|
When the software meets the hardware
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: wrote: On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:31:06 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: wrote: Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams trying to justify their jobs would make them so. It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t Why does it need even that? A purely mechanical flush would work fine. Its not as if the train is doing barrel rolls. The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without tanking; How delightful. A mobile sewage farm. Why is fault reporting required? So that Hitachi can be notified that there’s a problem and send a fitter out; or at the very least see a pattern of recurring faults and investigate the underlying fault, rather than just press the reset button every night. (Whether these things actually happen is another matter!) So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their complexity a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller.... On 800s the smaller toilets with the manual doors which therefore can’t lock themselves out of use, generally get filled to the brim with **** before people stop using them. HSTs and 323s, however, I’ve seen clogged and blocked to the brim with excrement and paper, which (a) stinks (b) is difficult to clean (for HSTs it requires an extra shunt to the siding with the flushing apron and application of hosepipe to either end of the pipe until it’s cleared; that could be the difference between several sets leaving depot on time in the morning or not). Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats not a commuter train. Not everything needs to be computerised or have some sort of monitoring system built in. No, but if it can predict faults before they occur (eg, that door/set of points is taking longer and longer to move, send someone to check it out) then that’s an advantage, surely? Only if that outweighs the disadvantages of the toilet not working half the time because of its complexity. |
When the software meets the hardware
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: wrote: On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 19:31:06 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: wrote: Toilets don't need to be software controlled in the first place. Only teams trying to justify their jobs would make them so. It could be controlled by a box of relays, I suppose, but it wouldn’t Why does it need even that? A purely mechanical flush would work fine. Its not as if the train is doing barrel rolls. The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without tanking; How delightful. A mobile sewage farm. The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm. Why is fault reporting required? So that Hitachi can be notified that there’s a problem and send a fitter out; or at the very least see a pattern of recurring faults and investigate the underlying fault, rather than just press the reset button every night. (Whether these things actually happen is another matter!) So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their complexity a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller.... Conventional toilets get blocked too. Conventional toilet door locks fail too. Conventional toilets run out of water too... On 800s the smaller toilets with the manual doors which therefore can’t lock themselves out of use, generally get filled to the brim with **** before people stop using them. HSTs and 323s, however, I’ve seen clogged and blocked to the brim with excrement and paper, which (a) stinks (b) is difficult to clean (for HSTs it requires an extra shunt to the siding with the flushing apron and application of hosepipe to either end of the pipe until it’s cleared; that could be the difference between several sets leaving depot on time in the morning or not). Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats not a commuter train. People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree. Anna Noyd-Dryver |
When the software meets the hardware
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 09:52:16 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without tanking; How delightful. A mobile sewage farm. The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm. I meant in the sense of them no necessarily being emptied every night. So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their complexity a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller.... Conventional toilets get blocked too. Conventional toilet door locks fail too. Conventional toilets run out of water too... I can't remember the last time the toilets in my office failed never mind my house. As for the locks failing, who the hell cares? Keep it shut with your foot. Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats not a commuter train. People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree. Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins. |
When the software meets the hardware
wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 09:52:16 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without tanking; How delightful. A mobile sewage farm. The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm. I meant in the sense of them no necessarily being emptied every night. How else would you deal with the sets which outstable at Hereford, Worcester and Exeter? So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their complexity a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller.... Conventional toilets get blocked too. Conventional toilet door locks fail too. Conventional toilets run out of water too... I can't remember the last time the toilets in my office failed never mind my house. As for the locks failing, who the hell cares? Keep it shut with your foot. How does that work with a sliding door, a wheelchair user, or even a non-wheelchair user in the accessible toilets where the door is too far away? Or the occasional station toilet cubicle where the door opens outwards... The toilets in your house presumably aren’t used as intensively as train ones? Over the years I’ve known domestic toilets get blocked, flush broken, flushes which only work with a certain technique, multiple flushes needed to actually clear the bowl... Mess room toilets which perhaps approach train toilet frequency of use, get blocked often enough that people add the word 'again' when they talk about it... Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats not a commuter train. People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree. Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins. Round here the commuter trains are often in the middle of long journeys, between 4 and 10 hours end-to-end. Just because I’m only on board for 15 minutes doesn’t mean everyone else is. Anna Noyd-Dryver |
When the software meets the hardware
wrote:
Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats not a commuter train. People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree. Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins. Thought you had children? Many youngsters are not able to go for hours without having to go the toilet and many seem to want use one soon after all preparations have been completed ,possibly brought on by excitement. Would not like to spend the time on a long journey in the vicinity of an 7 year old who has **** himself and a child of that age will not be in nappies. Then there is the large percentage of the population who are female whose different plumbing ,menstrual cycles and smaller bladder capacity when pregnant often means they need toilet facilities more often than men. I would agree you don’t need toilets on commuter trains where such as crossrail where off train facilities can not be too far away and frequent services make journey interruptions not the end of the world but there are many journeys around the 3 to 5 hour length such as Waterloo Exeter that some would fine awkward, your proposal that people could get off at stations might work for a single traveller , but they might be giving up a reserved seat. Could be even worse for a family who would have to get off at successive stops as each sprog decides its their time to go. GH |
When the software meets the hardware
On 26/01/2019 22:20, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote: On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 09:52:16 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without tanking; How delightful. A mobile sewage farm. The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm. I meant in the sense of them no necessarily being emptied every night. How else would you deal with the sets which outstable at Hereford, Worcester and Exeter? So the toilets are complex so that when a fault occurs due to their complexity a technician can be notified? Calling Mr Heller.... Conventional toilets get blocked too. Conventional toilet door locks fail too. Conventional toilets run out of water too... I can't remember the last time the toilets in my office failed never mind my house. As for the locks failing, who the hell cares? Keep it shut with your foot. How does that work with a sliding door, a wheelchair user, or even a non-wheelchair user in the accessible toilets where the door is too far away? Or the occasional station toilet cubicle where the door opens outwards... The toilets in your house presumably aren’t used as intensively as train ones? Over the years I’ve known domestic toilets get blocked, flush broken, flushes which only work with a certain technique, multiple flushes needed to actually clear the bowl... Mess room toilets which perhaps approach train toilet frequency of use, get blocked often enough that people add the word 'again' when they talk about it... Perhaps install more toilets in stations and get rid of them on trains altogether. We're a small island, there are no journeys really long enough to make them worthwhile except maybe the overnight sleeper to scotland but thats not a commuter train. People travelling 5h30 from Paddington to Penzance might disagree. Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins. Round here the commuter trains are often in the middle of long journeys, between 4 and 10 hours end-to-end. Just because I’m only on board for 15 minutes doesn’t mean everyone else is. The guard was just locking the only working wash room on a Cardiff Pompey service last year just as I got there. He suggested I got off at Cosham so I had him endorse my ticket and caught the following gWr service with a one hour delay. I claimed my refund for an hour's delay and got it. |
When the software meets the hardware
martin.coffee wrote:
The guard was just locking the only working wash room on a Cardiff Pompey service last year just as I got there. He suggested I got off at Cosham so I had him endorse my ticket and caught the following gWr service with a one hour delay. I claimed my refund for an hour's delay and got it. If the toilet was working, why was it being locked out of use? Anna Noyd-Dryver |
When the software meets the hardware
On 27/01/2019 05:46, Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
martin.coffee wrote: The guard was just locking the only working wash room on a Cardiff Pompey service last year just as I got there. He suggested I got off at Cosham so I had him endorse my ticket and caught the following gWr service with a one hour delay. I claimed my refund for an hour's delay and got it. If the toilet was working, why was it being locked out of use? Because it was no longer working! |
When the software meets the hardware
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 22:20:37 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: wrote: On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 09:52:16 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: wrote: On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 20:22:39 -0000 (UTC) Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: The vacuum flush saves water and retention tank capacity and allows the train to run a whole day (or maybe two, for those which outstable) without tanking; How delightful. A mobile sewage farm. The alternative is for the entire railway to be the sewage farm. I meant in the sense of them no necessarily being emptied every night. How else would you deal with the sets which outstable at Hereford, Worcester and Exeter? A portable vacuum unit to empty them. How else? I can't remember the last time the toilets in my office failed never mind my house. As for the locks failing, who the hell cares? Keep it shut with your foot. How does that work with a sliding door, a wheelchair user, or even a non-wheelchair user in the accessible toilets where the door is too far away? Or the occasional station toilet cubicle where the door opens outwards... So make the open inward. Why does it have to slide? How do disabled people cope in non train toilets? The toilets in your house presumably aren’t used as intensively as train ones? Over the years I’ve known domestic toilets get blocked, flush broken, flushes which only work with a certain technique, multiple flushes needed to actually clear the bowl... Mess room toilets which perhaps approach train toilet frequency of use, get blocked often enough that people add the word 'again' when they talk about it... I can barely recall the last time I saw anyone use a toilet on a commuter train. Possibly, but those sort of journeys are probably 1 in 1000. There's little reason to have toilets on most multiple units IMO, certainly not something like Thameslink where the average journey is probably 45 mins. Round here the commuter trains are often in the middle of long journeys, between 4 and 10 hours end-to-end. Just because I’m only on board for 15 minutes doesn’t mean everyone else is. 10 hours? Where the hell is it going from and to? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 10:48 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk