Standardization

[Kenneth and Tracie Josephson]

Derrick J Brashear wrote:

> (You're using a mail client which doesn't autowrap, aren't you?)

Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. We had to upgrade to Netscape 4.7.
There are so many options now, I may have hit something that "unwrapped" it.
Sorry 'bout that.

> Maybe there's something to be said for buying from a big company, that
> "gets it right". Of course, maybe e.g. Flxible was a big company, and was
> just getting squeezed by GM. To be honest I can't compare products of that
> vintage. I will say that I always hated PAT's 1978 AM Generals: they were
> always noisy as hell, and the windows rattled badly because they didn't
> fit snugly in their tracks.

Those AM Generals were looking rather long in the tooth by the early 1980's.
As for Flxible, perhaps they were being squeezed by GM, but they did use GM
engines, so there was some interchangability.

> In my mind, RTS is the Boeing LRV of the bus world: an horrid abortion of
> an implementation of a good concept: a standardized, modular vehicle.
> The Port Authority RTS buses served their requisite time before the
> Feds would fund replacement, and moved on.

Absolutely. I always believed the RTS concept made sense. But they rattled,
burned a lot of fuel, the interiors showed dirt very readily, etc. As for LRV
standardization, we all know mono-motor trucks are fine for San Diego, but not
for South Hills topography.
"Toto, we're not in Frankfurt anymore."

Ken J.