Basil Jet wrote:
On 23/01/2019 19:31, 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
necessarily be more reliable and there’d still have to be a computer
interface for fault reporting.

Isn't the point of it that the PIS systems all the way down the train
report which toilets are vacant?


IETs don’t have that feature. In any case, that could still work if the
toilet (not the PIS) was controlled by a box of relays.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

CONTACT EMAIL ..... danyroland27(@)AT gmail(Dot)com

CALL OR TEXT (949) 228-9436

WHATSAPP+1(949)228-9436

Wickr me ID:.......duroharry

hello buds man is back with good deals for long term buyers and good
and reliable if what you are interested is not on my list let me know
what you need..i also offer sample to built trust

see prices

FOR DIAZEPAM AND KETAMINE SMALLER ORDER

diazepam 10mg 300pills £25
diazepam 10mg 500pills £40
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £60
ketamine £20 each vial/1g

FOR DIAZEPAM AND KETAMINE BULK ORDER

diazepam 10mg 1000pills £65
diazepam 10mg 5000pills £280
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £60
diazepam 5mg 5000pills £270
diazepam 5mg 10000pills £270
diazepam 10mg 10000pills £500
ketamine £15 each vial/1g

FOR KETAMINE SMALLER ORDER

5vials............£100
10vials............£175
20vials............£325
25vials............£400

FOR KETAMINE BULK ORDER

25vials............£400
50vials............£650
100vials............£1200
200vials............£2100

FOR WEED SMALLER ORDER

10g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £50
14g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,£75
28g/oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £100

FOR WEED BULK ORDER

56g/2oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £175
112g/4oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,£300
500g/17oz,,,,,,,,,,,, £600
1000g/1kg,,,,,,,,,,,,,£900

i also have my delivery records all around the worlds and i provide
dated pictures with buyers name and my name

CONTACT EMAIL ..... danyroland27(@)AT gmail(Dot)com

CALL OR TEXT (949) 228-9436

WHATSAPP+1(949)228-9436

Wickr me ID:.......duroharry

thanks
buds man

Go away, pest.

Complaint sent.

On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 00:41:21 -0800 (PST), wrote:

CONTACT EMAIL ..... danyroland27(@)AT gmail(Dot)com

CALL OR TEXT (949) 228-9436

WHATSAPP+1(949)228-9436

Wickr me ID:.......duroharry

hello buds man is back with good deals for long term buyers and good
and reliable if what you are interested is not on my list let me know
what you need..i also offer sample to built trust

see prices

FOR DIAZEPAM AND KETAMINE SMALLER ORDER

diazepam 10mg 300pills £25
diazepam 10mg 500pills £40
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £60
ketamine £20 each vial/1g

FOR DIAZEPAM AND KETAMINE BULK ORDER

diazepam 10mg 1000pills £65
diazepam 10mg 5000pills £280
diazepam 5mg 1000pills £60
diazepam 5mg 5000pills £270
diazepam 5mg 10000pills £270
diazepam 10mg 10000pills £500
ketamine £15 each vial/1g

FOR KETAMINE SMALLER ORDER

5vials............£100
10vials............£175
20vials............£325
25vials............£400

FOR KETAMINE BULK ORDER

25vials............£400
50vials............£650
100vials............£1200
200vials............£2100

FOR WEED SMALLER ORDER

10g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £50
14g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,£75
28g/oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £100

FOR WEED BULK ORDER

56g/2oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, £175
112g/4oz,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,£300
500g/17oz,,,,,,,,,,,, £600
1000g/1kg,,,,,,,,,,,,,£900

i also have my delivery records all around the worlds and i provide
dated pictures with buyers name and my name

CONTACT EMAIL ..... danyroland27(@)AT gmail(Dot)com

CALL OR TEXT (949) 228-9436

WHATSAPP+1(949)228-9436

Wickr me ID:.......duroharry

thanks
buds man

In message , Optimist
writes
Go away, pest.

Complaint sent.

I assume, if, like me when these posts first arrived, you responded to
"Complaints-To: " you'll be told by Google that
you aren't authorised to complain !!!

--
Bryan Morris

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.

necessarily be more reliable and there’d still have to be a computer
interface for fault reporting.

Why is fault reporting required? People generally won't use a broken toilet and
the sorts who will will just **** up the wall if its closed anyway plus the
cleaners can simply check them in the evening and report if they're not working.

Not everything needs to be computerised or have some sort of monitoring system
built in.

On 24/01/2019 16:52, 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.

I suspect it's not just the bog itself (which is easy as you say), but:

1. The lights and any interlocking between them and the door / lock
2. The occupied light outside
3. The occupied light somewhere else in the carriage
4. Any sensors in the toilet - smoke, fire, excessive moisture etc
5. Emergency alarm pull
6. Overstay alert
And so on and so on. Yes - you could build it all out of wires and
relays, but it sort of makes sense to have it all controlled and linked
together by a computer that could then log and report issues centrally

wrote:


Why does it need even that? A purely mechanical flush would work fine. Its
not as if the train is doing barrel rolls.

I wish you luck in trying to find a route to the retention tank
for a domestic size waste pipe, and in dealing with the volume of
water required.

Vacuum toilets are not cheap, or simple, but they make retention
toilets possible.

I was involved in planning work on a trial system to be fitted in
place of an inboard retention tank (which was abandoned once the
real cost/benefit figures began to emerge). This was very similar
to the kit used on submarines, and was essentially a
bio-digester, which produced clean water of a quality suitable
for flushing, thereby much extending the service intervals.

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Plant amazing Acers.

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; HSTs are tanked at every terminus and still run dry. 323s last a
day, usually, except when there was a leaky valve. 323 tanks overflow onto
the track when full, though, which is no longer allowed - so the toilet
needs to be able to lock itself out of use when the tank is full.

If it’s the Universal Access Toilet, it can lock the door out of use when
the toilet is out of use, too.

necessarily be more reliable and there’d still have to be a computer
interface for fault reporting.

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!)

People generally won't use a broken toilet

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).

and
the sorts who will will just **** up the wall if its closed anyway


Good job the toilet can lock itself OOU then.

plus the
cleaners can simply check them in the evening and report if they're not working.


Yes, and the same fault reoccurs the next morning.

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?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 05:22:22PM +0000, Someone Somewhere wrote:

[on why train bogs should be techno-bogs]

I suspect it's not just the bog itself (which is easy as you say), but:

1. The lights and any interlocking between them and the door / lock

Solved by having modern low-energy LEDs, always on

2. The occupied light outside

A mechanical switch in the mechanical lock.

3. The occupied light somewhere else in the carriage

Wired in parallel with the prior light and both controlled by the same
switch.

4. Any sensors in the toilet - smoke, fire, excessive moisture etc

I really really hope that the fire alarm is *not* controlled by a
computer.

5. Emergency alarm pull

I really really hope that that isn't controlled by a computer either.
Or if it is then there shouldn't be anything in the bog itself except
a switch or two.

6. Overstay alert

What are the benefits of this? I can certainly see that there are some,
but do they outweigh the costs of false alarms and of taking the bog out
of service when the techno- part of the techno-bog metaphorically ****s
its silicon pants?

--
David Cantrell | Pope | First Church of the Symmetrical Internet

Godliness is next to Englishness

On 24/01/2019 18:13, Chris J Dixon wrote:

I was involved in planning work on a trial system to be fitted in
place of an inboard retention tank (which was abandoned once the
real cost/benefit figures began to emerge). This was very similar
to the kit used on submarines, and was essentially a
bio-digester, which produced clean water of a quality suitable
for flushing, thereby much extending the service intervals.

I think India and Russia use something like that on some /very/ long
distance trains.


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK