Advertising Last completed movie pages
AEC Regent III RT 
Class: Bus, Double-deck — Model origin: 
![[*]](/res/star.png){kind=small}
Background vehicle
Comments about this vehicle| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
◊ 2006-08-02 01:40 |
AEC Routemaster? -- Last edit: 2006-08-02 01:43:56 |
|
◊ 2006-08-02 08:53 |
1957, I think it's rather an AEC LT/RTL ... Routemaster was launched few years later, 1960 around |
|
◊ 2006-08-02 11:13 |
The top rear window size could mean that it is a Leyland RTW. http://www.countrybus.org.uk/RT/RTW.htm Let's wait for SteveA's comment. |
|
◊ 2006-08-02 23:39 |
 I'd been trying to avoid this one......not an LT (six-wheel, prewar), not an RM - they didn't enter service until later. My first reaction was it's an RT or RTL. The difference between the RT/RTL family and the RTW is the RTW is 6 inches wider. Compare http://www.countrybus.org.uk/RT/RTL and http://www.countrybus.org.uk/RT/RTL.htm . However, it appears to be on route 11, and in 1957 the route was run by a mixture of......RTs and RTWs! However RTWs far outnumbered RTs. So it's either a Leyland Titan PD2/3 RTW class with Leyland body, or an AEC Regent III RT class with Weymann or Park Royal body. Those 6 inches make all the difference......... |
|
◊ 2006-08-02 23:42 |
Is there a chance to identify it more precisely, or do we just have to pick one of the two names? |
|
◊ 2006-08-02 23:51 |
If the screen capture is correctly proportioned, then you have to decide whether the back of that bus is 14 foot 6 high and 8 foot wide (RTW) or 14 foot 6 high and 7 foot 6 wide (RT or RTL)! I guess we can't get a registration number - if we could we could nail it very quickly. Without that or a closer look, I'm going to have to shrug my shoulders and say I don't know. |
|
◊ 2006-08-02 23:54 |
The back of the bus is about 100x180 pixels, so I would say that it is 7f6 rather than 8... |
|
◊ 2006-08-03 00:48 |
I measured the original image and got 105 x 196 pixel = 7'9" ! So we are as clever as before! ![[Image: nixweiss.gif]](http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/nixweiss.gif "http://www.my-smileys.de/smileys2/nixweiss.gif") I would think -- make myself believe .gif ";)") -- that the images are a tiny bit too high rather than a tiny bit too wide. If that is so and not just my imagination it would speak for the RTW. Shall we take Leyland Titan PD2/3 RTW? What do you say? |
|
◊ 2006-08-03 00:58 |
I rotated the picture to take its size, but I forgot the shadow under the bus, does the height count only the body or the whole vehicle? |
|
◊ 2006-08-03 01:22 |
All of it, including the wheels ... provided they were not stolen last night by some buggers ... .gif ":)") |
|
◊ 2006-08-03 01:34 |
![[Image: outforjustice02aie3tq1.2686.jpg]](http://pics.imcdb.org/0is260/outforjustice02aie3tq1.2686.jpg) -- Last edit: 2007-04-14 18:32:13 (antp) |
|
◊ 2007-07-15 18:14 |
It is definately not an RTW as the advert stickers either side of the destination blind are closer together.On RTWs the stickers would be wider apart.I'd say its a RTL out of Battersea garage. |
|
◊ 2009-04-12 18:37 |
Combining SteveA's comment and twoslices' identification its an AEC Regent III RT Another clue to the width differences between an RT and RTW is the alignment between the left hand sides of both the rear destination board and the lower deck's rear window. Almost in alignment on the narrow RT, but the rear destination board is noticeably 'stepped-in' on the RTW. AEC Regent III RT |
Add a comment Advertising Advertising
