|
New London Taxi
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008, Adrian wrote:
Tom Barry gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: and more risk to cyclists Mmmm. Every London cyclist I know seems to loath bendis with a _passion_. Usually based on a near-death-experience. I'm pleased to offer myself as one that doesn't. The stats show very clearly that bendy buses are no more dangerous to cyclists than normal buses, when considered on a route basis, and may even be substantially safer. Bendis just plain don't fit London streets with tight junctions, pedestrian refuges and frequent traffic lights. I would certainly agree that there are some routes where they don't fit, and those should perhaps be debendified or re-routed. There are also many routes where they fit fine. tom -- All roads lead unto death row; who knows what's after? |
New London Taxi
Tom Anderson gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: Mmmm. Every London cyclist I know seems to loath bendis with a _passion_. Usually based on a near-death-experience. I'm pleased to offer myself as one that doesn't. Long may it stay that way... I wouldn't have said I knew you, though. grin |
New London Taxi
"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
... wrote ... Mercedes - Benz Vito Taxi approved earlier this year & widely reported in I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it - other than Britain manufacturing jobs perhaps. I thought that the Benz Vito was simply an option, and that there are no plans to get rid of the standard designs. Quite right; it's a free market. Just the Mercedes is probably better, and certainly better value than the TX4 unless they drop their prices to planet Earth. Which they may well do, when faced with competition. The Mercedes can make U-turns better, one driver told me. IIRC, it is because the rear wheels can also turn to a degree. How much is the Mercedes compared to the TX4? I heard that the latter in a brand new state costs around £50,000, whereas second-hand is about £35,000. |
New London Taxi
"RobWilton" wrote in message
... The current tarriff for London taxis is ridiculously overpriced & that's because the operating costs & the price of the vehicle are far too high "approx" £35,000,my friend who is a licensed cabby was telling me that with the current economic downturn the first thing that the public have cut back on is riding in cabs,why not have licensed tuc tucs working at a fixed price betwen destinations that way three people sharing could get arond London far cheaper then buses or trains. They tried tuc tucs in Brighton, but it didn't work out. My guess is that HSE would have something to say about tuc tucs plying London streets. |
New London Taxi
In message ,
writes "RobWilton" wrote in message ... The current tarriff for London taxis is ridiculously overpriced & that's because the operating costs & the price of the vehicle are far too high "approx" £35,000,my friend who is a licensed cabby was telling me that with the current economic downturn the first thing that the public have cut back on is riding in cabs,why not have licensed tuc tucs working at a fixed price betwen destinations that way three people sharing could get arond London far cheaper then buses or trains. They tried tuc tucs in Brighton, but it didn't work out. My guess is that HSE would have something to say about tuc tucs plying London streets. You can say that again. If you'd seen the reports on the safety (or lack of) record of the Tuc Tuc's you'd be very worried. There was even one occasion when one of these turned over. The owner of the company tried to put a positive spin on the whole incident by claiming that the fact no one was injured showed that the 'safety enhancements' (seat belts required by law) he'd had fitted to the vehicles had made then safer. He conveniently overlooked the fact that the thing had turned over at a relatively low speed and it was just luck that there was no serious injury - unlike the poor soul who is (was?) in a semi vegetive state as a result of an accident that occurred in Queen Street, Brighton -- Mike Hughes A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England Interested in American trains real and model? Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/ |
New London Taxi
In message ,
writes "Andrew Heenan" wrote in message ... wrote ... Mercedes - Benz Vito Taxi approved earlier this year & widely reported in I don't see what merits the TX4 has over it - other than Britain manufacturing jobs perhaps. I thought that the Benz Vito was simply an option, and that there are no plans to get rid of the standard designs. Quite right; it's a free market. Just the Mercedes is probably better, and certainly better value than the TX4 unless they drop their prices to planet Earth. Which they may well do, when faced with competition. The new Mercedes is not priced significantly lower than the TX4. It is a new vehicle which has yet to have some serious mileages so there is not yet any data of the longer term, higher mileage statistics for this vehicle. A friend of mine had a Merc Vito fitted as a taxi in Brighton about 6 years ago. It was not the present model and did not have the electrically operated doors, steering, etc so it is not possible to make a direct comparison. However, his experience was that when the vehicle was new it was brilliant but after about 2 years he found that it just wouldn't stand up to the kind of service that Brighton taxi users subjected it to (Brighton's hills and the out of town jobs along the M23 combine to really test vehicles!) and cost him a lot of money and down time. The Mercedes can make U-turns better, one driver told me. IIRC, it is because the rear wheels can also turn to a degree. But you have to stop to engage the rear steering and be travelling at less than 5 mph for it to work - not so useful when you want to get out of the way quickly to avoid traffic coming towards you in some instances. How much is the Mercedes compared to the TX4? I heard that the latter in a brand new state costs around £50,000, whereas second-hand is about £35,000. New TX4 around £38k (depending on spec) and a Merc only slightly less. FWIW I write every month for Taxi "talk" magazine (www.taxitalk.co.uk for an example) and am often made aware of problems before they become common knowledge. As far as the Merc is concerned I am reserving my judgement as there are several items which have mechanical or electronic operation (electric step, electric doors, rear steering) which have not seen heavy duty yet. I always have this fear that mechanical things can go wrong and the ore complicated they are the more time and money they take to repair. -- Mike Hughes A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England Interested in American trains real and model? Look here http://mikehughes627.fotopic.net/ |
New London Taxi
|
New London Taxi
"Mike Hughes" wrote in message ... In message , writes "RobWilton" wrote in message ... The current tarriff for London taxis is ridiculously overpriced & that's because the operating costs & the price of the vehicle are far too high "approx" £35,000,my friend who is a licensed cabby was telling me that with the current economic downturn the first thing that the public have cut back on is riding in cabs,why not have licensed tuc tucs working at a fixed price betwen destinations that way three people sharing could get arond London far cheaper then buses or trains. They tried tuc tucs in Brighton, but it didn't work out. My guess is that HSE would have something to say about tuc tucs plying London streets. You can say that again. If you'd seen the reports on the safety (or lack of) record of the Tuc Tuc's you'd be very worried. There was even one occasion when one of these turned over. The owner of the company tried to put a positive spin on the whole incident by claiming that the fact no one was injured showed that the 'safety enhancements' (seat belts required by law) he'd had fitted to the vehicles had made then safer. He conveniently overlooked the fact that the thing had turned over at a relatively low speed and it was just luck that there was no serious injury - unlike the poor soul who is (was?) in a semi vegetive state as a result of an accident that occurred in Queen Street, Brighton ------------------------------------------------------- There was even one occasion when one of these turned over. The owner of the company tried to put a positive spin on the whole incident . Turned over.....Positive spin!! AH, the old ones are the best eh,Mike. |
New London Taxi
wrote:
In article , (Adrian) wrote: An RM is about 7.5t ULW. A Citaro bendy is about 18t ULW. Actually, an RML (nearer in capacity to a bendy and not appreciably different from a modern double-decker) is 8.25 tons ULW. You only get a 64-seater RM for 7.5 tons. Difference between tonne and ton? RMLs were always labelled as 7t15cwt - so your figure is high unless the replacement engines were half a ton heavier than the originals. RMs were 7t5wt. And the RM is as rigid a bus as has ever been produced. I suspect a big part of the reason why modern buses are so heavy is that the low floor requirement means you have to put in more metal to get the same rigidity (because it can't be in the most weight-efficient places). A front engine, front entrance (behind the front wheel) Borismaster might be able to be lighter than any existing low-floor bus, especially if it didn't have a driveshaft to the back wheels. Colin McKenzie -- No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:04 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk