Keighley – West Yorkshire
1938
Bristol K5G
Roe L27/28R

Keighley – West Yorkshire was established as a branch of West Yorkshire Road Car in 1930, if we believe the entry on Wikipedia. CWX 671 was new to KWY in 1938 and is a Bristol K5G, but the bodywork is not what one might expect, being by Roe rather than by ECW, and is to L27/28R layout being rebodied in 1950, it originally did have an ECW L27/26R body. We see her in North Albert Street, on the corner of Kent Street, Fleetwood, arriving to take her place for Tram Sunday on 20 July 2003.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Pete Davies

28/08/15 – 06:56

It was actually 1932 when Keighley Corporation "gave way" into Keighley West Yorkshire Services Ltd. Also, after the April 1954 renumbering, these DGs never had the fleet number on the front dash as shown here. Before the April 1954 renumbering, they DID carry fleet numbers here.
These Roe bodies were of exceptional quality and were ordered because ECW were unable to carry out the total rebody requirement for the K class pre war buses. It was part of a wider "ex Tilling Group" exercise with United Automobile also being involved.
Wonderful old Bristol buses, and firm favourites of mine as we were blessed with a good allocation at Bradford depot!
Thanks Pete for a super memory jogger!

John Whitaker

29/08/15 – 06:53

Thanks, John. I wasn’t aware of her original body details, and I suspect that Peter added this bit from his sources.

Pete Davies

29/08/15 – 06:54

Exceptionally good-looking body, the more so because it’s a low-bridged one, yet don’t obviously look it.
The blind display itself is very informative, if not presented well in the photo!
Thank goodness the re-build also included the lower PV radiator, otherwise the overall effect would have been greatly diminished!.

Chris Hebbron

01/09/15 – 07:18

As John points out, ECW at the time were at full stretch, with full order books and a backlog developing, hence the rebodying of sixteen of West Yorkshire’s Bristol K5G ‘rehab’ chassis by Roe in 1950. The vehicles concerned were Keighley-West Yorkshire K362/366 (BWY994/998) dating from 1937, and K381-384 (CWX669-672) from 1938. Main fleet vehicles so treated were 385-394 (CWX673-682) from 1939. In the 1954 renumbering K362/366 became KDG16/20, K381-384 became KDG24-27, and 385-394 became DG28-35. When delivered, they were unusual in having the beading edging the cream bands picked out in red, rather than the usual black, and I believe all sixteen retained this feature throughout their WY/KWY lives. A lovely shot of KDG26, and to my eyes bright sunshine always seemed to show the Tilling red at its best. Wonderful.

Brendan Smith

01/09/15 – 07:19

KDG26 was part of a batch of 16 buses supplied with Roe low-bridge bodies in 1950. 10 were owned by the West Yorkshire Road Car Company Ltd and 6 including KDG26 were owned by Keighley-West Yorkshire Services Ltd. My records for 1953 show all the 10 WYRCC buses were allocated to the Bradford depot and this confirms the comments from John W. They were lovely solid buses to ride on and sometimes appeared on the Bradford to Ilkley 63 service which was my home route.
I do recall United Automobile having some similar Bristol K5G/Roe re-bodies but I am not sure of the number they had. Can anybody supply more information?

Richard Fieldhouse

01/09/15 – 07:20

More shots of KDG 26 taken at a Gardner Engine Rally held in June 2005 at Castlefield Canal Basin in Manchester. As well as buses the event included lorries, narrowboats and static engines. Anything was welcome as long it had a Gardner engine. It was a very successful event but I am not aware that it was ever repeated although I moved away from the north west shortly after and lost touch with events in that area.

Philip Halstead

02/09/15 – 06:58

The fascinating thing about these Roe rebodied K5Gs is the body profile, which seemed to have more in common with the pre-war ECW bodies carried originally, than the contemporary ECW design!
The chassis overhaul was very thorough, including of course, the update to PV2 radiator.
I doubt that the original bodies were worn out either, as 5 were transferred to 707-711, the W sanction K6As originally with Strachan utility bodies, later to be K5Gs. Probably the whole exercise was the result of a calculation to maximise the life expectancy, an aim which was well fulfilled!
To cover this K rebodying programme, the G type buses mainly remained in service until 1951/2, and what memories they bring back!

PS. !! Just to echo Brendan`s comment about Tilling red! It was a classic livery . If only the modern image was so adorned !!

John Whitaker

02/09/15 – 06:59

Thank you for your thoughts, gents.

Pete Davies

03/09/15 – 07:15

Coincidentally First Leeds have just repainted a Volvo/Gemini double decker into WYRCC Tilling red with single cream band livery (or an approximation of it).

John Stringer

04/09/15 – 07:09

Interesting thought, John. It has to be better than the multiple shades of grey "camouflage" paint job.

Pete Davies

04/09/15 – 07:12

With reference to the comment on West Yorkshire RCC by Richard Fieldhouse, United rebodied 4 prewar buses with Roe lowbridge bodies;
LUT1 EHN 617 Bristol K5G 47.088 Roe 3058 L27/28R
LUT2 EHN 618 Bristol K5G 47.089 Roe 3062 L27/28R
LUT3 EHN 620 Bristol K5G 47.091 Roe 3067 L27/28R
LUT4 EHN 621 Bristol K5G 47.092 Roe 3071 L27/28R
BGL 17-18,20-21, later BDO 17,18,20 & 21. New in 1939 with ECW 5684/5/7/8 L24/24R series 1 bodies, Rebodied in 1950 as LUT 1-4.
EHN 619 was not rebodied.
United also bought two new Bristol L5G single deck buses bodied by Roe in 1952;
BG 13 PHN 408 Bristol L5G 73.177R Roe ? B35F 1952
BG 14 PHN 409 Bristol L5G 73.178R Roe ? B35F 1952

Ron Mesure

04/09/15 – 07:14

It’s probably not a coincidence that First Leeds have painted a Volvo in Tilling Red since one of the current owners of CWX 671 is a very senior member of management at First Bus.
I’ve just been lent some Omnibus Society Magazines dating from 1963 and there was some comment about the fact that this bus had been entered in the London – Brighton run and some people felt it was too modern. I bet nobody would complain if it was entered now.

Nigel Turner

04/09/15 – 07:14

Having seen it at the Sheffield running day last weekend, I don’t think the first bus Gemini is the correct shade of red.

Don McKeown

05/09/15 – 07:11

Many thanks Ron M for the detailed information on the United Bristol K5Gs.

Richard Fieldhouse

05/09/15 – 07:12

It’s a while since a topic has come up on which I can comment. Here are three photographs which I took of Keighley West Yorkshire K5Gs in 1961 and 1963. I grew up in Keighley and used these K5Gs every day because they were the mainstay of the cross town routes.

In this photo of BWY 999 (KDG21) with BWY 994 (KDG16) you can see the difference in them as they are parked side by side in Keighley depot, the ECW body on the left and the Roe on the right.

In this photo showing the entrance to Keighley garage, the ECW bodied CWX 668 (KDG223) is next to the famous CWX 671 (KDG26). This shot was taken in October 1961 on a Sunday morning. The buses are watering up ready for going into service. It’s a pity that we can’t see the fleet number on KDG 26, and that is because it was one of the handful which retained stamped metal number plates. I am not sure of the dates when these plates were fitted to the buses, but they were not very legible and so were replaced by transfers.

The third photo shows KDG26 just 3 months before it was withdrawn and it looks smart even then. The photo was taken 30/9/62.

David Rhodes

06/09/15 – 07:07

oooH! Nice, David, and very atmospheric! Thank you for posting.

Pete Davies

06/09/15 – 07:08

Lovely photos David and thank you for posting. The aluminium fleetnumber plates you mention were introduced in summer 1957. They were applied externally to 52 vehicles, but by the end of the year the idea had been dropped – the plates being difficult to read at a distance, as David points out. West Yorkshire had had two plates produced for every vehicle in the fleet, and it was decided that they would be fitted internally to each vehicle instead, rather than scrapping them altogether. (One was fitted in the cab and the other near the entrance door).

Brendan Smith

06/09/15 – 07:09

Was Ramsden’s "Yorkshire’s Most Popular Beer"? Ramsden’s brewery occupied the site in Halifax currently occupied by the HBoS offices. Tetley’s brewery, of Leeds, purchased Ramsden’s in 1964, the brewery was demolished in 1968 . . . the then Halifax Building Society’s head office rising from the site in 1973. History suggests perhaps that Ramsden’s might have been over-stating their popularity! Advertisements on buses provide a window into other aspects of social history, which I’m starting to appreciate more as I accelerate past middle age.

Philip Rushworth

06/09/15 – 07:10

In response to Philip Halstead, the Gardner Engine Rally is a two-day weekend event which takes place every two years at different locations on the canal network. Unfortunately there are usually few if any PSVs present. Details at //gardnerengineforum.co.uk/Events.html

Peter Williamson

16/11/19 – 13:12

Re the Philip Rushworth comment 06/09/15, advertising claims like "Most popular" or "best" (as in the Nottingham Area "Home Ales are best" probably fell foul of the Trades Description Act, as they are always open to question.

Terry Walker

Maidstone & District Motor Services Ltd
1963
AEC Reliance 2U3RA
Willowbrook B53F

S 3 was among Maidstone & Districts first 36ft long vehicles being an AEC Reliance 2U3RA with a Willowbrook B53F body delivered in September 1963 as part of a batch of four, the body was to the early BET design with a curved rear dome and the four piece flat glass windscreen. The style of which was later fitted with first the curved windscreen and later still the peaked rear dome, overall I did like the BET design. The distinctive Maidstone & District livery always looked good on any type of body, with it’s cream ‘moustache’ below the windscreen and cream bands below and above the side windows, that above the windows having a subtle light green edging which combined with the dark green main colour looked pure class. This was one of very many fine liveries lost to NBC’s corporate dead hand (and head) now only seen at rallies etc. Todays colour schemes, I refuse to call them liveries, nearly all scream TAT, never CLASS, there that is my rant for today!!

Photograph and Copy contributed by Diesel Dave

24/08/15 – 06:04

I agree entirely Dave about modern colour schemes. I’ve just been to Blackpool for the first time in many years and the once smart fleets of cream and green buses and trams have been replaced by a mish-mash of black and yellow on the buses and purple and white on the new trams. To compound the felony most of the vehicles in both fleets are festooned in hideous adverts all over the vehicles including the windows. There were two of the Balloon trams running on the day of my visit on Heritage Tours in the original liveries and again compared to the modern stuff they looked sheer class.

Philip Halstead

25/08/15 – 06:19

PMT had two similar batches of buses, ten like this on AEC Reliance chassis, the other ten on early Leyland Leopards. They squeezed in 54 seats (I seem to remember an inward facing single behind the entrance door). Thinking back, they must have been a bit cramped for leg room or maybe people were smaller generally in those days. I agree entirely that the later BET design with curved front and rear windows was a true classic – even this version had a touch of class about it.

Ian Wild

26/08/15 – 05:50

NGT’s Percy Main depot ‘Tynemouth & District’ had two 49 seat D/P versions from 1962, FFT 812/3 – 262/3. They were on a Leyland Leopard PSU3/3R chassis. On Saturdays during the summer months, drivers on 0800 spare would often find themselves doubled up with a Northern driver doing a Dup to Blackpool. The bodies were stylish and well built, and the Leyland wasn’t a bad vehicle, however, I always found them to be a bit on the clumsy side, perhaps it was the low sitting position, or the lack of power steering.

Ronnie Hoye

26/08/15 – 05:50

One of these days someone with clout within the hierarchy of a significant operator, is going to (1) tell the PR/Marketing gurus to go and play with an alligator, (2) bring back a modest dignified livery, not invented by "Toys R We", and (3) restore windows (and former window apertures), to the purpose for which they were invented – looking through! He (or she) might even throw out stupid punning route descriptions, and substitute a series of proper route numbers that starts at 1 and carries on until all the routes have been covered – usually without getting anywhere near the 3-digit variety, let alone the 500, 600, 700 etc. series.

Stephen Ford

26/08/15 – 17:24

And so say all of us, Stephen.

David Wragg

26/08/15 – 17:24

Absolutely spot on, Stephen, and magnificently put.

