On 26/11/2013 19:34, Bill Wright wrote:
chris French wrote:
In message , Bill Wright
writes
Tim Watts wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...wire-team-to-c
hange-tens-of-thousands-of-out-of-reach-light-bulbs-8961562.html
Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!


"The current lighting on the Terminal 5 concourse is being replaced
with environmentally friendly LED bulbs"
So all the people waiting to board the most environmentally damaging
form of transport known to man will be happy in the knowledge that
the airport's light bulbs that shine down on them are
'environmentally friendly'. What a load of arse. Anyone genuinely
bothered about CO2 etc wouldn't fly.


But given that the airport is going to be there I'd rather the
building used energy as efficiently as possible.

The point is though that people go on these flights just because they
can. Often there's no sensible reason.

There is always a sensible reason, even if it is not one you would
choose yourself.

The CO2 per mile thing is
misleading because most aeroplane journeys are very long, and needn't
be.

They are just as long as they need to be to get from one airport to
another. Passenger kilometres are about the only way to make a
meaningful comparison between different modes of passenger transport.

As the figures I posted show if I use my bus pass, I am generating far
more CO2 than if I take a flight and it is quite difficult to get to
somewhere like Madeira by bus.

I think aeroplane travel should be heavily taxed, and the money
given to those who live under the flightpath.

I doubt there are many people who have been living in places that are
under flight paths longer than the flight paths have been there. Why
should they get preferential treatment over any other people who take
advantage of the lower cost of housing that is blighted in some way?

Colin Bignell

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:58:26 -0000, Bill Wright wrote:

Tim Watts wrote:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!


"The current lighting on the Terminal 5 concourse is being replaced with
environmentally friendly LED bulbs"
So all the people waiting to board the most environmentally damaging
form of transport known to man will be happy in the knowledge that the
airport's light bulbs that shine down on them are 'environmentally
friendly'. What a load of arse. Anyone genuinely bothered about CO2 etc
wouldn't fly.

The LED bulbs will last longer (alledgedly), although most of the one's Iive bought fail prematurely (in under a year). They're 50W equivalent GU10 spots though, probably run too hot.

--
In the UK, 17% of employees are health and safety officers.
Say NO! to health and safety in the workplace, before there are no real workers left!
Look out for yourself and stop blaming each other like 6 year olds!

On 25/11/2013 12:45, Tim Watts wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design
stage!

Then they will replace them with LEDs and work out that they are too
dim, and do the whole exercise again ;-)


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 25/11/2013 12:45, Tim Watts wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design
stage!

Then they will replace them with LEDs and work out that they are too dim,
and do the whole exercise again ;-)


http://www.schneider-electric.co.uk/...Terminal_5.pdf

And from that link "We now have an ongoing relationship with BAA regarding
training and maintenance"

--
Adam

Tim Watts wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

Would it have been impractical to design the bars the lights are on so they
could be lowered as happens in theatres?

--
Jeremy C B Nicoll - my opinions are my own.

Email sent to my from-address will be deleted. Instead, please reply
to replacing "aaa" by "284".

On Monday 25 November 2013 14:52 Jeremy Nicoll - news posts wrote in uk.d-i-
y:

Tim Watts wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

Would it have been impractical to design the bars the lights are on so
they could be lowered as happens in theatres?


Or incorporate a series of arty walking gantries into the design - and hang
the lights off those.

Oh - that would involve architects thinking - I forgot, silly me...

--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

In article id, Jeremy
Nicoll - news posts wrote:
Tim Watts wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

Would it have been impractical to design the bars the lights are on so
they could be lowered as happens in theatres?

Architects don't concern themselves with details.

I have a proposal (based on working in ba=rand new buildings) that members
of that profession should be compelled to live or work, as appropriate,
for at least 6 months in any building they have designed.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

In article , charles
writes
In article id, Jeremy
Nicoll - news posts wrote:
Tim Watts wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...hwire-team-to-
change-tens-of-thousands-of-out-of-reach-light-bulbs-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

Would it have been impractical to design the bars the lights are on so
they could be lowered as happens in theatres?

Architects don't concern themselves with details.

I have a proposal (based on working in ba=rand new buildings) that members
of that profession should be compelled to live or work, as appropriate,
for at least 6 months in any building they have designed.

Looking at the design, it is quite possible that it was designed with
maintenance in mind. There appears to be a continuous round tube above
the light fittings and it may have been intended to run a captive bogey
over that as a rail to maintain the lights.

I'd expect the truth of the matter is that that rail will be used to
suspend a mobile working platform.

The high-wire headline being bull**** of course as they admit in the
body of the story that it is simply roped access.
--
fred
it's a ba-na-na . . . .

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article id, Jeremy
Nicoll - news posts wrote:
Tim Watts wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

Would it have been impractical to design the bars the lights are on so
they could be lowered as happens in theatres?

Architects don't concern themselves with details.

I have a proposal (based on working in ba=rand new buildings) that members
of that profession should be compelled to live or work, as appropriate,
for at least 6 months in any building they have designed.

The French brothel architects agree with you.



--
Adam

On Tuesday, November 26, 2013 3:58:05 AM UTC+13, charles wrote:

I have a proposal (based on working in ba=rand new buildings) that members
of that profession should be compelled to live or work, as appropriate,
for at least 6 months in any building they have designed.

I heard of one architect who was staying in an earthquake-proof hotel that he designed, when there was a huge earthquake. The hotel survived with no damage. Not surprising since it looked like an Egyptian pyramid.

charles wrote:

I have a proposal (based on working in ba=rand new buildings) that members
of that profession should be compelled to live or work, as appropriate,
for at least 6 months in any building they have designed.


I found the TV/sat socket in one corner of each largish room; the
nearest power point in the opposite corner.

There's a hospital where the room layout was planned with no regard for
the internal steel columns. Result: some rooms can't be used because the
boxed-in column almost fills the space behind the door.

At another place the room layout ignores the positions of the windows.

Bill

On 26/11/2013 19:40, Bill Wright wrote:
charles wrote:

I have a proposal (based on working in ba=rand new buildings) that
members
of that profession should be compelled to live or work, as
appropriate, for at least 6 months in any building they have designed.


I found the TV/sat socket in one corner of each largish room; the
nearest power point in the opposite corner.

There's a hospital where the room layout was planned with no regard for
the internal steel columns. Result: some rooms can't be used because the
boxed-in column almost fills the space behind the door.

Similar to the car parks where 2 out of 3 spaces have a column in them
or some spaces have a bollard or trolley park right on the line, yet
these spaces are no wider than the rest, so no-one can position vehicles
in the spaces and be able to open doors both sides.

At the local shopping centre, the car park had an entrance/exit that was
too narrow and too sharp, so a vehicle exiting (sharp left) could not do
so without crossing over the centre line of the road. If a vehicle was
waiting to come out, another could not come in at the same time, but the
queue of vehicles waiting to come in made it impossible for vehicles to
come out! For years everyone complained about it. Eventually they
changed the car park layout, moved the entrance a few feet ... and built
the same problem in all over again!

At another place the room layout ignores the positions of the windows.

Pillars in front of the windows?

Where I am working now, the entrances to the toilets on each floor have
two doors one after the other - so close together that they've had to
put warning signs on to avoid accidents. The inner door also hits anyone
that is using the hand-dryer and due to the washbasins and the unit they
are intalled into, the person drying their hands cannot stand to one
side. Anyone using the washbasins prevents access to the toilet cubicles.

SteveW

On 27/11/2013 12:52, Huge wrote:
On 2013-11-25, charles wrote:
In article id, Jeremy
Nicoll - news posts wrote:
Tim Watts wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

Would it have been impractical to design the bars the lights are on so
they could be lowered as happens in theatres?

Architects don't concern themselves with details.

I have a proposal (based on working in ba=rand new buildings) that members
of that profession should be compelled to live or work, as appropriate,
for at least 6 months in any building they have designed.

Hear, hear.

I worked in a building in Canary Wharf which had been designed by a world
renowned architect and cost £750M. It was ****.

I went to school in a building that won design awards in the 60s

1) Floor to ceiling glass, so freeze or bake depending upon the time of
year.
2) Flat roofs, so numerous leaks.
3) Internal drainpipes, so more leaks - especially into the classrooms
below the chemistry labs.
4) Design based upon a rectangular hall/dining hall, with a square
building at each corner, overlapping one side to allow a doorway at each
common wall section. The squares containing variously classrooms, labs,
gym and engineering/woodwork block. Hence whenever exams were on in the
hall, pupils had to move from block to block outside the building, no
matter what the weather - there weren't even any pathways to the
engineering block!

