Anyone else see this kludge?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 16:47:21 +0100, Part Timer wrote:

Anyone else see this kludge?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456

On the basis my local council couldn't keep the wheelchair lift outside
our library vandal-free[1], I can't see it lasting long. That and the
fact that they'd be quite nickable, if not as stairlifts, for the metal
alone.

[1]I am not a fan of medieval punishments but I would have to be held
back from dealing out some "blowtorch and pliers" justice to scum who
vandalise mobility aids.

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 16:12:53 +0000, Jethro wrote:

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 16:47:21 +0100, Part Timer wrote:

Anyone else see this kludge?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456

On the basis my local council couldn't keep the wheelchair lift outside
our library vandal-free[1], I can't see it lasting long. That and the
fact that they'd be quite nickable, if not as stairlifts, for the metal
alone.

[1]I am not a fan of medieval punishments but I would have to be held
back from dealing out some "blowtorch and pliers" justice to scum who
vandalise mobility aids.

I think the application of torsion to arms and legs, followed by four
quick applications of an iron bar, would provide a useful mobility lesson.



--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Sep 2, 4:47*pm, Part Timer wrote:
Anyone else see this kludge?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456

The original lift system didn't sound much better. What did a resident
on floor 15 do to visit their neighbour on floor 14 - go all the way
to the ground, change lifts, and go back up?

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 16:47:21 +0100, Part Timer wrote:

Anyone else see this kludge?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456

the thought of a tower block decorated in paisley is quite horrific.

On 02/09/2011 16:47, Part Timer wrote:
Anyone else see this kludge?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456


Pah.

Sedan chairs and lots of manpower.

Or elephants.

They can go over the Alps, so why not up a tower block.

The council need to think outside the box , as they say.

--
R

Bob Eager wrote:

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 16:12:53 +0000, Jethro wrote:

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 16:47:21 +0100, Part Timer wrote:

Anyone else see this kludge?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456

On the basis my local council couldn't keep the wheelchair lift outside
our library vandal-free[1], I can't see it lasting long. That and the
fact that they'd be quite nickable, if not as stairlifts, for the metal
alone.

[1]I am not a fan of medieval punishments but I would have to be held
back from dealing out some "blowtorch and pliers" justice to scum who
vandalise mobility aids.

I think the application of torsion to arms and legs, followed by four
quick applications of an iron bar, would provide a useful mobility lesson.




Something mongolian, involving horses and ropes...

--
Tim Watts

On 02/09/2011 16:47, Part Timer wrote:
Anyone else see this kludge?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456

If they originally wanted lifts that only stopped at every other floor,
they should have had two lifts capable of stopping at every floor, but
electronically arranged to only do every other one - thus allowing one
to be switched to cover every floor whenever the other was out of action.

SteveW

On Sep 2, 9:07*pm, Steve Walker -
family.me.uk wrote:
On 02/09/2011 16:47, Part Timer wrote:

Anyone else see this kludge?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456

If they originally wanted lifts that only stopped at every other floor,
they should have had two lifts capable of stopping at every floor, but
electronically arranged to only do every other one - thus allowing one
to be switched to cover every floor whenever the other was out of action.

SteveW

Pointless. The saving is that there are not even doors on "unused"
landings.

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation.
I imagine most will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs
anyway.

[Default] On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:15:15 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, harry , randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation.
I imagine most will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs
anyway.

Actually, multi-storey flats and elderly people are an ideal match.
They have accomodation on one level, there's no garden to maintain,
and they don't generally have young children that need a space to play
in. Refuse disposal is via a chute, so no wheely bins to move.
Provided the lifts are maintained, they usually don't have to go down
stairs to get out of the building.
--
Hugo Nebula
"If no-one on the internet wants a piece of this,
just how far from the pack have I strayed"?

"Hugo Nebula" wrote in message
...
[Default] On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:15:15 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, harry , randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation.
I imagine most will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs
anyway.

Actually, multi-storey flats and elderly people are an ideal match.
They have accomodation on one level, there's no garden to maintain,
and they don't generally have young children that need a space to play
in. Refuse disposal is via a chute, so no wheely bins to move.
Provided the lifts are maintained, they usually don't have to go down
stairs to get out of the building.

They are more secure too, as long as the access system works.

Older people don't turn them into rubbish tips like some other residents
used to.

On Sep 3, 1:48 pm, Huge wrote:
On 2011-09-03, Hugo Nebula wrote:

[Default] On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:15:15 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, harry , randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation.
I imagine most will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs
anyway.

And even if they are, how do they get back up again, you dumb ****?


presumably they could also walk/stagger/mutter down the next flight to
get the lift down from the floor below.....;)

Jim K

Huge wrote:

Actually, multi-storey flats and elderly people are an ideal match.

Precisely.

I know several multi-storey blocks of flats that are ideal for old
people. Sadly they tend to be in places like Marble Arch and are only
for the wealthy who can aford the annual service charges. They manage to
provide clean public areas, lifts that are serviced and always
serviceable and security at the door. The big difference from council
accomodation is that they have 24/7 security.

This would all be achieveable in council owned accomodation and the
price of having 24h concierge/warden service would be relatively low
considering the number of individual homes in a multi-storey block. With
adequate training and perhaps some imagination in terms of providing
live-in accomodation the staff could provide social as well as physical
security.

Sadly the f'ing morons who run councils see only a cost and not the long
term cost saving.

On Sep 3, 2:52*pm, (Steve Firth) wrote:

Sadly the f'ing morons who run councils see only a cost and not the long
term cost saving.

What are you blaming councilors for. They have all the headaches and
none of the spindoctors and PR people to fend off reality that bank
mismanagers and more powerful government politicians have.

If you want to blame someone go to the rich half of a Caribbean island
and kill a few recluses. It's your money they bought their seclusion
with.

On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:48:10 +0000, Huge wrote:

On 2011-09-03, Hugo Nebula wrote:
[Default] On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:15:15 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, harry , randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation. I imagine most
will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs anyway.

And even if they are, how do they get back up again, you dumb ****?

Edward de Bono would be ashamed of you....get the lift to the floor
above, and walk down. (disregarding the edge case of a failed lift to the
top floor)



--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 15:28:31 +0100, Bob Eager wrote:

On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 12:48:10 +0000, Huge wrote:

On 2011-09-03, Hugo Nebula wrote:
[Default] On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:15:15 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, harry , randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation. I imagine most
will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs anyway.

And even if they are, how do they get back up again, you dumb ****?

Edward de Bono would be ashamed of you....get the lift to the floor
above, and walk down. (disregarding the edge case of a failed lift to the
top floor)



Until there is a power cut... :-)

--
Rod

On Sep 3, 2:03*pm, Jim K wrote:
On Sep 3, 1:48 pm, Huge wrote:

On 2011-09-03, Hugo Nebula wrote:

[Default] On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:15:15 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, harry , randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation.
I imagine most will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs
anyway.

And even if they are, how do they get back up again, you dumb ****?

presumably they could also walk/stagger/mutter down the next flight to
get the lift down from the floor below.....;)

Jim K

They go down whether entering OR departing......dumb ****.

Huge wrote:
On 2011-09-03, Hugo Nebula wrote:
[Default] On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:15:15 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, harry , randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation.
I imagine most will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs
anyway.

And even if they are, how do they get back up again, you dumb ****?

Up two in the lift and walk back down a flight. Derhhhh!


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On Sat, 03 Sep 2011 17:18:39 +0100, John Williamson wrote:

Huge wrote:
On 2011-09-03, Hugo Nebula wrote:
[Default] On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:15:15 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, harry , randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation. I imagine most
will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs anyway.

And even if they are, how do they get back up again, you dumb ****?

Up two in the lift and walk back down a flight. Derhhhh!

Unless the lift to the top floor is inoperative.

--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 03/09/2011 07:15, harry wrote:
On Sep 2, 9:07 pm, Steve -
family.me.uk wrote:
On 02/09/2011 16:47, Part Timer wrote:

Anyone else see this kludge?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-14762456

If they originally wanted lifts that only stopped at every other floor,
they should have had two lifts capable of stopping at every floor, but
electronically arranged to only do every other one - thus allowing one
to be switched to cover every floor whenever the other was out of action.

SteveW

Pointless. The saving is that there are not even doors on "unused"
landings.

But it's not a saving if when work is required it needs 14 stairlifts
put in!

I did wonder whether it was a cost thing, but also wondered whether it
was a lift speed/size thing - you can use smaller lifts and run them
faster if they are not going to be stopping at as many floors and
picking up so many people.

Lifts go wrong - that's a simple fact - so having two lifts, but not
having redundancy is ridiculous.

SteveW

On 03/09/2011 14:52, Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:

Actually, multi-storey flats and elderly people are an ideal match.

Precisely.

I know several multi-storey blocks of flats that are ideal for old
people. Sadly they tend to be in places like Marble Arch and are only
for the wealthy who can aford the annual service charges. They manage to
provide clean public areas, lifts that are serviced and always
serviceable and security at the door. The big difference from council
accomodation is that they have 24/7 security.

This would all be achieveable in council owned accomodation and the
price of having 24h concierge/warden service would be relatively low
considering the number of individual homes in a multi-storey block. With
adequate training and perhaps some imagination in terms of providing
live-in accomodation the staff could provide social as well as physical
security.

Nah. I used to have friends who lived on the 16th floor of a tower
block. If you just pressed the intercom 0 button and told security that
you were going to flat 163 and their intercom wasn't working, they'd
open the outer door for you.

Security were at ground level in this building and they also monitored
the next building by camera - one day the scrotes got in and stole the
cameras!

SteveW

On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 16:12:53 GMT, Jethro
wrote:

That and the
fact that they'd be quite nickable, if not as stairlifts, for the metal
alone.

That's 26 sealed lead acid batteries to nick for a start before
bothering with the difficult bits :-).

(Second hand stair lifts have almost zero value as stair lifts).

On Sep 3, 4:56 pm, harry wrote:
On Sep 3, 2:03 pm, Jim K wrote:



On Sep 3, 1:48 pm, Huge wrote:

On 2011-09-03, Hugo Nebula wrote:

[Default] On Fri, 2 Sep 2011 23:15:15 -0700 (PDT), a certain
chimpanzee, harry , randomly hit the keyboard and
wrote:

Stupid putting elderly cripples in such accommodation.
I imagine most will be capable of walking down one flight of stairs
anyway.

And even if they are, how do they get back up again, you dumb ****?

presumably they could also walk/stagger/mutter down the next flight to
get the lift down from the floor below.....;)

Jim K

They go down whether entering OR departing......dumb ****.

moi?!
dumb**** yourself!

Jim K

Steve Walker wrote:

On 03/09/2011 14:52, Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:

Actually, multi-storey flats and elderly people are an ideal match.

Precisely.

I know several multi-storey blocks of flats that are ideal for old
people. Sadly they tend to be in places like Marble Arch and are only
for the wealthy who can aford the annual service charges. They manage to
provide clean public areas, lifts that are serviced and always
serviceable and security at the door. The big difference from council
accomodation is that they have 24/7 security.

This would all be achieveable in council owned accomodation and the
price of having 24h concierge/warden service would be relatively low
considering the number of individual homes in a multi-storey block. With
adequate training and perhaps some imagination in terms of providing
live-in accomodation the staff could provide social as well as physical
security.

Nah. I used to have friends who lived on the 16th floor of a tower
block. If you just pressed the intercom 0 button and told security that
you were going to flat 163 and their intercom wasn't working, they'd
open the outer door for you.

They would at the blocks I'm thinking of. You'd get as far as reception
and then have to wait while they telephoned the flat to find out if the
residents were expecting you.

Security were at ground level in this building and they also monitored
the next building by camera - one day the scrotes got in and stole the
cameras!

The problem is that councils don't give a bugger about how their
services are run.

On 04/09/2011 00:48, Steve Firth wrote:
Steve wrote:

On 03/09/2011 14:52, Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:

Actually, multi-storey flats and elderly people are an ideal match.

Precisely.

I know several multi-storey blocks of flats that are ideal for old
people. Sadly they tend to be in places like Marble Arch and are only
for the wealthy who can aford the annual service charges. They manage to
provide clean public areas, lifts that are serviced and always
serviceable and security at the door. The big difference from council
accomodation is that they have 24/7 security.

This would all be achieveable in council owned accomodation and the
price of having 24h concierge/warden service would be relatively low
considering the number of individual homes in a multi-storey block. With
adequate training and perhaps some imagination in terms of providing
live-in accomodation the staff could provide social as well as physical
security.

Nah. I used to have friends who lived on the 16th floor of a tower
block. If you just pressed the intercom 0 button and told security that
you were going to flat 163 and their intercom wasn't working, they'd
open the outer door for you.

They would at the blocks I'm thinking of. You'd get as far as reception
and then have to wait while they telephoned the flat to find out if the
residents were expecting you.

No they'd just let you in at this one and you could go straight to the
lifts. As it happened the intercom was broken, but they still did it
after it was fixed.

Security were at ground level in this building and they also monitored
the next building by camera - one day the scrotes got in and stole the
cameras!

The problem is that councils don't give a bugger about how their
services are run.

On 04/09/2011 02:15, Steve Walker wrote:
On 04/09/2011 00:48, Steve Firth wrote:
Steve wrote:

On 03/09/2011 14:52, Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:

Actually, multi-storey flats and elderly people are an ideal match.

Precisely.

I know several multi-storey blocks of flats that are ideal for old
people. Sadly they tend to be in places like Marble Arch and are only
for the wealthy who can aford the annual service charges. They
manage to
provide clean public areas, lifts that are serviced and always
serviceable and security at the door. The big difference from council
accomodation is that they have 24/7 security.

This would all be achieveable in council owned accomodation and the
price of having 24h concierge/warden service would be relatively low
considering the number of individual homes in a multi-storey block.
With
adequate training and perhaps some imagination in terms of providing
live-in accomodation the staff could provide social as well as physical
security.

Nah. I used to have friends who lived on the 16th floor of a tower
block. If you just pressed the intercom 0 button and told security that
you were going to flat 163 and their intercom wasn't working, they'd
open the outer door for you.

They would at the blocks I'm thinking of. You'd get as far as reception
and then have to wait while they telephoned the flat to find out if the
residents were expecting you.

No they'd just let you in at this one and you could go straight to the
lifts. As it happened the intercom was broken, but they still did it
after it was fixed.

Kind of the point. The better places have security bods who give a toss,
the others will do as you describe.

On 3 Sep 2011 14:28:31 GMT Bob Eager wrote :
Edward de Bono would be ashamed of you....get the lift to the floor
above, and walk down. (disregarding the edge case of a failed lift to the
top floor)

Won't work in many towers here - they have door handles to let you in to
the fire stairs but no handles on the stair side except at ground level. My
key tab will only let me take the lift to the floor where I live. When I
press the button to let a visitor in, it allows lift access to my floor for
two minutes.

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on',
Melbourne, Australia www.greentram.com

"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
On 3 Sep 2011 14:28:31 GMT Bob Eager wrote :
Edward de Bono would be ashamed of you....get the lift to the floor
above, and walk down. (disregarding the edge case of a failed lift to the
top floor)

Won't work in many towers here - they have door handles to let you in to
the fire stairs but no handles on the stair side except at ground level.
My
key tab will only let me take the lift to the floor where I live. When I
press the button to let a visitor in, it allows lift access to my floor
for
two minutes.

So there's no way that a resident on floor 8 can go and visit a friend on
floor 7 then?

tim

On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 10:30:46 +0100 Tim.... wrote :
So there's no way that a resident on floor 8 can go and visit a friend
on floor 7 then?

Yes, they go down to the foyer, out the front door and type 7xx on the
key pad. Friend presses the lift release button and they come back up.

Alternatively they phone up friend, friend presses lift release button
and they can go directly to their floor.

Going back to your own floor is no problem of course.

The plus is that someone who tails you when you come into the building
can get to one floor but does not have the run of the building

--
Tony Bryer, Greentram: 'Software to build on',
Melbourne, Australia www.greentram.com

"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 10:30:46 +0100 Tim.... wrote :
So there's no way that a resident on floor 8 can go and visit a friend
on floor 7 then?

Yes, they go down to the foyer, out the front door and type 7xx on the
key pad. Friend presses the lift release button and they come back up.

I worked that one out for myself. I thought it too much of a faff to
consider a solution :-(

tim