Sheffield Corporation – AEC Bridgemaster – 1925 WA – 525

Sheffield Corporation - AEC Bridgemaster - 1925 WA - 525
Photograph by ‘unknown’ if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Sheffield Corporation
1961
AEC Bridgemaster
Park Royal H43/29F

I think this photo was taken when this bus was new it looks in very good condition to me. The angle of the shot does show up the very square and upright look of the Park Royal Bridgemaster. Why did the Bridgemaster have that small window to the left of the entrance doors (see D Oldfield update below) no other front entrance bus that I know of did. There must be a reason apart from just having a window otherwise moving the doors more into the saloon would be wasted space, bodybuilders do not waste space. If you know, let me know, please leave a comment.


“Reg no 1925 WA fleet no 525 was one of six Bridgmasters supplied to Sheffield Transport the other five were all rear entrance. It has been preserved.

George


“I think there was a first batch of six, all rear entrance followed 2 years later by a one off front entrance.

Anonymous


I have a shot of a rear entrance Sheffield Bridgemaster so I will do more research and it will arrive shortly with full details.
In fact I have done the research and the bus arrived on Monday 3rd August, here is a link to it.

Peter


Sheffield Bridgemasters: 519-524 were rear entrance with a row of five rear facing seats, Lodekka style, at the front of the saloon. This covered the gearbox/differential housing – which can be seen at the front of the saloon of all traditional half-cabs. On Bridgemasters, this was extra large – hence the reason on the front entrance version for the doors to be set further back and the strange small window.
From a Sheffielder who travelled – at times – on all seven vehicles.

David Oldfield


This photo would have been taken by the corporations own photographer. It is taken outside the gates of Norfolk Park. The council took photos of all there new buses here. The East Bank, Shoreham Street and Queens Road depots were all less than a mile from here.

James Walker


06/07/12 – 07:20

This bus was often to be seen on the number 7 route to Stannington

Brian


03/10/13 – 08:49

I have conducted on 525 doing a few weddings this summer. Can any of your Sheffield experts tell me why the lower deck has a green interior including seats whilst the staircase and upper deck is red.

Geoff S


03/10/13 – 14:35

Because that was the standard post war interior colour scheme until 1959. Only in 1960, with 1325-1349, did the inside saloons begin to have a red scheme, but not all. This scheme only lasted until 1966 when the interiors were again changed – this time to blue on each deck. Why? I have to admit, I often wondered that myself but – as we were often told in the days, it is because it is!

David Oldfield


03/10/13 – 15:41

David, I remember the wheels being blue for a while too, due to local politics, but don’t think that would be the reason for the seats as the council was very red at the time.

Les Dickinson


04/10/13 – 06:11

True or not, Les, it’s the sort of childish behaviour we’ve come to expect from modern-day politicians! Some years, ago, when Big Ben was being renovated, it was found that the original paint applied to the clockfaces was blue. In the interests of historical accuracy, preparations were made to repaint them blue, until the non-Labour MP’s got to hear of it. They remained black! Of course, compromise could have made three of them red, blue and yellow respectively, with the other one…… pink!

Chris Hebbron


04/10/13 – 15:14

On the interiors, we have to remember the down stair seats were upholstered, whilst the upstairs were leather, so smokers would not damage them.
My personal choice was for red wheels with chrome rings, even though I come from the blue half of the city.

Andy Fisher


04/10/13 – 17:21

Blue half, Andy? That much?

David Oldfield


05/10/13 – 15:38

More like the blue 3/4 side.

Andy Fisher


22/10/13 – 17:37

Just thought I would let you know that the first vehicle in the fleet to have blue seats (moquette on both decks incidentally) was No 340, the Commercial Motor Show Atlantean exhibit of 1964. It was also the first to sport blue wheels. The Fleetline’s which came the same year had the normal red seats and wheels etc as did the Neepsend bodied Atlantean’s. It was 1966 that the blue seats and wheels were adopted as standard, the first vehicles being Park Royal and Neepsend bodied Atlantean’s and the Bedford VAS/Craven.

Trev Weckert


23/10/13 – 17:41

1925 WA_rear

It was never going to be as attractive as Kylie M’s rear aspect but interesting nevertheless. Seen here before final touches added after repaint.

John Darwent


24/10/13 – 07:50

I always think that this PRV design was the ugliest they ever came up with and one of the ugliest ever by anyone. It first graced Atlanteans then PD2s, Regent Vs and Tiger (PS1/PS2) rebuilds. Nevertheless, every time I see 525 I feel a great affection for it. Are the proportions better than on the East Kent Regent Vs? Does the livery suit it better? …..or am I just a big softie who remembers the old girl when she was brand new, doing the Herdings in Sheffield? […..and that is a fantastic photo, John.] I’d love to have a drive of her.

David Oldfield


26/10/13 – 07:22

I seem to remember seeing the rear open platform buses, at the bus stop on Olive Grove Road on the 101 Arbourthorne route. Service 28 & 43 also run from that stop. Rightly or wrongly I believed that they had some kind of air suspension that you could bounce up & down. Would this be so? My times catching the 43, they had Regent 5s with front operated doors, a handsome bus, but I never rode a Bridgemaster.

Andy Fisher


26/10/13 – 12:15

64-73 were, indeed, handsome buses. 1963 Regent V 2D2RA with Weymann Aurora bodywork. They were regular performers on the 28/43 group. [My Grandmother lived on the 28 route.] You are right about the air suspension on the Bridgemasters.

David Oldfield


29/10/13 – 07:38

973 FWJ

Here is 273 (originally 73) as mentioned by David above it is seen reversing at Lodge Moor Hospital on 20th January 1968.

Ian Wild


29/10/13 – 13:16

Thanks for that, Ian. I always thought that these were the best looking front loader AECs. 435-460 (1960s back loader Orions) were also handsome buses. A great pity that Sheffield never had front loader Roe bodies on their Regent Vs as the Park Royals were "unbalanced" and not at all attractive. Give me 64-73 any time.

David Oldfield


29/10/13 – 13:18

966 FWJ_lr

Here is an off side view of 66 (966 FWJ). What a day that was didn’t stop raining all day.

Peter


29/10/13 – 16:11

Totally agree, a handsome bus & the ones I remember. These were one of the first busses I remember that had the string pull bell, asking the passenger to stop the bus with one pull. There may have been other types, just that I did not ride them. I also think they had 2 door opening levers, one for the driver in the cab & one for the conductor on the bulkhead, or was there room for the driver to operate the bulkhead one. Of the Atlanteans of the era, I preferred the Park Royal bodywork.
There was a coach building firm on Penistone Road, on the right hand side just before the speedway track outbound. I think they made the 1965 c reg, on the Shiregreen route, may have been 47 & 48 routes. Their terminus was on Bridge Street. They had twin windows at the rear & also the upstairs emergency window & not a particularly good looking thing. Does anyone have any photos or information on the coach builder or pictures? I have pictures of them as part of streets scenes, but no information, as the subject matter was on how things looked at the time.

Andy Fisher


30/10/13 – 07:07

They were the Neepsend bodied PDR1/2 Atlanteans built between 1964 and 1966. There is still a misconception about Neepsend Coachworks. Cravens of Darnall came out of bus building after the 1950 Regent IIIs for Sheffield. At the suggestion of East Lancs own board of directors they came back in 1964 by buying all the shares of East Lancashire Coachbuilders from their three owner/directors. Cravens decided to create more capacity by building a new factory at Neepsend, Sheffield but to use East Lancs designs. Initially this was done by building up East Lancs parts but eventually everything was built in Sheffield for Neepsend bodies. This didn’t last for long and extra capacity was unnecessary – so Neepsend production had ceased by 1968. [Neepsend quality was apparently not up to Lancashire standards either.] East Lancs continued in Cravens ownership until Cravens themselves were bought by John Brown and the Trafalgar House. Eventually ownership passed to Drawlane – but Neepsend was long gone by this time.

David Oldfield


30/10/13 – 07:07

Penistone Road- That would be Neepsend (which is where they were) who suddenly appeared there in the 60’s- until ? They were part of East Lancs and possibly there was an incentive to open up there. The factory had see-through doors and bus skeletons would slowly appear for passers by and then be clad.

Joe


30/10/13 – 07:08

Andy, Neepsend Coachworks was on Penistone Road as you describe. Neepsend was a subsidiary of East Lancs Coachbuilders, Blackburn. They built two batches of bodies of 20 each on Leyland Atlantean PDR1/2 chassis for Sheffield in 1964/5/6. I thought they were good looking buses, better than the Park Royals as they had equal depth windows on each deck. Neepsend fitted new staircases to Sheffield Weymann bodied Regents 811 and 813 at a time when Queens Road was overwhelmed by such work on the batch of 40.

Ian Wild


30/10/13 – 11:52

Ian, Neepsend was not a subsidiary of East Lancs. This is one of the long standing misconceptions of bus industry history. The correct story is given above in great detail by David.

Roger Cox


31/10/13 – 07:11

David, thanks for the clarification over Neepsend ownership. Huddersfield had 16 CVG6LX delivered in 1966, half bodied by East Lancs and half by Neepsend. The bodies from each source were randomly distributed amongst the fleet numbers. I don’t recall either make of body being any worse than the other when it came to the first COF at 7 years

Ian Wild


31/10/13 – 08:16

That’s OK, Ian, there have been years of obfuscation over the ownership but, even as a kid in Sheffield when they were built, I was aware that they were "really" Cravens. East Lancs, being the higher profile name, people would, and did, jump to the wrong conclusion. To be strictly correct, both East Lancs AND Neepsend were independent subsidiaries of the holding company Cravens. [The details came from the East Lancs book from Venture (or was it TPC?).] It was common to mix and match East Lancs and Neepsend in an order – I think it happened at Southampton – which I think is bizarre, but I wasn’t running the company. Somehow, I’d missed out that Huddersfield had any – only took 57 years for me catch up!

David Oldfield


31/10/13 – 15:07

I think a great deal of the confusion comes from the fact that traditional East Lancs customers placed orders with that company and, because of either lack of space at the Blackburn factory or to give work to Neepsend, orders or part orders were dealt with by Neepsend. It would be interesting to know how much say the customer had in where the vehicle was bodied. I know that in the case of Stockport its 1967 order was split because the chassis, already delayed due to a large order book at Leyland, would have lingered for many months, or been bodied by another company, had half the order not been dealt with by Neepsend. The two batches were at least numbered one following from the other but it was widely understood over the ensuing years in service that the Sheffield product was inferior.

Phil Blinkhorn


02/11/13 – 17:57

I borrowed a book from the library on Firth Browns steel company. One of the separate companies, (from poor memory Firths) bought Cravens, as a way of placing their steel. It said they made railway carriages, trams & busses. It must have been early 1900s, because there was not a lot of bus activity, although expanding fast, but lots of the other forms of public transport. The next time I use the library, (I will have to be quick as Sheffield is closing numerous libraries, politics, do not get me started) I will get the book out again to research, unless you chaps know the answer.

Andy Fisher


07/11/13 – 15:25

Got the book now. John Brown of Firth Browns (world renown steel company here in Sheffield), bought Cravens in 1919. It was called at that time Cravens Train & Carriage Company or something similar. I am not sure if Sheffield had any busses in 1919, as trams ruled. He bought it when work was short in the steel industry. It enabled him to sell wheels, axles & springs to them.

Andy Fisher


07/11/13 – 17:55

Just returning to the point about East Lancs orders being fulfilled at Neepsend, it seems all the frames were supplied from East Lancs thus enhancing the widely held view of the relationship between the companies that had Neepsend as the junior partner.

Phil Blinkhorn


08/11/13 – 06:39

Phil. I would probably still call them the junior partner, they simply weren’t owned by, nor were they a subsidiary of, East Lancs. Both were owned by Cravens – but in terms of volume and life-span Neepsend was certainly the baby brother, dependent on its older sibling.

David Oldfield


08/11/13 – 06:39

There is of course an interesting thread on a Neepsend posting under the Bodybuilder section of the OBP site. Coincidentally, the final post is by one John Brown!

John Darwent


24/11/13 – 07:38

I have got another book which proves my presumption of no buses in 1920. It shows a Daimler, double decker, solid wheels, with Allen (Sheffield) bodywork, around 1912. Any more info from you gentlemen?

Andy Fisher


26/11/13 – 15:42

In my last posting I should have said my presumption of no buses pre 1920 was wrong. Sheffield Corporation took over the running of busses a few days after WW1 broke out, around the 7th of August 1914.
Did any other Corporations in other city’s do the same?

Andy Fisher


01/12/13 – 08:19

Lovely to see my favourite bus from my schoolboy days in the early Sixties is still alive and kicking! Driving down Wortley Road in Rotherham I could not believe my eyes when there she was parked waiting to pick up a wedding party! Who now owns her and where does she live? (the link at the top of his thread did not work when I tried it) I would love to visit her for old time sake and relive schoolboy memories.
I became acquainted with her and her six rear loading sisters on the 101,102 & 105 routes to Gleadless Townend/Herdings in 1962. I always wondered why the Bridgemasters were used on these routes, there being no overbridges on these routes. I never saw them on any other route but previous threads show they were.
The attraction about 525 to me was the lovely turbine like whining noise she made in top gear. this was not shared with her sisters, can anyone explain why. Does she still sound the same given she has been re-engined. You could always tell AECs because if the whining noise they made in lower gears but this top gear noise appeared to be unique to 525.
I had heard stories that she had been preserved but it was lovely to see her out and about again. What happened to her and her sisters after they left Sheffield and why was she the only one?

Andrew T

You are correct Andrew the link goes nowhere, I have deleted it. Thanks for that.


01/12/13 – 08:48

1925 WA is believed to be privately owned by a member of the Blackman family, and is sometimes used on wedding and other hires by the same family’s Halifax-based Yorkshire Heritage Buses.

John Stringer


02/12/13 – 13:32

John
Try the following website, www.yorkshireheritagebus.co.uk
Its the Yorkshire Heritage Bus Company based at Luddenden Foot between Sowerby Bridge and Hebden Bridge in the Calder Valley.
Their website shows 525 as part of their collection.
It appears to be minus its fleet number and Sheffield coat of arms on its sides.

Andrew T


1925 WA_lr Vehicle reminder shot for this posting


26/02/17 – 07:09

I was placed on Sheffield 525 as a trainee conductor for about a week on the Herding’s route during the long, bad winter ( ice, more than snow )of 1963 ; very glad of the doors! She was a splendid beast all round I thought. Some years later, when driving, I never got a chance on her, but once volunteered, after duty, to drive 519 back from the centre to East Bank garage just to have a go on a Bridgemaster.
Sheffield, in those days, had transfers in the cab reading ‘Do not rest your foot on the clutch pedal’, and the way out-dated ‘ You are driving a covered top bus’ ! Overtime was referred to as ‘Suet’ for some strange reason.
All in all, Sheffield had a superbly well maintained and turned-out fleet, with staff always correctly attired. I later moved to Manchester Transport at Hyde Road garage and was shocked by both the road staff’s bad attitude and their disregard for full uniform dress. The culture shock also included finding that conductors there were known as ‘Guards’, not forgetting new words like ‘Demic’, meaning something, e.g. a bus, having broken down " It’s a demic."
One ‘guard’ I worked with there knew of the incident years before when a Sheffield single deck bus had crashed into, and brought down, part of the Manchester Victoria Railway Station facade. He said, The only good thing to come from Sheffield is the road to Manchester’. The fact that it is also used in reverse seemed not to have registered!
Of interest is that the Neepsend coachwork’s building on Penistone Road was still being completed after production had begun there when a new wall collapsed crushing some part-built bus bodies. That must have been in 1962 ?
I have some interesting correspondence from the late GM, Geoffrey Hilditch, whom I once met, regarding solving issues with Manchester’s trolleybuses and also the many problems adapting the former London Feltham trams to the Leeds system, but I don’t understand this site yet, so not sure where it should go.

Mike C

 

Oldham Corporation – Leyland Titan PD2/4 – DBN 330 – 427

Bolton Corporation Leyland Titan PD2/4
Photo by ‘unknown’ if you took this photo please go to the copyright page.

Oldham Corporation
1949
Leyland Titan PD2/4
Leyland H30/26R

The PD2/4 was a special model it was a PD2/3 which was 26’ 0” long 8’ 0” wide, had an exposed radiator, synchromesh gearbox and this is where they differ the PD2/3 had vacuum brakes and the PD2/4 had air brakes. These buses were originally owned by Bolton Corporation but see below for Keith’s excellent comment.

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

A full list of Titan codes can be seen here.

———

This photo shows 2 of the batch of Bolton PD2/4’s after sale to Oldham Corporation in approx 1966. In the company of Oldham’s traditional fare of Roe bodied Titans, they are wearing the maroon and white livery
These purchases arose due to the Ministry of Transport putting prohibition notices on a substantial number of Oldham’s fleet due to maintenance problems. Further Leyland bodied PD2’s were also purchased from Halifax and Sheffield, to help out at the time.
Also seen to the extreme right of the photo, is one of the hired in Manchester PD2/3 ‘3200’ Leyland bodied ‘Salmon tins’, the original ‘Farringtons’.

Keith Jackson

———

A batch of PD2/4s found their way to Dublin Carrying the CIE version of the traditional Leyland body they were known not surprisingly as "Boltons" they lasted until the end of the 1960s. For many years CIEs also owned large numbers of enclosed radiator PD3s with in house bodywork which gives a vague idea of what 30 foot Leyland coachwork might have looked like. CIE retained the pre-war practice of a triple upper deck front window on theses buses which also had 6 lower deck windows. The last CIE Titans were rebuilds using parts of withdrawn Leyland Tiger PS types the bodywork was supplied CKD by Park Royal. Leicester had a batch of PD3s to a similar design in 1966 sadly in part it was based on the early rear engined design and was brutally ugly to my mind although others may differ.

Chris Hough

———

I lived in Oldham for many years and remember the problems the department had. Buses were sent to Halifax and other places to be repaired as well as by the Corporation. Some of them had to be withdrawn which necessitated the purchase if 16 vehicles, 8 from Sheffield, 4 from Bolton and 4 from Halifax. 427 PBU 927 was in fact a PD2/30. The ex Bolton vehicle pictured was numbered 472.

Eric Langley

 

Bradford Corporation – AEC Regent V – UKY 123 – 123

Bradford Corporation - AEC Regent V - UKY 123 - 123

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

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

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

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

———

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

Charles in Australia

———

Charles, greetings!

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

Kevin Hey

———

15/08/11 – 13:32

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

Kev

———

15/08/11 – 21:54

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

John Whitaker

———

15/08/11 – 22:02

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

Roger Cox

———

16/08/11 – 09:00

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

David Oldfield

———

17/08/11 – 07:21

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

John Whitaker

———

17/08/11 – 07:24

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

Roger Cox

———

17/08/11 – 10:29

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

Joe

———

17/08/11 – 13:22

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

John Whitaker

———

23/08/11 – 10:07

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

David Hudson

 

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

Old Bus Photos from Saturday 25th April 2009 to Thursday 4th January 2024