Carryfast:
ramone:
It must have been a great place to work at the time , i’ve just watched the video again and the cost to set it up must have been huge , then the refurb costs for each bus.No wonder the RMs lasted so long .But after the initial set up costs were taken out of the equation i wonder if it was cheaper to refurb than scrap and buy new. Having said that the RMs had no successor so they carried on for an extra 40 years . The end of the RMs was the start of the throw away era for London busesMaybe a contradictory mish mash of an intensive maintenance regime being turned into what was effectively a remanufacturing operation.Party based on the RT/RM’s simplicity of maintenance.Thereby compromising the continuing viability of the product and the production facilities themselves and the resulting loss of continuing manufacturer product support for it.As cav has said previously major mechanical components have a limit on reconditioning viability at which point new components then have to be fed into that maintenance regime.But the production operation for spares also needs a viable new vehicle production and sales regime to make their production viable.So you can have the best refurb/remanufacturing facility possible but that won’t be any use if in doing so you’ve taken out the manufacture of new replacement vehicles and parts.As stated I think the RM was withdrawn from production far too soon,not helped by LT relying too much on remanufacture of existing vehicles,thereby also wrecking the future viability of AEC’s PSV division at least.When it probably would have been possible and cheaper to create a far more new vehicle production friendly compromise between maintenance and vehicle replacement regime.Which would have provided the best of all worlds of keeping the RM in viable production.With the win win that LT could still have taken maximum advantage of its relative simplicity in terms of maintenance and reliability compared to Swift and DMS etc.
I think Leyland would have put a stop to it before it started as all AEC double decker production ceased in (I think) 1968. They had already developed the rear engined Routemaster but the group had the Atlanteen , Bristol and Daimler Fleetline in their line up.
The second link may be of interest to you if you have time to read it , Leyland management getting a roasting in Parliament for blaming the workforce for closures.