Copyright J A Pitts

Copyright J Copland

Bradford Corporation Transport            Bradford Corporation Transport
1934                                                       1935
AEC 661T                                                AEC 661T
English Electric H32/26R                      NCB H30/26R (rebuilt 1949)  

This photo of Bradford “Regen” 607 was taken in 1944 outside Duckworth Lane depot and shows this trolleybus in dark blue with war time white paint and headlamp masks. The overhead wiring has flash guards fitted on the points as a blackout precaution. Also present are two Bradford motor buses in khaki livery which did not apply to any of the trolleybuses in the fleet. The bus on the left is a 1939 Daimler COG6/English Electric Company and the bus on the right is a 1936 Daimler COG6/Weymann. Behind 607 there is a parked 1935 “Regen” in the “new blue” livery introduced by Bradford in 1942. “New blue” was the description used by the Bradford engineering staff during the early years of this light blue and cream livery which remained the standard in Bradford up to April 1972 when WYPTE took over all the Corporation fleets in West Yorkshire.
From my research I have found that 607 had a serious front accident in late December 1935 and was rebuilt with a full width cab and seating reduced to 58. The control contactors and shunt resistors were relocated from the chassis side to the cab. All the “Regens” except 632 were originally built with a half cab and 60 seats but all were rebuilt to full cabs as 607 in 1937/38 and the seating reduced to 58.
Perversely due to the cramped half cabs, the main circuit breakers were located on the roof trolley gantry and operated by levers in the drivers‘ cab connected by Boden cables with steel wires. Overtime these steel wires extended and often broke rendering the trolleybus inert and an operational disaster. It is surprising that Bradford did not fit cab located circuit breakers at the time when the full bulkheads were fitted. This work however did start in 1942 for some “Regens” but was not done to 607 where the large boxes are the circuit breakers which can be seen on the roof. 607 was withdrawn for re-bodying in June 1945 and returned to service with a Northern Coachbuilders Mark 1 56 seat body in September 1946.

The photo of 620 now with a 1949 Northern Coachbuilders Mark 2 56 seat body shows it accelerating noisily up Godwin Street in Bradford City Centre in October 1952. In the background is a Brush bodied “Regen” on the Allerton service to the City Centre terminus. 620 still wears the glorious Tattam livery with cream bands, black beading and yellow lining. It soon lost its cream bands, was moved from Duckworth Lane depot to Thornbury in 1954 and then could be seen elsewhere in the City, Sadly 620 was withdrawn from service prematurely in April 1958 due to a serious accident when it skidded and overturned on the Clayton route. Other “Regens” with NCB bodies lasted until November 1962 having given 28 years service, albeit with a troubled number of early years until re-bodied in the forties.
Happy days, these unique “Regens” with their wailing and humming sound will always remain etched in my mind.

Photographs and Copy contributed by Richard Fieldhouse

Bus tickets issued by this operator can be viewed here.

01/02/11 – 18:41

What a treat to see the 2 "Regen" Bradford trolleybuses, and thanks to Richard for the technical data concerning the circuit breakers and full cab rebuilding.
It all goes to emphasise the points I made about the severe problems with these early EEC metal bodies, mentioned in my own "Regen" post.
In their rebodied form, I spent hours travelling in them, and, like Richard, will never forget their distinctive wailing sound. Also of interest is the rear of the EEC bodied COG6. My recent article on English Electric Bus Bodies mentions the 1937 re-design, and the well rounded rear dome of this bus illustrates this very well. There were very few takers for this design. I can only think of TD5s at Barrow, and lowbridge "Regents" at Southend. Anyone know of any more? The previous design had a very upright dome as can be seen on the "new blue" AAK "Regen" to the left of 607.
My home was about a mile and a Half from Duckworth Lane depot, shown here, and I was about five when the photo was taken!

John Whitaker

01/02/11 – 18:47

Fascinating submission. This is not the first one which mentions noisy trolleybuses, yet I cannot ever recall hearing more than the odd whine and swish from them, and I must have visited and travelled on them in some 10 towns which operated them. Any reason for the noise?.
I must confess that noise would have given individuality to an otherwise usually rather bland form of travel.
Even so, I was always impressed by their 0-60 acceleration and indeed used to ride on the last trolleybus from Croydon to Mitcham which went flat out across the common (about 60) silently, bar the singing of the poles/wires and the vibration from a far from new class of trolleys. On reflection, I wonder if I saw the girlfriend, who gave me this routine, for longer than I might, simply for the trolleybus experience!!

Chris Hebbron

02/02/11 – 06:14

Chris, I think the noise was generated by the double reduction gears in the rear axle differential that were straight cut teeth. Similar to tram motor gearing so a similar noise. I am pleased you found these Regens pictures interesting.

Richard Fieldhouse

05/02/11 – 16:07

Glasgow must have had very quiet trolleybuses. My dad can remember them being almost silent to pedestrians and they became known as ‘the silent death’. I hadn’t ever heard this mentioned anywhere else but reading Ken Houstin’s excellent ‘The Corporation Bus’ (Grosvenor House, £9.99 from Waterstones) lastnight I came across mention of one Dionne Warwick vs Glasgow Corporation. It seems the singer left the Glasgow Odeon after a concert using the back door on to West Nile Street. This being shrouded in thick fog, she didn’t hear or see a trolleybus and was struck by it and an out-of-court settlement smoothed things over!

Scott Anderson

29/04/11 – 06:49

One of the class lasted until 1965 having become trainer no. 060 in 1962. This was the former 597 with an NCB (mk2) body. I photographed it in this role outside Thornbury depot in July 1963. On withdrawal in 1965 it had achieved almost 31 years of service.
No. 603 was repainted in the 1911 style livery to celebrate Bradford’s Golden Jubilee in 1961. According to Stanley King no. 603 attained 1 million miles in service on 24 April 1962.

Malcolm Wells

26/03/12 – 07:53

I have just put together a gallery to commemorate 40 years since the end of Bradford trolleybuses. This incorporates over 500 photos including a section on the ‘Regens’ which I hope will shed some new light on the issues they experienced. Richard Fieldhouse has given me some useful information which has helped to interpret the photos, a lot of which relate to the structure of the body.
There is also route-by-route coverage. The gallery can be found at: //davidbeilby.zenfolio.com/  
Hope you enjoy it!

David Beilby

26/03/12 – 13:21

David, the Bradford additions to your gallery are absolutely superb. Many thanks for your efforts, and particularly the EEC views, which to us Bradford enthusiasts are unbelievable. We would never have believed that such a wonderful archive even existed, let alone become available.
The Regens have always been my main transport "love", as I grew up with them, and have previously said on a 606 posting, they were "personal friends" in the way that true transport enthusiasts will readily understand.

John Whitaker

27/03/12 – 07:17

Thx, David B, for putting Bradford’s trolleybuses on your website. Interestingly, the range 597-632 is virtually identical to (2)16-(2)24 (and especially (2)24 in Portsmouth Corporation’s fleet. Bradford re-bodied them around the end of the war, but Pompey’s carried their original bodies until they were scrapped, mainly in the 1957-8 period.
What was news to me were the five AEC ‘Q’ trolleybuses, presumably all with English Electric bodies, although whoever built the ‘Q’ (trolley)bus bodies, usually seemed to make them all look very similar. Bradford’s ‘Q’, 633, had a relatively short life (1934-1942). To withdraw a vehicle in mid-war would seem to indicate a really serious deficiency somewhere. The clue might lie with Southend’s ‘Q’ trolleybus No. 123, originally on hire from AEC Ltd., from 1934. It was rebuilt by Sunny Dawes in 1943 and again by Beale in 1945, finally being withdrawn in 1949. Intriguingly, Peter Gould’s website shows this vehicle as being a lowbridge example.

Chris Hebbron

27/03/12 – 15:47

Chris. Bradfords Regens were the first EEC metal framed trolleybus bodies. Like their BCN Leyland TD3 cousins, the bodies were literally shaken to pieces after 10 years, due to body weakness, cobbled streets, and the double reduction drive. EEC had learnt a few lessons by the time PCT received their’s, and there was a redesign in 1937, as exemplified by 635 etc in the BCPT fleet.
the Q ("Queenie", No 633) was sold to South Shields in 1942, where she ran until c.1950. She was non standard in Bradford, regarded as draughty, and there were problems with the front overhang. A MOWT directive instructed BCPT to sell earlier 6 wheelers, and 633, South Shields and Newcastle being the recipients in 1942, and 1945.
Bradford had, of course, received 10 Sunbeam MF2s in 1942 under MOWT directive, which enabled these transactions to proceed. I refer to the "Joburghs", 693-702.
We could write paragraphs on the "Regens", so I will leave it there!

John Whitaker

28/03/12 – 08:31

Thanks, John, for filling in the gaps. We tend to forget cobbled streets and the effect they had on vehicles of the time, and probably to a lesser extent now as well. I sometimes wonder if East End of London cobbles were a prime reason for London Transport’s chassisless bodies coming into service. Although one or two small orders had their weaknesses, most survived the punishment well, although a large maintenance workforce would have helped.

Chris Hebbron

28/03/12 – 18:23

It has always amazed me Chris, that the LPTB chassisless trolleys performed as well as they did, and that the concept was not followed up apart from, I suppose, the RM input. Interesting point!
Re. Bradford`s Q trolley, I think an identical, or near identical body was fitted to the Halifax Motorbus Q. Have a look on David`s site. Most Q motorbuses had MCW bodies as did Bradford`s.
As you say, Southend`s EEC Q was lowbridge, as were the earlier 661Ts! What a fascinating fleet that was!
re. Portsmouth, I am assuming that their EE bodied 5 bay AEC 661T trolleys were metal framed, as I always assumed, perhaps wrongly, that they were. The earlier 6bay EEC bodies, and their 6 wheel equivalents were definitely composite, as the BCPT ones, delivered from November 1934, were definitely the first trolleys from EEC with metal framing.The Burnley C and N Titans were their first all metal motorbus bodies, and caused horrendous problems, as has been stated before. What a great hobby interest we share!!

John Whitaker

02/12/14 – 16:14

I always thought these Bradford Corporation AEC 661Ts 597 to 632 (built 1934/35) with double-reduction differential rear axle drives were unique. This belief was wrong as I have now found details in the recently published Portsmouth Trolleybus book by David R H Bowler that their AEC 661Ts 16 to 24 were also fitted with double-reduction drives and also made a loud noise when running. These Portsmouth trolleybuses with English Electric bodies were built in 1935 and followed the Bradford order and were similar in appearance. By 1936 I believe a worm drive with stronger bearings had emerged from AEC, no doubt due to London Transport influence, and future orders by Bradford and Portsmouth were for AEC 661Ts with worm drives which were much quieter in their operation.

Richard Fieldhouse

03/12/14 – 05:39

Nice to hear from you again, Richard. If you go to ‘More Pages’ on this website, then Old Bus Sounds, the first item is a Portsmouth trolleybus of the later type, but still with a noisy rear axle, albeit because it was worn, perhaps, near the end of its days! It’s certainly not a silent one! I confess that I never heard one of the 16-24 type, to my knowledge. They didn’t possess battery power movement and were usually relegated to peak time workings and were scrapped earlier than would otherwise have been the case. They also had a neglected air about them, with faded paintwork. Sad, because I always thought they had the most attractive bodies of all of Pompey’s trolleybus fleet.

Chris Hebbron

03/12/14 – 10:26

Many thanks Chris for your kind words and advice on the Bus Sound section for the sound of a Portsmouth AEC 661T/Craven trolleybus. I believe the General Manager Mr Ben Hall of Portsmouth was very wise to specify at a late stage Battery Traction availability for the large AEC 661T/Craven order. With the damage due to bombing during World War II, the trolleybuses in Portsmouth were still able to operate by using temporary turning points on battery power. Regarding trolleybus noise, this was also common in Bradford with some of their AEC 661Ts with worn worm drives adding to the "music". It made every trolleybus seem to be a character. Interestingly the Karrier E4s (677 to 692; built 1938) used to make a more growling noise even when newly overhauled. Perhaps these were the bass section.

Richard Fieldhouse

Copyright Robert F Mack

Williamson’s (Bridlington)
1938
Leyland Titanic TT5c
Roe H32/28R

Here is the picture of Williamson’s ex Doncaster Titanic (76 – DT 9643) in action in Queen Street.  Unfortunately the destination blind is obscured by the sun but would say either "The Quay and Queensgate" or "Old Town and The Quay", depending on whether it was quarter to or quarter past the hour, or on the hour or half past. It was a 1938 Titanic TT5c and served only one year in Bridlington, from July 1949 to July 1950. Possibly its Titanic running costs, maybe aggravated by the torque converter, resulted in this short career. In view of the notorious maritime disaster of 1912 I’ve always thought it either brave or cavalier of Leyland to give the model this particular name !!

Photograph and Copy contributed by Chris Youhill

18/03/12 – 11:28

Slightly off our normal bus subject – hard labour of a the non driving sort. In Nov 1907 a man called Arthur —- was charged on remand with stealing the tin box containing the fares collected on one of the ‘busses plying between Old Town and the Quay (note the old plural spelling for buses) the thief got 2 months hard labour – obviously not soft on crime in Bridlington!

Ian Gibbs

19/09/13 – 17:57

Doncaster had nine Titanics, some of which were passed to other operators – one even ending up with Yorkshire Traction. Some lasted until the early 1950s.
Sheffield’s Titanics had a reputation for poor-hill climbing, and I believe they were used mostly on the relatively flat 57 route to Stocksbridge.

Geoff Kerr

20/09/13 – 18:38

Geoff – I believe Sheffield’s Titanics were known as ‘Dragonflies’ on account that they would ‘drag’ themselves slowly up the hill and ‘fly’ down the other side!

John Darwent

03/10/13 – 17:37

I recently came across this picture of Doncaster’s "Titanic" No 65. This was evidently taken outside the Charles H.Roe works prior to delivery. According to the accompanying text "It seems likely that this imposing bus was the only TT2 Titanic other than the three supplied to City and taken over by the L.P.T.B., of which the chassis numbers were 2288-90".
The photograph was credited to ‘Mr G. Warnes’

Nigel Edwards

04/10/13 – 06:14

These might not have been the earliest Titanics, for I have a feeling that I once saw a photo of a Western SMT TT1 Titanic which dated back to about 1928. So they were in the catalogue for a long time, even if they only sold in penny numbers.

Chris Hebbron

04/10/13 – 08:39

I know I’ve mentioned this before, but whatever were Leyland thinking of to use this model name when you consider the appalling shipping disaster of 1912 ??
Perhaps level headed operators paid no heed to this, but who knows if the insensitive name played perhaps just a little part in the low sales achieved??

Chris Youhill

04/10/13 – 15:04

Yes, Chris – it is indeed strange that they used the name Titanic so soon after the tragedy, but I suppose the then more recent Great War memories made this event almost trivial in comparison. However, I find it strange that, today, the Titanic disaster has become something almost to be "celebrated" as in Belfast. Sorry – not a bus related comment. However, it’s good to know that the AEC equivalent had a more positive and inspiring name – Renown, albeit with the same poor sales.

Paul Haywood

04/10/13 – 18:08

Of course, it was LGOC/LPTB who boosted the otherwise meagre sales of the pre-war AEC Renown; 1488 LT’s and 22 LTC’s, plus the true coach taken onboard from Edward Hillman (LT1489). The only other ones that readily come to my mind are the 25 bought by Leicester Corporation in 1939-40. As for the Titanic, the WWI torpedoing of the Lusitania might have made the Titanic sink into the background of folks memories. I’ve just realised the Freudian slip, but will leave it as an example of the way the mind innocently works at times!
As an aside, I’ve only ever seen photos of Leicester’s Northern Counties-bodied Renowns (one preserved)- I assume that the MCCW versions were a different design.

Chris Hebbron

05/10/13 – 08:24

The famous Mr Rackham – who designed both the Leyland Titan and the AEC Regent – was vociferous in his dislike of what we now call tri-axle designs and disapproved of the LTs. Leicester’s MCCW Renowns were specifically delivered to a Northern Counties like outline to make all the Renowns look similar.

David Oldfield

05/10/13 – 08:25

65 was a 1934 TT2c withdrawn in 1947 (Peter Gould)
Williamsons was Doncaster 76 a TT5c new in 1938 withdrawn in 1949. What a huge difference in appearance over 4 years. 76 would pass for a post war bus, but 65 looks almost 20’s.

Joe

28/02/16 – 15:19

My grandmother Doris was Ruben Williamson daughter, who married Samuel Bolton & lived across the road from the garage at 22 Havelock Crescent & my dad often told me about Williamson buses when he was 14 before school he used to help his dad Samuel bring the buses out (abo 1935).
My dad was Arthur Williamson Bolton

Graham Bolton

Copyright Ian Wild

Derby Corporation Transport
1949
Daimler CVD6
Brush H30/26R

I don’t know a great deal about Derby buses. This was taken on a short visit in August 1967. It’s a Daimler CVD6 with I think a Brush body. The olive green and cream livery was quite unusual and sombre and the provision of a polished rear bumper (just visible) seemed really old fashioned.

Photograph and Copy contributed by Ian Wild

A full list of Daimler codes can be seen here.

———

Brush were popular around their native Loughborough but "disappeared" after about 1952 when taken over by neighbour Willowbrook. They continued with their railway (locomotive) work and I believe they still exist (but not necessarily by the same name).
Derby and Nottingham were both big Brush customers but their biggest was possibly BET.

David Oldfield

———

This bus is identical to four vehicles purchased second hand by Samuel Ledgard and new to Exeter Corporation – these, too, had the useful but "dated" offside rear bumpers. Ledgard also bought the entire batch of ten similar buses withdrawn indecently early by Leeds City Transport. An immediate furore occurred in the Council Chamber and angry questions were asked as to why they had been sold and yet were in widespread use on busy services in and around Leeds – and just to rub salt in the wound they were to be seen daily passing their former home depot at Headingley!! At once a ban was placed on the sale of any further LCT vehicles for use within the City. The Brush bodies were beautifully built and were very heavy, but this posed no problems for the superb smooth and powerful Daimler engines.

Chris Youhill

———

Not sure they were taken over by Willowbrook David, more that they chose to leave the bus business, and sold their designs to neighbours Willowbrook. I live in Loughborough, and this is what local enthusiasts tell me, as well as the many retired folk who live here and worked at "The Brush".
Brush had a major national share of the bus body business, and were by no means a regional player though.
Brush do still exist in the town, much reduced, but more involved with transformer work and the like. At one time, they were the second biggest builder of tramcars in the UK. (Dick, Kerr being No1 with the ERTCW works at Preston).
The Derby style, also used by Exeter, Leeds Bradford et al is a composite development of the wartime design, whereas the post war metal bodies were much more rounded and stylish as seen on the Leicester Mk 111s.

John Whitaker

———

31/01/11

I’m very pleased to see this posted as I’ve been considering recently, the fact that Brush seemed to have several styles in production at the same time. There was the type shown, which as John says was a progression of the utility design, then the type supplied to Maidstone Corporation and Yorkshire Woollen which had metal window pans with more rounded corners. In addition, the Leicester Regent III’s (and also six for Ebor of Mansfield) again referred to by John, were a completely different design.
I’ve also wondered about their durability, as some were disposed of after relatively short lives, such as the Leeds examples which Chris refers to and the Bradford ones (although both had second lives with Ledgard and Green Bus) Nottingham only kept their Daimlers for nine years but the trolleybuses were built like tanks and would have lasted forever! Derby got over twenty years out of the batch shown, and I note Chris’s comment about them being beautifully built, so is there any truth in the suggestion that some operators had problems with Daimlers cooling system?
Derby had three batches of Daimlers, the ACH’s, the BCH’s (8ft wide) and the CRC’s of 1952 which were apparently finished by Willowbrook and had curved fronts, whilst the Crossleys and Fodens of the same year had the flat front as shown. Luckily a Daimler and a Crossley are still with us, if only a Foden could have made a trio!

Chris Barker

———

31/01/11

I stand to be corrected, but wasn’t this batch the first of the 8 foot wide version? The Leeds, Exeter, Bradford, SHMD, Nottingham and earlier Derby ones were 7 foot 6 wide – Derby No.27 (ACH627) is preserved. Derby had quite a large fleet of the 8 foot CVD6s with Brush bodywork. The obvious difference inside was that the light fittings were a polished flat circular plate, instead of the chromium plated "volcano" on the earlier vehicles. I have seen a comment in connection with SHMD that the "Brush bodies were rubbish". However, to me they always exuded charm. It is true that the Nottingham ones had a relatively short life, but then, Daimlers were little more than a footnote in a fleet that was massively dominated by AECs. By the way, for anyone straining to read it, the blind reads "Priory Estate via Sussex Circus". I never understood why they insisted on blanking off half the window and having such ridiculously small lettering!

Stephen Ford

———

31/01/11

Although not using a Brush design one of the biggest customers for Loughborough built bodywork was Midland Read who bought both pre and post war Brush bodywork The Falcon works of Brush were also responsible for many first generation diesel locos for British Rail most notably the class 47 also known in some circles as the Brush type 4

Chris Hough

———

31/01/11 – 15:00

Chris B mentions that it was said in certain quarters that the Daimler cooling system could give problems. I don’t know about this from the operators’ points of view, but I can say for certain that those splendid engines did run very hot all the time, Winter included, and "boiling" was not unknown. One unusual feature was that the exhaust manifold was on the inner (driver’s) side of the engine, which ensured a scorched left leg in Summer and welcome warmth in the colder times. The practice at Samuel Ledgard was to fit all second hand buses with those excellent "KL" underseat heaters – two downstairs and one under the front seat "up aloft." They certainly had the method off to perfection because all worked extremely effectively. I can relate without exaggeration that one Daimler in particular, former Exeter JFJ 55, was so hot in even the worst of weather that passengers were known on occasion to beg for the heaters to be turned OFF !!

Chris Youhill

———

31/01/11 – 20:16

Hence (presumably) the practice of driving them with the side access panel open & leaning on the mudguard: ah the smell of hot diesel… you just don’t get it today.

Joe

———

01/02/11 – 05:30

Indeed, I can just remember the Derby Daimlers operating with the bonnet side open, it was always a joy to see them running like that!
On the subject of Brush bodies, I had forgotten to mention the Ribble PD1’s and PD2’s which were yet another style, so when John W states that Brush sold their designs to Willowbrook when they left the bus business, it seems there were plenty of them!

Chris Barker

———

01/02/11 – 05:33

I have it on good authority that Birmingham’s Daimler engines were certainly plagued with overheating problems. Elsewhere smoking is the main problem I’ve heard of.
On the subject of Brush bodies it should not be forgotten that there were also 50 on Daimler CVG5 chassis for Manchester. According to "The Manchester Bus" by Eyre & Heaps these caused the company a major headache because they had not realised they had to be built to the Corporation’s own curvy design, but in the end they were among the finest bodies Brush ever built.
However, I first encountered the Brush name not on any of the products mentioned in these comments, but on an electric milk float!

Peter Williamson

———

02/02/11 – 06:18

Chris Y mentions about the exhaust manifold being on the driver’s side, and the smell of burning flesh from the driver in Summer! London Transport’s D’s were nearly all CWA6’s, but they did take about 10 CWD6’s to aid Daimler’s development of it. The non-standard engine, the exhaust heating and access problem and the fact the the timing chains were at the back of the engine, ensured that, in 1950, they were re-engined with surplus AEC engines. However, I well recall one CWD6 bearing a chalk comment in the driving cab "Dxxx, the fastest D of them all"!.
Incidentally, Chris Y talks about the ‘Sutton’ Daimler CWA’s going to Samuuel Ledgard, and I also thought there were no exceptions. However, I’ve found that SL took just one Merton one. It was Brush-bodied D126 (GYL 291), with them from 8/56 to 6/60. Does it ring a bell, Chris? (No pun intended!).

Chris Hebbron

———

02/02/11 – 10:04

I didn’t make things quite clear originally Chris and I actually meant that the twenty two 1946 Park Royal "HGF"s were all from Sutton Depot. I remember GYL 291 very well indeed and there is a super picture of it in "London’s Utility Buses" (page 127) by Ken Blacker. By coincidence it is passing Streatham Common within yards of the top of Leigham Court Road where my relations were and so its possible I may have ridden on it there as a youngster. Pictures of some of the twenty two "HGF"s also appear in the same splendid book. Ledgard also had just one more London utility Daimler – Duple bodied D178 (HGF 805). There is no doubt at all that these vehicles literally saved the Firm from going under due to death duties after Samuel Ledgard died in April 1952. Only those of us actually "on site" can appreciate the heroic heavy work that they did. Despite being second (or more) hand their performance and reliability were a credit to the maintenance in London and here in the West Riding of Yorkshire. Some of the schedules involved heavy loadings, tight timetables, hilly terrain and daily mileages in excess of two hundred and yet failures were virtually unheard of. "Lost mileage" was an obscene term at Ledgard’s, and any rare occurrence resulted in a thorough enquiry and, if necessary, the rolling of a guilty head or two !!

Chris Youhill

———

02/02/11 – 10:04

GYL 291 came to Sammy via Bee Line did it not Chris. So sayeth "Beer and Blue Buses", one of the best bus books I ever bought!

John Whitaker

———

02/02/11 – 20:53

GYL 291 certainly did arrive with Ledgard thus John. "Beer and Blue Buses" is indeed a splendid volume – marred only by the picture of a certain young conductor on the front cover – yours truly. I willingly helped my friend Don considerably with certain aspects of the book, notably operational issues and photo captions, and just a few of my own early pictures and my route map are included.

Chris Youhill

———

02/02/11 – 21:13

Thx, John, for clarifying its second owner, who obviously looked after it well.
Chris Y – bearing in mind the fragile nature of the bodies (and LT gave up overhauling them part-way through) did Ledgard’s not have body problems with them?

Chris Hebbron

———

03/02/11 – 10:40

Chris H – As GYL 291 was always at the Armley Head Depot and was our only Brush utility I can’t comment on it individually but I’m not aware of it being troublesome. As far as the utilities bought new by Ledgard are concerned the Roe and Duple bodies caused remarkably little trouble through out their existence. The same can’t be said for the two Pickering bodies on the Guys which fell into awful dilapidation long before they were replaced at eight years old !! Also, in contrast to the very satisfactory mechanical performance and reliability of the "Sutton HGFs", it has to be acknowledged that many of their Park Royal "relaxed utility" bodies needed a fair amount of rectification from time to time – this treatment though was invariably successful though and ensured further front line service. One exception was the very sad HGF 940 (D 263) of Otley Depot which was in such awful condition bodywise that, after only one recertification, it was the first of the twenty two to be withdrawn, and prematurely at that. The body of HGF 948 (D 271) was transferred on acquisition to one of Sammy’s own CWA6s, JUB 649 and made a very fine vehicle which was a pleasure to work on. The chassis of HGF 948 then received the rebuilt coach body from a 1935 Maudslay – Sammy’s were never afraid to tackle enterprising engineering exercises, but this strange scheme had everyone baffled and remains an enigma to this day !!

Chris Youhill

———

03/02/11 – 17:59

Re. Chris`s comments on HGF 948.
This was an amazing exercise which no enthusiast has ever really understood. How much service did the resultant coach actually enjoy, as I never saw it in service.
It is the sort of exercise which is more appropriate to the lifetime of Mr Ledgard, and not to the regime of the "executors" Ledgards just has to be the finest independent for enthusiasts to get excited about, and the book "Beer and Blue Buses" brings it all back to mind. Well worth the money, although a price rise is to be expected due to the sartorial elegance of a certain person on the front cover! Must be worth another fiver Chris!

John Whitaker

———

03/02/11 – 20:14

Is this book still available? If so how would I obtain a copy?

Chris Barker

———

04/02/11 – 06:50

John, regarding HGF 948 I’m happy to say that, despite its strange creation, it was extremely busy on all classes of work throughout its time with Ledgard. Arriving in April 1954 it ran until withdrawal after an accident in January 1960 and was sold in the April. Your kind remarks are greatly appreciated but I’m happy to say that there will be no increase in the price of the book as a result of my appearance on the cover – in fact many wags have been heard to loudly declare that a drastic reduction is called for !!
Chris B, the book is still available in many West Yorkshire book shops and, I believe, by mail order from the Samuel Ledgard Society or from the author, Don. Postage is expensive on account of the great weight of the book and so collection is preferable naturally. If you care ask Peter for my address and E Mail me, indicating your locality, I’ll see what arrangements can be made should you decide you’d like one.

Chris Youhill

———

05/02/11 – 05:35

Chris Y – Thank you for the detailed and interesting reply. I must say that I have warmed to SL following your various enthusiastic comments; a company, like Provincial, not afraid of ploughing its own furrow in a thoroughly professional way, especially through the hard times.
Now, how about a photo of that Maudslay/Daimler CWA6 conversion!

Chris Hebbron

———

05/02/11 – 05:45

Well, many thanks Chris for that, I do visit Leeds from time to time, so if there’s anywhere there which may have it, I’d be happy to seek it out on a future visit

Chris Barker

———

05/02/11 – 09:26

Thanks for the reference to "Beer and Blue Buses", John and Chris. I plan to go to the Dewsbury Bus Museum Open Day on March 13th. I wonder whether a stallholder there will have a few copies? Hope so!

Ian Thompson

———

27/02/11 – 20:42

I think what stands out on this body is the hallmarks it still bears with Brush’s austerity style, and these bodies were produced in 1949 and still identical to the style that Derby took in 1946 (22-27)! It doesn’t detract that they look handsome in Derby’s tasteful colour scheme.

Chris Hebbron

——— Top of this posting ———