London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old August 7th 09, 04:32 PM posted to uk.transport.buses,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: May 2008
Posts: 278
Default Routemaster registrations

I'm from the era when the registration of a Routemaster and the stock number
matched. For instance I seem to remember something along the lines WLT885
was RM (or was it RML) 885.

But over the years, some Routemasters seem to have acquired new
registrations. Now, I can understand that when sold on from LT they might
have received new registrations but is it that simple and why did LT not
sell with the registrations, was it because of the "exclusivity" of the LT
in WLT, VLT etc?


  #2   Report Post  
Old August 7th 09, 06:36 PM posted to uk.transport.buses,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 1
Default Routemaster registrations

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 17:32:30 +0100, "Graham Harrison"
wrote:

I'm from the era when the registration of a Routemaster and the stock number
matched. For instance I seem to remember something along the lines WLT885
was RM (or was it RML) 885.

But over the years, some Routemasters seem to have acquired new
registrations. Now, I can understand that when sold on from LT they might
have received new registrations but is it that simple and why did LT not
sell with the registrations, was it because of the "exclusivity" of the LT
in WLT, VLT etc?


Quite a few were reregistered (without selling the buses) simply
because money could be made. So many routemasters picked up odd xxx
nnn A registrations.
  #3   Report Post  
Old August 7th 09, 07:44 PM posted to uk.transport.buses,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Oct 2004
Posts: 947
Default Routemaster registrations

Ken W gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

I'm from the era when the registration of a Routemaster and the stock
number matched. For instance I seem to remember something along the
lines WLT885 was RM (or was it RML) 885.

But over the years, some Routemasters seem to have acquired new
registrations. Now, I can understand that when sold on from LT they
might have received new registrations but is it that simple and why did
LT not sell with the registrations, was it because of the "exclusivity"
of the LT in WLT, VLT etc?


Quite a few were reregistered (without selling the buses) simply because
money could be made. So many routemasters picked up odd xxx nnn A
registrations.


Or pre-63 age related plates.

Quite a few of the old plates are on more modern buses, so they've been
kept within the fleets.
  #4   Report Post  
Old August 7th 09, 08:26 PM posted to uk.transport.buses,uk.transport.london
MIG MIG is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2004
Posts: 3,154
Default Routemaster registrations

On 7 Aug, 20:44, Adrian wrote:
Ken W gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

I'm from the era when the registration of a Routemaster and the stock
number matched. * For instance I seem to remember something along the
lines WLT885 was RM (or was it RML) 885.


But over the years, some Routemasters seem to have acquired new
registrations. * Now, I can understand that when sold on from LT they
might have received new registrations but is it that simple and why did
LT not sell with the registrations, was it because of the "exclusivity"
of the LT in WLT, VLT etc?

Quite a few were reregistered (without selling the buses) simply because
money could be made. So many routemasters picked up odd xxx nnn A
registrations.


Or pre-63 age related plates.

Quite a few of the old plates are on more modern buses, so they've been
kept within the fleets.


This came up recently. The suggestion was that the old plates had a
value to disguise the age of newer buses.

I found this implausible for buses, unlike someone showing off their
car, but it was suggested that some luxury coach operators might want
to use an ageless ex-Routemaster registration rather than have punters
think their coaches were two years old or something.

So maybe some were sold and that's why they were replaced with aaa nnn
A. I don't know why some were put on later London buses though.

I am pretty sure that 885 would have been an RML.
  #5   Report Post  
Old August 7th 09, 10:08 PM posted to uk.transport.buses,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,018
Default Routemaster registrations

On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 22:27:57 +0100, "Graham Harrison"
wrote:

I was under the impression that Northern Irish plates were the way to hide
the age of a coach.



True; any plate without an age-related prefix or suffix will do.

With reference to coaches, one reason for using old registrations was
to escape the need to fit 62 mph speed governors (EU Directive). All
coaches registered after a certain date had to have the governor. But
coaches whose chassis had been registered before that date could
operate without a governor up to their legal limit of 70 mph.

So, at least for a time, there was a market in old coach chassis being
thoroughly refurbished for use under new coach bodies. The
registration went with the chassis, so what was essentially a brand
new coach that had some older (but refurbished) chassis parts could
operate legally at 70 mph. meanwhile, an identical body on a brand
new chassis was restricted to 62 mph (100 km/h).

I don't know if this still goes on, or whether the requirement for
governors has now been further backdated. But that is one of the
reasons why so many coaches have old registration numbers.



  #7   Report Post  
Old August 7th 09, 11:37 PM posted to uk.transport.buses,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 4
Default Routemaster registrations

On 07/08/09 22:27, Graham Harrison wrote:

[snip]


And then some of the RM plates were transferred to newer buses? Like
what? That almost sounds like LT wanting vanity plates (mind you I
suppose that in some ways that's what the old WLTxxx plates were!).


My favorite was MXX 1 which was on an RF single decker (don't recall
which one). That would have been worth a bob or two, wonder where they
are now..? (Reg and bus..)

