"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
I tried a 30W CFL in our hall pendant fitting a couple or three years
ago. It was claimed to be equivalent to a 130W incandescent lamp AFAICR
but my impression was that it seemed no brighter than a 100W incandescent
lamp which makes me suspect that the wattage equivilency for CFLs is
still based on the UK and European 240 and 220 volt 1000 hour lamps
rather than the much brighter American 120v 750 hour lamps which is the
benchmark for LED lamps.

Never really understood why makers need to lie about light output.

Once one starts doing it, it should be obvious why more do too.

Does it sell more to the gullible?

More of yours, obviously.

It certainly annoys those who expect such claims to be true.

But if they all do it, that’s stiff **** for them.

If they claimed the light output was say equivalent
to the 60w (or whatever) GLS most would know,
and it turned out to be better, who would complain?

Thanks for that completely superfluous proof of why you always needed a
union.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Robin wrote:
If they claimed the light output was say equivalent to the 60w (or
whatever) GLS most would know, and it turned out to be better, who
would
complain?


Save that there are adults today who have never used ordinary, domestic
incandescent lamp and wouldn't find that a useful benchmark.

In which case no real point in making the claim. Simply state the light
output in a standard way.

Trouble is that most don’t have a clue what say 800 lumens means light wise.

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is based on the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp type than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on offer of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find it is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light. Seems to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point, especially true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as much as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn them
on and off when needed?


--
Adam

On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is based on the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp type than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on offer of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find it is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light. Seems to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point, especially true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as much as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn them
on and off when needed?

You might trip over trying to find the lightswitch, especially if
elderly or infirm.

On 25/10/2017 21:37, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is based on the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp type than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on offer of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find it is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light. Seems to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point, especially true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as much as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn them
on and off when needed?

You might trip over trying to find the lightswitch, especially if
elderly or infirm.

Or more likely not bother turning the light on because it "seems" light
enough even though it isn't quite.

SteveW

On Tue, 24 Oct 2017 20:28:21 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Johnny B Good wrote:

Dave Plowman wrote:

Simply state the light output in a standard way.

They already do, using a Lumens output figure (typically 806 or 810
Lumens for the classic A bulb American 60W GLS lamp).

I often get asked to replace one or more blown lamps when I visit my
parents (they have 5 + 3 fittings in lounge and dining room) I noticed
that the boxes for the 60W incandescent lamps this time *were* marked
clearly in lumens.

JOOI, can you recall the lumens figure on those 60W lamps (assuming that
you're in the UK)? I'd expect a much lower figure than the 806/810 lumens
figure typical of a "60W" LED lamp for 240v 1000 hour rated GLS lamps.

According to wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Incandescent_light_bulb#Electrical_characteristics (sorry about the line
wrap) the lumens output figures for 120 and 230 volt 60W lamps are 850
and 730 respectively. However, I notice anomalous figures being shown for
the 25W lamps (transposed column data?) so I wouldn't assume any
accuracy, just 'Ball Park' figures.

Bear in mind that for a LED lamp to lay claim to being equivalent to a
60W 120v 750 hour rated incandescent lamp, the 806 lumens figure is at
the bottom end of the tolerance range for said 60W reference light source.

--
Johnny B Good

On 24/10/2017 11:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:

I tried a 30W CFL in our hall pendant fitting a couple or three years
ago. It was claimed to be equivalent to a 130W incandescent lamp AFAICR
but my impression was that it seemed no brighter than a 100W incandescent
lamp which makes me suspect that the wattage equivilency for CFLs is
still based on the UK and European 240 and 220 volt 1000 hour lamps
rather than the much brighter American 120v 750 hour lamps which is the
benchmark for LED lamps.

Never really understood why makers need to lie about light output. Does it
sell more to the gullible? It certainly annoys those who expect such
claims to be true.

It was the only way they could sell CFLs originally - by pretending that
the feeble 40W ghastly greenish equivalent light output of a nominally
60W equivalent CFL was the same as a real 60W incandescent.

For some strange reason trading standards was never interested in it
because it was problematic (ie expensive) to measure reliably.

If they claimed the light output was say equivalent to the 60w (or
whatever) GLS most would know, and it turned out to be better, who would
complain?

It caught me out in the reverse direction when alarmed by the slow start
time of a CFL in my parents bathroom I replaced it with an LED 60W lamp.
The LED units produce the same light as a *real* 60W incandescent and
are instant on which was far too bright. I had to fit a 40W instead!

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

Johnny B Good wrote:

can you recall the lumens figure on those 60W lamps
(assuming that you're in the UK)?

The clue's in the email address :-P

I'd expect a much lower figure than the 806/810 lumens figure typical of a "60W" LED lamp for 240v 1000 hour rated GLS lamps.

They were not [marked as] rough service lamps just normal "old hat light
bulbs" this is the type they'd bought, so 500 lm.

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/4iMAAOSwFNZWvTy3/s-l500.jpg

Different wattages from other photos from the same eBay seller

40W pearl = 270 lm
40W clear = 280 lm
60W pearl = 500 lm
60W clear = 520 lm
100W pearl = 970 lm
100W clear = 1000 lm
150W pearl = 2000 lm
150W clear = 2100 lm

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/oSQAAOSwUuFWvTbr/s-l500.jpg

strangely the 40W clear golfball are 350 lm ...

On Thursday, 26 October 2017 08:42:22 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
On 24/10/2017 11:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Never really understood why makers need to lie about light output. Does it
sell more to the gullible? It certainly annoys those who expect such
claims to be true.

It was the only way they could sell CFLs originally - by pretending that
the feeble 40W ghastly greenish equivalent light output of a nominally
60W equivalent CFL was the same as a real 60W incandescent.

For some strange reason trading standards was never interested in it

because the claims made were true. CFL output was not compared with a standard filament lamp in the box claims.


NT

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 10:17:57 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

Johnny B Good wrote:

can you recall the lumens figure on those 60W lamps (assuming that
you're in the UK)?

The clue's in the email address :-P

Yeah, redundant assumption on my part. Mind you, the return email
address can be made up any which way you like but in this case, it would
have been reasonable to assume a UK location without further comment.


I'd expect a much lower figure than the 806/810 lumens figure
typical of a "60W" LED lamp for 240v 1000 hour rated GLS lamps.

They were not [marked as] rough service lamps just normal "old hat light
bulbs" this is the type they'd bought, so 500 lm.

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/4iMAAOSwFNZWvTy3/s-l500.jpg

Different wattages from other photos from the same eBay seller

40W pearl = 270 lm 40W clear = 280 lm 60W pearl = 500 lm 60W clear = 520
lm 100W pearl = 970 lm 100W clear = 1000 lm 150W pearl = 2000 lm 150W
clear = 2100 lm

https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/oSQAAOSwUuFWvTbr/s-l500.jpg

strangely the 40W clear golfball are 350 lm ...

Oddly, they all look like figures typical for long life / rough service
lamps rather than for the UK standard 1000 hour life GLS lamp. The only
clue in that picture to suggest that they might be long life / rough
service being the use of the word "Professional" on the packaging.

Anyway, harking back to the observation that modern "60W" 810lm LED GLS
lamps seem to match or exceed expectations (for those of us in the UK at
any rate), is simply down to the manufacturers being forced by regulation
to use lumens output figures based on the more efficient American 120v
incandescent lamp standard when such equivalency "Wattage Ratings" are
included on the packaging by way of a guide to help their customers
choose a replacement for an incandescent light bulb.

It's rather fortunate for us in the UK (and Europe for that matter) that
the American incandescent lamp figures were the ones chosen to set the
standard since this results in an LED GLS lamp that produces a little
more light than our wattage equivalent incandescent lamps produce.

The increase is a very welcome one since choice of incandescent lamp
wattage is typically based on a minimum acceptable level to keep their
running cost as low as possible. The main reason we use 60W lamps in
place of 150W lamps is on account of the profligate energy consumption
such a "luxury item" as a 150W lamp would represent. A doubling or
tripling of the light levels commonly used in homes lit by classic
tungsten filament GLS lamps would be a very welcome improvement in all
bar a few exceptional cases, hence my use of the phrase "You never had it
so good." :-)

--
Johnny B Good

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 08:42:19 +0100, Martin Brown wrote:

On 24/10/2017 11:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:

I tried a 30W CFL in our hall pendant fitting a couple or three
years
ago. It was claimed to be equivalent to a 130W incandescent lamp
AFAICR but my impression was that it seemed no brighter than a 100W
incandescent lamp which makes me suspect that the wattage equivilency
for CFLs is still based on the UK and European 240 and 220 volt 1000
hour lamps rather than the much brighter American 120v 750 hour lamps
which is the benchmark for LED lamps.

Never really understood why makers need to lie about light output. Does
it sell more to the gullible? It certainly annoys those who expect such
claims to be true.

It was the only way they could sell CFLs originally - by pretending that
the feeble 40W ghastly greenish equivalent light output of a nominally
60W equivalent CFL was the same as a real 60W incandescent.

For some strange reason trading standards was never interested in it
because it was problematic (ie expensive) to measure reliably.

If they claimed the light output was say equivalent to the 60w (or
whatever) GLS most would know, and it turned out to be better, who
would complain?

It caught me out in the reverse direction when alarmed by the slow start
time of a CFL in my parents bathroom I replaced it with an LED 60W lamp.
The LED units produce the same light as a *real* 60W incandescent and
are instant on which was far too bright. I had to fit a 40W instead!

Two points: the *real* 60W lamp is the brighter American 60W lamp making
it a little brighter than our (UK) 60W lamps and I hope you took
advantage of Poundland as your source for the "40W" 470lm light bulb
which, in its "A" form, has proved reliable, unlike the golfball version
which didn't.

--
Johnny B Good

Johnny B Good wrote:

Oddly, they all look like figures typical for long life / rough service
lamps rather than for the UK standard 1000 hour life GLS lamp.

The spec sheet says 1000 hours, and avoids use of the word "rough" but
does include words such as "robust", "industrial" and "reinforced".

http://www.cromptonlamps.com/images/pdf/trad_sp_pro_range_gls.pdf

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 03:24:37 -0700, tabbypurr wrote:

On Thursday, 26 October 2017 08:42:22 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
On 24/10/2017 11:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Never really understood why makers need to lie about light output.
Does it sell more to the gullible? It certainly annoys those who
expect such claims to be true.

It was the only way they could sell CFLs originally - by pretending
that the feeble 40W ghastly greenish equivalent light output of a
nominally 60W equivalent CFL was the same as a real 60W incandescent.

For some strange reason trading standards was never interested in it

because the claims made were true. CFL output was not compared with a
standard filament lamp in the box claims.

Most likely they chose a 240v long life lamp as "Their Standard". I
suspect the regulations now in place for LED lamps simply didn't exist as
such so they were free to choose the lowest possible benchmark by which
to 'legitimately' make wattage equivalency claims on the packaging.

Whether the new regulations applied to LED GLS lamps are also being
applied to the current production of CFLs, I simply do not know. If the
CFL lamp manufacturers know what's good for them, I'd expect them to now
be voluntarily applying the LED GLS standards even if they're not obliged
by force of regulation to do so. However, in view of the impending
obsolescence of the CFL, that's rather a moot point.

--
Johnny B Good

"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is based on
the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp type than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on offer of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find it is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light. Seems
to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs
compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point, especially
true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as much as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn them
on and off when needed?

You might trip over trying to find the lightswitch, especially if
elderly or infirm.

Not if you have movement sensors instead of light switches.

Main problem is when you wonder about the noise outside
in the middle of the night and want to see what the potential
criminal is up to without it being clear that you are watching.

All easily fixed with a Hue system that you can tell to ignore the
movement sensors in that situation before checking. Not cheap tho.

On Thursday, 26 October 2017 17:52:08 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is based on
the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp type than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on offer of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find it is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light. Seems
to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs
compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point, especially
true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as much as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn them
on and off when needed?

You might trip over trying to find the lightswitch, especially if
elderly or infirm.

Not if you have movement sensors instead of light switches.

Then other things can turn them on like pets, also sometime yuo just don't want the light coming on.


Main problem is when you wonder about the noise outside
in the middle of the night and want to see what the potential
criminal is up to without it being clear that you are watching.

If it were me I'd have a video cameras to see what he was up to and record, if I were bothing with sensors switching on lights that is.



All easily fixed with a Hue system that you can tell to ignore the
movement sensors in that situation before checking. Not cheap tho.

It's always easy to fix by throwing money at the system.

On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW wrote:

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs
compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point, especially
true in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as
much as convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights
switched on between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn them
on and off when needed?

We have those neon surrounds on the hall/landing light switches. They
give enough light anyway.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 26/10/2017 11:24, wrote:
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 08:42:22 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
On 24/10/2017 11:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Never really understood why makers need to lie about light output. Does it
sell more to the gullible? It certainly annoys those who expect such
claims to be true.

It was the only way they could sell CFLs originally - by pretending that
the feeble 40W ghastly greenish equivalent light output of a nominally
60W equivalent CFL was the same as a real 60W incandescent.

For some strange reason trading standards was never interested in it

because the claims made were true. CFL output was not compared with a standard filament lamp in the box claims.

Trading and advertising standards are quite capable on acting on what
the public would expect, not what the small-print actually says. If
they'd wanted to, they could have enforced a comparison that was
actually meaningful to Joe Public.

SteveW

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 17:52:08 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good
CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is based
on
the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp type
than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but
we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on offer
of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My
problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find it
is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I
want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light.
Seems
to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In
which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs
compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point, especially
true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as much
as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn them
on and off when needed?

You might trip over trying to find the lightswitch, especially if
elderly or infirm.

Not if you have movement sensors instead of light switches.

Then other things can turn them on like pets,

Not when you position them proper and have the right type of movement
sensor.

also sometime yuo just don't want the light coming on.

What I said, stupid.

Main problem is when you wonder about the noise outside
in the middle of the night and want to see what the potential
criminal is up to without it being clear that you are watching.

If it were me I'd have a video cameras
to see what he was up to and record,

Sure, but when its clear that something is up, you may well want
to have a look yourself too, without the house lights coming on.

if I were bothing with sensors switching on lights that is.

Why fart around with manual switches at all anymore ?

All easily fixed with a Hue system that you can tell to ignore the
movement sensors in that situation before checking. Not cheap tho.

On Thursday, 26 October 2017 22:56:18 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 17:52:08 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good
CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is based
on
the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp type
than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but
we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on offer
of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My
problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find it
is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I
want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light.
Seems
to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In
which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs
compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point, especially
true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as much
as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn them
on and off when needed?

You might trip over trying to find the lightswitch, especially if
elderly or infirm.

Not if you have movement sensors instead of light switches.

Then other things can turn them on like pets,

Not when you position them proper and have the right type of movement
sensor.

Another reason not to have them.


also sometime yuo just don't want the light coming on.

What I said, stupid.

which makes auto on, not an idea option.


Main problem is when you wonder about the noise outside
in the middle of the night and want to see what the potential
criminal is up to without it being clear that you are watching.

If it were me I'd have a video cameras
to see what he was up to and record,

Sure, but when its clear that something is up, you may well want
to have a look yourself too, without the house lights coming on.

True, hopefully I'd have an app on my phone for viewing .


if I were bothing with sensors switching on lights that is.

Why fart around with manual switches at all anymore ?

Because they are still more practical for most.
Here we have a new building with auto lights. Trouble is at night
going into the toilet it;s dark, until after you enter then the lights flicker on as they use a sensor inside and not on the door, so the lights don't come on until you are in the toilet, OK when you;re used to it and know, otherwise you g=have to stand there until the lights come on.
So a tweeking of sensors of having them operate when you open the door, rather than wait until you have walked in would be better.



All easily fixed with a Hue system that you can tell to ignore the
movement sensors in that situation before checking. Not cheap tho.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 22:56:18 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 17:52:08 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good
CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is
based
on
the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp
type
than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but
we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on
offer
of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in
the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My
problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find
it
is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I
want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light.
Seems
to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In
which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs
compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point,
especially
true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as
much
as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched
on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn
them
on and off when needed?

You might trip over trying to find the lightswitch, especially if
elderly or infirm.

Not if you have movement sensors instead of light switches.

Then other things can turn them on like pets,

Not when you position them properly and have the right type of movement
sensor.

Another reason not to have them.

reams of your troll**** flushed where it belongs

also sometime yuo just don't want the light coming on.

What I said, stupid.

Main problem is when you wonder about the noise outside
in the middle of the night and want to see what the potential
criminal is up to without it being clear that you are watching.

If it were me I'd have a video cameras
to see what he was up to and record,

Sure, but when its clear that something is up, you may well want
to have a look yourself too, without the house lights coming on.

True, hopefully I'd have an app on my phone for viewing .

Pity it costs much more to have complete camera coverage.

if I were bothing with sensors switching on lights that is.

Why fart around with manual switches at all anymore ?

Because they are still more practical for most.

Like hell they are.

Here we have a new building with auto lights.
Trouble is at night going into the toilet it;s dark,
until after you enter then the lights flicker on

Not with led lights they dont.

as they use a sensor inside and not on the door, so
the lights don't come on until you are in the toilet,

So its ****ed by design. No surprise you lot couldnt
even manage to get a system that isnt ****ed by design.

OK when you;re used to it and know, otherwise
you g=have to stand there until the lights come on.

And you dont have to when its not
****ed by design. I never have to.

So a tweeking of sensors of having them operate when you open
the door, rather than wait until you have walked in would be better.

And even a terminal ****wit such as yourself should be able manage
that in your own home, if someone was actually stupid enough to
lend you a seeing eye dog and a white cane, again, troll****.

All easily fixed with a Hue system that you can tell to ignore the
movement sensors in that situation before checking. Not cheap tho.

On 10/21/2017 6:49 PM, Me wrote:
My house is mostly lit by cfl lamps, apart from a couple of LEDs used as
bedside lights.Â* I am thinking about switching to LEDs throughout.Â* Is
this viable?Â* Pros and cons?Â* I would value your opinions.

Thank you.

Wow, what a response!
I read every reply, even the ones that drifted away from the original
question and am much the wiser for it.

I will replace most if not all of cfcs but not all at once. I will wait
for them to expire, which won't take too long in my own experience.
Thank you all for some very interesting reading, you have been a great help.

One further thing, when I first started using (over 20 years ago) cfcs I
was told never to switch one off before at least 20 minutes had elapsed
to allow for "cathode regeneration" or the bulb life would be seriously
shortened. Is this still true?

Thanks again

On Thursday, 26 October 2017 21:32:10 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 26/10/2017 11:24, tabbypurr wrote:
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 08:42:22 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
On 24/10/2017 11:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Never really understood why makers need to lie about light output. Does it
sell more to the gullible? It certainly annoys those who expect such
claims to be true.

It was the only way they could sell CFLs originally - by pretending that
the feeble 40W ghastly greenish equivalent light output of a nominally
60W equivalent CFL was the same as a real 60W incandescent.

For some strange reason trading standards was never interested in it

because the claims made were true. CFL output was not compared with a standard filament lamp in the box claims.

Trading and advertising standards are quite capable on acting on what
the public would expect, not what the small-print actually says. If
they'd wanted to, they could have enforced a comparison that was
actually meaningful to Joe Public.

SteveW

the reality is they never did

On Saturday, 28 October 2017 18:47:15 UTC+1, Me wrote:

One further thing, when I first started using (over 20 years ago) cfcs I
was told never to switch one off before at least 20 minutes had elapsed
to allow for "cathode regeneration" or the bulb life would be seriously
shortened. Is this still true?

Thanks again

never was


NT

On 28/10/2017 22:57, wrote:
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 21:32:10 UTC+1, Steve Walker wrote:
On 26/10/2017 11:24, tabbypurr wrote:
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 08:42:22 UTC+1, Martin Brown wrote:
On 24/10/2017 11:11, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Never really understood why makers need to lie about light output. Does it
sell more to the gullible? It certainly annoys those who expect such
claims to be true.

It was the only way they could sell CFLs originally - by pretending that
the feeble 40W ghastly greenish equivalent light output of a nominally
60W equivalent CFL was the same as a real 60W incandescent.

For some strange reason trading standards was never interested in it

because the claims made were true. CFL output was not compared with a standard filament lamp in the box claims.

Trading and advertising standards are quite capable on acting on what
the public would expect, not what the small-print actually says. If
they'd wanted to, they could have enforced a comparison that was
actually meaningful to Joe Public.

SteveW

the reality is they never did

No. Which makes me wonder, was there political pressure to keep quiet
and get the things sold depite them being disappointing to almost
everyone who used them?

SteveW

On 10/21/2017 6:49 PM, Me wrote:
My house is mostly lit by cfl lamps, apart from a couple of LEDs used as
bedside lights.Â* I am thinking about switching to LEDs throughout.Â* Is
this viable?Â* Pros and cons?Â* I would value your opinions.

Thank you.

Wow, what a response!
I read every reply, even the ones that drifted away from the original
question and am much the wiser for it.

I will replace most if not all of cfcs but not all at once. I will wait
for them to expire, which won't take too long in my own experience.
Thank you all for some very interesting reading, you have been a great help.

One further thing, when I first started using (over 20 years ago) cfls,
not cfcs..(edit) I was told never to switch one off before at least 20
minutes had elapsed to allow for something called "cathode regeneration"
or the bulb life would be seriously shortened. Is this still true?

Thanks again

On Saturday, 28 October 2017 05:35:59 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 22:56:18 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 17:52:08 UTC+1, Rod Speed wrote:
"Scott" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 25 Oct 2017 21:34:10 +0100, ARW
wrote:

On 24/10/2017 02:45, Johnny B Good wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 12:55:04 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Johnny B Good wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 01:28:42 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

====snip====

I found the filament style 60W equiv lamps
to be very good a true match for light output and a pretty good
CRI.

That'll be on account the 806Lm lamps "Wattage" rating is
based
on
the
more efficient American 120v 750 hour tungsten filament lamp
type
than
on our less efficient UK 240v 1000 hour lamp type.

It's taken quite a few years longer than promised by Cree but
we're
finally seeing LED lamps with efficiencies above the best on
offer
of
81Lm per watt of the past five years now raised to somewhere in
the
region of 120 to 130Lm per watt.

I'd think most know an LED is more efficient than tungsten. My
problem
is buying one which says it is a 100 watt equivalent only to find
it
is
not -
and noticeably so.

If I'm happy with a particular light level/quality, that's what I
want
of any replacement, since it is the primary purpose of a light..
Seems
to
me many think saving money is the primary purpose of a light. In
which
case leave it switched off. ;-)

When CFLs first became available, the savings in running costs
compared
to tungsten filament lighting was the main selling point,
especially
true
in locations such as hallways and landings where, for safety as
much
as
convenience, it would be preferable to leave those lights switched
on
between dusk and bedtime.

Preferable to who? What safety?

What's wrong with a light switch in a convenient position to turn
them
on and off when needed?

You might trip over trying to find the lightswitch, especially if
elderly or infirm.

Not if you have movement sensors instead of light switches.

Then other things can turn them on like pets,

Not when you position them properly and have the right type of movement
sensor.

Another reason not to have them.

reams of your troll**** flushed where it belongs

you're too thick to even understand the basics.



Sure, but when its clear that something is up, you may well want
to have a look yourself too, without the house lights coming on.

True, hopefully I'd have an app on my phone for viewing .

Pity it costs much more to have complete camera coverage.

Most can work out where to put cameras, and the footage recorded for viewing later by the police if need be.
And it does cost a lot to have full coverage as it does to have all doors on maglocks, which is why so few do it, more people have cameras than have maglocks.



if I were bothing with sensors switching on lights that is.

Why fart around with manual switches at all anymore ?

Because they are still more practical for most.

Like hell they are.

fun gimmicks for a while but teh novelety soon wares off.
Those phillips hues are OK pretty dim as lights go, you should actually try them, compared to normal bulbs the light level is pretty low and at the price they are they are mostly just a gimmick.


Here we have a new building with auto lights.
Trouble is at night going into the toilet it;s dark,
until after you enter then the lights flicker on

Not with led lights they dont.

Yes they do.


as they use a sensor inside and not on the door, so
the lights don't come on until you are in the toilet,

So its ****ed by design. No surprise you lot couldnt
even manage to get a system that isnt ****ed by design.

you don't realy want the touilet lights coming on when studetns are outsoide queueing to get in the lecture room what would be the point of that ?

That's one problem of these great idea, they don't solve the problem just mask it.



OK when you;re used to it and know, otherwise
you g=have to stand there until the lights come on.

And you dont have to when its not
****ed by design. I never have to.

How does it know you want the light on ?
This is why they don't use such things for street lighting, you don't want to be driving down a road and have the street lights come on after you pass them.
Most peole want t alight on before they enter a roomn and that is why most light switches are located by the doorway so you can switch the light on as the first action after opening the door.



So a tweeking of sensors of having them operate when you open
the door, rather than wait until you have walked in would be better.

And even a terminal ****wit such as yourself should be able manage
that in your own home,

I have the inteligence to use an on off switch when I need to, I don;t need some sensor to tell me, I can work out whether or not I need a light on and how bright I want it all by myself.




you can't as the circut takes time to activate and it doesnlt until you enter the room. if someone was actually stupid enough to
lend you a seeing eye dog and a white cane, again, troll****.

you're troll **** flushed where it belongs.

On 31/10/17 12:07, whisky-dave wrote:
Here we have a new building with auto lights.
Trouble is at night going into the toilet it;s dark,
until after you enter then the lights flicker on
Not with led lights they dont.
Yes they do.


I have one LED bulb tyhta delays 1/4 seciond. All the others come on
instantly

It is therefore likely that it is your brain that is flickering, or
retinal detachment



--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On Tuesday, 31 October 2017 12:10:33 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/10/17 12:07, whisky-dave wrote:
Here we have a new building with auto lights.
Trouble is at night going into the toilet it;s dark,
until after you enter then the lights flicker on
Not with led lights they dont.
Yes they do.


I have one LED bulb tyhta delays 1/4 seciond. All the others come on
instantly

It is therefore likely that it is your brain that is flickering, or
retinal detachment

No the sensor is trigger by PIR for this I have to be actually inside the room/toilet then the sensor sends the signal to the contactor which then triggers the lights/LED or whever makes little differnce.

When I open the door there is darkness the lights don't come on until I am well into the room and that is because I am not sensed until I am in the room, unless yuo can get light to travel faster than the speed of light that is, then the lights will come on before I open the door.

On Tuesday, 31 October 2017 12:10:33 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/10/17 12:07, whisky-dave wrote:
Here we have a new building with auto lights.
Trouble is at night going into the toilet it;s dark,
until after you enter then the lights flicker on
Not with led lights they dont.
Yes they do.


I have one LED bulb tyhta delays 1/4 seciond. All the others come on
instantly

It is therefore likely that it is your brain that is flickering, or
retinal detachment

There's a relatively new type of controller built into some LED lights that does cause some flicker. Fine for plant lighting, not ideal for home use.


NT

Some drunken bum desperately cowering behind
whisky-dave wrote nothing
but troll****, as always. All flushed where it belongs.

On Tuesday, 31 October 2017 20:05:15 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
Some drunken bum desperately cowering behind
whisky-dave wrote nothing
but troll****, as always. All flushed where it belongs.

Yes **** for brains, in fact yesterday 5pm I noticed that the lights were on before I entered, yes I think people have been complaining about walking into dark rooms at night.
Went again this morning at 10am lights on during the day, they have turned the sensors off and the lights now remain on even in daylight.
So that proves they are a failure in the real world.
But this technology works OK with the sinks, as they detect when your hand is under the tap and it starts dispensing warm water, which you only really want on once your hand is in the sink unlike lights which people prefer to be on before they enter the room rather than come on after you enter it with a delay.

whisky-dave wrote

in fact yesterday 5pm I noticed that the lights were on before I entered,
yes
I think people have been complaining about walking into dark rooms at
night.
Went again this morning at 10am lights on during the day, they have turned
the sensors off and the lights now remain on even in daylight.

Like I said, ****ed by design and you terminal ****wits can't even manage to
fix the ****ed by design abortion you clowns were too stupid to specify
properly.

whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

So they ordered me forty 2KW convection heaters, but the college
doesn;lt allow convection heaters in labs or offices so I had to tell
them
to cancel the order, they have now given me 5 oil filled 2KW heaters.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Has been for 30 years.

So its taken you clowns 30 ****ing years to even notice that that
place doesnt have adequate heating, and even when you clowns
do eventually notice that, you **** fixing that up completely.

Heating should have been part of the original design
and someone should have told whoever did the
original design that without heating it was completely
****ing useless and that they had to fix that.

Yes they were told that at the time, but then some manager might have
lost his job, so there was the make do, cover up of the late 50s early
60s.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

So 9am it was just 16C now 19C students still
say they feel cold, most have their coats on.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

yep. Designed in 1955 I think.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

The college is pushing to improve the studetn experience as we are
gettign low or very low marks for it in the last national student
survey.

It shouldnt have taken a student survey to realise you need ****ing
heating.

Well most students are complaining about lack of facilities,
lack of help, used to be lack of equipment but we sorted that.

Bet you lot ****ed that up completely too.

One year it was 5C in the lab.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Yep single glazed window of 1955 just didn't
last the 100s of years they perhaps expected.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 19:49:58 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

So they ordered me forty 2KW convection heaters, but the college
doesn;lt allow convection heaters in labs or offices so I had to tell
them
to cancel the order, they have now given me 5 oil filled 2KW heaters.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Has been for 30 years.

So its taken you clowns 30 ****ing years to even notice that that
place doesnt have adequate heating, and even when you clowns
do eventually notice that, you **** fixing that up completely.

Heating should have been part of the original design
and someone should have told whoever did the
original design that without heating it was completely
****ing useless and that they had to fix that.

Yes they were told that at the time, but then some manager might have
lost his job, so there was the make do, cover up of the late 50s early
60s.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

So 9am it was just 16C now 19C students still
say they feel cold, most have their coats on.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

yep. Designed in 1955 I think.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

The college is pushing to improve the studetn experience as we are
gettign low or very low marks for it in the last national student
survey.

It shouldnt have taken a student survey to realise you need ****ing
heating.

Well most students are complaining about lack of facilities,
lack of help, used to be lack of equipment but we sorted that.

Bet you lot ****ed that up completely too.

One year it was 5C in the lab.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Yep single glazed window of 1955 just didn't
last the 100s of years they perhaps expected.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get

It was know at the time apparently nothing to do with the staff here.
That's like blamming the residents of grenfel for the fire.

The building wasn't designed by any staff employed here.
It was between those desining the building and those responsible for the heating installation.




around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 19:49:58 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

So they ordered me forty 2KW convection heaters, but the college
doesn;lt allow convection heaters in labs or offices so I had to tell
them
to cancel the order, they have now given me 5 oil filled 2KW heaters.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Has been for 30 years.

So its taken you clowns 30 ****ing years to even notice that that
place doesnt have adequate heating, and even when you clowns
do eventually notice that, you **** fixing that up completely.

Heating should have been part of the original design
and someone should have told whoever did the
original design that without heating it was completely
****ing useless and that they had to fix that.

Yes they were told that at the time, but then some manager might have
lost his job, so there was the make do, cover up of the late 50s early
60s.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

So 9am it was just 16C now 19C students still
say they feel cold, most have their coats on.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

yep. Designed in 1955 I think.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

The college is pushing to improve the studetn experience as we are
gettign low or very low marks for it in the last national student
survey.

It shouldnt have taken a student survey to realise you need ****ing
heating.

Well most students are complaining about lack of facilities,
lack of help, used to be lack of equipment but we sorted that.

Bet you lot ****ed that up completely too.

One year it was 5C in the lab.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Yep single glazed window of 1955 just didn't
last the 100s of years they perhaps expected.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get

It was know at the time apparently nothing to do with the staff here.

Taking 50 ****ing years to even start to do anything about it and
then the complete and utter abortion of a couple of oil filled heaters
that aint gunna provide any useful heating is down to you clowns.

The building wasn't designed by any staff employed here.

But what you clowns are doing to fixed the original
design abortion, 50 ****ing years too late, is.

It was between those desining the building and
those responsible for the heating installation.

Wrong, as always.

around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 14:36:13 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 19:49:58 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

So they ordered me forty 2KW convection heaters, but the college
doesn;lt allow convection heaters in labs or offices so I had to tell
them
to cancel the order, they have now given me 5 oil filled 2KW heaters.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Has been for 30 years.

So its taken you clowns 30 ****ing years to even notice that that
place doesnt have adequate heating, and even when you clowns
do eventually notice that, you **** fixing that up completely.

Heating should have been part of the original design
and someone should have told whoever did the
original design that without heating it was completely
****ing useless and that they had to fix that.

Yes they were told that at the time, but then some manager might have
lost his job, so there was the make do, cover up of the late 50s early
60s.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

So 9am it was just 16C now 19C students still
say they feel cold, most have their coats on.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

yep. Designed in 1955 I think.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

The college is pushing to improve the studetn experience as we are
gettign low or very low marks for it in the last national student
survey.

It shouldnt have taken a student survey to realise you need ****ing
heating.

Well most students are complaining about lack of facilities,
lack of help, used to be lack of equipment but we sorted that.

Bet you lot ****ed that up completely too.

One year it was 5C in the lab.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Yep single glazed window of 1955 just didn't
last the 100s of years they perhaps expected.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get

It was know at the time apparently nothing to do with the staff here.

Taking 50 ****ing years to even start to do anything about it and
then the complete and utter abortion of a couple of oil filled heaters
that aint gunna provide any useful heating is down to you clowns.

which clowns those that installed the system in the late 1950s they are mostly dead now the apprenice is.


The building wasn't designed by any staff employed here.

But what you clowns are doing to fixed the original
design abortion, 50 ****ing years too late, is.

Nothing to to with us any more than the cladding is.
I never told them to put the asbestos in or to remove it.


It was between those desining the building and
those responsible for the heating installation.

Wrong, as always.

right as always.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 14:36:13 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 19:49:58 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

So they ordered me forty 2KW convection heaters, but the college
doesn;lt allow convection heaters in labs or offices so I had to
tell
them
to cancel the order, they have now given me 5 oil filled 2KW
heaters.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Has been for 30 years.

So its taken you clowns 30 ****ing years to even notice that that
place doesnt have adequate heating, and even when you clowns
do eventually notice that, you **** fixing that up completely.

Heating should have been part of the original design
and someone should have told whoever did the
original design that without heating it was completely
****ing useless and that they had to fix that.

Yes they were told that at the time, but then some manager might
have
lost his job, so there was the make do, cover up of the late 50s
early
60s.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

So 9am it was just 16C now 19C students still
say they feel cold, most have their coats on.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

yep. Designed in 1955 I think.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

The college is pushing to improve the studetn experience as we are
gettign low or very low marks for it in the last national student
survey.

It shouldnt have taken a student survey to realise you need
****ing
heating.

Well most students are complaining about lack of facilities,
lack of help, used to be lack of equipment but we sorted that.

Bet you lot ****ed that up completely too.

One year it was 5C in the lab.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Yep single glazed window of 1955 just didn't
last the 100s of years they perhaps expected.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get

It was know at the time apparently nothing to do with the staff here.

Taking 50 ****ing years to even start to do anything about it and
then the complete and utter abortion of a couple of oil filled heaters
that aint gunna provide any useful heating is down to you clowns.

which clowns

You clowns that can't even work out how to heat the place now.

On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 16:52:49 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 14:36:13 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 19:49:58 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

So they ordered me forty 2KW convection heaters, but the college
doesn;lt allow convection heaters in labs or offices so I had to
tell
them
to cancel the order, they have now given me 5 oil filled 2KW
heaters.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Has been for 30 years.

So its taken you clowns 30 ****ing years to even notice that that
place doesnt have adequate heating, and even when you clowns
do eventually notice that, you **** fixing that up completely.

Heating should have been part of the original design
and someone should have told whoever did the
original design that without heating it was completely
****ing useless and that they had to fix that.

Yes they were told that at the time, but then some manager might
have
lost his job, so there was the make do, cover up of the late 50s
early
60s.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

So 9am it was just 16C now 19C students still
say they feel cold, most have their coats on.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

yep. Designed in 1955 I think.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

The college is pushing to improve the studetn experience as we are
gettign low or very low marks for it in the last national student
survey.

It shouldnt have taken a student survey to realise you need
****ing
heating.

Well most students are complaining about lack of facilities,
lack of help, used to be lack of equipment but we sorted that.

Bet you lot ****ed that up completely too.

One year it was 5C in the lab.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Yep single glazed window of 1955 just didn't
last the 100s of years they perhaps expected.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get

It was know at the time apparently nothing to do with the staff here..

Taking 50 ****ing years to even start to do anything about it and
then the complete and utter abortion of a couple of oil filled heaters
that aint gunna provide any useful heating is down to you clowns.

which clowns

You clowns that can't even work out how to heat the place now.

We do, well I do.
First you need a heating system.
Reciebved this in an email this morning.

"This situation should have been avoided as a temporary boiler was to be installed to cover the loss of heating and hot water from the engineering works. This is currently being investigated by the project team and contractor. I have again chased up the delivery of the temporary heaters and will distribute these as soon as they are available."

So nothing to do with us in teaching.

This morning when I arrived the building contractors had cordened off the entrance to the lab so NO students could get in, I went through the door that says NO ACCESS. The contractors had lorries outside pouring concrete up onto the 2nd or 3rd floor and for some reason they didn't want students around them or their equipment.

"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 16:52:49 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 14:36:13 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 19:49:58 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

So they ordered me forty 2KW convection heaters, but the
college
doesn;lt allow convection heaters in labs or offices so I had
to
tell
them
to cancel the order, they have now given me 5 oil filled 2KW
heaters.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Has been for 30 years.

So its taken you clowns 30 ****ing years to even notice that that
place doesnt have adequate heating, and even when you clowns
do eventually notice that, you **** fixing that up completely.

Heating should have been part of the original design
and someone should have told whoever did the
original design that without heating it was completely
****ing useless and that they had to fix that.

Yes they were told that at the time, but then some manager might
have
lost his job, so there was the make do, cover up of the late 50s
early
60s.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

So 9am it was just 16C now 19C students still
say they feel cold, most have their coats on.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

yep. Designed in 1955 I think.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

The college is pushing to improve the studetn experience as we
are
gettign low or very low marks for it in the last national
student
survey.

It shouldnt have taken a student survey to realise you need
****ing
heating.

Well most students are complaining about lack of facilities,
lack of help, used to be lack of equipment but we sorted that.

Bet you lot ****ed that up completely too.

One year it was 5C in the lab.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Yep single glazed window of 1955 just didn't
last the 100s of years they perhaps expected.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get

It was know at the time apparently nothing to do with the staff
here.

Taking 50 ****ing years to even start to do anything about it and
then the complete and utter abortion of a couple of oil filled heaters
that aint gunna provide any useful heating is down to you clowns.

which clowns

You clowns that can't even work out how to heat the place now.

We do, well I do.

Nope.

First you need a heating system.

But not the one you stupidly went for.

Reciebved this in an email this morning.

"This situation should have been avoided as a temporary
boiler was to be installed to cover the loss of heating and
hot water from the engineering works. This is currently
being investigated by the project team and contractor.
I have again chased up the delivery of the temporary
heaters and will distribute these as soon as they are available."

So nothing to do with us in teaching.

Everything to do with you clowns not even checking what was
sposed to be done during the building works about heating
and added lots of oil filled heaters anyway, and ended up
with the mains voltage sagging down to 200V with yet another
example of ****ed by design, quite apart from the waste of money.

This morning when I arrived the building contractors had cordened
off the entrance to the lab so NO students could get in,

Yet another example of ****ed by design.

I went through the door that says NO ACCESS. The contractors had
lorries outside pouring concrete up onto the 2nd or 3rd floor and for
some reason they didn't want students around them or their equipment.

Yet another example of ****ed by design.

On Thursday, 9 November 2017 16:46:53 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 16:52:49 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 14:36:13 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 7 November 2017 19:49:58 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote
Rod Speed wrote
whisky-dave wrote

So they ordered me forty 2KW convection heaters, but the
college
doesn;lt allow convection heaters in labs or offices so I had
to
tell
them
to cancel the order, they have now given me 5 oil filled 2KW
heaters.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Has been for 30 years.

So its taken you clowns 30 ****ing years to even notice that that
place doesnt have adequate heating, and even when you clowns
do eventually notice that, you **** fixing that up completely.

Heating should have been part of the original design
and someone should have told whoever did the
original design that without heating it was completely
****ing useless and that they had to fix that.

Yes they were told that at the time, but then some manager might
have
lost his job, so there was the make do, cover up of the late 50s
early
60s.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

So 9am it was just 16C now 19C students still
say they feel cold, most have their coats on.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

yep. Designed in 1955 I think.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get
around to even attempting to fix that now, and you ****ed
it up completely even when you clowns did eventually get
off your lard arses and tried to do something about it now.

The college is pushing to improve the studetn experience as we
are
gettign low or very low marks for it in the last national
student
survey.

It shouldnt have taken a student survey to realise you need
****ing
heating.

Well most students are complaining about lack of facilities,
lack of help, used to be lack of equipment but we sorted that.

Bet you lot ****ed that up completely too.

One year it was 5C in the lab.

Like I said, ****ed by design.

Yep single glazed window of 1955 just didn't
last the 100s of years they perhaps expected.

And its taken you clowns more than 50 ****ing years to get

It was know at the time apparently nothing to do with the staff
here.

Taking 50 ****ing years to even start to do anything about it and
then the complete and utter abortion of a couple of oil filled heaters
that aint gunna provide any useful heating is down to you clowns.

which clowns

You clowns that can't even work out how to heat the place now.

We do, well I do.

Nope.

Yep.


First you need a heating system.

But not the one you stupidly went for.

I haven't gone for any, I was expecting a heating system to be present and working in the building. I was told buy a previousl line manager that the heating system wasn't working properly when he started work here in 1975.
In those days they were given fan heaters.


Reciebved this in an email this morning.

"This situation should have been avoided as a temporary
boiler was to be installed to cover the loss of heating and
hot water from the engineering works. This is currently
being investigated by the project team and contractor.
I have again chased up the delivery of the temporary
heaters and will distribute these as soon as they are available."

So nothing to do with us in teaching.

Everything to do with you clowns not even checking what was
sposed to be done during the building works about heating
and added lots of oil filled heaters anyway, and ended up
with the mains voltage sagging down to 200V with yet another
example of ****ed by design, quite apart from the waste of money.

teh design was from the 1950s I wasn't even born then niether were the majority that work here, because they would be over 60 and past retirment age.



This morning when I arrived the building contractors had cordened
off the entrance to the lab so NO students could get in,

Yet another example of ****ed by design.

Difficult to pump concrete up a few floors and allow students to walk below because of H&S.



I went through the door that says NO ACCESS. The contractors had
lorries outside pouring concrete up onto the 2nd or 3rd floor and for
some reason they didn't want students around them or their equipment.

Yet another example of ****ed by design.

We didn't design it or make the H&S rules.

Thre would have been an easy solution but the RFID system won't allow students through the most convient door to the building, now if it had a key access we could unlock it, very simple solution but not with mag-locks it seems.