links to further pages.

Roger Cox


 

Quick links to the  -  Comments Page  -  Contact Page  -  Home Page

 


 

All rights to the design and layout of this website are reserved     

Old Bus Photos from Saturday 25th April 2009 to Wednesday 3rd January 2024