Sheffield Corporation
1952
Leyland Titan PD2/10
Leyland (previously H33/26R)

This is my only photo of G56 in action doing what it did so often in the 1960s, recovering an errant PDR1/2 Atlantean in this case on a very wet day in Leopold Street, Sheffield.
G56 was converted from fleet number 666 as a gritter/tow wagon in 1966. Three of the batch were put on one side for conversion, 662 as a tower wagon to replace AEC Regent CWJ 410 and 667 as a driver trainer but in the event only the gritter conversion went ahead. It was a standard Sheffield conversion, lop off the top deck, take away the drop rear frame extension and install a doorway into what was the lower deck gangway. Random buses were modified in this way over the years when the Transport Department had to stand on its own feet when snow fell as Local Authority road gritting was not commonplace.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

03/02/14 – 13:55

This type of conversion continued into PTE days with at least one ex Doncaster bus getting the treatment in addition to a number of ex Sheffield PD3s and an ex Severn of Duncroft example.

Chris Hough

03/02/14 – 17:09

Small point. It was originally a 58 seater. The first 59 seaters were the 1957 PD2s (ECW, Roe and Weymann).
Nice atmospheric shot of Leopold Street in its one way phase with the Town Hall and Beethoven House (and Wilson Peck’s music shop) in the far distance and the Education Offices in the near distance. The latter have been redeveloped into upmarket boutiques and restaurants – the bit out of sight on the West Street corner was what originally was a college which eventually became Sheffield University. Leopold Street was named after the Prussian Prince Leopold.
The broken down Atlantean had its body built in Sheffield. Why did so many Atlanteans fail in the ’60s? Sheffield bought around 100 PDR1/2s between 1964 and 1966 – by far the worst and least reliable of all Atlantean variants!

David Oldfield

04/02/14 – 07:46

What a wonderful old workhorse this machine was; in the heady days when Atlanteans were hove to all over the city, with engine covers raised and pools of oil gathering underneath, I doubt G56 ever really cooled down. I still consider it a great shame that this splendid old PD2 ended up getting scrapped and not preserved, even though half of it was already missing!

Dave Careless

04/02/14 – 07:47

The problem with the PDR1/2 seemed to be in the combination of Leyland engine and Daimler gearbox which didn’t appear to work very well, was it something to do with the power produced by the Leyland engine being too much for a gearbox designed to be coupled with a Gardner slogger? Certainly the Manchester examples never sounded quite right compared to either a PDR1/1 or a Gardner engined Fleetline. I used to enjoy travelling on the back seat downstairs on a BND-C or END-D PDR1/2 for an exciting combination of excessive heat and interesting mechanical smells!

Michael Keeley

04/02/14 – 13:44

Apologies for submitting a photo with myself in it, but I thought in this instance it might be forgivable. On holiday from Canada in the spring of 1984, I caught up with G56 in a sorry looking state at the SYPTE Meadowhall Training Centre in Sheffield, out of use and presumably awaiting the scrapman. Unfortunately, there was nobody in authority to whom I could beg, plead or otherwise come to an agreement with about acquiring the much coveted registration plate! Note that somebody has already taken it upon themselves to ‘rescue’ the ‘Leyland’ radiator badge! OWB 866 was thirty two years old by this time, had worked hard all its life, and didn’t owe anybody anything.

Dave Careless

04/02/14 – 13:46

According to my information, the power outputs of the engines contemporary with the Atlantean PDR1/2 were as follows. The Gardner 6LX developed 150 bhp at 1700 rpm, with a maximum torque of 485 lb. ft. at 1050 rpm. The corresponding figures for the later 6LXB were 180bhp at 1850 rpm, and 536 lb. ft. at 1050 rpm. For the Leyland engines in bus applications, these became, for the O600, 125 bhp at 1800 rpm, and 410 lb.ft. at 1100 rpm. The O680 gave 150 bhp at 1800 rpm and 450 lb. ft. torque at 1100 rpm. The ‘Power Plus’ O.680 gave 200 bhp at 2200 rpm, and 548 lb. ft. at 1200 rpm., but this engine was not employed in the Atlantean. These figures did sometimes vary with differing applications, but not by much. The Gardner engines were lighter than their Leyland equivalents, though not so compact in design. It is unlikely, therefore, that the torque of the Leyland engines was responsible for transmission problems in the PDR1/2.

Roger Cox

05/02/14 – 09:29

Here is an ex Birmingham PD2 in use as a towing wagon, but in this case by a scrapman. Photo taken at Walsall depot, 1970
I don’t remember what the vehicle was being towed, but appears to have had an argument with a low bridge.

Tony Martin

05/02/14 – 13:54

Note in the background, yet another quaint destination on Walsall Corporation No.315 : "Boney Hay".

Stephen Ford

06/02/14 – 06:36

It’s actually 815, a Leyland PD2/12 with Roe body. The destination is a reminder that Walsall, like neighbouring Wolverhampton, ran well outside its own boundaries.

Tony Martin

07/02/14 – 18:04

I wasn’t aware until this discussion that there was a known transmission problem with the PDR1/2. Leyland were aware of a weakness in the Daimler gearbox at that time, which caused them to refuse to supply PDR1/2s with O.680 engines in standard Atlantean fettle, but the standard O.600 should not have been a problem.
Manchester specified derated O.680s for durability rather than extra power, and had them rated at 130bhp. This was the same as the derated 6LXs in the Fleetlines, but I don’t have torque figures for either. As a passenger I did notice a tendency to slip in top gear, but that was no worse than on the Fleetlines.
I know exactly what Michael means about Manchester’s PDR1/2s not sounding "right", but this seems to have been confined to Manchester, and was probably due to them having strangulated O.680s instead of standard O6.00s.

Peter Williamson

07/02/14 – 18:46

The Daimler gearbox of that era was not a very robust unit with excessive band wear evident resulting from poor driving standards (2nd gear restarts/full throttle gear changes). The Mk3 version with wider brake bands made a significant improvement about 1971 followed by a ‘self wrapping’ 2nd speed band by 1975 (we called these the Mk4 although this was not an official Daimler/Leyland classification). The Fleetline used a trailing link coupling between flywheel output and gearbox input throughout its life. This was intolerant of misalignment usually down to failing rear engine mountings, again these were substantially improved by the early 70s. I have never seen under the bonnet of a PDR1/2, does anyone know whether it used the Daimler coupling or a short propshaft between flywheel and gearbox? The Leyland 600/680 engine was shorter than a 6LX giving more space. All sorts of reasons why the PDR1/2 was so poor compared with the standard PDR1/1. (Memory suggests that the Leyland engine Fleetline used a short propshaft – mind you, they were never as good as the Gardner version)

Ian Wild

27/02/14 – 07:34

The reason that the PDR1/2 Atlantean model suffered problems was due to the adoption of an Albion Lowlander dropped centre axle
Daimler supplied the right angle drive gearbox, as the Leyland PDR1/1 design could not be used.
In Sheffield a fleet of 99 PDR1/2 chassis were ordered. Disaster occurred in 1965 when a late duty to Worksop by an East Lancs bodied PDR1/2 shed its rear axle gearing when the Albion designed unit broke up. All the Sheffield PDR1/2 buses were returned for repair and modification over many months.

Keith Beeden

27/02/14 – 10:55

As far as I’m aware, the weakness of the PDR1/2 was in leakage from the flywheel oil seal – this would be consistent with ‘pools of oil’ and ‘slipping in top gear’. The oil seal itself was presumably every bit as good as the ones fitted to other marques, so the implication is that there was something about the transmission which upset the apple cart. I do recall that with the PDR1/2s there was noticeable vibration at moderate to high revs in the indirect gears.

David Call

28/02/14 – 07:52

That’s interesting Keith. I hadn’t realised that the rear axle in the PDR1/2 was such a problem. No doubt Sheffield’s hills exacerbated the problem. Does anyone know if the weakness in the rear axle also affected Lowlanders.

Ian Wild

30/11/14 – 10:29

In the picture of the Birmingham PD2 towing a bus at Walsall, could this be the bus behind. I had taken the photo at Wolverhampton Falling Road Depot in the late 1960s

Philip Savin

Southampton Corporation
1968
Leyland Atlantean PDR1/1
East Lancs H45/31F

OCR 149F entered service with Southampton City Transport on 1 July 1968 as fleet number 105, (note – not Southampton Corporation Transport since elevation to City status in 1964. (But posted here under Corporation to keep the Southampton fleet postings under one heading.) This vehicle acted as a "prototype" for the other 19 of the batch, which entered service in September and October of that year. Despite this, the fleet list in the otherwise-excellent history by A K Macfarlane-Watt records her as OCR 149G but as can be seen below was clearly ‘F’ registered.

She is an Atlantean PDR1/1 with East Lancs H76F bodywork. She is seen in Portswood Road, parked outside the depot, on 31 August 1981. This was the final day of ‘conductor’ operation in Southampton (at least until Deregulation) except for the occasional failure in the system when a Fitter would be called upon to drive while an Inspector took the fares. I experienced this several times!

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

26/01/14 – 17:33

It was at about this time that Leyland started sorting out the Atlantean’s problems. Between 1968 and 1972, improvements were made which culminated in the introduction of the AN68 in 1972. This is what the Atlantean should have been from the start and it became by far the best first generation rear-engined decker. The Daimler Fleetline was always a good bus and, after take over by LMC, replaced the dreadful disasters known as the PDR1/2 and PDR1/3 Atlanteans as Leyland’s low-height deckers. By offering both the Gardner and the Leyland engines, all bases were covered. Of course the AN68 eventually formed the backbone of both Southampton and Portsmouth fleets – and myriad others too.

David Oldfield

27/01/14 – 08:14

Thanks for this Pete. I’ve been doing some research into the end of crew operation around the UK and the previous information I had obtained (from where, I don’t recall) was that Southampton’s last crew routes were the 7 and 9 from Lordshill to Weston around 1984/5. So whilst that info is quite detailed, it’s substantially different from 31/08/1981. I’ll trust your date with your personal experiences!

Dave Towers

27/01/14 – 09:28

David O and Dave T, thanks for your comments. My first experience of a Daimler Fleetline was in Birmingham, going back to City Centre on the 55 route from Saltley after an interview: 3344. I thought then how much better it seemed to perform than the Atlanteans Ribble were using. The vehicle illustrated was simply "parked" and not taking part in the formal City Tour, with the Guy Arabs and Regent Vs all sporting clusters of balloons. Photos available of them if required! By 1984/5, we were very much into the driver only era, even with the local NBC operator, Hants & Dorset. The Routemasters introduced after Deregulation were withdrawn in January 1989.

Pete Davies

29/06/14 – 17:23

There seems to be some confusion about dates here. 31 August 1981 (a bank holiday) was the last day of operation of rear platform buses in Southampton, and was celebrated with a tour and commemorative tickets. Crew operation did, however, continue, but with Atlanteans, and I would think that 1985 would have been the correct date for the introduction of full OPO. In 1981, I was working at the Civic Centre (city hall) in an administrative capacity, but in 1983 I transferred to the Transport Department, and we still had conductors then – as Dave Towers correctly says, on the 7/9 group of services between Weston and the Lordshill/Aldermoor area.
The end of crew operation was accompanied by the introduction of the no change farebox system, which was considered in certain quarters to be an unwise decision in the period before deregulation. Given the time spent discussing this aspect of the change, I would be reasonably sure that the conductors continued until 1985.
Deregulation came in October 1986, and Southern Vectis started their competitive Solent Blue Line venture the following spring, with conductors and making great play of the fact that they gave change. SCT could not ignore that, and introduced Routemasters soon after. Later on, the preserved Regent V that had run the ‘last open platform bus’ tour (401) was transferred back to the bus operator from the Museums Department, and re-entered service. Some of us, who had travelled on that last open platform tour, wondered if we had a case for a refund!

Nigel Frampton

30/06/14 – 07:03

Thanks Nigel. I’ll change my spreadsheet back to "c. 1985" and hope that somewhere some more information may come to light!

Dave Towers

30/06/14 – 11:38

Welcome to the forum, Nigel. Do you still live in Shirley? I bow to your "insider" knowledge!

Pete Davies

01/07/14 – 06:49

Thanks for the welcome, Pete. No, not in Shirley any more – but in south west Germany, near to Freiburg!

Nigel Frampton

01/07/14 – 10:54

Be fair, Nigel, Shirley wasn’t THAT bad!

Chris Hebbron

Kevin

Yes, it was most definitely F and all the others were G, even though they were still 0CR with sequential numbers either side of 149. I first saw this "prototype" on display at the Southampton Show and was very excited about the new fleet numbering, although I was wondering what would happen when the numbers caught up to the remaining Guy Arabs 164 and 167 (when they did, of course, these were renumbered 64 and 67 respectively). I seem to remember that one of the next batch of Atlanteans, TTR —H was never delivered because it caught fire and there was forever a gap of one in the Fleet Numbers. Happy days!

Kevin

30/06/17 – 06:39

Kevin – you are quite correct in saying that one of the TTR-H Atlanteans was never delivered (it would have been number 123).
To be strictly correct, it was the bodyworks that caught fire, and several other vehicles were destroyed as well. The chassis of 123 was exported to Australia, where (if I recall correctly) it received a single deck body.

Nigel Frampton

Portsmouth Corporation
1931
Leyland Titan TD1
Park Royal H26/24R

After purchasing its double-deck Karrier WL6/2’s in 1927/28, Portsmouths next double-deck purchase was seven petrol-engined Leyland TD1’s numbered 4-10. Numbers 4-6 and 9-10 had Short Bros. bodies like that of the diesel AEC Regent posted elsewhere on this site. A diesel Crossley Condor also had a Short Bros. body. Numbers 7 and 8, however, had rather attractive 5-bay Park Royal bodies, never purchased before or afterwards. They had long lives, RV 716 being withdrawn in 1950 aged 19 years and RV 715 in 1952, aged 21 years.

Photograph copyright Park Royal and Copy contributed by Chris Hebbron

09/01/14 – 12:26

Yes Chris, this pair of Park Royal bodied TD1’s looked smart, even in later life, when the whole bonnet area was painted red, and the depth of the white waist rail reduced. However, I’m too young to remember seeing them, and can only rely on photos like these! Thank you. These were Portsmouth’s first Leylands (also a single-deck Lion, No 3). Portsmouth bought 8 bodies from Hall Lewis in 1929 (4 each Dennis EV and Thornycroft BC), and 5 bodies from Park Royal (the Lion mentioned here, the two TD1s as the subject of this posting, and 2 TSM B10A2s. Park Royal never again featured in CPPTD orders, and the main suppliers became English Electric then Cravens in the 1930’s, and Metro-Cammell and Weymann post-war. This official looking portrait also shows a neatly lined out lower deck panel, but no lining out on the ‘tween deck panels. The reason for this was queried on the earlier posting of the Portsmouth AEC Regent with Short Bros body, No. 35. This was also a pre-entry to service official picture. I believe that the reason for this was to allow advertisements to be placed on the bus before entry to service. Why paint ornate lines which were going to be covered over? The extent of the adverts can be seen on the posting for the Portsmouth Corporation TSM E60A6. The side adverts cover virtually the full length of the vehicle. Post-war, this changed, and buses had lining out on the sides in front of and behind the adverts, which only covered the centre bays, not full length.

Michael Hampton

10/01/14 – 09:47

I thought that Park Royal was formed out of Hall Lewis, so the batches of 8 buses and 5 were really from the same stable.

Petras409

10/01/14 – 10:56

Yes, Petras409, Hall Lewis did become Park Royal. In a summary, Alan Townsin states that Hall, Lewis & Co Ltd was formed in 1924, and was based at Abbey Road, Park Royal, London. AAT states that the origins of this are complex and go back to 1889. Hall, Lewis was involved in other transport interests, not just a successful bus body building programme. In spite of some sizeable and successful contracts, the firm became bankrupt in early 1930. One of the creditors, a Mr Harry Yager, bought the business, and it was renamed Park Royal Coachworks, as from April 1930. Before the 1930 change, there was a link to Northern Counties of Wigan through the Lewis family, but the Lewis family retained their interests in NCME when Hall Lewis was bought by Yager and became Park Royal. This is a mere summary of Alan Townsin’s summary in Vol 2 of his book Park Royal Vehicles 1942-1980. Portsmouth Corporation, however, did not avail themselves of their products after this initial foray, leaving Provincial on the other side of Portsmouth Harbour to build up a fleet of Park Royal-bodied AEC Regents, and Southdown to run into Portsmouth using Leyland TD4 and TD5, some with Park Royal bodies.

Michael Hampton

Thank you, Petras409 and Michael H for respectively asking and answering a queaion that I was going to ask!

Chris Hebbron

11/01/14 – 15:20

A lovely photo Chris , from a super period in bus history!
It does show how dated the TD1 was in its chassis geometry though. The space between the front bulkhead and the wheel centre was greater than most of its contemporary competitors such as the more recent Regent, and Daimler designs, and it was not until the TD3 that this feature was brought into line with "fashion". There was the whole TD2 model to go through first!
By 1931, Rackham inspired bow fronted bodies were coming into fashion, as typically exemplified by Weymann, Brush etc, and this was a most fascinating chapter in the evolution of bus design.

John Whitaker

11/01/14 – 17:55

In other TD1 photos I’ve seen, John, the rear of nearside wings all curve rearwards to avoid a total gap, even slightly earlier Hall, Lewis ones. The original photo of this vehicle is not clear enough to work out the actual situation, but it is strange that the safety rail projects forward of the front bulkhead, so maybe the wing just follows the tyre shape and leaves a gap. I think the bodywork style gives the bus the impression of being slightly later than 1931, partly because the stubby radiator in not obvious.

Chris Hebbron

12/01/14 – 07:44

It’s all subjective, I know, but I find this double-decker about as good-looking as a bus can get. That nice forward-set front axle was part of the appeal of the Reading TD1s, along with the subdued engine note and howling gearbox. They had Leyland bodies but–as John W points out–it was the chassis that dictated the overall look. Lucky old Portsmouth always got handsome buses especially with that wonderful livery.

Ian Thompson

14/01/14 – 14:49

I agree, Ian, that it has that certain elegant simplicity about it. Of course, it looks very tidy around the windows, presumably because it has one-piece three-quarter wind-down opening ones, so beloved at this time, but not for much longer. This aids the impression of a light, airy appearance inside.

Chris Hebbron

05/02/14 – 06:08

This picture appears in the October 1964 issue of buses illustrated as part of the Portsmouth edition and is part of a contributor’s personal favourites.
According to the article, this is number 8- RV 716.

Dave French

05/02/14 – 09:25

Thx, Dave F, for clarifying which of the two it was. I agree that, for its time, it’s quite handsome.

Chris Hebbron