![]() |
Routemaster lament
Neil Williams wrote:
On 8 Sep 2004 08:52:29 -0700, (Boltar) wrote: And a modern double decker weights 11 or 12 tons. You have to wonder where that extra 3 or 4 tons of flab was needed. Length, width, height, interior trim and glass. A modern decker is *substantially* larger in all dimensions than a Routemaster. But the 1970s/80s generation of high-floor double-deckers were only around the 10 ton mark, and they're not much smaller than modern low-floor deckers. And no way were they as much as 25% bigger in area than RMLs - 12% longer, 4% wider (and no taller). Obvious conclusion: lots of extra metal needed to put the engine at the back, lots more again to make low-floor buses strong enough, and enormous amounts to keep a bendi-bus rigid and flexible in the right places. Colin McKenzie -- The great advantage of not trusting statistics is that it leaves you free to believe the damned lies instead! |
Routemaster lament
Colin McKenzie ) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying : Obvious conclusion: lots of extra metal needed to put the engine at the back, lots more again to make low-floor buses strong enough, and enormous amounts to keep a bendi-bus rigid and flexible in the right places. I wonder how heavy the Bendibuses that Sheffield used in the 80s were? |
Routemaster lament
On 13 Sep 2004 20:07:28 GMT, Adrian
wrote: I wonder how heavy the Bendibuses that Sheffield used in the 80s were? Or, indeed (to compare like for like), the old high-floor Mercedes O405 derivative bendies occasionally found in Germany. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK To e-mail use neil at the above domain |
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk