Why use cisterns
The Technical Manager
for supplying water for heating ? Surely they could be eliminated by the
use of pressure regulator valves instead between the mains water supply
and the hot water tank inlet.
Do cold water cisterns really serve a purpose anymore or is it that old
plumbing habits die hard ?
MrCheerful
Are you asking why you have a cistern for heating or for hot water.
I think you are asking about hot water.
The tank in the loft acts as a buffer for the water suppliers, if
everyone took their baths at the same time there would be no water
coming out of the taps. Also in low pressure areas the flow to
upstairs would peter out to a dribble with hot and cold on at the same
time, just go and visit someone with a boiler that supplies the hot
water on demand, it is painfully slow unless the pressure and the
boiler are really good.
HTH
MrCheerful
Andy Hall
Assuming you mean the domestic hot water, then the purpose is to
provide a store of cold water as well as the supply for the DHW
cylinder. This has the advantage that multiple appliances can be run
simultaneously without any effect at all from the performance of the
mains supply. It is also helpful to have a supply in the event of
mains failure or periods of low pressure, which do happen.
In older properties and even those as little as 15-20 years old, the
mains water feed from the street is through piping of 20mm or less.
In addition, mains pressure pipework inside the house has typically
been 15mm. the effect of these is to limit the flow, even though that
was not the intent. The net result is that the supply may well be
adequate to replenish a roof tank, but to supply a pressurised tank
may not.
In recent properties, where mains pressure water systems (pressurised
tanks or combi boilers) are used, the service pipe from the road is
normally 25-35mm and 22mm internal pipework is used. The flow rate is
then pretty good. In most other countries this is the normal way
that systems are implemented, but they are designed for it from the
outset. For example, in the U.S. the service pipe from the street is
normally 1 1/2" and main internal pipework 1" only dropping to smaller
sizes close to appliances. As a result, one typically gets good
results although if two showers are run simultaneously, it is
noticable.
The problem comes with retrofits especially in a larger property where
multiple appliances operating simultaneously is the norm.. I looked
at doing this myself recently and have provisioned a hot water
cylinder that will operate in a pressurised mode. With some effort,
the internal pipework can be upgraded as well. The difficulty comes
with the cost of upgrading the service pipe. By the time the drive
is reinstated there would be no change out of £5000 and I didn't feel
the benefits were worth the cost. I can fill the bath and run two
showers simultaneously as it is.
In a smaller property of say 2-3 bedrooms and 2-3 people, the story is
different because demands are not so high. As a result, combi
boilers have become popular for retrofits in properties of this type.
Some people are happy to compromise on water flows for the extra
square metre in the loft.
It depends on what you want.
Andy Hall
Email by removing the word after the two letter,
top level Nordic country domain.
Christian McArdle
> for supplying water for heating ? Surely they could be eliminated by the
> use of pressure regulator valves instead between the mains water supply
> and the hot water tank inlet.
Yes they can eliminated in such a fashion (and in other ways too, such as
combi boilers). If you want to fund the replacements of all the hot water
systems in all the houses in the country (and associated flow rate
improvements), feel free!
It is my understanding that most (all?) new houses are now fitted with mains
pressure hot water systems of one type or another, usually using combination
boilers which do away with the hot tank, too. Older properties might not be
easily convertable, due to poor mains water connections.
Christian.
The Technical Manager
> The Technical Manager wrote:
> > Why is it that houses continue to use cold water cisterns in the
> loft
> > for supplying water for heating ? Surely they could be eliminated by
> > the use of pressure regulator valves instead between the mains water
> > supply and the hot water tank inlet.
> >
> > Do cold water cisterns really serve a purpose anymore or is it that
> > old plumbing habits die hard ?
>
> Are you asking why you have a cistern for heating or for hot water.
The cistern I am referring to is used as a cold water reservoir where the
water is later supplied to the hot water tank for heating before emerging
from hot taps. I am not referring to the cistern used as a water
reservoir on a closed circuit central heating or heat exchanger system.
> I think you are asking about hot water.
> The tank in the loft acts as a buffer for the water suppliers, if
> everyone took their baths at the same time there would be no water
> coming out of the taps.
The water emerging out of the hot taps comes from the hot water tank and
not the cold water cistern although the hot water tank is refilled from
the cold water cistern.
> Also in low pressure areas the flow to
> upstairs would peter out to a dribble with hot and cold on at the same
> time, just go and visit someone with a boiler that supplies the hot
> water on demand, it is painfully slow unless the pressure and the
> boiler are really good.
Also take into account how much water the boiler can heat to a specified
temperature per minute without it melting its insides !!
>
>
> HTH
>
> MrCheerful
Inge Jones
tec...@niobiumfive.co.uk says...
was a way to at least flush the loo.
Ed Sirett
Andy Hall <an...@hall.gl.stopjunkmail> wrote in message
news:vju9tuk5q1camfi0j...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:42:52 +0000, The Technical Manager
> <tec...@niobiumfive.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> The problem comes with retrofits especially in a larger property where
> multiple appliances operating simultaneously is the norm.. I looked
> at doing this myself recently and have provisioned a hot water
> cylinder that will operate in a pressurised mode. With some effort,
> the internal pipework can be upgraded as well. The difficulty comes
> with the cost of upgrading the service pipe. By the time the drive
> is reinstated there would be no change out of £5000 and I didn't feel
> the benefits were worth the cost. I can fill the bath and run two
> showers simultaneously as it is.
>
On a recent job I have been involved in, SubTerra charge £800 to mole though
a 12m length of 32mm MDPE from the pavement to the house. The drive was not
effected.
> In a smaller property of say 2-3 bedrooms and 2-3 people, the story is
> different because demands are not so high. As a result, combi
> boilers have become popular for retrofits in properties of this type.
>
> Some people are happy to compromise on water flows for the extra
> square metre in the loft.
>
Of in flats a whole cupboard dedicated to tank and cisterns.
--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at www.diyfaq.org.uk
Andy Hall
<e...@makewrite.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Andy Hall <an...@hall.gl.stopjunkmail> wrote in message
>news:vju9tuk5q1camfi0j...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 15 Nov 2002 12:42:52 +0000, The Technical Manager
>> <tec...@niobiumfive.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>> The problem comes with retrofits especially in a larger property where
>> multiple appliances operating simultaneously is the norm.. I looked
>> at doing this myself recently and have provisioned a hot water
>> cylinder that will operate in a pressurised mode. With some effort,
>> the internal pipework can be upgraded as well. The difficulty comes
>> with the cost of upgrading the service pipe. By the time the drive
>> is reinstated there would be no change out of £5000 and I didn't feel
>> the benefits were worth the cost. I can fill the bath and run two
>> showers simultaneously as it is.
>>
>Did you investigate the installation of a new service main with a mole.
>On a recent job I have been involved in, SubTerra charge £800 to mole though
>a 12m length of 32mm MDPE from the pavement to the house. The drive was not
>effected.
>
No I must admit I didn't. The problem is the layout of my drive and
house and those of neighbours. I am at the end of a cul-de-sac
(actually at the end of one branch of a hammerhead.)
From the main it would involve going along about 30m of my drive and
then turning left under part of the front garden before going around
the side and eventually the back of the house under a patio. There's
no way to go the full length of the drive and come up, since the
garage is at the end of it. Presumably a mole arrangement can't
go round corners...or can it??? Do these kind of guys have authority
to dig up the public road?
Thr drive is going to be renewed in the next few years, so I may
consider doing it then.
Edward W. Thompson
Roof/Loft cisterns seem to be a "British" thing. You can't use
cisterns in places where typical winter temperatures are sub-zero. I
can hardly believe that cistern based systems are still being fitted
in new construction in the UK. Traditions die hard!
Tony Williams
Andy Hall <an...@hall.gl.stopjunkmail> wrote:
> Assuming you mean the domestic hot water, then the purpose is to
> provide a store of cold water as well as the supply for the DHW
> cylinder. This has the advantage that multiple appliances can be run
> simultaneously without any effect at all from the performance of the
> mains supply. It is also helpful to have a supply in the event of
> mains failure or periods of low pressure, which do happen.
Stupid question... but I know little of combi's
and the like.
If everything in the house is plumbed directly
onto the mains, do all water-heating devices
have to have non-return valves in their supply
lines? Or even a non-return valve close to
the incoming stopcock?
The reason I ask is that we live on a hill,
supply by a mains pipe, which breaks frequently.
If the break is below us we get negative pressure
on our supply. Flush an upstairs bog and the cold
pipework fills with air.
--
Tony Williams.
Dave Liquorice
> Or even a non-return valve close to the incoming stopcock?
With directly connected appliances I think the regs state that you
need a double check valve after the internal stop cock followed by a
drain cock.
--
Cheers new...@howhill.com
Dave. Remove "spam" for valid email.
Tony Williams
Dave Liquorice <new...@howhill.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Nov 2002 10:14:51 +0000 (GMT), Tony Williams wrote:
> > Or even a non-return valve close to the incoming stopcock?
> With directly connected appliances I think the regs state that you
> need a double check valve after the internal stop cock followed by a
> drain cock.
Thank you. Yes, that would make sense.
Does that still mean (during a water failure)
that a downstairs tap could drain the pipework
feeding (say) an upstairs appliance?
This is all beginning to feel rather complicated
(and relying on technology) compared to a cistern.
--
Tony Williams.
Trevor Coleman
incredibly complicated and difficult to have a system without a cold water
tank. But just about every other country in the world manages very well
without them, and they think UK is very antiquated to have tanks.
I've lived in various countries overseas and have never had a problem due to
the lack of a tank. And you get mains pressure hot and cold water in your
shower - wonderful!
TC
Dave Liquorice
> Does that still mean (during a water failure) that a downstairs tap
> could drain the pipework feeding (say) an upstairs appliance?
Once there is some where at the top to let air in or if the vertical
distance is more than 32' that much run out anyway creating a vacum
above. ie a water barometer...
> This is all beginning to feel rather complicated (and relying on
> technology) compared to a cistern.
Quite, I like the buffer that 50 gallons provides (or in our case
about 300 gallons) provides. Just think you've been out all day doing
something filthy, mean while some oik with a JCB has seriously broken
a water main somewhere. Your water is going to be off for the next
48hrs. You can't even have a wash, let alone a cup of coffee.
M. Damerell
2 further points. 1: if a mains-pressure pipe starts to leak, it
will spout, a low pressure pipe will dribble. Also low pressure
HWc's are cheaper that mains-pressure ones. OF course combi boilers dont
need HWC's but it seems to be difficult to find a combi that will give
you an adequate flow of hot water.
2: There is a severe danger that climate change will turn off the Gulf
Stream. If that happens then all our careful calculations about how
big a boiler; how much lagging & other insulation; hoe reliable our
supplies are; whether we can have a tank in loft; will become
completely worthless.
The Technical Manager
> It's strange. Whenever I have seen this topic discussed it seems to be
> incredibly complicated and difficult to have a system without a cold water
> tank. But just about every other country in the world manages very well
> without them, and they think UK is very antiquated to have tanks.
I read somewhere last year that British housebuilding is the most conservative
in the developed world, certainly compared to some countries in Europe, Asia,
North America etc. where new houses are often built in modern styles, with
modern construction techniques and modern materials. Apart from a few isolated
cases like the Integer Project, most new houses are still built using
traditional brick and mortar technology in classical period styles like mock
Tudor or Jacobean as opposed to a futuristic appearance. Wooden window frames
and bargeboards are still used rather than rot resistant UPVC, low voltage or
energy saving lighting isn't installed as standard when it should be along with
battery backed up lighting for when power cuts happen.
Is it British people not wanting ultra modern houses or construction companies
not willing or able to build them ?
Brian Sharrock
"M. Damerell" <uha...@rhbnc.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.4.21.02111...@sun.rhul.ac.uk...
>
snip
> 2: There is a severe danger that climate change will turn off the Gulf
> Stream. If that happens then all our careful calculations about how
> big a boiler; how much lagging & other insulation; hoe reliable our
> supplies are; whether we can have a tank in loft; will become
> completely worthless.
>
Oh God! Another thing to worry about ! ... and the bloke on R4
has just told me that my herbaceous borders and lawns won't
be thriving in fifty years time [I should live so long :( ]
due to global warming.
Shrivelled lawns _and_ frozen pipes ... can't win!
--
Brian
Christian McArdle
>modern construction techniques and modern materials. Apart from a few
isolated
>cases like the Integer Project, most new houses are still built using
>traditional brick and mortar technology in classical period styles like
mock
>Tudor or Jacobean as opposed to a futuristic appearance. Wooden window
frames
>and bargeboards are still used rather than rot resistant UPVC, low voltage
or
>energy saving lighting isn't installed as standard when it should be along
with
>battery backed up lighting for when power cuts happen.
We got hit hard by the 1960s. This means that people won't buy newly
constructed houses made out of concrete. With our wet climate and some dodgy
bodging in the 1970s and 1980s, wooden frame construction fell out of
favour.
The British seem to like bricks. They look nice. We also got hit by horrible
looking uPVC and aluminium double glazing in the 1980s. Many people have now
replaced them with much better looking wooden windows. They may take more
maintanance, but it is an aesthetic thing. People are willing to repaint
their windows every couple of years if it means they don't have to put up
with horrible plastic everywhere.
Light fittings designed to only accept low wattage lights make a house look
like a hospital. We prefer standard light fittings with energy saving bulbs.
Much of the British housing stock is very old, Victorian etc. This is why
many houses have dodgy plumbing. IME, new houses tend to be fitted with
mains water systems, either combi systems or pressurised cylinders.
Christian.
The Technical Manager
> >North America etc. where new houses are often built in modern styles, with
> >modern construction techniques and modern materials. Apart from a few
> isolated
> >cases like the Integer Project, most new houses are still built using
> >traditional brick and mortar technology in classical period styles like
> mock
> >Tudor or Jacobean as opposed to a futuristic appearance. Wooden window
> frames
> >and bargeboards are still used rather than rot resistant UPVC, low voltage
> or
> >energy saving lighting isn't installed as standard when it should be along
> with
> >battery backed up lighting for when power cuts happen.
>
> We got hit hard by the 1960s. This means that people won't buy newly
> constructed houses made out of concrete. With our wet climate and some dodgy
> bodging in the 1970s and 1980s, wooden frame construction fell out of
> favour.
>
> The British seem to like bricks. They look nice. We also got hit by horrible
> looking uPVC and aluminium double glazing in the 1980s. Many people have now
> replaced them with much better looking wooden windows. They may take more
> maintanance, but it is an aesthetic thing. People are willing to repaint
> their windows every couple of years if it means they don't have to put up
> with horrible plastic everywhere.
UPVC now comes in various shades of brown so wood effect window frames are
possible.
Tony Bryer
> People are willing to repaint their windows
> every couple of years if it means they don't have to put up
> with horrible plastic everywhere.
From what I see around me I would have thought that exactly the
opposite was true, in most cases anyway
--
Tony Bryer SDA UK 'Software to build on' http://www.sda.co.uk
Free SEDBUK boiler database browser http://www.sda.co.uk/qsedbuk.htm
The Natural Philopsopher
Tony Bryer wrote:
> In article <3dda6ca1$0$8505$ed9e...@reading.news.pipex.net>, Christian
> McArdle wrote:
>
>>People are willing to repaint their windows
>>every couple of years if it means they don't have to put up
>>with horrible plastic everywhere.
>>
>
> From what I see around me I would have thought that exactly the
> opposite was true, in most cases anyway
>
I think that is very true. It depends on whether a house is an object of
aesthetic beauty, or a warm place to swig beer and watch telly.
Both p(o)ints of view are valid.
>
Ed Sirett
The Technical Manager <tec...@niobiumfive.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3DDA2E69...@niobiumfive.co.uk...
Here are some of the things that might make for that, IMHO/2p:
A) One of the biggest forces for conservatism in UK building are the
mortgage lenders and insurance companies, they want to only lend/cover for a
narrow range of building types that 'the suits' feel safe with. (Tried to
get cover for a flat roof house?, Thatched? Timber frame?)
B) When innovative methods are tried out its often HAs or LAs for social
housing, because they are not restrained by (1) above. This leads to
several problems:
1) The innovation goes wrong and then get a bad reputation.
Because
a) The idea was crap to begin with, amongst all
innovations some ideas should be strangled at birth but...
(ceiling heating).
b) The idea was OK but was done too much on the
cheap to meet the low budget for social housing.
(Pre-fab housing cf Austrian pre-fabs).
c) The idea needed specialist maintenance that was
not widely available.
(hot air heating)
2) The innovation becomes too closely associated with low
budget housing and then gets 'tarred' with negative values that stem from
non-housing matters (crime, drugs, squalor...) (Concrete construction.
Aerial walkways).
3) The idea was OK in principle but was not right for the
people who lived their. (high rise blocks cf. what would you
need to give for a flat in one of the barbican towers
these days (city of london owner occupier high rise)).
4) The idea did not take account of our climate.
C) The appearance of a building is not the same as how technically
innovative its fittings and contruction are.
--
Ed Sirett - Property maintainer and registered gas fitter.
The FAQ for uk.diy is at www.diyfaq.org.uk
Gas fitting FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/Gasfit21118.htm
Sealed CH FAQ http://www.makewrite.demon.co.uk/Sealedch21118.htm
Andy Hall
<tec...@niobiumfive.co.uk> wrote:
>
>I read somewhere last year that British housebuilding is the most conservative
>in the developed world, certainly compared to some countries in Europe, Asia,
>North America etc. where new houses are often built in modern styles, with
>modern construction techniques and modern materials.
There are two things here - one being modern construction method and
materials and the other modern design. The two are often associated
together but don't need to be. There is a third factor that you hint
at which is the technical specification - e.g. energy requirements
etc.
On my travels in the rest of Europe I occasionally look at new houses
being built. If you ignore apartment buildings which are more of a
phenomenon in a lot of places than here, then brick or block and
mortar or equivalent bonding material are quite widely used and were
traditional. I am thinking mainly of France, Benelux and Germany
here and reasonable quaility private homes as opposed to social
housing where prefabricated concrete sections seem to be quite
popular.
There are new techniques that are more widely used like I-beam joists
that are apparently very strong. One could argue that UK Construction
PLC is conservative in not using them.
There are other great ideas like having service ducts built into the
structure of the building so that you can pull wires later; and having
upstairs floors or parts of them concrete so that one can have a wet
room and laundry in the bathroom.
In the Nordic countries the situation is different because a high
proporton of properties are built with timber frames applying modern
materials and techniques. There are some quite radical ideas around
as well. For example one can purchase a piece of land lay in the
services and put in a concrete slab of a certain size and spec.
There are companies with enormous factories who will prefabricate a
house for you to varying quality and price levels depending on factors
like amount of customisation. The house is made in sections in the
factory and some are even fitted out and decorated, before delivery to
site. On site assembly and finish is then a matter of days.
The practical reason is that the construction season outside is pretty
short.
>Apart from a few isolated
>cases like the Integer Project, most new houses are still built using
>traditional brick and mortar technology in classical period styles like mock
>Tudor or Jacobean as opposed to a futuristic appearance.
There are examples of futuristic and examples of traditional building
appearance in every country, with classical themes repeated.
For example, you mention Tudor and Jacobean appearances. If you look
further you will find that in virtually every century there are copies
or inspirations from the original designs, adapted a bit to account
for what were modern materials and techniques for the day.
You can see the same thing if you travel through parts of France with
farmhouse reproductions being popular.
At the other end of the spectrum, there are examples where modern
designs and materials are used. For example, there is a part of
Amsterdam where an experimental scheme has been tried whereby the
basic parameters of a canalside house have been kept and mandated by
the planners - narrow house and high, with the only other requirement
that the plot should be filled. Other than that, almost complete
freedom for individuals or their architects to buy a plot and develop.
It's very interesting wandering by. A lot of houses have been built
in high tech styles with stainless steel and glass or similar
materials and with interesting non-conventional layouts. One house
has almost half of its volume given over to a tree that is inside the
building. Others look like very traditional canalside homes..
One can only conclude that some people prefer one idea, others prefer
the other. I am sure that the notion of wanting to be able to sell a
property in the future leads people to think and buy conservatively.
We are probably more like that here in the UK because in general (and
it's a sweeping generality) we are risk averse.
>Wooden window frames
>and bargeboards are still used rather than rot resistant UPVC, low voltage or
>energy saving lighting isn't installed as standard when it should be along with
>battery backed up lighting for when power cuts happen.
People will weigh up what most consider to be the aesthetic
superiority of wood against the practicality of plastic.
Builders will switch from wood to plastic if it saves cost without
detracting from the appearance and saleability of a property.
People buy on what they see more than anything else. You don't often
see information on the construction techniques and they are not used
as sales points.
In general, building control - in effect the technical control of the
specifications, designs and building process makes a lot of sense, be
it in the area of structural safety, energy saving or usability
However, there are examples where there is too much focus and
micromanagement on things of relatively little importance, where
aesthetics are ignored.
For example, forcing people to have energy saving lighting by means of
legislation is completely inappropriate. I use low energy lamps for
outside fittings because a) they are on for quite long periods and b)
I don't have to look at them. I wouldn't even entertain the idea of
having any in the house because the effect is to make things look flat
and bilious. The energy saving argument is largely bogus for internal
use because the inefficiency appears as heat. Were I to buy a new
house, I would rip them out and put them away to be refitted upon
selling.
Emergency lighting makes good sense in the same way as fire detectors.
>
>Is it British people not wanting ultra modern houses or construction companies
>not willing or able to build them ?
>
Apart from all the points above; the summary is that most people are
conservative, be they builders or buyers.
If I look through the property pages in my local paper, I see want
ads. Some are a few words by the side of the details of a property
that has been sold recently saying that the agent has people looking
for properties like it. Others are panel adverts from individuals
asking for properties in a specific place or a type. I have never
seen anyone asking for a house made in a specific modern way (of any
type)
>>
>> I've lived in various countries overseas and have never had a problem due to
>> the lack of a tank. And you get mains pressure hot and cold water in your
>> shower - wonderful!
Andy Hall
Edward W. Thompson
Your point can be expanded to cover the whole of British Soceity. The
UK is becoming a very sad back water compared with the rest of the
world. It seems to revel in the idea that traditional ways of doing
things is best and is being left behind in many many areas.
The Natural Philopsopher
C-H Gustafsson
>
> In the Nordic countries the situation is different because a high
> proporton of properties are built with timber frames applying modern
> materials and techniques. There are some quite radical ideas around
> as well. For example one can purchase a piece of land lay in the
> services and put in a concrete slab of a certain size and spec.
> There are companies with enormous factories who will prefabricate a
> house for you to varying quality and price levels depending on factors
> like amount of customisation. The house is made in sections in the
> factory and some are even fitted out and decorated, before delivery to
> site. On site assembly and finish is then a matter of days.
> The practical reason is that the construction season outside is pretty
> short.
>
Houses are built all year round even in Scandinavia :) I would think
the main reason for prefabs is cost. Few can afford a house built
on-site. Prefabs are sometimes put up in a day, minimizing the cost of
construction work. (Workers are ŁŁŁ) A prefab house with the little
piece of land needed will cost at least Ł100000.
The manufacturers offer a range of different models. Two manufacturers
picked at random:
http://www.gripsholmshus.se/grip_eng/docs/index.html
http://www.gotenehus.se/villor.html
I think Latvian and Russian manufacturers are going to enter the
market soon, driving prices down.
The old ban on high rise wooden houses has recently been lifted in
Sweden. (Fire is no longer considered an issue) A few have been built,
and more are planned. (Wood is cheaper than concrete.)
/Clas-Henrik
The Natural Philopsopher
Edward W. Thompson wrote:
> Your point can be expanded to cover the whole of British Soceity. The
> UK is becoming a very sad back water compared with the rest of the
> world. It seems to revel in the idea that traditional ways of doing
> things is best and is being left behind in many many areas.
Having spent some time in mexico, a cistern would have been a welcome
addition to the plumbing.
However, in this country, it is almost completely superflous I agree.
- lowers avaialable pressure
- is bulky costly and prone in time to overflwoing if teh ball valve sticks
- needs carefuul covering to prevent ingress of dead insects, birds and
mammals and is a health risk.
Only think going is it maky juat give you a polluted drink or a
couple of loo flushes if your water gets cut off.
Mine never has been. Ever. Allegedly the situation is worse in
towns where raod diggers regularly screw up mains water supplys..
Tony Bryer
> a couple of loo flushes if your water gets cut off.
What are you flushing yours with - an oil barrel?
The Technical Manager
> Your point can be expanded to cover the whole of British Soceity. The
> UK is becoming a very sad back water compared with the rest of the
> world.
Especially for affordable broadband internet provision.
> It seems to revel in the idea that traditional ways of doing
> things is best
Apart from discipline in schools but then thats a different matter anyway.
> and is being left behind in many many areas.
I wonder about the future of Britain as a technologically advanced society. It
seems as if the high technology end of things really is going down the plughole. A
lot of my engineering colleagues are worrying that engineers are set to become
obsolete superfluous people in a Britain dominated by pop stars, financial whiz
kids and media types which the government is actively promoting. Engineering and
manufacturing are just seen as too old fashioned and uncool for "trendy" Britain of
today.
It might end up that those with a PhD in electronics will end up having to work as
plumbers fixing ball valves in cisterns that should have been banished to the
scrapheap of technology decades ago because there is no electronics industry left
to employ them in.
The Technical Manager
> On Tue, 19 Nov 2002 12:28:25 +0000, The Technical Manager
> <tec...@niobiumfive.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >
> >I read somewhere last year that British housebuilding is the most conservative
> >in the developed world, certainly compared to some countries in Europe, Asia,
> >North America etc. where new houses are often built in modern styles, with
> >modern construction techniques and modern materials.
>
> There are two things here - one being modern construction method and
> materials and the other modern design. The two are often associated
> together but don't need to be. There is a third factor that you hint
> at which is the technical specification - e.g. energy requirements
> etc.
>
> On my travels in the rest of Europe I occasionally look at new houses
> being built. If you ignore apartment buildings which are more of a
> phenomenon in a lot of places than here,
For the purpose of this thread only freestanding houses are considered. Not
apartment buildings.
> then brick or block and
> mortar or equivalent bonding material are quite widely used and were
> traditional. I am thinking mainly of France, Benelux and Germany
> here and reasonable quaility private homes as opposed to social
> housing where prefabricated concrete sections seem to be quite
> popular.
>
> There are new techniques that are more widely used like I-beam joists
> that are apparently very strong. One could argue that UK Construction
> PLC is conservative in not using them.
>
> There are other great ideas like having service ducts built into the
> structure of the building so that you can pull wires later;
Should have had that decades ago.
Err heat rises so you end up heating the air close to the ceiling rather than lower
in the room where people reside. I investigated the heat flow from ceiling mounted
incandescent lights as part of my physics GCSE and confirmed that they were pretty
much useless for warming rooms in typical domestic settings.
IMM
"The Technical Manager" <tec...@niobiumfive.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3DD4EBCC...@niobiumfive.co.uk...
> Why is it that houses continue to use cold water cisterns in the loft
> for supplying water for heating ? Surely they could be eliminated by the
> use of pressure regulator valves instead between the mains water supply
> and the hot water tank inlet.
>
> Do cold water cisterns really serve a purpose anymore or is it that old
> plumbing habits die hard ?
Old habits do die hard. Only half new homes have mains pressure water
systems.
IMM
> I read somewhere last year that British
> housebuilding is the most conservative
> in the developed world,
John Prescott said it. The government is forcing building companies to adopt
state of the art faster and cheaper techniques. Embarrassing I know.
IMM
"C-H Gustafsson" <esb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:74f03cde.02112...@posting.google.com...
Thanks, interesting sites. The UK is adopting SIP panels to give a homes
that don't require full heating systems in our temperate climate. Swedish
timber frame companies operate in the UK. Masonite sell their beams here.
IMM
news:6bjmtuouspgujon23...@4ax.com...
>
> Your point can be expanded to cover the whole of British Soceity. The
> UK is becoming a very sad back water compared with the rest of the
> world. It seems to revel in the idea that traditional ways of doing
> things is best and is being left behind in many many areas.
There was a brilliant BBC 2 TV prog last night on modernist architecture (Le
Corbusier sp?), etc. The British were nowhere in the modernist movement of
the 1920s/30s. Only when Hitler forced modernism out did the German, and
Russian, architects come to the UK, otherwise we would have still been
Victorian in design. The early brilliant designs are still there. A few
British architects embraced the movement too, producing some excellent work.
We tend to invent, so at a high academic level we are supreme. At the lower
implementation levels we are backwards. Prescott is forcing us into the 21st
century.
IMM
"The Technical Manager" <tec...@niobiumfive.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3DDCCB46...@niobiumfive.co.uk...
> It might end up that those with a PhD in electronics will end up having to
work as
> plumbers fixing ball valves in cisterns that should have been banished to
the
> scrapheap of technology decades ago because there is no electronics
industry left
> to employ them in.
I know one man with a computer science degree who is now a plumber. He is
paid more and the work is highly stable.
IMM
news:mhnltu4hmikm5aa9l...@4ax.com...
> <tec...@niobiumfive.co.uk> wrote:
> There are new techniques that are more
> widely used like I-beam joists
> that are apparently very strong. One could
> argue that UK Construction
> PLC is conservative in not using them.
They do. Westbury and Bryant, and other now use them. they are now
mainstream.
> There are other great ideas like having service
> ducts built into the structure of the building
> so that you can pull wires later; and having
> upstairs floors or parts of them concrete so
> that one can have a wet room and laundry
> in the bathroom.
We have the washing machine and dryer in the kitchen to reduce noise
adjacent to bedrooms.
> >Apart from a few isolated
> >cases like the Integer Project, most
> >new houses are still built using
> >traditional brick and mortar technology
> >in classical period styles like mock
> >Tudor or Jacobean as opposed to
> >a futuristic appearance.
The 2008 insulation regulations will change that. To get the U values the
walls would be too thick using B&B.
> >Is it British people not wanting ultra
> >modern houses or construction companies
> >not willing or able to build them ?
>
> Apart from all the points above; the
> summary is that most people are
> conservative, be they builders or buyers.
"Well designed", open plan modern looking homes sell like hot cakes.
Planners force builders into mock Victorian looks.
Frank Erskine
>
> I know one man with a computer science degree who is now a plumber.
I'd have thought that computers are more "technology" than "science".
--
Frank Erskine
IMM
"Frank Erskine" <frank....@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:arjt29$4fm$1...@helle.btinternet.com...
> IMM wrote:
> >
> > I know one man with a computer science degree who is now a plumber.
>
> I'd have thought that computers are more "technology" than "science".
That's what he has.
IMM
> will spout, a low pressure pipe will dribble. Also low pressure
> HWc's are cheaper that mains-pressure ones. OF course combi boilers dont
> need HWC's but it seems to be difficult to find a combi that will give
> you an adequate flow of hot water.
There are many high flow models about.
Andy Hall
wrote:
>
>The 2008 insulation regulations will change that. To get the U values the
>walls would be too thick using B&B.
Do you have a particular URL or reference to 2008 requirements
indicating definite elemental U values that have been approved and are
on the parliamentary track?
I can find one or two consultative documents on John the Bruiser's web
site but nothing definitive apart from the UK commitment to reduce CO2
emissions by certain levels by 2008.
If you are extrapolating from something, OK, but please explain the
steps of how you work out the requirements.
As another point, if you are assuming that this will cause the UK
construction industry to move to timber frame construction in a 6 year
period, I have difficulty seeing how that would come about considering
the conservatism of said industry. Where would all the chippies who
can do framing come from for one thing? Having looked at framing
being done in the U.S., this is not as trivial as it appears to do
properly.
Or did you have other construction methods in mind?
>
>> >Is it British people not wanting ultra
>> >modern houses or construction companies
>> >not willing or able to build them ?
>>
>> Apart from all the points above; the
>> summary is that most people are
>> conservative, be they builders or buyers.
>
>"Well designed", open plan modern looking homes sell like hot cakes.
>Planners force builders into mock Victorian looks.
>
I think consumer demand has something to do with it. It would be
interesting to see if any surveys have been published on people's
preferences.
One idea that I did see in a recent TV architecture program I quite
liked. The idea was to construct the house with a minimum of truly
structural components within the interior, so that rooms could be
separated with demountable walls that could be moved as needs change -
for example as kids grow up and leave home, different sized families
and so on. This idea has been tried in Holland to good effect in
allowing people more choice of internal layout with new build
properties. However, what was interesting was that most went for
very traditional layouts, even though they could be changed later.
Andy Hall
<frank....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>IMM wrote:
>>
>> I know one man with a computer science degree who is now a plumber.
>
>I'd have thought that computers are more "technology" than "science".
It depends where you are in the development cycle. Some of the
concepts for computing of the future are very much at the pure science
stage - i.e. the theories involved may or may not work, they need
exploring etc. Technology really begins to happen more when the
principles are understood and when it comes to looking at viability,
commercially and in other ways.
That's how I see it anyway, but "computer science" as a degree subject
can mean anything from the pure science that I've described to a very
practical and implementation focussed curriculum. The same is
largely true in subjects like "electronics" or "electronic
engineering". You really have to look at the syllabus to know what
the focus of a course or HE or FE establishment is - there is a broad
spectrum....
Andy Hall
wrote:
>
>We tend to invent, so at a high academic level we are supreme.
I wouldn't disagree with that
> At the lower
>implementation levels we are backwards.
or that, particularly except that I wouldn't describe it as "lower".
Some people are skilled intellectually, others practically. Our
problem is that we don't value the practical skills or encourage them.
> Prescott is forcing us into the 21st
>century.
>
Using Marquis of Queensbury rules?
The continued tinkering with the education system on the assumption
that intellectual skills are the only ones worth having does not help
individuals or society as a whole.
Andy Hall
wrote:
You should send this thought to the Times. It would make an
excellent subject for their Saturday Nature Notes cartoon. I can
just see Johnny with one foot in each Jag and his boxing gloves
beating up the poor beleaguered construction industry, grabbing grey
planning officials by the neck and handing out title deeds to the
masses.
Tony Bryer
> There was a brilliant BBC 2 TV prog last night on modernist
> architecture (Le Corbusier sp?), etc. The British were nowhere in the
> modernist movement of the 1920s/30s. Only when Hitler forced modernism
> out did the German, and Russian, architects come to the UK, otherwise
> we would have still been Victorian in design. The early brilliant
> designs are still there. A few British architects embraced the
> movement too, producing some excellent work.
I saw it too: you noted the modern movement flats all abandoned and
security shuttered, desperately looking for a buyer, whilst probably
within a mile Tudor style semis are changing hands for Ł300K+
IMM
"Andy Hall" <an...@hall.gl.stopjunkmail> wrote in message
> > Prescott is forcing us into the 21st
> >century.
>
> Using Marquis of Queensbury rules?
If necessary. Once he has a strategy he follows it through and no one gets
in the way.
> The continued tinkering with the education
> system on the assumption that intellectual
> skills are the only ones worth having does not help
> individuals or society as a whole.
That was the case with antiquated system we had.grammar schools were
intellectual and taught no practical; skills and secondary purposely moulded
factory fodder. Disgusting situation.
IMM
"Tony Bryer" <to...@sda.co.uk> wrote in message
news:VA.00001e0...@sda.co.uk...
> In article <arjram$6qg$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>, Imm wrote:
> > There was a brilliant BBC 2 TV prog last night on modernist
> > architecture (Le Corbusier sp?), etc. The British were nowhere in the
> > modernist movement of the 1920s/30s. Only when Hitler forced modernism
> > out did the German, and Russian, architects come to the UK, otherwise
> > we would have still been Victorian in design. The early brilliant
> > designs are still there. A few British architects embraced the
> > movement too, producing some excellent work.
>
> I saw it too: you noted the modern movement
> flats all abandoned and security shuttered,
> desperately looking for a buyer, whilst probably
> within a mile Tudor style semis are changing hands for £300K+
These are nearly, if not all, all grade 1 listed. Some block were fully
occupied. The ones that were not were obviously waiting for the right buyer
who values the heritage. Most developers would strip out the 1930s decor and
put in IKEA, the laws are preventing them on this one.
IMM
"Andy Hall" <an...@hall.gl.stopjunkmail> wrote in message
> I can
> just see Johnny with one foot in each Jag and his boxing gloves
> beating up the poor beleaguered construction industry, grabbing grey
> planning officials by the neck and handing out title deeds to the
> masses.
And a wonderful sight that will be.
Tony Bryer
> These are nearly, if not all, all grade 1 listed. Some block were
> fully occupied. The ones that were not were obviously waiting for the
> right buyer who values the heritage. Most developers would strip out
> the 1930s decor and put in IKEA, the laws are preventing them on this
> one.
The 'heritage' has a negative value. What would that bit of land be
worth covered in 1930's semis? What would it be worth as a cleared site?
What is it worth with an empty 1930's modern movement listed building on
it that will need EH approval to every last change. A lot less. If the
freehold had stayed in the same ownership since the 1930's the present
owners would now be left wishing that their predecessors had erected a
building of no great merit so that they could now do what they chose
with the site.
IMM
"Andy Hall" <an...@hall.gl.stopjunkmail> wrote in message
> >The 2008 insulation regulations will
> >change that. To get the U values the
> >walls would be too thick using B&B.
>
> Do you have a particular URL or
> reference to 2008 requirements
> indicating definite elemental U values
> that have been approved and are
> on the parliamentary track?
The construction mags are full of it. I can't give a ref as yet.
> As another point, if you are assuming
> that this will cause the UK construction
> industry to move to timber frame construction
> in a 6 year period, I have difficulty seeing
> how that would come about considering
> the conservatism of said industry.
"All" major developers have bought timber frame companies. All of them. SIP
panel companies are emerging like fury and even Kingspan have one.
> Where would all the chippies who
> can do framing come from for one
> thing?
Wood skills are easier to acquire than wet skills. Also power
tools/machines will do most work.
The cement industry is responding with higher insulation blocks with thin
motor joints. A Finnish company is pushing one large panel, the size of a
room side, using lightweight block material. The cement industry will
attempt to compete. I see timber frame, and especially SIPs to dominate.
> >"Well designed", open plan modern
> >looking homes sell like hot cakes.
> >Planners force builders into mock
> >Victorian looks.
>
> I think consumer demand has something
> to do with it.
No. The Draconian planning system we have.
> One idea that I did see in a recent
> TV architecture program I quite
> liked. The idea was to construct the
> house with a minimum of truly
> structural components within the
> interior, so that rooms could be
> separated with demountable walls that
> could be moved as needs change -
> for example as kids grow up and leave home,
> different sized families and so on.
The BBC Dream House, or Integer House, had these.
Andy Hall
wrote:
>
>"Andy Hall" <an...@hall.gl.stopjunkmail> wrote in message
>news:391rtu4rfbj878e5r...@4ax.com...
>
>> > Prescott is forcing us into the 21st
>> >century.
>>
>> Using Marquis of Queensbury rules?
>
>If necessary. Once he has a strategy he follows it through and no one gets
>in the way.
Mmm, I'd noticed, especially if they're a voter
>
>> The continued tinkering with the education
>> system on the assumption that intellectual
>> skills are the only ones worth having does not help
>> individuals or society as a whole.
>
>That was the case with antiquated system we had.grammar schools were
>intellectual and taught no practical; skills and secondary purposely moulded
>factory fodder. Disgusting situation.
>
That wasn't really what I meant - I was thinking more about further
and higher education.
However don't imagine that separating secondary education into
academic, business related and practical/professional is not done
elsewhere - for example it is in Germany.
http://www.agr.kuleuven.ac.be/intorg/ica/guide/germany/page1.htm
The hangup in the UK has been that somehow one form of education was
better than another and that academic content was the only thing to go
for. The wrongdoing of successive governments has been interfering
with it every couple of years and generally politicising it.
The Technical Manager
1930s seems to be quite fashionable from an antique point of view and prices of
1930s and Art Deco stuff has skyrocketed in the past 10 or so years. Back in
the early 1980s anything from the 1930s was seen as ugly old fashioned tat and
fit for the bin. Those old bakelite phones from the 30s now sell for around
£200.
IMM
I love Art Deco, which originated on the early 1900s. The term Art Deco was
coined by the Sunday Times in 1966. Many Art Deco style flats were built in
British cities in the 1920-30s, but these were not of the modernist
movement. Basically flats with Art Deco trimmings.
The Natural Philosopher
IMM wrote:
>>>Apart from a few isolated
>>>cases like the Integer Project, most
>>>new houses are still built using
>>>traditional brick and mortar technology
>>>in classical period styles like mock
>>>Tudor or Jacobean as opposed to
>>>a futuristic appearance.
>>>
>
> The 2008 insulation regulations will change that. To get the U values the
> walls would be too thick using B&B.
>
Don't be silly. What can be 'too thick' about a wall? No problem in
sticking 75-100mm insulation in a wall.
>
>>>Is it British people not wanting ultra
>>>modern houses or construction companies
>>>not willing or able to build them ?
>>>
>>Apart from all the points above; the
>>summary is that most people are
>>conservative, be they builders or buyers.
>>
>
> "Well designed", open plan modern looking homes sell like hot cakes.
> Planners force builders into mock Victorian looks.
>
No they don't. They are of a certain style, and that appeals only to some.
I happen to hate virctoriana with a vengeance, and I am not very
impressed with open plan modern houses either.Its OK for an urban 'loft'
if you want to live like that, but I'd sooner have a flat in Eaton
Square any day...
I personally prefer the feel of Jacobean and Georgian houses, if
renovated to modern standrads of comfort.
>
>
>
The Natural Philosopher
Frank Erskine wrote:
> IMM wrote:
>
>>I know one man with a computer science degree who is now a plumber.
>>
>
> I'd have thought that computers are more "technology" than "science".
>
When I ran a computer company, foud the least useful people were those
with comp. sci. degrees.
Mathemticians made the best programmers, and the best all round software
inegrators were usually software engineers or ordinary engineers.
> --
> Frank Erskine
>
>
>
The Natural Philosopher
Andy Hall wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Nov 2002 23:41:05 -0000, "IMM" <I...@NOOSSPPAM-IMM.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>We tend to invent, so at a high academic level we are supreme.
>>
>
> I wouldn't disagree with that
>
>
>
>>At the lower
>>implementation levels we are backwards.
>>
>
> or that, particularly except that I wouldn't describe it as "lower".
> Some people are skilled intellectually, others practically. Our
> problem is that we don't value the practical skills or encourage them.
>
Some of us are both. We are called 'engineers'
The Natural Philosopher
IMM wrote:
Grammar schools were there to teach people how to think. Those that were
unable to do this were taught what to think, and how to do. It happend
that factories were in exuistence then, and a skilled job in one is a
damned sight better than having no job at all.
You are a classic case in point.
>
>
The Natural Philosopher
Tony Bryer wrote:
> In article <arl62u$1of$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>, Imm wrote:
>
>>These are nearly, if not all, all grade 1 listed. Some block were
>>fully occupied. The ones that were not were obviously waiting for the
>>right buyer who values the heritage. Most developers would strip out
>>the 1930s decor and put in IKEA, the laws are preventing them on this
>>one.
>>
>
> The 'heritage' has a negative value. What would that bit of land be
> worth covered in 1930's semis? What would it be worth as a cleared site?
> What is it worth with an empty 1930's modern movement listed building on
> it that will need EH approval to every last change. A lot less. If the
> freehold had stayed in the same ownership since the 1930's the present
> owners would now be left wishing that their predecessors had erected a
> building of no great merit so that they could now do what they chose
> with the site.
>
Hear hear!
The listing thing has got entirely out of hand. Grade II listed is being
used to stop out of chartacter developmnet (which I agrre with) in a
really stupid way, which I don't.
Thank heavens I didn't buy a listed house - now, with the period
reproduction in place, the whole village keeps saying 'how nice it looks
- quite unlike the normal 'new house'
If only Garde I listing meant 'adapt, modernise and even rebuild *in
the style of what was there* rather than 'keep it just the way it was,
warts and all' it would mean a huge revitalisation of interesting period
style properties.
>
The Natural Philosopher
IMM wrote:
>>
>
> Wood skills are easier to acquire than wet skills. Also power
> tools/machines will do most work.
>
Bollocks. Carpenters are probably the most intelligent and skilled of
all professions. Wet workers are gibbons mainly. It takes no
intelligence whatsoever to pour concrete, mix mortar and slap down
bricks more or less in a straight line, and plasetring is simply a
mechanical skill.
Carpentry is inherently structural, needs to be thought about and planned.
> The cement industry is responding with higher insulation blocks with thin
> motor joints. A Finnish company is pushing one large panel, the size of a
> room side, using lightweight block material. The cement industry will
> attempt to compete. I see timber frame, and especially SIPs to dominate.
>
I don't think anything will dominate. My house is timber, and it suits
me, but it rings like a well tuned drum when you walk in it. I like that
- but lots of peole like the 'feel' of 'solid' blockwork, as well as its
inherent sound insulation properties. Yer pays yer money...in an urban
environment I would be tempted to do a building the way many offices are
built - prefab panels and cast concrete, with large insulating slabs
inside, then dry lined or block interior partitioning and lining. Quieter.
>
>>>"Well designed", open plan modern
>>>looking homes sell like hot cakes.
>>>Planners force builders into mock
>>>Victorian looks.
>>>
>>I think consumer demand has something
>>to do with it.
>>
>
> No. The Draconian planning system we have.
>
Bullshit. They don't sell like hotcakes, except against jerry built
cardboard 'wimpy homes'
>
>>One idea that I did see in a recent
>>TV architecture program I quite
>>liked. The idea was to construct the
>>house with a minimum of truly
>>structural components within the
>>interior, so that rooms could be
>>separated with demountable walls that
>>could be moved as needs change -
>>for example as kids grow up and leave home,
>>different sized families and so on.
>>
>
> The BBC Dream House, or Integer House, had these.
>
If you want to live in an office....why not?
>
>
>
IMM
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
news:3DDE8B28.4040808@b.c...
> >>>"Well designed", open plan modern
> >>>looking homes sell like hot cakes.
> >>>Planners force builders into mock
> >>>Victorian looks.
> Bullshit. They don't sell like hotcakes,
They do.
> If you want to live in an office....why not?
You want to build an office type of house don't you.
IMM
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
>
> > The 2008 insulation regulations will change that. To get the U values
the
> > walls would be too thick using B&B.
>
> Don't be silly. What can be 'too thick'
> about a wall? No problem in
> sticking 75-100mm insulation in a wall.
100mm = aprox 4". 4" brick 2" cavity, 4" insulation, 4" block = 14" thick
wall, on a tiny British plot too, so a no, no. To get the U values I believe
it would be even wider than this.
> I happen to hate virctoriana with a vengeance,
> and I am not very impressed with open plan
> modern houses either.
From someone who built a house that needs a haircut. How silly.
IMM
> When I ran a computer company, foud the least useful people were those
> with comp. sci. degrees.
>
> Mathemticians made the best programmers, and the best all round software
> inegrators were usually software engineers or ordinary engineers.
What were comp sci people good at then? BTW, programming is below them.
IMM
> > That was the case with the antiquated system
> > we had. Grammar schools were
> > intellectual and taught no practical skills
> > and secondary purposely moulded
> > factory fodder. Disgusting situation.
>
> Grammar schools were there to
> teach people how to think.
They were not. They were to re-inforce a class system. The middle classies
went to Grammar schools.
> Those that were unable to do this
> were taught what to think,
No, they were to be factory fodder, and their education was geared that way
because they were working class. Many of them were very bright yet were
suppressed.
> You are a classic case in point.
You are a prime example of the class ridden British education system, being
brainwashed by a snotty uni. You are a case, but a poignant reminder to all
of the backwardness of our society and education system.
Andy Hall
wrote:
>
>"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
>news:3DDE8B28.4040808@b.c...
>
>> >>>"Well designed", open plan modern
>> >>>looking homes sell like hot cakes.
>> >>>Planners force builders into mock
>> >>>Victorian looks.
>
>> Bullshit. They don't sell like hotcakes,
>
>They do.
>
It's behind you!
We are fast approaching that time of year again.
Having three characters available to offer must be a tremendous
advantage. Which is to be this year? IMM, Dr. Evil or FB?
I have an oriental cat,who I could lend to the production who while
not a sphynx could double reasonably well for Mr. Bigglesworth.
Frank Erskine
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2002 00:17:14 +0000 (UTC), "Frank Erskine"
> <frank....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> IMM wrote:
>>>
>>> I know one man with a computer science degree who is now a plumber.
>>
>> I'd have thought that computers are more "technology" than "science".
>
> It depends where you are in the development cycle. Some of the
> concepts for computing of the future are very much at the pure science
> stage - i.e. the theories involved may or may not work, they need
> exploring etc. Technology really begins to happen more when the
> principles are understood and when it comes to looking at viability,
> commercially and in other ways.
>
As soon as any product (computers, space travel, medicine, etc) is concerned
things change to technology, don't they?
The "Science Museum" (which is a great place!) should largely be the
"Technology Museum"!
--
Frank Erskine
IMM
"Andy Hall" <an...@hall.gl.stopjunkmail> wrote in message
> On Fri, 22 Nov 2002 23:12:28 -0000, "IMM" <I...@NOOSSPPAM-IMM.com>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
> >news:3DDE8B28.4040808@b.c...
> >
> >> >>>"Well designed", open plan modern
> >> >>>looking homes sell like hot cakes.
> >> >>>Planners force builders into mock
> >> >>>Victorian looks.
> >
> >> Bullshit. They don't sell like hotcakes,
> >
> >They do.
> >
>
> It's behind you!
>
> We are fast approaching that time of year again.
>
> Having three characters available to offer must be a tremendous
> advantage. Which is to be this year? IMM, Dr. Evil or FB?
>
> I have an oriental cat,who I could lend to the production who while
> not a sphynx could double reasonably well for Mr. Bigglesworth.
How could you!! You missed out Blofeld!!!!!
Andy Hall
wrote:
I'm not sure of what denoted or denotes the so called working and
middle classes - family income, occupation of breadwinner(s), net
worth, location of residence, how they speak? Any others?
My recollection of grammar school was that it was certainly mainly
about how to think, how to problem solve and how to analyse.
If I think of other people in the school, they came from a wide
variety of backgrounds as defined by all the factors that I could
think of above.
This was the case also at primary school. I am in touch with quite a
lot of my peers from that time, some of who went to grammar schools,
some to selective schools and some to secondary modern.
Again it was not based on any of the "class" parameters from my first
paragraph.
Pretty much all of them from the primary school era have gone on to do
what they wanted to in life and were happy with the education they
received. Many who went the selective and secondary modern school
routes went to universities or polytechnics while others went into
apprenticeships in colleges.
Occupations range from Times 100 company director to insurance sales
to furniture maker to Radio 4 presenter to motor dealership manager.
Again these were not based on any of the so-called "class" parameters,
and financially there is very little correlation to whether the
individuals went to grammar school or one of the (90 or so)
universities.
I don't know why there are the hangups about having appropriate
education and educational establishments to fit the abilities and
needs of the individual. For some reason, the perception of UK
society is that achievement on an academic scale is the be-all and
end-all, and that therefore everybody should be given the same
academically focussed education, adjusted so that the maximum number
achieve something.
In this respect the current systems are failing dramatically by
trying to create what is seen as "equal" opportunity while completely
missing the point of appropriateness.
If you look at the secondary education systems of other countries in
Europe you will see that the majority split the students into
different schools somewhere between 11 and 14, with some focussing on
academic learning, some on business and some on vocational teaching.
I don't hear criticisms of these arrangements for "class" reasons.
From your post in another thread, you seem to be suggesting that a
fireman only deserves a modest salary because he doesn't need to be a
graduate. Isn't that perpetuating the prejudice that people's worth
in society relates to academic achievement?
Andy Hall
<frank....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>Andy Hall wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Nov 2002 00:17:14 +0000 (UTC), "Frank Erskine"
>> <frank....@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> IMM wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I know one man with a computer science degree who is now a plumber.
>>>
>>> I'd have thought that computers are more "technology" than "science".
>>
>> It depends where you are in the development cycle. Some of the
>> concepts for computing of the future are very much at the pure science
>> stage - i.e. the theories involved may or may not work, they need
>> exploring etc. Technology really begins to happen more when the
>> principles are understood and when it comes to looking at viability,
>> commercially and in other ways.
>>
>So really _any_ "science" which has a defined "product" isn't "pure" per se!
I think that's one convenient way to look at it, but not the only one.
A colleague, who is very distinguished in her sphere, described
science as being a bit like cartography - in other words you climb a
small hill, have a look around and form a map of the other hills. You
may well have to climb down, because there is nothing of interest on
this one and go and climb one of the others.
OTOH, technology was defined as being more like a mountain expedition
with a specific single goal in mind. You could apply the same
descriptions to "research" and "development".
>As soon as any product (computers, space travel, medicine, etc) is concerned
>things change to technology, don't they?
>
>The "Science Museum" (which is a great place!) should largely be the
>"Technology Museum"!
I can remember going there almost every school holiday from the age of
about 4 so it has fond memories. To begin with it was just a case of
pressing the buttons on the exhibits to see what would happen; then
the interest grew in terms of how and why.
I think a lot of the content is technology, but if you think about
something like the steam engine, it started as a discovery, leading
through science to a practical technology.
The Natural Philosopher
Andy Hall wrote:
No, I was simply extending IMM's point in that case.
Having spent many tears actually earning les as a designer of factory
products than the unionised 'factory fodder' who performed the
unbelievably complex tasks of screwing my designs together, I know for a
fact that IMM is talking out of his anal orifice.
What anyone is worth bears no relationship to what they actually get
paid. They get paid according to their scarcity or ability n some other
way to achieve a monopoly in he jobs market place (e.g. union blackmail).
What happened in the 70s and 80s and beyond, is that people noticed that
intelligent people (a) went to university and (b) commanded higher
salaries and (c) proportionately came more often from privileged
backgrounds as defined by whatever weird class system they were
interested in perpetrating (although they all claimed the opposite)
It took a genius of the order of that displayed by IMM here, to decide
that if they renamed all the technical colleges 'Universities' and sent
everyone there, they would all then command higher salaries!
Its a classic case in pseudo science and pseudo logic. About as stupid
as syaing that because 90% of comopany directors drive a mercedes, jag
or BMW, if the government gives you one, you will be a company director...
Smart people get on, whether they went to uni or not. Look at Alan
sugar. Stupid people have to find some other way to make money than
using their brains. In the past, of course, where you sent the kids to
school arguably made a difference. You could e.g. join the conservaticve
party, or become a criminal, or indeed as post Thatcher events have
shown, do both. Now of course the criminals are all migrating to the
'other side'.
I just wish someone somewhere would have th courage to stand up and say
'I belive in the fundamental assumpotion that all people are not created
equal, but in fact completely different, and in fact society as we know
it could not survive if it were any other way, and we ought to be
creating an education system that reflects that fact and inculcates the
essential belief not that "you are as good as the next man" but that in
fact, you are "better than the next man at being YOU" and the purpose of
education is to discover who you are, and show how you can use it to
do somthing useful and productive, or failing that, at least passably
amusing and non-destructive'
Firefighters have a nice cosy monopoly. They were originally paid by
insurance companies, to keep their claims down. They were paid what made
economic sense to pay them, and if they didn't like it they could do
something else. If there wasn't anythng else they cold do, they could
naff off. That's how society *works* and whingeing on that people who
rsik their lives daily ought to be paid more is all veryu easy to say,
but hard to arrange. Everybody ought to be living in the lap of luxury,
having the time of their lives. Unfortunately someone still has to clear
away the empty beer cans. Personally I rate the man who clears the
rubbish somewhat more valuable than Tony Blair et al, and many times
more valuable than IMM. But there ya go. HE doesn't clear the rubbish,
he just tries to gain brownie points by pretending that they all ought
to have degrees in beer can clearing and get paid accordingly. Out of
someone elses pocket no doubt.
IMM should go and live in South Africa, as I did for a while, where he
would realise that changing the government from one subgroup to another,
with the avowed intention of making things 'fairer' does not of itself
solve the innate problems of society. With no private money, no capital
to invest, equally poor education for all, you end up drifting back into
pre-industrial unpleasantness.
Blearrgh. Fine feathers don't make fine birds. Who will bell the cat?The
emperor has no clothes....
The Natural Philosopher
IMM wrote:
hahah. As usual you haven't thought it through. Or thought at all.
Your naïveté is staggering.
>
>
Andy Hall
wrote:
>
>>
>> From your post in another thread, you seem to be suggesting that a
>> fireman only deserves a modest salary because he doesn't need to be a
>> graduate. Isn't that perpetuating the prejudice that people's worth
>> in society relates to academic achievement?
>>
>>
>
>
>No, I was simply extending IMM's point in that case.
>
Apologies, I was referencing IMM's remark.
In other respects, I think you've said much the same as I did in a
different way.
IMM
"Andy Hall" <an...@hall.gl.stopjunkmail> wrote in message
> if you think about
> something like the steam engine, it started as a discovery, leading
> through science to a practical technology.
Discovery, ten practicality then science with a the steam engine. They were
operating them and not knowing what was happening inside.
IMM
> IMM should go and live in South Africa,
> as I did for a while,
I did. Amd you really have not got a clue.
IMM
> hahah. As usual you haven't thought it through. Or thought at all.
> Your naļveté is staggering.
It is plain by your writings that you are slowly losing it. Seek
professional attention quick.
Andrew Gabriel
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> writes:
> When I ran a computer company, foud the least useful people were those
> with comp. sci. degrees.
>
> Mathemticians made the best programmers, and the best all round software
> inegrators were usually software engineers or ordinary engineers.
SNAP!
When I worked for GEC, we started getting serious problems with
the quality of new graduates. It turned out that the HR department
had started insisting on Computer Science degrees for applicants.
The management then did a quick check on the backgrounds of
around 100 staff in the department most of whom were involved in
design/programming (ignoring those brought in under the new HR policy),
and the Computer Scientists were nearly all at the lowest acheivement
level. As you said, Mathematicians came top, followed by scientists
(Physicists, Chemists, etc), with Engineering graduates forming the
main bulk of the middle road.
--
Andrew Gabriel
IMM
"Andrew Gabriel" <and...@cucumber.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aroahn$ojd$1...@new-usenet.uk.sun.com...
I have found computer science grads far more knowledgeable of computers in
general than all others. Most do not like programming for long periods, as
they consider it beneath them and their education. You can learn programming
from a 2 month course.
I have also found that those entering computing from other disciplines tend
to have a superficial knowledge, with no firm base root understand of
computers, how they work and unable to see the "big picture" as the computer
science grads. Computer science grads "thought" about problems far more
deeply and came out with far better solutions. They were also far more able
to see eye to eye with the manufacturers. I found the difference to be in a
simple analogy: Computer science grads = automotive engineer, others = the
mechanic.
The Natural Philosopher
IMM wrote:
Guess who has a comp sci degree then?
I have a different take., Comp sci gaduates do nothing but think about
teh problem, endlessly debate it and come up with one elegant but
totally impractical solution after another.
Maths grads look at things logically, don't care how teh computer works,
because they are writing softwarte, not fixing hardware,. and come up
with simple elegant solutions that work. Their coding may or may not be
any good, but susually it works.
Engieneers come up with some bloody awful approaches, but in the end
make them work well..the best thing is to have the design domne by the
maths heads, and the actual construction by the engineers. And don't let
rthe comp sci anyahere near it, or it will be wrecked.
Copmputre scientists do NOT belond in industry. They belong in academia,
or possibly the odd one in cutting edge reseearch and development.
>
>
>
The Natural Philosopher
IMM wrote:
I think they knew exactly what was happening inside. That is not the
point you ought to be making. The point is that technology is always a
bit ahead of science. Science comes along afterwards and helps refine it.
Occasionallty science suggests a new techniology - but its still
afterwards a question of fiddling till it works, and using science to
work out how well it ought to work, and why it doesn't.
Science is descriptive, not creative.
Science answers questions, it doens't tell you which ones to ask.
>
>
The Natural Philosopher
IMM wrote:
> "The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
> news:3DDF4A4F.1020305@b.c...
>
>
>>hahah. As usual you haven't thought it through. Or thought at all.
>>Your naďveté is staggering.
>>
>
> It is plain by your writings that you are slowly losing it. Seek
> professional attention quick.
>
Oh dear. Trod on a nerve did I?
>
>
IMM
> >>if you think about
> >>something like the steam engine,
> >>it started as a discovery, leading
> >>through science to a practical technology.
> >
> > Discovery, then practicality then science
> > with the steam engine. They were
> > operating them and not knowing what
> > was happening inside.
>
> I think they knew exactly what was
> happening inside.
From from a scientific view they never.
> That is not the point you ought to be making.
> The point is that technology is always a
> bit ahead of science. Science comes along
> afterwards and helps refine it.
That is the point I made.
> Occasionallty science suggests a new techniology - but its still
> afterwards a question of fiddling till it works, and using science to
> work out how well it ought to work, and why it doesn't.
>
> Science is descriptive, not creative.
>
> Science answers questions, it doens't tell
> you which ones to ask.
Ah tonight in the Great Britons: Isaac Newton laid them down and Brunel made
them into useful and practical for millions to use and change their lives.
The man that does it is the one that matters. The Ancient Greeks thought of
all sorts of things, but never made them happen. BTW, I voted for John
Lennon.
IMM
> I have a different take., Comp sci gaduates
> do nothing but think about teh problem,
> endlessly debate it and come up with one
> elegant but totally impractical solution
> after another.
Wrong.
> Maths grads look at things logically,
They do!!!
> don't care how teh computer works,
> because they are writing softwarte,
> not fixing hardware,. and come up
> with simple elegant solutions that work.
Where?
> Engieneers come up with some bloody
> awful approaches, but in the end
> make them work well..the best thing is
> to have the design domne by the
> maths heads,
Manths heads? Are you sane?
> and the actual construction
> by the engineers.
Under the supervision of computer science grads.
> Copmputre scientists do NOT belond in
> industry. They belong in academia,
> or possibly the odd one in cutting edge
> reseearch and development.
Some truth there, but they have a greater depth of knowledge that the rest
put together. I have come across maths grads that have programmed for about
10 years and can't give a simple explanation to what an Operating System is
or does. They remember lots of UNIX commands and think are clever because of
it.
I came across a raw computer science grad who blew the pants off people who
had been programming Relational databases for many years. Her knowledge in
depth of the subject was awesome while the others could hardly take anything
to 3rd normal form. She produced databases that zipped along.
IMM
"The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
> > "The Natural Philosopher" <a@b.c> wrote in message
> > news:3DDF4A4F.1020305@b.c...
> >
> >>hahah. As usual you haven't thought it through. Or thought at all.
> >>Your naïveté is staggering.
> >
> > It is plain by your writings that you are slowly losing it. Seek
> > professional attention quick.
>
> Oh dear. Trod on a nerve did I?
I am bringing to your attention a problem you obviously unaware of.
Mark Hudson
> I love Art Deco, which originated on the early 1900s.
> The term Art Deco was coined by the Sunday Times in 1966.
> Many Art Deco style flats were built in British cities
> in the 1920-30s, but these were not of the modernist
> movement. Basically flats with Art Deco trimmings.
Suggest you look at the following URLs...
http://www.le.ac.uk/ulas/annualreports/ar2001/savoy/savoy.html
http://www.jesus.org.uk/jact/northampton/index.html
The former cannon/abc/savoy cinema in Northampton closed in the early
90s shortly after the same parent company opened its MGM multiplex in
the town (which became Virgin, now UGC).
The building is a fabulous art deco building designed by WR Glen that is
currently going to ruin since being purchased by the "Jesus Army" who
seem to not have the funds to do anything with it.
Modern cinemas just do not have auditoriums of that size. Anyone who has
been to a magnificent cinema such as the Odeon in Leicester Square,
London will know that the atmosphere in a big auditorium like that
during a movie is much better than some of the tiny auditoriums in
modern multiplexes (even if the seating is now much more comfortable) :)
Mark
IMM
news:arssd1$foq$1...@yarrow.open.ac.uk...
The Cinema (Odeon?) in Muswell Hill is superb and is under protection. many
of these brilliant cinemas all over the country were demolished in the early
1970s. One in Birkenhead was brilliant on the outside.
I was in the Odeon, Leicester Sq to see the day after premier of the James
Bond film where he ski's off the cliff. When parachute opened the audience
cheered like in a football game. Wonderful.
Edward W. Thompson
On Sun, 24 Nov 2002 13:19:17 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c>
wrote:
John Campbell
>
> http://www.le.ac.uk/ulas/annualreports/ar2001/savoy/savoy.html
> http://www.jesus.org.uk/jact/northampton/index.html
>
> The former cannon/abc/savoy cinema in Northampton closed in the early
> 90s shortly after the same parent company opened its MGM multiplex in
> the town (which became Virgin, now UGC).
>
> The building is a fabulous art deco building designed by WR Glen that is
> currently going to ruin since being purchased by the "Jesus Army" who
> seem to not have the funds to do anything with it.
and has been drying out the interior, as well as completing major
underpinning works. Not much to show, I know but vital.
As far as long term plans are concerned, the initial development plans
prepared by the architects would have exceded the maximum expenditure
allowed under charity law -- the issue is not Jesus Army resources,
but Charity Commission oversight.
We are confident that the renovated building will reopen in late 2003.
John Campbell
Jesus Army Charitable Trust