Steve Crompton

27/08/15 – 06:36

I fully understand what Stephen F means. But let’s not forget that traditional London Transport used route numbers up to the 700s well before this site’s 1970 date. It seems that 1-199 were red bus routes, 200-299 were single-deck routes, 300-499 were green bus routes, 500-699 were trolleybus routes, and 700-799 were Green Line routes. At the trolleybus conversions, though, some were renumbered into the 200 series. Southdown also had an "area scheme" for their route numberings, such as the 40’s in the Portsmouth area, and the 50’s in Chichester and Bognor. If these overran, the equivalent 100 series were used. But there were no 200’s until after NBC took a hand, and 700’s were used for Limited Stop services. I remember BMMO and Crosville had letter prefixes to some services for local areas. So although there may be a case for using low numbers for bus routes, not all traditional bus companies followed that philosophy forty or fifty years ago!

Michael Hampton

27/08/15 – 10:45

Portsmouth Corporation befuddled many a holidayer by giving some routes a different route number for each direction – 18 one way and 19 on the return, for example. But, later, it stopped doing this, leaving two systems in place. As for route suffixes, it used them for the same route, but shortened sections. The highest I recall was the 143 which went up to 143F! Stagecoach West, my local operator, however, uses them for deviations on a basic route.

Chris Hebbron

27/08/15 – 17:06

Quite right Michael and Chris. Obviously big operators will in any case need to go into the hundreds. Midland Red was an obvious example (Lichfield-Stafford route 825 etc), and so were Western/Southern National. In my own local area the much-lamented Midland General used a letter followed by single digit number, which would in theory have given them up to 234 two-digit route descriptions – though, in fact, they never got beyond letter G! It seems strange that in the deregulated/privatised bus scene route numbers can be dictated by the dead hand of local government, because the public are not credited with enough intelligence to distinguish between a red number 25 and a blue number 25. Of course, it would help if all the buses operated by a particular operator were painted blue, or red, or whatever instead of random daubings of ginger-pink with yellow stripes (which is where I came in!…)

Stephen Ford

27/08/15 – 17:07

With the creation of T&W PTE, control of all services wholly, or where the majority of the route was within the boundaries of Tyne and Wear passed to the PTE. These services were operated by the former Corporation fleets of Newcastle, South Shields and Sunderland, as well as NGT group companies and United, and several independents who ran unnumbered routes. Having gained control, the PTE in their wisdom or otherwise decided that no two routes within their area would have the same number, and regrdless of company, all vehicles on those routes would share a common livery. Former Newcastle routes remained more or less unaltered, numbers where then anything from 100 to 800 groupings, depending on the area. I suppose it made sense to someone, but the public didn’t like it at all, especially in areas which had previously been served by several different companies, all of whom had a different livery.

Ronnie Hoye

27/08/15 – 17:08

Just a small point. The route pairings on Portsmouth Corporation were different. 18/19 was not a route pair although 17/18 and 19/20 were. (Personally I always found this system more convenient than the the usual bi-directional system.)
Incidentally, route numbers such as 143 covered journeys outside the city boundary and were from the Southdown series. Thankfully, there are now many books available covering the Portsmouth Corporation system for those looking for further information.

Andy Hemming

28/08/15 – 06:52

I should have known better than to mix up two trolleybus routes on which travelled frequently, Andy. Thanks for correcting me.
I should also have mentioned, originally, that the corporation’s ‘local’ bus routes were lettered, too. The 1xx series, logically, covered areas some miles outside Portsmouth (Leigh Park, for example) and into Soouthdown territory, to which their buses could go, as they were building developments created especially for ex-Portsmouth residents displaced by wartime bombing.

Chris Hebbron

28/08/15 – 06:54

Philip, I have just been to Blackpool and I noticed some slightly smarter newer buses which are Grey with Lemon though of course their dark tinted windows tend to look blackish, much nicer than the Black and Yellow, but horror of horrors they have some of the heritage trams in that Purple, I hadn’t noticed them on previous visits. Bolton 66 was out and running on the limited stop heritage rides today.

John Lomas

28/08/15 – 06:54

The difference between a red 25 and a blue 25? Well, In the 1950’s/60’s, Southdown managed to run two routes designated 38! Fortunately they were about 50 miles apart, as one was in Brighton, the other in Portsmouth, so never the twain met. I haven’t checked this, but I think the Brighton one was eventually run by BH&D after the BATS scheme came into operation. Did any other of the larger companies have a pair of routes within their territory with the same number, but separated by a fair distance?

Michael Hampton

29/08/15 – 06:51

Manchester, up until the end of the trams, had trams, trolleybuses and buses, all with the same route number running through the city centre, all serving different destinations.

Phil Blinkhorn

01/09/15 – 07:37

You also had the phenomenon of a joint service on which each operator used a different number, e.g. Huddersfield – Bradford, where for a number of years Hebble used 12, Huddersfield JOC 38 and Bradford 64, or Gloucester – Hereford, where Bristol used 55 and Red & White 38.

Geoff Kerr

29/09/18 – 06:57

Southdown also had two routes numbered 15 when it became involved in Brighton area Transport services. It took over the Brighton service 15 from Brighton Hove and District when it was co-ordinated with the 13 route (which was already worked by Southdown). The other Southdown service 15 was Eastbourne – Hastings via Polegate, worked jointly with Maidstone & District Motor Services.

Andrew Newland

Hutchings and Cornelius
Copyright Unknown

Demonstrator
1949
Jensen JLP1
Sparshatt B40F

In December 1949 the first prototype of the Jensen JLP1 passenger chassis visited the Manchester area while on an extensive demonstration tour. The vehicle was unregistered and its (presumed!) the trade plate had been removed for this publicity shot and replaced with the false registration mark 1 AEA – in real life this wasn’t issued until 1960. It was distributed by North-West area Jensen dealership J R Evans of Cross Street, Manchester 2. Despite a fondness for Jensens (and other lost causes) I’ve never seen a photograph of the prototype during its demonstration tour before. Are there any others?
The JLP1 was an extended (27ft 6in) version of the JP1 personnel carrier offered to industrial and social welfare users. Less than 50 of the JP1 were sold and only five of the longer PSV version. All had aluminium chassis frames to reduce weight to slightly less than 5 tons – not bad for a 40 seat vehicle but aluminium was an expensive material which resulted in a price-tag 25% higher than that of a comparable Sentinel STC4.
The bus version was offered as a semi-integral, bodied by Sparshatt as seen in this view. The only order came from Hutchings & Cornelius of South Petherton for two vehicles, the first prototype (as seen here) which became MYA 391 in July 1950, and a second vehicle (which had already been built as a "speculative" sale) as MYA 816 in August.
The coach version was slightly more successful, with three being produced in 1949/50 for small operators in London (with a Strachans body), the Isle of Wight (with a Reading body), and County Durham (with ACB bodywork). Jensen soon gave up on goods vehicles and PSVs to concentrate on its sports cars.

(With thanks to Mike Shaw and George Turnbull of GMTS for finding the shot and allowing me to borrow it for scanning)

Photograph and Copy contributed by Neville Mercer

20/08/15 – 05:57

Thanks for posting, Neville. Another ‘blast from the past’ as they used to say on a radio station of the mid to late 1960’s. I understand that it’s still with us (the radio station, I mean, not this gem) At first glance, it looks rather Beadle or MCW Olympic in origins, so it’s interesting that the price comparison is with a Sentinel!

Pete Davies

20/08/15 – 05:58

A very interesting photograph indeed Neville, and thank you very much for posting, and thanks also to Mike Shaw and George Turnbull for granting permission to do so. I must admit to not knowing a great deal about JNSN, apart from it being the commercial vehicle arm of Jensen Motors of West Bromwich at one time, and I believe the bus/coach model utilised a combination of Perkins engine and David Brown gearbox. The Sparshatt body looks quite neat, but there does not appear to be a door fitted at the unusually-shaped entrance, which must have made for a draughty ride. (That would have confined any cigarette smoke well and truly to the rear of the vehicle!). Use of aluminium for the chassis/underframe obviously led to the impressive unladen weight, and is reminiscent of Bristol’s two LS prototype buses, which also had aluminium alloy underframes. Subsequent LS production models had steel underframes however – steel lending itself better to welding techniques and also being less expensive than aluminium.

Brendan Smith

20/08/15 – 10:32

Interesting post – JNSN certainly lived a shadowy life. Much was against the success of this vehicle. As usual, conservatism in the industry and 1950 was a bit late, post-war, for the benefit of distressed purchases. I can’t make out the entrance at all. There seems to be a bulkhead behind the driver, but only a half-height partition in front of the front nearside passenger seat, making for an even draughtier journey!
Interesting that Sparshatts and Reading both get a mention above. They were physically next door neighbours at Hilsea, Portsmouth. Reading eventually sold out to Sparshatts, who carried on with Reading’s order book, but did not take over their building, which slowly decayed over the years.

Chris Hebbron

24/08/15 – 06:01

I always enjoyed the occasional glimpse of a Jensen lorry on the road but never saw a bus. Without those silly black shapes over the wheelarches this well-proportioned example would look very good: neat and businesslike. I’m surprised they didn’t manage to get the weight below 5 tons. Wonder what the fuel mileage was like? With the Perkins P6, perhaps not all that wonderful. In the yard outside the 1964(?) Commercial Motor Show in London there was a Dennis Pax demonstrator bus giving rides. It had much in common with the Jensen: entrance ahead of front axle, light weight, Perkins P6; but a Dennis gearbox instead of the Jensen’s David Brown. Good try…

Ian T

24/08/15 – 09:30

Ian T – I can remember going up the Great Orme once on a Dennis Pax bus, rather basic, but built for a challenging job. It didn’t have an entrance forward of the front wheels, however.

Chris Hebbron

26/08/2015 17:22:16

Jensen has popped up on this site before, but not in a form to be indexed. There was a question about them which provides a bit more info from David Oldfield and Peter Tulloch and some scratchbuilt models by Iain Simms. I am always intrigued by the radiator grille which seems the opposite of the discreet identities we are generally used to, and I wonder if it was OTT for some operators- RR might have been OK. I dimly remember seeing it on pantechnicons too?

Joe

23/11/15 – 06:31

My father worked for Martins the Cleaners based at Apperley Bridge Bradford. I remember they had a few Jenson pantechnicons and these were followed by Commer Avengers and Ford R226.

Geoff S

23/11/15 – 14:46

With Regard to Ian T’s comment, we at Glasgow Vintage Vehicle Trust recently were donated a number of mid 1960s editions of Passenger Transport courtesy Model Bus Federation Scotland. In one of them Alan Townsin road tests a Dennis Bus for rural services. It was a Dennis bodied Dennis Pax IIA PSV model and had as you say a Dennis gearbox but the engine was a Perkins 6:308 the direct injection development of the P6.
It was photographed in Dennisville, Guildford carrying registration HPC 153C but that does not show on BLotW which has a list of all Pax IIA buses, the majority wheelchair accessible school buses for London Authorities.
AIUI the surviving Llandudno bus has a 6:354 and a David Brown Gearbox.

Apologies. I appreciate BLotW is an evolving site. HPC 153C does now appear if you search for it. but not in the Pax IIA list. NO chassis number is listed so it might be the one sold to Merseyside Fire Brigade on the other list.

Stephen Allcroft

28/10/17 – 17:11

I remember travelling on the two H&C JNSN vehicles many times, particularly to work in Taunton. In the winter they were rostered on the route via Isle Brewers because they were very good at passing through the floods in Isle Brewers and over the River Isle to Fivehead. I wonder if they were bought especially for their capacity to pass through deep water.
I recall one occasion when the driver stopped at the top of Fivehead hill, came round and changed into wellington boots and told us to take our luggage up off the floor. He set off through the flood which at is deepest was running through the sunken footwell to a depth of several inches.
There was a door to the passenger compartment which ran on rails behind the drivers compartment. When the buses were converted for one man operation an operating lever was fitted behind the drivers seat, which possibly caused injured backs amongst the drivers. At the same time the drivers seat was boxed in and a ticket machine and cash tray fitted.
By the mid 60s the aluminium body was becoming sloppy around the rivet holes and swayed from side to side on corners.
By the way Len Cornelius, son of the founder, taught my father and my self to drive and we both took and passed our test on the same day in 1965.

Richard Burton

16/09/18 – 07:20

A pity this almost unique vehicle is listed as a demonstrator. To list it by it’s operator would give Hutchings and Cornelius it’s only apparent entry on this excellent website

Richard Burton

16/09/18 – 07:20

Couldn’t agree more it is now listed to Hutchings and Cornelius as well.

Peter