Treewolf

Yes, there would have been issues with pedestrian impact safety, airbags, crumple zones, side impact protection and roll-over protection and that is just for starters. By the time they'd made the structural changes required to comply the vehicle would look like a Grenadier. A classic Defender will generally survive an moderate impact with a normal modern car since the car acts as the crumple-zone. A classic Defender is an extremely bad place to be if someone runs into the side of you or if you are in a hard rollover. Surviving either withough injury is rare.

I know the TD5 was the start of the ECU era - I had one until recently, and the 2.4 TDCi Defender was arguably the best 'real' Defender of the lot. You could argue that LR did carry on and do a "luxury version of the Defender", it's the L663 "new Defender". Any new version of the original Defender concept would have had to be completely re-engineered anyway for compliance reasons. If LR had tried to make the true spiritual successor to the original Defender it would have ended up being a lot like the Grenadier, except with a lot more wrong with it including multiple water leaks, reliability issues, and appalling after sales service. Worst of all it would have had the god-awful Ingenium engine. It would also have cost at least as much as a Grenadier and probably more. I stand by my assertion that the reason that LR didn't replace the classic Defender with a newer better classic Defender is because they didn't want to, the margins and money simply don't exist in that market. They could have built one, they have the know-how and experience, they simply changed direction. It is equally pointless to say that they should have done so because the company became more successful and delivered a better return to its owners by not doing so.

That point is key - the old Defender apparently cost about the same to manufacture as a full-fat Range Rover, however the max price the market would support was £30k for the Defender but £100k for the RR. The margin therefore was huge on one compared to the other, and was the reason for the other factor below. This overlooks the fact that JLR no longer no longer wanted to be in the utility vehicle market at all, it is complex, expensive, and the margins are small. From a shareholder perspective it is much better to bang out luxury boxes for posh folk to take their kids to school and that sell for £100k netting you a £70k profit per vehicle. The realignment of the product line up with the old Freelander being replaced by the Discovery, and the old Discovery being replaced by the new Defender completed the transformation of JLR into "just another SUV manufacturer". To me the rot was complete and I lost all interest in the brand. Until they cocked everything up with shocking customer care, inadequate parts supply, and poor managing of a cyber attack the company became far more profitable. Jim Radcliffe and Ineos has more-or-less proved that it is not possible to build a classic Defender in the way that we want (i.e., modern, better, but still very simple and only costing £30k) with the Grenadier. It is a great vehicle and is the spiritual successor to the old Defender, but it is not possible to mass-produce a simple car nor a cheap car that complies with world legislation now. We are trapped in an era of ECUs and software and complexity and consequent high cost.

Is "both" an option?

Can anyone remind me if the DVSA will send the necessary paperwork for an age-related licence renewal automatically as my birthday approaches or do I need proactively to obtain the forms? I'm coming up to number 65 and can't remember what happened five years ago. Many thanks,

This doesn't really bear thinking about: US takes Greenland by force resulting in NATO imploding because Article 5 never contemplated an attack by one NATO country on another. The disintegration of NATO coupled with NATO's weakness without the US removes any inhibitions Putin may have from making a move on the Suwalki Gap then on Poland, leading to a major war in Europe with no possibility of a good outcome. Finally DJT awards himself a big beautiful 'Trump world peace prize' for causing WW3. Not really the retirement I had planned.

"Midelfart" is a great name!

Correct, only the 13 pin socket is tested for the MoT test.

Sadly not the case. The driver is always liable for the safety and roadworthiness of the vehicle. Towbars are not included in the MOT test except for 13-pin sockets (but not the earlier 7-pin) which bizarrely are tested.

He could take a leaf out of Idi Amin's playbook and award himself a Nobel prize - just like Idi awarded himself the VC. Perhaps, like Idi, Trump could also proclaim himself King of Scotland.

The only way I've ever found to remove barbed staples is to hammer the pliers spike into the staple and lever it out. Over the years I've done hundreds, probably thousands, on weldmesh animal enclosures built with old telegraph poles. It's very tedious and easy to damage the mesh. If you don't need to reuse the post a cordless grinder with a 1mm disk used carefully is quicker. With animal enclosures there's the added problem that you have to account for every staple and every fragment that might cause injury.

Dashcam footage reveals moment tractor separated from its trailer on the A227 Gravesend Road before plunging off bridge onto M20 below WWW.KENTONLINE.CO.UK Footage shared widely on social media shows the moment a tractor plunged off an overbridge onto a motorway before landing in the central reservation.

It's a pity the HA didn't just reroute the path away from the tree.

I bet each of the 900 had to pay the traffickers a lot more than £500 though.

If you are a similar age to me and passed your test in the same era as me (the 1970s) you will have B+E, C1, and C1+E through "grandfather rights". These will (at least should) endure as long as you have a licence, so as you start to have to renew periodically and self-certify fitness you should keep these automatically. The C1 category is the one that allows you to drive up to 7.1/2 ton vehicles, which used to be allowed on the standard "car licence". If, like me, you also have C and C+E as vocational categories, i.e., you did the HGV test, you will need to renew then every 5 years from (I think) age 45 and annually from 65. To renew, you need a medical certifice from a GP. They will not renew automatically. I am told (and perhaps someone here can confirm) that if you do not renew your C/C+E and allow them to lapse, you can reactivate them later, after the lapse, by getting a medical and reapplying without the need for any testing etc.