East Midland Motor Services
1954
Leyland Tiger Cub
Saunders-Roe B44F

This batch was a favourite of mine. The Saro body looked so much better than many contemporary offerings. These were sometimes to be found on East Midland route 99 Chesterfield to Sheffield via Ford and Ridgeway. This picture is in the maroon livery but they looked even better in the chocolate, biscuit, and cream livery.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson

---

11/01/13 – 05:46

I couldn’t agree more, Les. We didn’t have any at Percy Main, but the Northern General group had quite a number of these. I always thought they looked particularly good in Sunderland District’s dark blue and white livery, they always had the look that they were built up to a standard rather than down to a price

Ronnie Hoye

---

11/01/13 – 05:46

Seeing the caption to this one has prompted me to look at the East Midland entries in the column on the left. Yes, the chocolate and cream style was distinctive. My only experience of Tiger Cub/Saro buses was with Ribble.
I note some comments about migrating managers who took their old operator’s livery with them. Readers will know that Southampton’s traditional dark red – cherry might be the simplest way of describing it – was supplanted on the Atlanteans with much more cream, and a lighter red. Bill Lewis brought that arrangement with him from Manchester.

Pete Davies

---

11/01/13 – 08:09

The Saro bodywork was a much more good looking version of the BET specification which spawned thousands of MCW Hermes bodies that took a number of iterations to look only half as attractive.

Phil Blinkhorn

---

11/01/13 – 15:58

Interesting to note that probably the three largest fleets of these Saro/Tiger Cubs, Ribble, East Midland and NGT all ended up in unrelieved dark red/maroon livery. Even so they still looked smart.

Eric Bawden

---

12/01/13 – 06:23

Interesting too that, to the best of my knowledge, this type of body was never built on a Reliance.

Chris Barker

---

12/01/13 – 13:55

Good point, Chris, I cant say that I’ve ever seen these on anything other than a Tiger Cub. According to the bus chassis lists, the NGT group had 31 in total, DCN 843/857 ‘Northern’ and OUP 655/670 ‘Sunderland District’ all delivered in 1954

Ronnie Hoye

---

12/01/13 – 16:28

One type that did share the body was the SARO Integral which was Gardner powered which appeared around 1953.
If I remember correctly this was unique and the sole example went to Maidstone and District as SO68 registered as RKE 540 see www.flickr.com/
It ended up with Berresford Cheddleton who ran it in a livery that looked very similar to PMT between 1966 and 1968 with the fleet number 28.

Phil Blinkhorn

ps I’ve found a photo in Berresford’s colours www.flicker.com/

---

13/01/13 – 07:30

…and preserved Guy LUF SARO demonstrator LJW 336!

Ian Thompson

---

A Guy UF demonstrator was also similarly equipped: www.sct61.org.uk/
Very similar bodies were fitted to BUT trolleybuses for Dunedin and Auckland New Zealand (the nearest we get to a Reliance?) and less similar, less attractive, 33 ft long Daimler Freelines also went to Auckland, the first as a complete build, the rest – 89 in number – ckd. Though looking different due to the panelling I gather the framing was the same.
Chris’s assertion about the lack of the body on the Reliance chassis seems to be correct

Phil Blinkhorn

---

13/01/13 – 07:58

Here is a shot of LJW 336, the Guy Arab UF demonstrator which was subsequently purchased by Blue Line of Armthorpe. This view shows it in 1969 at which point it had been just a store for a number of years. It seems surprising that it was on the heavier UF rather than the lightweight LUF chassis.

Alan Murray-Rust

---

13/01/13 – 14:11

Since posting my shot, I have found a number of views of LJW 336 in preservation, which refer to it as an LUF. I took my information from the PSVC fleet history PB4, which lists it as a UF. This is what also appears on the SCT61 site that Phil refers to. However, I have been back to my copy of PB4; this includes the PB4A appendix, which I had overlooked first time round. This corrects the original info and lists it specifically as an LUF.

Alan Murray-Rust

---

13/01/13 – 17:27

Alan, that makes a lot more sense though the Freeline as hardly a lightweight.

Phil Blinkhorn

---

15/01/13 – 06:20

LJW 336 was a special Guy Arab UF which was developed as a test bed for lighter construction. The result of this development was the Arab LUF, for which LJW acted as a demonstrator. The only objection to calling it an LUF is that the LUF hadn’t actually been invented when it was built!
I’m not sure about Manchester being the inspiration for Southampton’s new livery. Bill Lewis may well have taken the lighter red with him, but I think I’m right in saying he left Manchester before the Mancunians arrived (I was working under him at the time), and in any case the Southampton scheme doesn’t bear much resemblance to the Mancunian livery. However, I remember Ralph Bennett exhibiting a Bolton Atlantean to the Manchester public before then, and to my eyes the Southampton livery looks like the Bolton scheme with Manchester colours.

Peter Williamson

---

16/01/13 – 05:08

Peter, you may well be correct about the origins of the Bill Lewis style of Southampton livery. I suspect from what you say it is something of a hybrid: Bolton style so far as ‘what colour is where’ is concerned, but using the brighter Manchester red. It wasn’t just the Transport Department managers who had this idea of taking their old liveries with them: the then City Engineer in Southampton had come from Swindon, and brought that Council’s shade of blue with him.

Pete Davies

---

15/11/13 – 15:26

During the late 60s/very early 70s I was working in the Birmingham area but visited my folks in Nottingham most weekends. On fine Sunday mornings, I liked to borrow my Dad`s camera and trundle around the likely photo-spots in the city and here is one from that era.
This is parked up in the Ice Stadium car park and has all the clues to suggest it is one of the same batch as R324:

Obviously by then operated by East Midlands Housing Association, it occurred to me that its previous "East Midland" fleet name had been neatly over painted in black with the extra "S" on the end. One letter overlaps into the bay in front, but two into the bay behind.
By now looking a little tired and work-stained, it nevertheless attracted my attention as a handsome machine worthy of recording, sadly not enough to note the date and reg number.

Rob Hancock

---

31/12/13 – 07:04

Trent had 10 of these Saro Tiger Cubs. painted red below the waist rail white above and looked superb probably the best colour scheme of all. A couple ran in wales for a long time. I saw a photo of some Reliances with a similar body that were exported to the Caribbean.

Ron Stringer

---

03/07/17 – 16:16

Reading this column on Saunders Roe bodied Tiger Cubs, I was employed by Ribble at Carlisle depot 1963 to late 64 where there were at least 5 such buses including the two allocated to the 603 Bowness on Solway outstation. I occasionally got to drive one on other rural routes plus I was allocated one to operate an evening excursion to Appleby Horse Fair. I liked these buss with their light steering and gearboxes that needed skill to make a clean change, they were rather underpowered for hilly rural routes ie Carlisle to Hesket New Market climbing Warnell Fell, once down itno 2nd gear just above Goose Green pub there was no chance of ever getting back into 3rd before cresting the long drag due to the long delay in waiting for the revs to drop.

Attached is an official Saro photograph of an Auckland Transport Board Royal Tiger with Rivaloy body given to me by Saro after a request for information about the company back in the 1950s when I was a teenage bus enthusiast.

Gerald Walker

---

05/03/18 – 09:01

I recall Ribble operating Saro bodied Tiger Cubs on services from Colne to Barnoldswick, and occasionally Gisburn, via Foulridge and Whitemoor Reservoir in the early 60s. I used to have holidays at my aunt’s house in the "hamlet" of Hilltop outside Foulridge and I recall them struggling on the narrow twisty climb out of Foulridge to the reservoir

Smudge

---

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

---

31/01/19 – 06:00

I note a recent announcement by Oxford Diecast Models that they have produced a Saro bodied model of a prototype in London Transport Country Bus livery. Did LT ever take delivery of such a vehicle because it is the first I have heard of this? Possibly it might have been a demonstrator?

David Revis

---

01/02/19 – 05:48

David Revis asks if any Saro bodies were made for London Transport. The production summary at the back of the book ‘Saunder-Roe, Builders of the world’s lightest buses’ shows that NO single-deckers were built for London. From 1946-1956 there were 272 for the home market and 1246 for export. Of 376 double deckers built 300 were for LT. I assume that the model is presented as LT just to maximise sales with little regard for reality?

Les Dickinson

---

01/02/19 – 05:50

In 1953, following the completion of the RF delivery programme, London Transport was looking at future options regarding lightweight single deckers.
‘Buses of London’ by Colin H Curtis published by London Transport tells that three experimental models were obtained which were an Eastern Coachworks bodied Bristol LS5G (PHW 918), a chassisless AEC Monocoach with Park Royal bodywork (NLP 635) and a Saunders-Roe bodied Leyland Tiger Cub (PTE 592).
The text reads: ‘All were allocated to Reigate garage for extensive tests on route 447 and 711. At the end of the test no decision was made and the vehicles were returned to their owners’.

David Slater

---

01/02/19 – 05:51

Demonstrators indeed. See the following from the Oxford Diecast website: www.modelbuszone.co.uk/

Chris Hebbron

---

02/02/19 – 06:17

Chris H, David S, Les D: Thank you all for your responses. The thought did go through my mind that Oxford might have produced the model by way of artistic licence as Les inferred. It was a relief to learn that Oxford was completely ethical and had obviously done their homework.

David Revis

---

02/02/19 – 06:33

Here is a photo of PTE 592 whilst in service with London Transport on the 447 route.

Peter

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

H W Hunter and Sons
1937
Leyland Tiger TS7
Burlingham B35F

Another from H W Hunter and Sons. New to them in 1937, JR 6600 was a B35F Burlingham bodied Leyland TS7.

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

In 1954 it was rebodied by Roe as a B39C, so it was around at the same time that they had the two Titans previously featured on this site. I’m 90 per cent sure they had another Leyland single decker but I’ve been unable to trace it. They had a well deserved reputation that you could virtually set your watch by Hunter’s bus and in addition to the service vehicles they had several coaches, all either AEC or Leylands, although they later switched to Volvo’s. They escaped becoming part of NBC and the formation Tyne and Wear PTE didn’t seem to affect them much because their depot and most of their single route were outside the area controlled by the PTE, so they were more or less allowed to continue much as before. However, I think the PTE may have had some influence over the decision to extended the route from North Shields beyond Seaton Delaval to Cramlington. The huge operational area covered by the pre NBC United Automobile Services empire was split up into bite size pieces prior to deregulation, and the area between the Tyne and the Scottish border was taken by the newly formed Northumbria Motor Services, which was in effect a management buyout. I don’t know the circumstances and I wouldn’t want to speculate, but Hunter’s became part of the Group. I think the name lived on for a while, but Northumbria Motor Services were swallowed up by Arriva, and like many other independents the name of W H Hunter is now, just a memory.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ronnie Hoye

---

02/01/13 – 07:50

That is a huge seating capacity for a pre-war halfcab chassis. Was it extended when it was rebodied?

Eric Bawden

---

02/01/13 – 09:06

I wondered the same thing, Eric, and whether it was a road-based prototype for the "economy class" of airline seating!

Pete Davies

---

02/01/13 – 16:53

A most interesting question and 39 does seem a lot of seats in a vehicle of , presumably, 27’6" length. One would also have thought that a centre doorway, as opposed to the previous front door, might well reduce the available seat space. However, as the two pictures are taken from roughly very nearly the same perspective the vehicle appears to be the same length in both. It was unusual, but not unknown, for normal length prewar buses to have more seats than ideal space wise, but even the lightweight Lions and Cheetahs taken over by Samuel Ledgard in 1943 from the widow of G.F.Tate of Leeds originally seated 39 in their delightfully "old fashioned" Barnaby bodies.

Chris Youhill

---

02/01/13 – 17:35

I’ve given all the information I could dig up and I don’t know if the chassis was extended, but two things look a bit odd to me. On the Burlingham body, if you look at the seat above the letter ‘H’ it gives the impression that the seats over the rear axle appear to be facing each other, also the wheels are fairly flush to the side of the vehicle, whereas on the Roe they look to be slightly inboard, as if the vehicle has been widened but the axle length is still the same, or is it me?

Ronnie Hoye

---

03/01/13 – 06:42

7ft 6in chassis and original body, but 8ft new body, perhaps? If so, this wouldn’t be the only one, and they do look a bit strange!

Pete Davies

---

03/01/13 – 06:43

Ronnie, I would agree with you that the Roe body looks to be 8ft on a 7ft 6in chassis. The Roe body also has an extra window bay to the Burlingham.
It may be purely body style but the body overhang behind the rear axle looks to be longer on the Roe than the Burlingham, certainly, there are almost two full window bays behind the wheelarch on the Roe as against one and a half on the Burlingham. Also if you look at the exhaust tailpipe it appears to be in the same position in relation to the back axle in both photos yet the Roe overhang, again seems to be longer.
Don’t know if it has anything to do with this discussion but the front wheels, despite the absence of nutguard rings on the Roe are different to those fitted in the Burlingham picture.
As this body looks to be almost identical to the centre entrance Guys placed in service with Darlington in 1952/3 I wonder if Hunter’s body was tagged on to the end of the Darlington order, a not uncommon occurrence at Crossgates Works, even into the ’70s. I believe Darlington’s Guys were B41C.
Has anyone a nearside view of this bus with its Roe Body?

Eric Bawden

---

03/01/13 – 06:44

My word Ronnie, I think you’ve hit on two very pertinent features there for sure. As regards the "inset" appearance of the wheels on the newer Roe body I would say that the replacement coachwork is eight feet wide on the unaltered 7’6" TS7 chassis – a practice not unknown in the 1950s especially on single deckers. Your enlargement of the area above the "H" of Hunters reveals an interesting feature. The "A" shaped seat back appears to be a joint support for two seats, one on the left facing backwards and sharing the floor space with a forward facing seat to its rear, and one forward facing one on the right. The four passengers (plus four on the nearside) in the facing seats no doubt had to put their feet on the slightly intruding wheel arches. What a wonderful vehicle in both its forms !!

Chris Youhill

---

03/01/13 – 06:44

To my eye the newer body looks longer, though not much – the typical Roe high domed roof tends to mask this. 39 seats would mean 10 rows on the offside, 9 on the nearside (both including the rear 5-some). That sounds awfully tight in a length of 27’6" – minus the length of the cab and thickness of the front bulkhead.

Stephen Ford

---

04/01/13 – 06:45

Eric, I typed JR 6600 into my search engine, and up came the Park Royal vehicles site with what I take to be a pre delivery photo taken outside the Roe works. It differs slightly from the Darlington Guy’s, as when the doors are closed they form part of the side of the bus, whereas the platform steps are exposed on the Darlington vehicles.

Ronnie Hoye

---

04/01/13 – 17:43

Thanks Ronnie. After initial difficulty I eventually found the photo on the PRV site.

Eric Bawden

---

08/01/13 – 07:43

Noting some of the concerns about fitting 39 seats into a body on a 27’6" chassis so earlier today I took a tape measure to a 1952 Roe body with 39 seats although in an overall 30′ chassis and with a front entrance.
Putting 5 seats across the rear leaves a further 34 seats to be fitted by means of 9 sets of double seats on the offside and a further 8 sets with a door on the nearside. The length of the 30 footer from the bulkhead to the rear of the final pair of seats at the back was 22’2" with a gap of 29.5/30" between the same points on adjoining seats.
Turning to the shorter 27’6" bus under review and allowing the same distance from the front of the bus to the front bulkhead and similar requirements for the rear seats leaves circa 19’6" for the 9 sets of seats on the offside and would allow a gap of just 25" between the same point each set of adjoining seats. To me that looked a rather tight fit so I measured the seat gaps on some others from that era and all of them were in the range of 28-30"
To reduce the gap between seats by 5" in the 1950’s would, in my opinion, require smaller seat bases or otherwise it would be impossible to fit your legs in.

Andrew Beever

---

08/01/13 – 10:42

Andrew: Although I agree that the extra seats would be tight, your maths isn’t quite right. With a 39 seater there are 10 rows of seats on the offside, including the back bench seat. On the basis of your 29.5" pitch, the overall length of the 10 rows is 295". Reduce this by 30" and the ten seats now have to fit 265", so the pitch is 26.5". You lose 3" per seat, rather than your 5". I am over 6 ft, with long legs, and can just make a 27" pitch with a thin seat back with my legs straight, so the average person just about fits OK. Birkenhead used to cram 66 seats onto a PD2 without a 3 seater at the back or a television seat. Those seats were definitely tight for me, and probably similar in pitch to 39 on a 27ft 6in half-cab.

Alan Murray-Rust

---

08/01/13 – 13:43

Alan, I had specifically excluded the rear seat in my calculations since this seat is effectively fitted into the rounded rear corners with very limited foot room under it.

Andrew Beever

---

15/01/13 – 16:38

Hunter 21 (JR 6600) had Roe body GO3827 when rebodied 3/54.
Hunter 20 (JR 4901) was the other Leyland TS7 10076 rebodied by Roe in 4/53 (GO3680) also squeezing in 39 seats in its centre entrance body.
Hunter did, of course, have another new Roe body. Fleet number 30 was WTY 843J, a Leyland PDR1A/1R, with H43/29D bodywork

MikeB

---

16/01/13 – 10:48

Thanks for that, Mike, I’ve been racking my brains, or rather what little is left of them. I knew they had a second Tiger but I’ve been unable to find any records of it, did that also start life with a Burlingham body?

Ronnie Hoye

---

27/01/13 – 10:30

I’m sure the two single deckers were VTY 360. & TJR 573 this I have to say is from memory many years ago.

Bob Mandale

---

28/01/13 – 08:40

Bob, MikeB came up with the answer I was looking for. The two single deck buses you refer to were the replacements for JR 4901 and 6600. They were AEC 2MU3RV’s with Plaxton Highwayman B45F bodies. TJR 573 was delivered in 1961 followed by VTY 360 in 1962 (VTY 360 is coming as a separate posting soon). By that time the chassis on 6600 was nigh on 25 years old and from the registration I would estimate 4901 to be a couple of years older. Apart from WTY 843J mentioned by MikeB, I believe the two AEC’s were the last new service buses bought by Hunter’s as all subsequent vehicles were either coaches or D/P’s

Ronnie Hoye

---

03/04/15 – 05:31

Further to the discussion on the length of JR4901 and JR6600, can I mention that these two vehicles had a rear-facing seat for five across the front bulkhead, and an inward facing single seat on the nearside just ahead of the centre entrance. I also think that the entrance may have been slightly wider than usual for a single decker of that era. I don’t recall the seat spacing as being especially tight, so I would think that the bodies must have been slightly longer than the original ones. Incidentally, the original body above is described as B34F, but it looks to me to be a coach body.

John Gibson

---

01/06/15 – 07:20

There was a heck of a lot of rebodying of half cab single deckers from 1950 as 38 or 39 seaters once the 27′ 6" maximum length had been increased to 30 feet.
However, all is not what it seems. Buses for Trent, North Western and Potteries and the Hunter’s Tiger were lengthened without any alteration to the wheelbase of 17′ 6" because the C&U Regs until 1961 allowed the rear overhang to be up to 50% of the wheelbase. With a front overhang of about 2′ 3" on, say, Gardner 5LW or AEC 7.7 engined chassis – and a rear overhang of 8′ 9" it was legal from 1950 to go to a maximum length of 28′ 6" without altering the wheelbase. This was sufficient for another row of seats to be fitted without any alteration of the chassis.
Indeed, I think it was only Yorkshire Woollen District which actually lengthened the wheelbase of its Willowbrook bodied PS2s to 18′ 9" when they lengthened them to 30 feet.
Many of the Leyland PS’s taken over by Potteries in the early fifties were already 28′ 6" long and may have inspired PMT to rebuild its Weymann single deck 17′ 6" wheelbase OPD2s by substituting a 2′ 7" long bay for a possible rear door with a 3′ 7" long standard window bay, increasing the seating capacity in the process.

Alan Johnson

Sheffield Corporation
1949
Leyland Tiger PS1 
Cawood B34F

When the Sheffield Strachan-bodied Leyland Tigers were discussed in a previous posting there was mention of a couple of batches bearing Cawood bodies. 103 was one of five for the Joint Committee (B fleet) another five were delivered to the Corporation (A fleet). I think this is parked outside Leadmill garage, waiting its turn for the washer and refuelling as was the norm at Leadmill. If my memory serves me well, the 29 at that time was for Ringinglow, which was a Leadmill route. Behind is TD5/Cravens H55R of 1937 which by the time of the pic was an instruction vehicle. This picture appears in Sheffield Transport by Chas.C. Hall, though I bought mine from RHG Simpson.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Les Dickinson

---

27/12/12 – 17:05

No. 27 was the Ringinglow route Les. No.29 was a City (Fitzalan Square) to Blackburn (Shardlow’s Works) and was jointly operated with Rotherham CT Dept.

John Darwent

---

27/12/12 – 17:23

Another example of a ‘B’ fleet bus on a Corporation ‘A’ route.
Would Leadmill garage have that many ‘B’ routes other than Chesterfield via Dronfield and Holmesfield?

Andrew Beever

---

28/12/12 – 06:40

I believe that the 29 to Blackburn (not the one in Lancashire!) required single deck buses because of a low railway bridge just off Ecclesfield Road. Rotherham used to use centre entrance Bristol single decks for their contribution to the service.

Ian Wild

---

28/12/12 – 06:41

These PS1’s were allocated to Townhead Street, and I’m pretty sure that’s where this picture is actually taken, on the parking area at the side of the garage where a lot of Townhead’s single-deck allocation were frequently parked, along with several of the training buses. The workers 29 service was, I believe, originally a Townhead duty that eventually ended up being the responsibility of East Bank.

Dave Careless

---

28/12/12 – 06:44

I rather think the location is Tenter st where single deckers were parked alongside the garage wall as was the norm.

David Grant

---

28/12/12 – 11:01

Thanks for the info everyone. Leadmill had several B routes Andrew. My home route was the 83 to Birley. Holmesfield (86??) was another, 57 Bradway another. Happy New Year to you all.

Les Dickinson

---

29/12/12 – 07:00

Interesting that 29 was an "A" route, although it ran outside the city boundary, likewise 69 to Rotherham. I think this was because these ran direct from the city into Rotherham Corporation’s area and did not enter the "B" area.

Geoff Kerr

---

30/12/12 – 07:21

Les, I’m sure it was a typo, but the 59 was the Bradway route.
Putting B fleet buses on A fleet routes was not unusual as they were jointly owned and could be deployed as required – if not required on B duties. Indeed, at times of heavy transport usage, A fleet buses would be used on B and, sometimes, C fleet routes – especially Easter and Whit Bank Holidays.
B and C fleets were for Railway (rural) routes outside the city area. 29 and 69 were joint agreements with a neighbouring (operating) authority rather than a route taken over with the railway agreement.

David Oldfield

---

30/12/12 – 07:21

Nobody seems to have asked the vital question.Who were Cawood and where did they come from? Did they build other bodies?

Philip Carlton

---

30/12/12 – 08:36

David, As a boy I could remember every single route. However there have been many changes since, and I’ve moved around the country a lot. Somewhere along the way I lost my fifties and sixties timetables so depend a lot on memory. (Now what was I saying?) Oh yes, what you say is absolutely correct. I’ve been at Bakewell on a Bank Holiday weekend and seen buses from all three fleets arriving there. My home route, 83 Birley, was a B route but now and again would have one of the 700 series Regents on there. At that time the 95 to Intake was covered by the 700/800 Regents with an odd appearance of a 1200 series Regent. Prior to moving away with my job in 1967 I never ever saw a Leyland on the 95 though I have seen pictures of this since then. 95 was also a Leadmill route. Phillip, there is some explanation of Cawood in another article (about Sheffield’s Strachan bodies I think).

Les Dickinson

---

30/12/12 – 08:36

Good point, Philip…..

David Oldfield

---

30/12/12 – 08:49

Dave Careless and David Grant comment on Townhead Street and Tenter Street garages. These were one over the other and in Sheffield’s tram days Tenter Street housed trams. "Sheffield Transport" by Chas Hall shows a line up of the superb Roberts trams on the last day of tram operation by the city.

Les Dickinson

---

31/12/12 – 17:19

If I remember correctly from my student days in the 60s, all five Sheffield depots in operation then had a mix of A and B routes, but the C routes were concentrated at East Bank and Townhead Street.
Bramall Lane depot was before my time in Sheffield so I don’t know the position there.
Naturally this wasn’t part of my university course and I had to work it out for myself!

Geoff Kerr

---

01/01/13 – 07:09

There was nothing quite as fascinating as a bus garage when you were a schoolboy bus enthusiast. Being a Rotherham lad, I spent many hours peering through the railings outside the Corporation depot at Rawmarsh Road, but stumbling across one in Sheffield that had trams in the basement and buses on top was truly mind boggling. I’d never scribbled numbers down quite that fast before!
All the Sheffield garages were something special back in those days; Leadmill Road, with the castle-like turrets at each each side of what had been the main doorway when it was Shoreham Street tram depot, was a fascinating building, and the then modern garages at Herries Road and Greenland Road, although perhaps not as architecturally pleasing, were truly a sight to behold late at night, with lights blazing and the forecourts stuffed full of AEC’s and Leyland’s in that remarkable Sheffield livery. Talk about nirvana.
All these years later, in Canada, I have a purpose-built glass-fronted display cabinet in the lounge, full of EFE’s and the like on several shelves. Granted it’s only a display cabinet, but after dark, when I plug in the subdued fluorescent lighting in it, it immediately ceases to be a model cabinet and magically becomes Herries Road garage in 1964!!

Dave Careless

---

01/01/13 – 07:10

Les. Like you, I am baffled – having only memories of AECs on the 95. [Presumably we have both seen the same picture of a PD2/Weymann.] My maternal grandmother lived on Woodhouse Road and the 95 was in weekly use!
I think Bramhall Lane had Chesterfields before Leadmill – they certainly had the 13** Regent Vs that ran them.
I "left" in 1971, but still have brothers, aunts and uncles whom I visit – as I did last week. I was day-dreaming of Regent IIIs and Chesterfield PD2s passing by my hotel on Chesterfield Road (in the grounds of what was once Jordanthorpe School). Well I am getting old and nostalgic…..

David Oldfield

---

01/01/13 – 11:18

Does anyone know when Lincs Road Car started their joint service 85 with SJOC between Sheffield and Gainsborough by any chance ? Was it late 60`s ?
Visiting Sheffield to see relatives in the early sixties , I was amazed with the variety in the bus station . Blue Crossley training buses, new Atlanteans ( wow ! ) lots of different types of AECs – nice livery and red wheels . Dead classy I thought !

Steve Milner

---

01/01/13 – 13:31

The transfer of certain ex Sheffield ‘C’ routes including the 85 was made on 1st January 1970, exactly 43 years ago!

Andrew Beever

---

01/01/13 – 13:38

Is this an urban myth? I was once told that when the Torys were in power on the City Council the wheels were painted blue and when Labour was in power the wheels were painted red!!!

Philip Carlton

---

01/01/13 – 16:34

I’ve read this but apparently blue wheels first appeared on the 1966 delivery of Atlanteans when Labour controlled the City Council. The change back to red occurred because no doubt someone decided they looked better.
Service 85 became jointly operated by Sheffield Transport, Lincolnshire Road Car and East Midland as part of the disposal of the JOC C fleet, most of which went to the NBC, as you say, 43 years ago.

Geoff Kerr

---

01/01/13 – 16:35

Philip no urban myth, I don’t think there was enough time to paint all of them blue.
I must confess I liked the red ones better
Better still one of the local golf courses managed to renegotiate it’s lease with the council at that time.

Andrew Beever

---

01/01/13 – 17:30

Cheers for the info re the 85 . I have seen a few photos of LHs and REs on the route – no MWs though .

