Copyright V C Jones

Copyright Surfleet Transport Photos

Copyright J C Gilham

National Omnibus/LGOC/London Transport
1930
AEC Regent I
Short Bros. L26/24R

In LGOC days, it competed with independents as much in the rural areas around London as in Central London. Two of the main contenders were, in the South, East Surrey, based in Reigate, and, in the North, the National Omnibus and Transport Co. Ltd, based in Watford. Slowly, they integrated their services and were eventually bought by LGOC, nevertheless still ploughing their own furrows, even to the extent of choosing their own vehicles.
Both organisations suffered from routes with low bridges and bought lowbridge buses. National solved their problem with six AEC Regent I’s, with Short Bros. lowbridge bodies for the Watford-Chesham service (later route 336). Unusually, the 24 upstairs seats were 3-in-a-row bench ones, accessed by a sunken gangway each side.
They all went into service in May/June 1930 and lived a steady life until 1941, when the double-decking of the single-deck route 127 (Morden-South Wimbledon) caused some to be painted red and despatched to Merton Garage until mid-1943. Others went to Godstone Garage, Surrey, to assist in route 410 and Weybridge Garage, also with a low bridge problems. Not only did they wander about, but they were also ‘Londonised’ during overhauls, but each one was done in different ways until not one looked like any of the others! They outlived all the other ST’s and were even re-engined with diesel engines around 1949-50 from scrapped STL’s, to extend their lives, until the eventual advent of RLH’s, which sealed their fate.
All were withdrawn in October 1952,, with some being sold on for further use. The last one (ST140) seems to have been finally withdrawn as a bus in August 1954, having served a very creditable 24 years service, for a wooden-framed body. Even then, it was spotted cut down as a lorry, in June 1955!

Photographs and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron (with help from Ian’s Bus Stop website)

20/07/15 – 05:42

The first photograph is almost certainly taken along the A320 near Staines, looking South with the bus heading North. The offending bridge is still there, and regularly struck by buses on charter and heading for Thorpe Park. The surrounding scene, unsurprisingly, has changed beyond all recognition.

Grahame Arnold

23/07/15 – 08:51

Always fascinating to see photos—and especially interior shots—of these twin-side-gangway deckers. Fine dignified design.

Ian T

24/07/15 – 05:44

I have heard about twin gangway lowbridge buses, but only ever had the doubtful pleasure of travelling on the single offside gangway type – mainly Hants & Dorset and Southern Vectis, but a couple of journeys on Seaview’s Titans. How was the nearside gangway reached once one got to the top of the stairs?

David Wragg

24/07/15 – 05:46

I remember the low bridge vehicles of Newcastle Corporation and United ‘among others’ they were a standard low bridge layout with four seats across, and a single sunken gangway down the off side which ran from the top stair, and had a step up over the drivers cab. Never having seen one of these before, how on earth did you get to the nearside gangway?

Ronnie Hoye

25/07/15 – 06:05

If I understand the drawings correctly there was a lower height gangway running transversely between the rearmost seat and the nearside gangway.
Incidentally National were not owned by General but had an area agreement with them. When the railways bought in to National, geographic names got added, Eastern, Southern and Western, but not Midland.

Stephen Allcroft

26/07/15 – 06:35

Further to Stephen’s comment on the area National names, I believe both Midland and Northern National were registered, to protect the names from use by others. However Northern was never used, there being no obvious company in the National empire, and Midland was not used, as it became an operating area of Eastern National, almost entirely separate from the main Essex Eastern National area. In 1952 it was transferred to United Counties, increasing that company’s size. Eastern National then regained size by the transfer of Westcliff on Sea Motor Services, and the take over of Hicks Bros and others in Essex at around that time. (Moores of Kelvedon survived for another 10 years or so).

Michael Hampton

27/07/15 – 06:42

Thanks Stephen, now we know how, the next question is, why? I suppose it made sense to someone, but I don’t understand the logic in having an extra gangway which reduces seating capacity, and would presumably be more expensive to build.

Ronnie Hoye

27/07/15 – 17:07

The conventional lowbridge layout must have been extremely inconvenient at busy times. If the person furthest from the gangway wished to alight, the other three passengers on that seat would have to unload themselves into the gangway and move forwards to let them out. If similar things were happening on the seats in front, the result could be the passenger equivalent of gridlock! Providing an extra gangway would completely eliminate this problem.

Peter Williamson

27/07/15 – 17:08

I guess the objective was to speed up boarding and alighting times, and perhaps make fare collection easier as well. Certainly being a conductor on an offside gangway lowbridge bus must have been a challenge.

David Wragg

30/07/15 – 06:14

I recall travelling on Hants & Dorset lowbridge Bristol Ks between Poole and Bournemouth on occasion. They had the gangway on the nearside upstairs IIRC, and it certainly was chaotic if the bus was busy. It must surely have led to delays, and issuing tickets to the passenger/s furthest from the gangway must have required some dexterity and conductors with very long arms!

Grahame Arnold

30/07/15 – 08:43

Did Leyland have some kind of patent on the single gangway design, or am I deluded?
In more prim & proper days it may have been felt undesirable with single gangways for gentlemen to be clambering over ladies’ knees to leave their seats? Still is, really. These designs always seemed a necessary evil, as big operators seemed to dispose of these types when bridges permitted- and hence the appeal of the Lodekka, although this presumably also gave an opportunity for standardisation in a limited market.

Joe

31/07/15 – 06:31

Unless I am mistaken, the bus in the top picture by V.C. Jones on the 461 route bears the registration GF 7214; this identifies the bus as ST 140.
In the late 40’s/early 50’s, Harrow Weald (HD) garage was host to ST 136, ST 141, ST 162 and ST 1090. At various times I rode on all 4 of these fascinating vehicles on Route 230, which had two low bridges, one of which was in Headstone Drive, Wealdstone close to the now defunct Kodak factory.

Jon Harry

31/07/15 – 06:32

As a youngster, I remember low bridge buses with an off side gangway, but instead of one seat going four across, they were staggered two by two, with the nearside pair being slightly further forward, but I cant for the life of me remember where I saw them. Newcastle had All Leyland PD2’s and Park Royal Regent V’s, and United had ECW Bristol KW’s, but I don’t think it was either of them. Moor Dale had a couple of Ex Ribble PD2 White Ladies? or it may have been whilst I was on holiday with relations who lived in Kilmarnock ‘Western territory’.

Ronnie Hoye

31/07/15 – 06:32

I seem to recall seeing photos of piano-fronted buses with about a 3/5ths wide central roof-bulge down the whole length, front to back. If this isn’t one of my wildest imaginings, was this the earliest variant of a lowbridge bus? I don’t think that they had anything to do with the Beverly Bar.

Chris Hebbron

31/07/15 – 09:03

Chris, what you describe would seem to have been early AEC Regents with the "camel roof" body design. This was a normal highbridge body that had the roof level lowered except for the central section over the gangway. I imagine that one had to be careful not to bang one’s head when leaving one’s seat. The reason for this rather futile idea was to give the visual impression of a low roof line to compete with the Leyland Titan lowbridge design. It was soon abandoned.

Roger Cox

31/07/15 – 09:03

Chris, perhaps they were ‘tunnel’ buses. LTPB had some for the Blackwall tunnel.

David Wragg

31/07/15 – 13:39

Ref : Tunnels.
Did Buses as well as trams use the Embankment to Kingsway tunnel?

John Lomas

01/08/15 – 06:33

Ronnie, in 1952 West Yorkshire experimented with staggered upstairs seating on a 1951 lowbridge Bristol KSW6B (830, later renumbered DBW12: KWU368). The original rows of bench seats for four were replaced by staggered rows, each offering their four occupants their own individual seat, each seat being staggered back from the one to the left of it. The bus was loaned to United Auto in December 1952 for evaluation, so could this have been the one you rode on Ronnie? (If this is the case, I’m sorry if I’ve given you’re age away!). West Yorkshire’s 1953 delivery of KSWs, to be their last, were delivered with staggered seating upstairs, these being KSW6Bs 853/854 (later renumbered DBW33/34: LWR419/420) and KSW6Gs 855-864 (later renumbered DGW1-10: LWR421-430).
I still have vivid memories of riding upstairs perched on the gangway end seat of WY’s earlier lowbridge KSWs, as they swung around the sharp lefthand turn from Otley Road into Market Street, Shipley, on their way to the bus station. Not an easy task when you have only your left buttock on the seat, whilst the right one hangs in mid-air, attempting to defy gravity with only its attached skinny schoolboy leg to offer support. I’d put up with this all again however, just to ride on such a wonderful beast.

