On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 09:54:48 +0100
Bruce wrote:
safety cell of a car-based design that looks wrecked (but which saved
my life) than be carried on a stretcher from a truck that looks
relatively undamaged but transferred much more of the energy of a
collision to its occupants.

Thats not the only problem with chassis designs. If the impact occurs above
the level of the chassis rails then the chassic can submarine under the
obstruction and the entire body - which has virtually no strength - can
be crushed or even torn right off of it.

B2003

On 2012\10\23 09:54, Bruce wrote:

The trouble with Addison Lee's business model is that it is there for
everyone to see, to emulate, to copy or improve on. It's dog eat dog
out there.

Except that the economies of scale in the minicab industry are wildly
good, and AL is more than 10 times the size of the second largest
minicab company.

On 23/10/2012 04:05, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2012\10\23 00:42, Bruce wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:

On 2012\10\22 20:39, Bruce wrote:
The company that makes London Taxis (LTI) has called in the
Administrators.

http://tinyurl.com/8fqam4x


No doubt Addison Lee's retiring boss will tell his drivers that if they
can write off one of the existing taxi fleet, he will pay their fines...


The LTI cabs are built like Army trucks.

Wasn't it you who showed me up last time I said that? You poured scorn
on the ladder chassis IIRC.

I have a feeling that it
would take more than one of Addison Lee's vehicles to write one off.

They have dozens of the things unused in their Granby Terrace yard,
allegedly because they are haemorrhaging drivers since Hailo started
eating Addison Lee's lunch.

It takes at least a couple of years to qualify as hackney cab driver,
however, doesn't it?

On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 00:42:55 +0100
Bruce wrote:
The LTI cabs are built like Army trucks. I have a feeling that it

Translation: Its a road car in 2012 still being built using a ladder frame
chassis.

The company really only has itself to blame for its downfall for charging
silly money for an antique because it had a monopoly. Well, not any longer
and when they realised they'd have to up their game what did they do? Improve
the taxi? Design something modern? Nope, they used cheap **** components from
china. Genius.

B2003

On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:54:00 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 00:42:55 +0100
Bruce wrote:
The LTI cabs are built like Army trucks. I have a feeling that it

Translation: Its a road car in 2012 still being built using a ladder frame
chassis.

The company really only has itself to blame for its downfall for charging
silly money for an antique because it had a monopoly. Well, not any longer
and when they realised they'd have to up their game what did they do? Improve
the taxi? Design something modern? Nope, they used cheap **** components from
china. Genius.

It's likely that Geely will buy Manganese Bronze cheaply from the
receiver, sans debts. The taxis are already mainly based on Chinese
components, so they might as well assemble the London taxis in
Shanghai, as they already do the cabs destined for other markets. Or
maybe they could use another of their European brands to do it: Volvo.

On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 13:13:17 +0100
Recliner wrote:
It's likely that Geely will buy Manganese Bronze cheaply from the
receiver, sans debts. The taxis are already mainly based on Chinese

Possibly.

components, so they might as well assemble the London taxis in
Shanghai, as they already do the cabs destined for other markets. Or

Are there many other markets? That whole "traditional" british schtick only
takes you so far. If the vehicle is crap no one will buy it unless they've
got no other option, especially at the silly money they were charging.
It sank without trace in the US when they tried to flog it there IIRC.

B2003

On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:54:00 +0000 (UTC), d
wrote:

On Tue, 23 Oct 2012 00:42:55 +0100
Bruce wrote:
The LTI cabs are built like Army trucks. I have a feeling that it

Translation: Its a road car in 2012 still being built using a ladder frame
chassis.

The company really only has itself to blame for its downfall for charging
silly money for an antique because it had a monopoly. Well, not any longer
and when they realised they'd have to up their game what did they do? Improve
the taxi? Design something modern? Nope, they used cheap **** components from
china. Genius.

According to Wikipedia these are supplied from China as semi-complete
knock-down kits so the British 'management' may have had little say in
the matter.