Steve Milner

---

02/01/13 – 07:28

Some years ago, when the Big Ben’s clock face was being renovated, they found that the black numbers were originally blue. There was some discussion about returning them to blue in the interest of historical accuracy, but Labour objected because it would favour the Tories, so black remained. Childish? Yes! True? Oh, Yes!

Chris Hebbron

---

02/01/13 – 07:29

Although the agreement relating to the sharing-out of "C" services between Sheffield Corporation and NBC came into effect on 01.01.1970 joint operation of the Gainsborough service didn’t start until the 18th – in the interim period four former "C" fleet Leopards were loaned to the Corporation to maintain the service. Thereafter, Sheffield provided one full-day and two part day duties from Greenland Road (generally using AEC Swifts which had been downseated to provide extra luggage capacity), East Midland provided two all-day duties from Worksop depot (generally using Leopards or REs), whilst Lincolnshire provided one all-day duty from its Retford depot (initially using a newly-allocated LH, but replaced the same year by an RE). Lincolnshire closed its Retford depot on 01.05.72, when most duties on the 85 transferred to Gainsborough depot, though a couple of buses were out stationed at East Midlands Retford depot.
Sheffield continued to outstation one bus at Retford, formerly used on the 85 pre-1970, until the end of April 1972: in recognition of their long service the Retford crew that used to work the 85 were given a duty at East Bank garage which allowed them to run light from Retford to South Anston each morning to pick up service on one of the Dinnington routes to run into Sheffield, work other routes as required, change buses, run back out to South Anston in service, and then light back to Retford – this arrangement ended when the conductor retired, after which the driver travelled to and from Sheffield as a passenger on the 85 to work as a spare driver, until he too retired the following year.

Philip Rushworth

---

02/01/13 – 09:04

Les, I have found my box of time tables and I have a Sheffield 11/63 to 05/64 #182 if you want to know anything just ask.

Peter

---

02/01/13 – 14:26

The timetable shows that through passengers on 85 had to change buses at Retford as double-deckers could not work to Gainsborough. In 1969 single-deckers began to run throughout and the 85 was operationally linked to a short A route to Parkway Markets (121).
This practice continued after the 85 had become joint, resulting in the odd sight of an East Midland bus working a Sheffield City service "on hire" – but the Lincolnshire bus did not apparently take part.

Geoff Kerr

---

05/01/13 – 05:44

Thanks Philip and Geoff for the extra info – great !

Steve Milner

---

08/01/13 – 07:41

Peter, thanks for the note on timetables – I’ll keep that in mind for my next "starter for 10". A fascinating garage was Eastbank as it had an extensive roof-top parking area which was often used by withdrawn vehicles, each with the Sheffields lettering / insignia and fleet numbers blacked our prior to sale or disposal.

Les Dickinson

---

18/01/13 – 16:55

I can recall the rather unusual Cawood bodied Leyland PS1’s running out of Pond Street in the early 50’s on the 21 route to Swallownest via Catcliffe and Treeton. I seem to remember they were used on short workings to Treeton on occasion.

Jerry Wilkes

---

24/03/13 – 08:03

The very first vehicle to receive blue wheel hubs was No340, Atlantean/Park Royal the Earls Court show vehicle of 1964. The Daimler Fleetline/Park Royals which were delivered that same year had the normal red hubs as did the Neepsend bodied Atlanteans of 1964/5. However, all vehicles delivered during 1966 Atlantean/Park Royal, Atlantean/Neepsend and the Craven bodied Bedford had blue wheel hubs and this was the year in which the Tory party was in charge. Incidentally, No340 was the first in the fleet with blue moquette seats on both decks, the Fleetlines being red/beige on lower deck and red leather upstairs.

Trev Weckert

---

Vehicle reminder shot for this posting

---

15/02/14 – 06:03

On the subject of Cawoods, it is worth noting that just after WW2 the Thames Valley company was so desperate to rebuild many of its war-worn fleet that a number of them were sent all the way up to Cawoods, including Harrington-bodied Leyland Tiger TS8 coaches and some of the Tiger TS3 and TS4’s re-purchased after being with the military. Full details are in my History of the Thames Valley Traction. Co. Ltd. 1931-1945 and 1946-1960 volumes.

Paul Lacey