On 28 Jun, 20:42, Bill Hayles  wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 16:27:27 -0700 (PDT), MIG
>
>  wrote:
>
> >Not very accessible single-deckers though.  Effectively a double-
> >decker without a bottom deck.
>
> You say that, but some of our less agile passengers preferred them to
> the Leyland Nationals which eventually replaced them (and for which I
> have a very high regard which I know isn't shared by everyone) because
> they could heave themselves into it by pulling themselves up with one
> hand on each side rail.  Then could even exit backwards the same way if
> necessary. With the much wider Leyland National entrance this was
> harder.
>
> As for other types (SM, BL, RP) the less said about them the better -
> nobody liked them.

I actually like the noise of the SMs, MBs etc (and RFs, RTs,
RMs ...).  It seemed like AEC came up with buses that made good
noises.  Obviously their reliability was crap.

The original Leyland Nationals sounded like someone shaking a spray
can.

The BLs were characterless things of no intereste whatsoever, but the
RP(?) ... my mind is a blank but it rings a bell somehow.