Copyright Stephen Howarth

Jersey Motor Transport
1955
Leyland Titan PD2/22
Metro Cammell H31/26R

When Leyland Motors finished building bus bodies, the Jersey Motor Transport Company went to M.C.W. for their next double deck bodies. Two were bought in 1955, the other being J 16521, fleet number 20. They were the first Double Decker’s in the fleet with ‘Tin Fronts’ and Lightweight bodies. It was reported that the seats were hard, and the bodywork rattled. But the Drivers liked them because they were nippy vehicles.
They served in the fleet for 16 years, being withdrawn in 1971, when Bob Lewis, from Trimdon Motor Services bought the J.M.T., and brought in more saloons, and gradually replaced Double Decker’s and Conductors. He also repainted the fleet in to a Blue livery getting rid of the Green/Cream used for many years. This was so vehicles could be moved between Trimdon and St Helier without repaint. J 16522 No 21 is seen here at the Corbiere Terminus of Route 12.  Incidentally both vehicles 20 and 21 were actually scrapped on the island of Jersey. 
In this photograph the Driver has changed the blind to St Helier, but the Conductor has yet to change the platform blind from Corbiere.
The advert is for Jersey’s Famous Beer ‘MARY ANN’ which has been Jersey’s local brew for over the last 100 years. Most of JMT buses through out the years carried an advert for ‘MARY ANN’ in one form or another. The building in the back ground is the old Corbiere Terminus Station (it is now a private residence) of the Jersey Railways & Tramways Limited, this company taking over the assets of the Jersey Railway Company Limited on 1st February 1896. The extension from St Aubin’s (the original terminus) to Corbiere being opened in 1899. The whole railway shut, after a fire broke out in St Aubin’s Station in the early hours of 18th October 1936, when the station buildings were badly damaged and 16 of the best carriages were destroyed.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Stephen Howarth

A full list of Titan codes can be seen here.

———

14/02/12 – 07:51

This is another example of the much maligned Orion design looking quite attractive. This is helped by the layout of the livery, a style which suited the Orion very well. The ones at Brighton which had the same livery layout but red instead of green always looked attractive to me.
I always thought JMT was owned by the Jersey Government and had no idea it was bought by Trimdon Motor Services. That seems a strange commitment for a relatively small North East based independent. My former employers did some construction work in Jersey (nothing to do with transport) and found it a difficult place to operate. Shall we just say there were a lot of ‘vested interests’!

Philip Halstead

———

14/02/12 – 07:53

The Orion body was not the most attractive of designs and adding it to the tin front ‘Midland Red’ Leyland chassis did it no favours. Mix that with a 7’6" wide chassis as in the case of JMT 21 and the result is positively undesirable, in my opinion. It looks narrow and top heavy, and that is from a side view!
Having said that the Orion body could be made to look quite reasonable if painted in a smart livery with lining out, for example, Halifax, Bradford or West Bromwich.
Equally, the BMMO style tin front Titan could be made to look quite attractive if it was fitted with a good looking body and smart livery, such as the Roe bodied Sheffield PD3’s shown in the previous posting. Perhaps a smart livery and body style draws the eye away from the plain BMMO style Leyland front. Who knows, beauty is in the eye of the beholder!

Eric

———

14/02/12 – 08:50

Know what you mean, Eric. I generally prefer exposed radiator PD3s – especially the Stockport’s. Sheffield’s tin fronts, however, do work.
As Charles Roe’s biggest fan, how is this for a variation on a theme (of livery improving an Orion)? Of all the many variations on offer, I found the worst looking one to be the front entrance PD3 – with several Doncaster operators, including the Corporation. Over the Pennines in Oldham (HQ of the Roe appreciation society?) their last traditional buses were front engined Roe/PD3s – which looked superb in their smart livery. So it can work both ways!

David Oldfield

———

14/02/12 – 11:27

Newcastle Transport had some very similar ‘tin front’ Orion PD2’s but Tyneside’s were the exposed radiator type, whilst the rest of the Northern groups Orions were Guy Arab’s They were all what could be best described as ‘cheap and chatty’ on the upper deck, with single skins and exposed frame’s, hence all the knocks bangs rattles and squeaks, but to be fair to the later PD3’s, although apart from being longer they looked very much the same from the outside, they were an entirely different beast inside, with double skins and sound proofing.

Ronnie Hoye

———

14/02/12 – 16:29

I should have mentioned in my original description that there is a Society devoted to the Channel Islands Bus scene.
This is the Channel Islands Bus Society.
Details can be obtained (please enclose a SAE), from
Dr Jim Young, 67 Boston Avenue, Southend on Sea, Essex, SS2 6JH.
Newsletters are published in Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter. Subscriptions are £14 per year for UK and CI residents or £17 for other EU countries.

Stephen Howarth

———

14/02/12 – 16:31

The demise of the Leyland bus-body building activities 1954 was a great loss to the bus industry. The alternatives such as the MCW Orion body must have been a great disappointment yet this style of body started a trend by other body builders such as Park Royal and Roe who attempted to copy and go lightweight.
However a good livery such as on the JMT Leyland does improve matters a little but inside comforts and appearances such as front dome of rough fibre-glass make me wonder how Weymann and MCCW could change from their previous classical and quality bodywork finishes.
My first view of a MCW Orion body was Yorkshire Woollen Leyland PD1 in overall red livery in Leeds in 1955, which was a shock to my senses.
Fortunately some operators such as Liverpool CT demanded a better specification and MCW gradually changed and improved their designs in the sixties.

Richard Fieldhouse

———

10/04/12 – 06:24

I wasn’t keen on the Leyland tin front either and another Orion/Tin front combination which looked awful was a batch of PD2s delivered to Bolton which had the full front design, also used by Blackpool.

David Pomfret

———

11/04/12 – 06:05

Regarding the comment by Mr Fieldhouse regarding the Yorkshire Woollen bus he saw just to set the record straight this was not a PD1 these buses were rebodied Leyland PS1s. Their Orion bodies were actually lighter than their original Brush single deck bodies. They were always called Cans or Salmon Cans by us enthusiasts. My wife used to conduct on them and she always said they were very cold in winter possibly because they had no internal lining panels to keep the weight down.

Philip Carlton

———

11/04/12 – 15:35

Edinburgh bought many MCW bodied PD2s with tin fronts for tram replacement. This lead a councillor to comment on them by calling them Monstrous masses of shivering tin the only modern thing about them is their approximation of rock and roll when moving! Edinburgh liked the Leyland tin front so much they retro fitted it to some exposed radiator PD2s and also some rebuilt Guys. They also continued to fit it to new deliveries until 1966 long after the St Helens version superceded the original. In the end they built their own fibre glass version in house.

Chris Hough

———

22/04/12 – 16:13

Nice to see a picture of JMT 21 taken when new at the Corbiere terminus Route 12. I have seen a pre-delivery shot of the sister J16521 but not 21 new.
Does the copyright owner have any other pictures of any other vehicle in Jersey at this time? I have a good collection of Jersey photos both pre and post war, but I am always looking to add to my collection.

John Luce

Copyright David Butterworth

Oldham Corporation
1958
Leyland Titan PD2/30
Roe H35/28R

I Would like to contribute the above photo of Oldham Corporation 451 taken after its first repaint – so minus the waistrail white stripe and the intricate lining out (abandoned when these vehicles were repainted in 1965). The interior paintwork was changed also from the original hammered metal finish to a plain cream finish on the majority of the buses.
The first example of this batch to receive a repaint was 439, in January 1965, after substantial repairs following a serious front end collision the previous summer, when it had ploughed into a terraced house on Manchester Road whilst operating on route 98. The Oldham Chronicle carried a story with a photo of 439 embedded in the house with its crumpled bodywork surrounded a pile of bricks. No one was injured apparently.
I well remember riding on it from school to home one evening in January 1965 on the B (later 21) route.

Photograph and Copy contributed by David Butterworth

A full list of Titan codes can be seen here.

———

23/01/12 – 07:52

These buses were a great favourite of mine. The Roe bodies were very well appointed and in the original livery with the red lining out they looked very classy. I rode on them frequently on the 9 route from Rochdale travelling to Watersheddings to watch the rugby. They were extremely comfortable and smooth riding. Oldham had a good team in those days and invariably beat Rochdale Hornets in the local derbies.
I agree the buses lost a bit of their class in the simplified livery, initially retaining the original maroon to be replaced later by the Pommard and Cream livery which Oldham adopted up to absorption into SELNEC. I understand there were problems with the maroon fading which led to the ultimate change to the purpley red shade of Pommard. Like most of the Manchester area half-cabs they didn’t look too good in the SELNEC orange and white.
They had a fair turn of speed and were much faster than Rochdale’s Gardner engined Regent V’s which often operated the Rochdale share of the 9 route which was jointly operated by Ashton, Oldham and Rochdale Corporations.
They also worked on the 24/90 Limited Stop service between Rochdale and Manchester where they could show their paces to good effect, particularly on the 90 which ran non-stop between Royton and Manchester.
The Roe bodied examples of Oldham’s large fleet of PD2’s always seemed to be a cut above the Northern Counties and Crossley bodied examples and there was definitely no contest with the Metro-Cammell Orions which were positively spartan by comparison.
The photo also shows us that Oldham was among the small band of operators that used route letters for some of their services. To set the hare running I can bring to mind others as Middlesbrough, Portsmouth and Exeter. I am sure someone will soon add some more!

Philip Halstead

———

23/01/12 – 10:15

Yorkshire Woollen District used route letters on their Dewsbury area tram replacement services.

John Stringer

———

24/01/12 – 05:57

Lettered bus routes sometimes came about when the bus routes came along in conjunction with the trams. The trams had the numbers, so the buses got the letters.
I’m intrigued about a reverse situation with Cheltenham, which always had route numbers, tram and bus, but, at some point, in recent years, changed over to letters.
Bizarre!

Chris Hebbron

———

24/01/12 – 15:45

Mexborough and Swinton used route letters until the trolleybuses were phased out in March, 1961, at which time they switched over to numbers.
Rotherham Corporation ran jointly on the trolleybus routes to Mexborough and Conisborough, the Rotherham saloons showing either 8 or 9, and the Mexboro’ Sunbeams ‘A’ or ‘B’ respectively, until the changeover.

Dave Careless

———

24/01/12 – 15:46

I seem to remember (from 1956) that Great Yarmouth had a mix of lettered and numbered routes. I think all the lettered ones went to Gorlestone, but not all Gorlestone services were lettered ones. I have the distinct memory that route 3 started from Newtown on the northern edge of Yarmouth, and terminated at "Gorlestone (Green Ace)" – presumably a hostelry!

Stephen Ford

———

25/01/12 – 13:14

Middlesbrough Corporation also used route letters. Teesside Municipal Transport carried on this tradition for a number of years.

Stephen Bloomfield

———

20/02/12 – 13:38

Cheltenham switched to letters in the late 1980s when the Gloucester and Swindon operation was separated from Bristol. Both Gloucester and Cheltenham started minibus operations under the Metro name, and to avoid confusion Gloucester went for numbered routes and Cheltenham went for lettered. The one Cheltenham town route that kept a number for a while longer was the Prestbury-town-Coronation Square route 2 (which had full sized buses), but that eventually became the A.

James McLaren

———

20/02/12 – 17:12

Thx, James, for the answer to my question. A strange decision, really, since that neither towns’ local services ever strayed beyond their boundaries before or after minibuses came along. Still, it makes for variety. Does anyone know of any other bus companies currently using lettered routes?

Chris Hebbron

———

21/02/12 – 07:15

The Hebden Bridge local services supported by Metro and operated by Tyrer Tours use letters A – E. These were introduced in 2003 when First commenced operating the revised services with Optare Solos and Aleros supplied by Metro.

Ian Wild

———

21/02/12 – 07:18

Stagecoach Devon’s Exeter city services are still designated by letters, and it seems that to a large extent they are the initial letters of the suburbs to which they run – e.g. P – Pennsylvania; A – Alphington.

Stephen Ford

———

12/01/13 – 16:15

Try Preston corporation buses. Fp was Farringdon Park and there would have been others.

Andrew

Copyright Stephen Howarth

Oldham Corporation
1958
Leyland Titan PD2/30
Roe H37/28R

I have been having a rummage through a few pictures and came across this one. Whilst it is not the best photograph in the world, I am sure it is of historical interest.
The vehicle on the right is one of Oldham Corporations 1958 ‘Tin front’ Titans fleet number 443, it was transferred to SELNEC on November 1969, and re-numbered 5343 in that fleet. In this photograph it is still in the Crimson and White lined out livery, which Oldham used until 1966, when replaced with Pommard and Devon Cream. It is photographed in Lever Street Manchester, (destination blinds showed Stephenson Square), operating the service 13 to Uppermill via Oldham and Scouthead. This service was a Limited Stop service operated jointly with Manchester Corporation Transport.
What is interesting with the photograph is that I caught a Maynes of Manchester AEC Regent operating on their service between Droylsden and Manchester Dale Street. Unfortunately the speed of the bus has made the registration unreadable, and there is no record on the rear of the photograph. But it looks like one of their AEC Regent V, with Park Royal H41/32R bodies.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Stephen Howarth

A full list of Titan codes can be seen here.

———

06/11/11 – 12:25

Aah, my favourite vehicle from my favourite batch of Oldham’s buses. These PD2s were superb inside and out, but sadly got more and more disfigured over the years with moquette seats replaced by vinyl ones and the original elaborately lined-out livery changing first to an unlined version, then pommard and cream and finally, for some, SELNEC’s orange and white.
443 escaped some of these treatments. As the batch were being worked through for re-certification when twelve years old the policy was changed so the earlier examples received orange and a five year ticket. 443 was done later and only got three years in total. To cut down on costs it wasn’t fully repainted but tidied up in pommard. This work was done at Stockport and as a consequence the original interior survived largely intact.
It survived a bit longer as it was used as a skid pan bus at Hyde Road for a while after withdrawal. I have a photo of it there carrying the grille (and therefore registration) off 442 – very confusing!
The Mayne’s bus will be on the Audenshaw to Dale Street service – the Droylsden service was numbered 46 and more significantly, ran to Stevenson Square, although both traversed this section of Lever Street. It can be identified as 6974 ND, a 1961 AEC Regent V 2D3RA with Park Royal H41/32R body of a particularly ugly design.
The photograph will have been taken just before quarter past the even hour, as that is when Oldham’s bus on the 13 left, the other bus after the odd hour being a Manchester one. North Western worked the opposite way round to Uppermill via Lees on the 14, then returning via Scouthead to Manchester as a 13.

David Beilby

———

06/11/11 – 17:03

A close colleague of the (A) Mayne’s bus is already on this site at this link. Doesn’t it look like a Bridgemaster – & the height is not all perspective, has it – no dome?

Joe

———

07/11/11 – 07:39

It’s exactly the same as the second Bridgemaster body – except, obviously, for the height. If you mean does it have a flat roof profile, the answer is yes.

David Oldfield

———

07/11/11 – 07:40

As David B said, the Park Royal bodies on that batch of Maynes Regent Vs were particularly ugly, and they were the last ones bought before Maynes switched to East Lancs. As an enthusiast I have always liked to think there is a connection between those two facts, but I have no evidence for this.

Peter Williamson

———

07/11/11 – 12:11

Well the East Lancs bodies were a distinct improvement aesthetically – but were they East Lancs or Neepsend?

David Oldfield

———

08/11/11 – 06:40

I agree with David Beilby, these Oldham PD2’s always exuded an air of quality with their comfortable interiors and lined out livery. I rode on them regularly on the 9 (Rochdale-Oldham-Ashton) and 24/90 (Rochdale- Manchester) routes. On the 90 Limited Stop service which ran non-stop from Royton into Manchester they could turn in a fair pace along Broadway if they got the many sets of traffic lights in their favour.
Regarding the ugly Park Royal bodies on the Maynes AEC, I did once read somewhere that Southampton turned away from Park Royal and moved to East Lancs after being very unimpressed with the abominations Park Royal inflicted on them on both Leyland PD2 and AEC Regent V chassis using the Bridgemaster derived design. I don’t know if this was true or even if operators cared about the appearance of their buses from a design point of view. Perhaps some did.

Philip Halstead

———

08/11/11 – 10:45

Well Philip, they certainly forsook the same PRV abominations for East Lancs/Neepsend – whatever the reason. [Swindon, Yorkshire Traction and Yorkshire Wooken also had versions – the latter two by Roe – not to mention the first ACV Atlanteans, again built by Roe.]

David Oldfield

———

10/11/11 – 07:37

Similar very ugly Park Royal bodies were bought on a batch of PD2s by Southampton. These seemed incredibly top heavy due to their short length.

Chris Hough

———

10/11/11 – 07:38

I am sure that the Southampton story is true. Possibly not all, but certainly many municipal General Managers had definite ideas about the standards of vehicle design and appearance. Inevitably, the name of Geoff Hilditch springs to mind, but he was by no means alone in holding such views, and the municipal GMs held regular get togethers at which opinions were frankly exchanged. I have some Southampton pictures that I will submit in due course.

Roger Cox

———

10/11/11 – 07:39

To answer David’s question, Maynes had two Regent Vs bodied by East Lancs in 1964 and three by Neepsend in 1965.

Peter Williamson

———

10/11/11 – 17:02

Thanks, Peter

David Oldfield

———

20/12/11 – 06:40

I too agree with David Beilby’s comments about the Leyland/Roe Titans 429-452. I remember riding on them to and from college/Oldham Music Centre, on the 9 (409) bus route (437,443 and 449) in the mid 1960’s when they still carried their original livery. Around 1964/5 I recollect seeing a few examples on our route (B, Fitton Hill-Middleton Junction), and off their usual routes. It was the elaborate lined livery which caught my eye, as the usual buses on this route were unlined by that time or indeed like Leylands 388-407 and 413-418 (NBU 488-507 and NBU 513-518), never had been. I used to take notes of the bus numbers over a period of twelve months in 1964/5. I rode on 432,433,438,446,447,448,451 and 452 – to and from school in Fitton Hill. Since they were used primarily on the trunk routes I couldn’t understand why; even so, with their increased seating capacity of 65 they were a welcome sight. By this time they were looking tired (435,440 and 452 particularly so) and before long a simplified livery was applied-what a disappointment!
By mid July 1966 they were introduced to our route in number, having been cascaded from the trunk routes when the Leyland Atlantean invasion gained ground.

D. Butterworth