Adding to the design failings were the build quality failings. A school
elsewhere collapsed and schools throughout the country were checked -
ours was found to have been built on inadequately drained ground, the
walls of the hall were slowly tilting outwards and the concrete main
roof beams were only on them by 1/2" each side. The wooden block
flooring in the dining area was forever lifting due to the damp under
there. Internal walls were all painted breeze-block, so brushing against
them took skin off.

SteveW

On Wednesday 27 November 2013 19:54 SteveW wrote in uk.d-i-y:

1) Floor to ceiling glass, so freeze or bake depending upon the time of
year.
2) Flat roofs, so numerous leaks.
3) Internal drainpipes, so more leaks - especially into the classrooms
below the chemistry labs.
4) Design based upon a rectangular hall/dining hall, with a square
building at each corner, overlapping one side to allow a doorway at each
common wall section. The squares containing variously classrooms, labs,
gym and engineering/woodwork block. Hence whenever exams were on in the
hall, pupils had to move from block to block outside the building, no
matter what the weather - there weren't even any pathways to the
engineering block!

Ah yes.

When that was designed, all the teachers would have been moaning about the
obvious flaws.

Meanwhile, there would have been some fools in "management" who were;

1) Wowed by the architect's flashy presentation;

2) Too out of touch and/or stupid to see the flaws;

3) A **** manager so won't listen to anyone.

And so it continues...


--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

On Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:54:36 +0000 SteveW wrote :
I went to school in a building that won design awards in the 60s

1) Floor to ceiling glass, so freeze or bake depending upon the time of
year.
2) Flat roofs, so numerous leaks.
3) Internal drainpipes, so more leaks - especially into the classrooms
below the chemistry labs.
4) Design based upon a rectangular hall/dining hall, with a square
building at each corner, overlapping one side to allow a doorway at each
common wall section. The squares containing variously classrooms, labs,
gym and engineering/woodwork block. Hence whenever exams were on in the
hall, pupils had to move from block to block outside the building, no
matter what the weather - there weren't even any pathways to the
engineering block!

Hunstanton School? Horrendous building according to the teaching staff,
winner of architectural awards and Listed.

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

Well, one would have thought that the original design would have included
the mounting hardware for a gondola system. I'm sure this was done in many
arenas with high cieling fitted lighting for goodness sake. What a bunch of
idiots the planning aceptance mob must have been.

Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Tim Watts" wrote in message
...
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

--
Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

http://www.sensorly.com/ Crowd mapping of 2G/3G/4G mobile signal coverage

On Monday, 25 November 2013 15:00:40 UTC, Brian Gaff wrote:

Well, one would have thought that the original design would have included
the mounting hardware for a gondola system. I'm sure this was done in many
arenas with high ceiling fitted lighting for goodness sake. What a bunch of
idiots the planning acceptance mob must have been.

Acceptance is the key.
I doubt they would have designed it to be unserviceable. Only the idiots it was designed for probably thought they could get people to do it a lot cheaper. Maybe the gang that remodelled Windsor Castle.

In article ,
Tim Watts writes:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

It costs £5K to replace some of the lamps in the London Underground.
That's one of the reasons they are moving to LED for some lights.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Mon, 25 Nov 2013 12:45:08 +0000, Tim Watts
wrote:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

Yep; bless'em, architects are such clueless ****s sometimes.
I installed high-up lighting in a barn conversion and suggested it
would be a good idea to arrange things in such a way as to enable lamp
replacement. The owners insisted on talking to the architect, who said
to just go ahead and stick to the drawings... What a ******. He didn't
like a humble artisan type highlighting his ****-up.

On Monday, 25 November 2013 12:45:08 UTC, Tim Watts wrote:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...s-8961562.html

Oops - someone did not really think that through at the design stage!

Tim Watts Personal Blog: http://squiddy.blog.dionic.net/

What a load of bollox reporting. I've just go back from my trapeze class and I can assure you that if aerialists were doing the work they'd be much more interested in whether they were pointing their toes and whether one pose looked batter than another. And the place would be full of glitter for months afterwards.

"High wire artists" don't do odd jobs like changing light bulbs and Cirque have got a fat little earner going in the entertainment business without branching out into building maintenance.
Maybe, just maybe, Heathrow have contracted a team who once did some work for Cirque but I even doubt that.

[Mind you, it would be awesome to perform in a 40m high space].