Brendan Smith

01/08/15 – 06:35

No, John L, although an experimental trolleybus was built and run through a few times. It had a normal nearside open platform, with an offide entry/exit, too, with sliding doors, necessary because the subway ‘stations’ had island platforms. The trolleybus roof was too high for it to use its poles, so would have had to stow these, gone through on battey power, then put the poles back up! I also read once that turning circles inside were tighter than with trams. When the tramway system closed in 1952, the subway closed with it.

Roger C – You’ve hit the nail on the head, (the clever metaphor won’t escape you!). I’d forgotten that Leyland did Lowbridge and Hybridge bodies which took added advantage of the low TD1 chassis. AEC’s futile camel-roof design was probably one reason for poaching Rackham from Leyland!

David W – The ‘Blackwall Tunnel’ buses were built much later than the ones I had in mind. They had conventional roofs, which were slightly more rounded. One feature they had was tyres with reinforced walls to extend life, since they rubbed along the kerbs of the two tunnels. Perhaps they even swopped the tyres offside/nearside periodically to further extend life. John H – Route 230, along with the 127 Morden-South Wimbledon, were the only two lowbridge routes in LT’s ‘red’ Central Area. The 230 was usually served by the unique ‘unfrozen’ lowbridge STL’s of 1942, whereas it was usually the green Country Area buses from Reigate which covered the 127 until 6 (later another 6)’austerity’ Daimler ‘D’s’ appeared in 1944.

Chris Hebbron

01/08/15 – 07:06

I recall travelling on Uniteds route from Newcastle via Bedlington to Ashington in Northumberland in 1963 I knew of United having 2 ECW Bristol’s KW’s In its fleet. Seating being 4 across always seemed to cause problems when full to capacity.

Alan Coulson

06/04/16 – 16:24

Ronnie, re your comment 31.07.2015 my apologies for this delayed reply but I am a newcomer to this group. North Western RCC had such a layout on a batch of 10 PD2/21s with Weymann bodied Orions KDB 671-670. There was quite a bit of publicity in the Stockport newspapers at the time about the technological "advances" with these staggered seats and the next time I was in Mersey Square I went inside one to have a look. Frankly, I couldn’t see what the fuss was about. According to Glory Days these buses were not liked by the crews.

David Revis

Hants & Dorset Motor Services
1962
Bristol Lodekka FS6B
ECW H60RD

7678 LJ is a Bristol FS6B with ECW H60RD bodywork, new to Hants & Dorset as 1478 in 1962. Under the 1971 renumbering, she became 1137. As we see, she has the offside illuminated advert panel and is in the NBC poppy red livery. She’s at Barton Park, Eastleigh in August 1976. This is where the waters become decidedly murky. The PSVC listing for this fleet (PK782) does not record her as having been painted thus, though it does mention some of her sisters, and it does not tell us when she was withdrawn. She looks to have been newly repainted in this view, but is among several withdrawn ones in W&D red, H&D green and NBC red. Any comments, folks?

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

16/07/15 – 15:30

Withdrawn in 1976 according to Peter Gould website.

Graham Woods

16/07/15 – 15:31

7678 LJ was repainted into NBC red livery in June 1975, withdrawn in August 1976, and sold to Martin (dealer) at Middlewich the following month.
It had had the air suspension (at the rear) replaced by coil springs in September 1968.
I don’t have information on any subsequent owners, however.

Peter Delaney

17/07/15 – 05:46

Between 1965-69 I worked as a fitter at West Yorkshire Road Car, York Depot. The air bags at the rear usually one would loose air and the flex beam that supported it would break, the other air bag could compensate for awhile. On replacing said components it had to be reset with the levelling valve by removing alloy plates near the rear seats. Also the Lodekka had upstairs heater radiators, getting the air out of the water system took sometime if the heads etc had been off. Best fitting job I had.

Peter Lister

17/07/15 – 05:47

Thank you, Graham and Peter. I’m forced to ask, if she was withdrawn in 1976 – as my photograph suggests – then why bother with the repaint? It’s like British Railways in the Beeching era – the line closes in three weeks, so let’s put down some new ballast!

Pete Davies

17/07/15 – 12:37

………or RAF stations, Pete D. If they started tarting one up, you knew it was doomed within the year!
Happened twice to me!

Chris Hebbron

18/07/15 – 06:16

Been to Mildenhall recently, then, Chris H? The Pentagon have announced its closure within two or three years. The units there don’t want to move [to Germany] and the locals are hoping a Republican gets in at the next election.

Pete Davies

29/12/15 – 06:51

I think I can answer this one; As a local enthusiast at the time, I was making regular visits to Poole depot where this vehicle was based. I clearly recall this bus as it was in fact the first ‘later-style’ FS to be taken out of service, and this was because it suffered major engine failure and being fitted with a BVW unit, was withdrawn prematurely rather than being repaired (there were I believe, still some late LD’s in service at the time). Hope this is helpful!

Geoff

29/12/15 – 10:44

Thank you, Geoff. That explains everything!

Pete Davies

16/02/17 – 07:02

The picture of 1478 stirred a long-forgotten memory for me – and I’m hoping it may be something you bus detectives might be able to clear up! During a visit to my grandparents at Lee-on-Solent sometime in the mid to late sixties, I remember boarding a very similar bus (still happily in Tilling green at the time), and noticing it had an opening push-out top vent to the nearside outwardly curved window at the rear (i.e. the one on the back nearest to the platform doors). I have never seen this on any other Lodekka. The bus was most definitely an FS and it had cream window rubbers, so it would have been post 1961-62. As I was a keen enthusiast in those days, I seem to recall the registration was of the four number/two letter arrangement. It could actually be this very bus, or at least one of the same batch. Can anyone shed any light on this unique Lodekka?

Colin Plucknett

22/04/17 – 07:25

Colin,
I can recall the vehicle you mention; in fact somewhere I have a photo of it, but would mean a lot of digging to find it I’m afraid! It was certainly a Southampton based FS and did have a ‘push out’ type vent (normally fitted to the front bulkhead windscreen) in the top of the rear emergency door glass. It was probably done as some kind of long forgotten experiment!

Geoff Cummings

Copyright Unknown

S Bingley (Hemsworth)
1935
Dennis Lancet I
Willowbrook C37F

Dennis Lancet I, chassis number 171027, was bodied by Willowbrook (2830) and seated thirty-seven passengers. It was new in 1935 and was operated by Associated Bus Companies Ltd (formed in 1928 of several local independents) prior to the acquisition of that company by Potteries Motor Traction in 1944. PMT withdrew it from service in 1946 and in April that year it was with S.Bingley, Hemsworth, eventually scrapped by Crossroads Commercials of Leeds in May 1956.
Did S Bingley have any connection with W R & P Bingley of United Services?

Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson

13/07/15 – 06:23

Given that the most common capacities of the time seem to have been 33 seats in coaches and 35 in single deck buses, 37 coach seats must have been very cramped!

Chris Barker

13/07/15 – 17:01

These Lancet I’s suffered from very heavy-looking radiator shells, unlike the equivalent 1935 Lance rads. It rather spolit the look of them.

Chris Hebbron

13/07/15 – 17:01

Perhaps the cramped seating was one reason why Potteries withdrew an eleven year-old vehicle at a time of severe post-war vehicle shortages? The driving cab also looks very fore-shortened leaving the front of the bonnet some way ahead of it.

David Wragg

15/07/15 – 05:59

I, too, am surprised by the large seating capacity. The Lancet I, which appeared on the market in 1931, had a very bulky and deep radiator shell that was shared by the heavier Dennis haulage models of that time, and the cab front was set behind this cowl. The front wings were swept forward in a manner later adopted by wartime Guy Arabs, and these ‘extensions’ were joined across the front by a kind of bumper bar. All this space inefficient front end had to be accommodated within the overall length of 27ft 6ins, which did not allow for a great capacity within the rest of the bodywork. The later Lancet II of 1935 remedied this shortcoming by having a very slim radiator shell mounted at the extreme front, and this was offset to the nearside to maximise driving cab space. Lancet IIs could be fitted with bodywork seating up to 39 passengers. The Lancet I and II were powered by the Dennis 6.79 litre ‘Big Four’ petrol engine that could be rated up to 97 bhp, a very compact and reliable design employing wet cylinder liners. Versions fitted with the ‘O’ type five speed gearbox could attain 58 mph, so the petrol Lancet was no sluggard. From 1934 the advanced O4 diesel was offered as an option in the Lancet II.

Roger Cox

15/07/15 – 15:25

I’d noticed to ‘Guy’ likeness to the wings, myself, Roger.
Pre-war wet-liner engines never seemed to suffer from the same problems as post-war ones did.

Chris Hebbron

15/07/15 – 19:07

You’re referring to the AEC wet liner debacle, Chris. AEC never did solve its wet liner problems, but the responsibility lay with the Southall firm, not with the wet liner concept. Dennis were engineers of a very high order, and knew how to get it right. The post war Dennis O6 diesel, like the earlier O4, was a wet liner engine with the timing gears situated at the rear of the crankcase, yet both of these design features were regarded with disfavour in some quarters following the shortcomings of AEC (wet liners) and Daimler and Meadows (rear timing gears). The Dennis O4 and O6 also employed four valves per cylinder, the only British production engines to be so equipped. The O6 was an outstanding engine, and installed in the Lancet III, was taken up enthusiastically by many small independent operators who valued its total dependability, notwithstanding its advanced specification.

Roger Cox

16/07/15 – 05:38

Amazing that AEC never cured the liner problem.
Renault cars in the 60/70’s had wet liners and I had two cars with them, as did a friend. They were no problem, but the timing chains were another thing. Poor tensioners and these were rear engines put at the front, so that the timing chains were then at the back. My friend with a Renault 16 cut a hole in the front bulkhead to sort out his, then put a plate back over the hole! Post-war Daimler bus also had rear timing chains, difficult to access without removing the engine. The few D’s with them were removed and replaced by surplus AEC 7.7’s within five years.

Chris Hebbron

18/07/15 – 06:23

An early Lancet I, albeit a Short B32F bodied bus rather than a coach, has, thankfully, been preserved. It was new, probably in 1932, to Smith’s of Westoning in Bedfordshire, a firm taken over by Seamarks of Dunstable. In June 1937 it was sold to K W Services, Daventry who ran it until 1944. In 1946 it became a caravan at Snodland in Kent until 1974 when it was bought for preservation. Apparently, this bus still has no electric starter, and has to be swung by hand! A picture may be found here:- https://www.flikr.com/photos/cheltonian1966/19456538949/

Roger Cox

18/07/15 – 06:24

It would appear that S Bingley died in 1968 and the firm was taken over by Pembertons coaches. There seems to have been an approach by W. R & P Bingley for a license to run some of the coach excursions. However the Traffic Commisioners refused the application due to the fact Pembertons were in final talks with Mr Bingleys widow to take over the coach company. Further information is listed on: //archive.commercialmotor.com/
Pemberton who were based at Upton nr Pontefract I think were absorbed into Welsh’s Coaches who operate from the same depot.

Brian Lunn

20/07/15 – 09:48

Thanks for that link Brian. I guess there was no existing family link or Pembertons would not have got a foot in the door in the first place.

Les Dickinson

16/12/15 – 07:27

Further to Chris Hebbron’s reference to timing chains at the rear of the Daimler CD6 and CD650 engines, that’s not the case, like the Dennis O6 and I believe the Meadows 6DC630 the timing was supplied by a gear train, there is further detail in ‘A Further Look At Buses’ by G. G.Hillditch.

Stephen Allcroft

17/12/15 – 07:39

Gardner’s 15.5 litre 6LYT engine broke new ground for the Company in having a rear-mounted timing gear train, rather than Gardner’s traditional triplex timing chain mounted at the front. The Leyland 500-Series engines as fitted to the Leyland National I, New Zealand Bristol RELLs and quite a number of Bristol VRT3s also had rear-mounted timing gear trains.

Brendan Smith

The preserved Smith’s of Westoning Lancet is now fitted with an electric starter. My 1935 ex-Southern Vectis one was always fitted with a starter but one should not over-estimate their effectiveness. They would start a vehicle with a warm engine, maybe even one that had had been garaged overnight, but were never suitable for a completely cold start. For that you needed somebody in the cab and somebody helping on the handle. I have seen other marques of vehicle that were similar.
For the record there is of course no such thing as a "Lancet 1" – in their time they were just "Lancet". The assumed designation only came about when the Mk2 arrived.

John H

25/06/17 – 09:26

Yes, the original Lancet was just that, like the original Arab, Regent and Regal, and, in the private car world, the Cortina amongst many others. The retrospective application of the appellation ‘1’ or ‘Mark 1’ does clarify the model being discussed. I suppose that, if one wished to be totally accurate, the term ‘1935 Lancet’ should be employed here, but that wouldn’t work either because the Lancet II came out in that same year. Adopting the form Lancet (1), Regal (1) etc seems unnecessarily pedantic to my mind. I should think that only in the military aircraft field would ‘Mark 1’ be used from the start, and then not always.

Roger Cox