Ivor

  #8   Report Post  
Old August 8th 09, 02:11 AM posted to uk.transport.buses,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 1
Default Routemaster registrations


"Bruce" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 22:27:57 +0100, "Graham Harrison"
wrote:

I was under the impression that Northern Irish plates were the way to hide
the age of a coach.



True; any plate without an age-related prefix or suffix will do.

With reference to coaches, one reason for using old registrations was
to escape the need to fit 62 mph speed governors (EU Directive). All
coaches registered after a certain date had to have the governor. But
coaches whose chassis had been registered before that date could
operate without a governor up to their legal limit of 70 mph.

So, at least for a time, there was a market in old coach chassis being
thoroughly refurbished for use under new coach bodies. The
registration went with the chassis, so what was essentially a brand
new coach that had some older (but refurbished) chassis parts could
operate legally at 70 mph. meanwhile, an identical body on a brand
new chassis was restricted to 62 mph (100 km/h).

I don't know if this still goes on, or whether the requirement for
governors has now been further backdated. But that is one of the
reasons why so many coaches have old registration numbers.


Utter rubbish, the speed limiter is set against the age of the vehicle as
registered on the C.O.I.F. (The Certificate of Initial Fitness.)
The registration has never been used as a means of identifying the age of
the vehicle by VOSA or any other body concerned with this type of
regulation.
It is purely a mistaken belief by operators that a Northern Irish
registration disguises the age of a vehicle when it does the exact opposite
and highlights its elderly state.
The rebodying of chassis was not done to attempt to circumnavigate these
regulations either, It was a means of getting further use out of a
relatively good chassis whose body had seen better days.
D.R.


  #9   Report Post  
Old August 8th 09, 07:45 AM posted to uk.transport.buses,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 45
Default Routemaster registrations

D.R. wrote:

It is purely a mistaken belief by operators that a Northern Irish
registration disguises the age of a vehicle when it does the exact opposite
and highlights its elderly state.


The contract for a lot of the top tour operators says that the vehicle
used must "Not *appear* more than three years old". (My emphasis).

Given this, if an operator takes the age related plate off, and puts a
dateless plate on, then the vehicle can be used on that contract for an
extra couple of years, as long as the maintenance and cleaning are kept
up. It almost doubles the useful life of what is a high cost, and still
perfectly serviceable, asset. As the passengers can't immediately tell
the age by just looking at the plate, they're none the wiser, the tour
operator's happy because there are no complaints about the ancient,
decrepit, three and a half year old coach their passengers are riding
in, and the coach operator's happy, because he's got double the use out
of the vehicle.

Incidentally, doing this also reduces the cost of providing the coach,
so the cost of the holiday is kept down, so everybody wins. Modern
coaches are designed to last over twenty years in service as against the
ten years when the tour operators' policies were put in place, so nobody
loses.

Incidentally, the operator I work for puts dateless plates on all
vehicles (Coaches *and* buses) when they come in new from the
maufacturers, so don't assume that anything with a dateless plate is old
and decrepit.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.
  #10   Report Post  
Old August 8th 09, 08:46 AM posted to uk.transport.buses,uk.transport.london
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,018
Default Routemaster registrations

On Sat, 8 Aug 2009 03:11:57 +0100, "D.R." wrote:
"Bruce" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 7 Aug 2009 22:27:57 +0100, "Graham Harrison"
wrote:

I was under the impression that Northern Irish plates were the way to hide
the age of a coach.



True; any plate without an age-related prefix or suffix will do.

With reference to coaches, one reason for using old registrations was
to escape the need to fit 62 mph speed governors (EU Directive). All
coaches registered after a certain date had to have the governor. But
coaches whose chassis had been registered before that date could
operate without a governor up to their legal limit of 70 mph.

So, at least for a time, there was a market in old coach chassis being
thoroughly refurbished for use under new coach bodies. The
registration went with the chassis, so what was essentially a brand
new coach that had some older (but refurbished) chassis parts could
operate legally at 70 mph. meanwhile, an identical body on a brand
new chassis was restricted to 62 mph (100 km/h).

I don't know if this still goes on, or whether the requirement for
governors has now been further backdated. But that is one of the
reasons why so many coaches have old registration numbers.


Utter rubbish



The worst kind, eh? ;-)


, the speed limiter is set against the age of the vehicle as
registered on the C.O.I.F. (The Certificate of Initial Fitness.)
The registration has never been used as a means of identifying the age of
the vehicle by VOSA or any other body concerned with this type of
regulation.



Ah, but the age of the chassis is crucial here. A chassis that was
registered before the cut-off date can be fitted with a new body but
the age of the chassis remains the same.




Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vehicle registrations (was '0207 008 0000') Terry Harper London Transport 0 January 5th 05 11:27 PM
Route 8 Routemaster's Last Day Pictures JMUpton2000 London Transport 0 June 6th 04 03:47 AM
Routemaster ad screens - Win2000 Pro Colum Mylod London Transport 6 May 13th 04 09:38 AM
Save the 73 Routemaster!!!! The Equalizer London Transport 44 February 27th 04 05:18 PM
Last Routemaster Service Sharon & Gordon Thomson London Transport 1 November 5th 03 10:54 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:47 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 London Banter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about London Transport"

 

Copyright © 2017