OT: CEng ? The IET seems to have us by the goolies
Fred
I'm about sick of paying out 180 squids per year for a useless
magazine that is about Popular Electronics standard, full of general
interst articles on greeen power generation and other uninteresting
rubbish. It now rarely gets the plastic cover torn off.
I'm not sure why I stay a member. Groucho said "I wouldn't join any
club that would have someone like me as a member."
So why do some of us remain in ? For me, I suppose it's because if I
look for another job, then CEng looks good (I think).
I was opposed to the IEE joining with the IMechE to form the IET. At
least with the old Institute of Electrical Engineers, the "Electronics
and Communications" magazine occasionaly had an interesting article.
So we remain members, because AIUI if you leave, you can't get back in
due to new, higher entrance requirements ! Do they require an MSc
these days because it is needed, or is it a reflection on many BSc
courses. Most likely I think it's a policy to stop people like me
leaving. Those policies seem to guarantee the eventual demise of the
IET as we will die.
I view the IET as a self-important, self-perpetuating quango that does
nothing for people like me.
Am I alone in this view of my (not) revered institution ?
Is membership declining ?
Does it count for anything any longer in job applications, or fees we
can charge as consultants?
Has anybody figured a way to keep the CEng and leave this lot ?
Strangely, in the IETelections, no candidates have a policy of cutting
the fee to 20 squids. Or how about something useful like a Costco
membership. Or, best of all, sell-off Savoy Place and distribute the
proceeds to members ? They'd get my vote.
Fred
The Natural Philosopher
Oh dear. Apart from my degree in electrical sciences I never joined any
professional institutions at all.
I tend to regard those that did, as being rather second rate, and
collecting letters after their name, to bolster their credibility. ;-)
You and only you can decide whether professional membership is worth the
cash.
I think its maybe worthwhile if you are deeply into a very narrow filed,
and it gives you access to all the latest research papers in that field.
But there were no institutions for the sort of stuff I was working on.
And technical books were cheaper and offered more.
I've been known to buy a 50 quid book for two sentences on one page.
Saved three of us from bashing our brains for ANOTHER week. Good value.
These days the internet means that 99% of the issues that you come
across have been solved somewhere by someone. And at the worst will lead
you to the paper or book you need to buy ;-)
The other use of a professional instution is to lobby from a hopefully
informed and disapssionate prespective. To stop rubbish like CFL bulbs
and wind turbines being foisted on us.
But I have to say that sadly many of these institutions are self
perpetuating bureacracies, with no clear idea of what their function
ought to be.
Sometimes the annual jolly is worth having.
Henry Lockwood
I was a MIEE for a while, after graduation, but as I'm not working in
a CEngable industry and didn't like the merger at all, I quit. They
called to ask me why, and I told them; it seemed to take them by
surprise.
Can't really say I've missed it.
HenryL
Theo Markettos
> OT, but lots of electronic engineers in Cambridge.
>
> I'm about sick of paying out 180 squids per year for a useless
> magazine that is about Popular Electronics standard, full of general
> interst articles on greeen power generation and other uninteresting
> rubbish. It now rarely gets the plastic cover torn off.
[snip]
+1 to much of that. I only pay because I'm a student member and the fee
/is/ 20 quid, but I still find that hard to justify.
FWIW I think the magazine is better than the old magazines (eg 'Computing
and Control'), which were filled with overly-specific pieces which couldn't
make up their minds whether they were journal articles or marketing puffs.
Some were interesting, but the majority didn't get read. But I still have a
stack of the new magazines in the plastic wrappers.
> So why do some of us remain in ? For me, I suppose it's because if I
> look for another job, then CEng looks good (I think).
That's the reason I've been staying, but I don't know actually how relevant
it is. I can see one huge paperchase, but I'm not entirely sure what that
proves (and I had to run the paperchase myself, at an employer who had never
done it before). What does being Chartered actually prove you can do, or
make people think that you can do?
> So we remain members, because AIUI if you leave, you can't get back in
> due to new, higher entrance requirements ! Do they require an MSc
> these days because it is needed, or is it a reflection on many BSc
> courses.
It appears a BSc is fine:
http://www.theiet.org/membership/types/designatory-letters/tmiet-miet.cfm
I do wonder whether they're trying to get people to claim it as a business
expense so they don't really mind how much the fees are.
Hearing this third-hand a few years ago, there was something to do with age
discrimination legislation which means they couldn't have differential fees
to charge those older members with higher earnings more than the
just-out-of-college graduate. But it just puts the fees massively out of
reach.
I'd be very interested to hear those with views on the other side of the
industry fence, as it were.
Theo
Fred
>It appears a BSc is fine:
>http://www.theiet.org/membership/types/designatory-letters/tmiet-miet.cfm
>
>I do wonder whether they're trying to get people to claim it as a business
>expense so they don't really mind how much the fees are.
>
>Hearing this third-hand a few years ago, there was something to do with age
>discrimination legislation which means they couldn't have differential fees
>to charge those older members with higher earnings more than the
>just-out-of-college graduate. But it just puts the fees massively out of
>reach.
>
>I'd be very interested to hear those with views on the other side of the
>industry fence, as it were.
>
>Theo
Hmm, I thought it was much tougher these days. Sure I heared somewhere
MSc now wanted . Can we be certain that MIET now automatically
includes CEng ?
The responses so far do not seem a glowing recommendation for the
value.
Andrew May
> The other use of a professional instution is to lobby from a hopefully
> informed and disapssionate prespective. To stop rubbish like CFL bulbs
> and wind turbines being foisted on us.
>
Didn't the IET lobby in support of Part P?
Gavin Walker
news:8b5ci0...@mid.individual.net...
> Didn't the IET lobby in support of Part P?
I used to be very anti-Part P -- I consider myself competent to do basic
wiring and testing --- but having bought a house that had some really,
really bad wiring done by the previous owner I'm reluntantly coming around
to the idea of regulation being required.
G.
The Natural Philosopher
If they did, resign immediately.
Probably the purest example of a bit of legislation achieving the exact
opposite result from what was intended at enormous expense all round.
Andrew May
doing it on the cheap and sod the regulations then they wouldn't have
followed Part P anyway.
Besides saying that some people would be better of with regulation
therefore we should all accept it is like saying that some people are
safer wearing cycle helmets and therefore they should be mandatory.
Ducks.
The Natural Philosopher
Indeed, but part P doesn't actually make that happen.
If you are, or were installing under building control, there is or was
already a requirement for wiring to be to standards.
If you are a cowboy wiring guy, you wont be telling anyone anyway.
Most dreadful wiring is done by amateur homeowners.
Most electricians are already aware of the standards, and stick to them.
> G.
>
>
Andrew May
Although my particular gripe was that they supported it but did not
lobby for Chartered Electrical Engineers to be able to self-certify. An
implicit declaration that they consider electricians to be better
qualified to do electrical work than Chartered Electrical Engineers.
Admittedly not all IET members work in wiring but to get Chartered
status they should have had to demonstrate and understanding of
engineering principles, and understanding of safety and an ability to
find out the information that they need.
The Natural Philosopher
Its a LOT easier to identify a cyclist without a helmet than a piece of
10A cable taking 25A tucked into a thatched roof.
And its only the cyclist at risk himself.
Classic case. I rented a house while mine was being built. It was a
totally shabby place, but cheap. I decided to emulsion the kitchen
white. The electricals went bang.
You will be as puzzled as I was at this point.
I handed it to the irritable landlord, who sent a sparks in, who took a
day to identify the rawplug in the wall with no screw in it, (the one
with a screw in was 2 inches to the left) that had obviously been fitted
so the screw went right through the cable, tripped something and so had
been removed, and the trip reset..
until a gob of wet emulsion causes a permanent short.
Would part P have helped? I cant see how. A modern consumer unit and RCD
trip CERTAINLY did. But under building regs anyway, I think they are
mandatory upgrades for any work on a consumer unit at all. No
electrician I have ever met would countenance NOT putting one in (nice
earners!) when upgrading a house.
People who insist on cheap as chips or DIY stuff wont tell anyone anyway..
Its more akin to putting a 15mph speed limit everywhere, on the grounds
it will increase safety. The reality is, its impossibly expensive to
enforce universally, leads to huge frustrations by people and costs -
in terms of increased journey times, and those who would have kept to
30, now do 50, cos once you are a criminal anyway, might as well..and
the boy racers or total goony birds wont even notice its there.
In short, net increase in accidents as its so stupid ass to be widely
flouted, net increase in costs as those that do keep to it pay the price
and the courts times are taken up with trivial cases, or every street
has a speed camera.. and so on.
Prophylactic legislation is almost never cost effective.
FAR better to prosecute anyone whose installation (or driving)
*actually* causes death or injury. Even the homeowner.
fewer cases, evidence clear and worth uncovering.
Gavin Walker
> Although my particular gripe was that they supported it but did not lobby
> for Chartered Electrical Engineers to be able to self-certify. An implicit
> declaration that they consider electricians to be better qualified to do
> electrical work than Chartered Electrical Engineers.
I think that's probably true. Nothing I did as part of my engineering degree
covered practical aspects of doing wiring. I just happened to take a year
out somewhere that taught us a lot of the basics, but I know my knowledge is
now out of date.
G.
Brian Morrison
There is a big difference between having been exposed to some wiring
practicals and knowing the theory and actually installing a full wiring
upgrade or replacement in a house.
--
Brian Morrison
Andrew May
to gaining an engineering degree should be able to realise that there
are regulations that must be followed and that there are right and wrong
ways to do things and research accordingly. They should also have the
capability to understand their limitations. If not then what is the
point of chartered status?
Jon Green
> Besides saying that some people would be better of with regulation
> therefore we should all accept it is like saying that some people are
> safer wearing cycle helmets and therefore they should be mandatory.
Not at all.
A helmetless cyclist who crashes head-first into a wall kills only
him/herself.
If you wire a house incompetently, you could kill the _next_ owner.
For me, Part P is a nuisance, as I'm more than capable of wiring to Part
P standard -- but if it stops the fire caused by someone else's
incompetent work killing my family in their sleep, I'll reluctantly put
up with it. Part P doesn't mean you can't do the work, just that it has
to be blessed and certified by an approved contractor.
> Ducks.
Curlews.
Jon
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! To reply in email, replace 'deadspam'
with 'green-lines'.
Blog: http://bit.ly/45cLHw Pix: http://bit.ly/d8V2NJ
Website: http://www.green-lines.com/
The Natural Philosopher
other from Hatfield Poly.
Where knowing the regs was part of passing the degree/diploma certificate.
Bring back poly's I say,
The Natural Philosopher
I never really answered that question to my own staisfaction.
"To impress people less clever than you were, and pretend you know more
than you really do" seemed to be the only possible explanation.
Ditto MENSA.
The Natural Philosopher
> On 26/07/2010 14:12, Andrew May wrote:
>> Besides saying that some people would be better of with regulation
>> therefore we should all accept it is like saying that some people are
>> safer wearing cycle helmets and therefore they should be mandatory.
>
> Not at all.
>
> A helmetless cyclist who crashes head-first into a wall kills only
> him/herself.
>
Although there is a social cost in cleaning up the mess.
A price well worth paying, you may say.
I couldn't possibly comment ;-)
> If you wire a house incompetently, you could kill the _next_ owner.
>
> For me, Part P is a nuisance, as I'm more than capable of wiring to Part
> P standard -- but if it stops the fire caused by someone else's
> incompetent work killing my family in their sleep, I'll reluctantly put
> up with it. Part P doesn't mean you can't do the work, just that it has
> to be blessed and certified by an approved contractor.
>
Or in my case the BCO said "you have a degree in electrical sciences, I
suppose you will be self certifying then?..."
Which as elsewhere discussed, is no guarantee of being able to wire up a
plug competently.
Richard Meredith
(Jon Green) wrote:
> For me, Part P is a nuisance, as I'm more than capable of wiring to
> Part P standard -- but if it stops the fire caused by someone else's
> incompetent work killing my family in their sleep, I'll reluctantly
> put up with it. Part P doesn't mean you can't do the work, just that
> it has to be blessed and certified by an approved contractor.
Worth remembering that what you need is *safe* wiring, not wiring that meets the
requirements of the building regulations - which only specify a set of rules which,
if followed, will be safe.
It doesn't mean that wiring that doesn't meet the building regulations will
necessarily be unsafe: that particulat cat can be skinned in many ways.
> > Ducks.
>
> Curlews.
Quack.
The Natural Philosopher
agreed, but apart from a few contentious issues, it represents agreed
best practice in both cases.
Its less the standards that are required, than the means by which they
are supposed to be enforced, that is counter productive.
>>> Ducks.
>> Curlews.
>
> Quack.
>
Jules Richardson
> For me, Part P is a nuisance, as I'm more than capable of wiring to Part
> P standard -- but if it stops the fire caused by someone else's
> incompetent work killing my family in their sleep, I'll reluctantly put
> up with it. Part P doesn't mean you can't do the work, just that it has
> to be blessed and certified by an approved contractor.
Yes, same sort of setup as over here (except that here we have to declare
what work we want to do before we do it, then get it inspected
afterwards; I'm not sure if Part P omits the former requirement?).
I think that it's probably a good thing, providing that folk are still
able to do all the tasks themselves if they want, and providing that
subsequent inspections remain cheap.
cheers
Jules
Mark Goodge
keyboard and typed:
There is anecdotal evidence to suggest that elctricity-related accidents
and incidents have actually risen since the introduction of Part P, because
it's now impossible for competant but skint householders to fix or upgrade
and faulty or older wiring. So work that previously would have been done
remains undone, and dangers that would have been dealt with remain in
place.
Mark
--
Blog: http://mark.goodge.co.uk
Stuff: http://www.good-stuff.co.uk
Patrick Gosling
Richard Meredith <ric...@rmeredith.co.uk> wrote:
>Worth remembering that what you need is *safe* wiring, not wiring that meets the
>requirements of the building regulations - which only specify a set of
>rules which,
>if followed, will be safe.
>
>It doesn't mean that wiring that doesn't meet the building regulations will
>necessarily be unsafe: that particulat cat can be skinned in many ways.
Sometimes I have to deal with code written by clever people who want to
show off how well they know the C operator precedence rules. So they
avoid using brackets in complicated logical expressions.
Once in a while, they'll accidentally use | instead of || .
The annoying thing then is that you now have to do a kind of forensic
or archaeological code examination, in which you deduce what they were
thinking at the time; you don't _know_ if they were just typo-ing
and were otherwise coding fairly obviously, or if there's some subtlety
and they really meant that, and the bug has arisen elsewhere.
In complex code, the effort required to debug this kind of thing exceeds
the effort that was put into the coding it in the first place. You not
only have to solve the problem; you have to work out how the previous
coder thought they were solving the problem.
You can rarely have too many brackets in logical expressions in C/C++
code.
I suspect there's a similar effect with wiring - if the next person to
come along gets to look at the wiring and say "ah, that's to building
regs", then if they see something that looks iffy, they have a fairly
simple decision to make - is it to regs, or not; if not, it's wrong.
If they look at the wiring, and it's safe but nothing like building regs,
they now have to start from scratch; and again, the effort involved in
checking things are correct will exceed the original effort put into
doing it.
So "safe, as long as I'm the only person who ever deals with it" is not
the same as "safe, allowing that someone else might have to come along
and sort it out".
-patrick.
Duncan Wood
wrote:
After a day in an attic today there's also the bit where you come along
afterwards & discover someone else just assumed it was wired as per
standard practice & modifys it accordingly. The regs don't really define
standard practise though, they're proscriptive of hazards rather than
prescriptive of methods.
The Natural Philosopher
> The regs don't really define
> standard practise though, they're proscriptive of hazards rather than
> prescriptive of methods.
That's because they weren't written, by and large, by socialists.
Duncan Wood
Well the most prescriptive ones I've encountered are in the US or from
LLoyds, I was unaware that either was run by socialists.
Jules Richardson
> Jules Richardson <jules.richa...@gmail.com> considered Mon, 26
> That's pretty much how it works here, except that they don't necessarily
> do an inspection.
> The inspection regime depends on how complicated the installation is,
> and how sensibly you describe it.
I think I'd rather a scheme where there was no need for submitting a
plan, but there was a legal requirement for an inspection afterwards -
"afterwards" being either at job completion, or when the owner sells the
property (or rents out a room). I think people should be free to do the
work as/when they see fit, and if they electrocute their own family in
the process then so be it - it'd just be nice if bodged wiring didn't
have the potetnial to harm the unaware further down the line.
> Obviously, "I'm gonna put some electric in the garage, I figured 2.5 2+E
> would do the job" is going to attract a lot more attention than a full
> project plan with schematic, dimensions, load/length calculations and a
> parts list.
Yeah, I think a lot of what they worry about this side of the Pond is the
"mechanical" side of it; making sure power outlets* are at the right
heights and maximum spacings, wire is run in correct conduits or the
correct depths in walls, that a major fire hazard (wooden houses over
here) isn't created etc. - the actual throwing some wire and connectors
together and working out the right breakers to use is the easy part :-)
* bit of a grrr for me, that is: I could use a couple more sockets in our
basement, which would be trivial to do, but the rules dictate something
like one every 6', so to do the job officially I'd have to spend three
times as much as I actually need.
> If you mention a UPS, expect the third degree. I've had domestic
> sparkies insist they can't be legal :))
I'm not sure what the deal is here with a UPS that sits between the
supply and devices - I do know that they sell service panels (consumer
units to you) with failover ability here, designed for hook-up to a
generator which can take over if the main power goes out, and the
procedure for fitting that kind of setup is within the realm of DIY (with
associated permits and inspection, of course).
Our power's been pretty good considering our rural location and some
bonkers wiring (load-control gear, two service panels, five fuseboxes,
and a right mixture of old and new wiring and fittings).
cheers
Jules
Paul Bird
Their officials have no discernable sense of humour. I say that as the
result of many unwanted encounters in immigration over the years (80s/90s).
PB
Chris Shore
"Dave {Reply Address In.Sig}" <noone$$@llondel.org> wrote in message
news:3p04i7-...@llondel.org...
> MIET does not automatically include CEng.
Correct.
> Once upon a time I think it did
> (assuming you paid your CEng fee, and probably before the IET came into
> existence), but typically one went from being a student member to AMIEE
> (Associate Member) and then after filling in the paperwork and jumping
> through the hoops, you were considered worthy of dropping the A. I never
> bothered, because at the time, the age-related membership fee for AMIEE
> topped out at age 45 and that for MIEE kept going up. The
> age-discrimination
> rules appear to have put paid to that, and at some point they seem to have
> dropped the associate member bit and separated the CEng Engineering
> Council
> stuff out from being a member of the Institution.
>
> I have worked for companies that have paid membership fees for a
> professional institution. It is something on which you can claim tax
> relief
> if you pay it yourself, which does reduce the cost once you're on higher-
> rate tax.
My employer kindly reimburses my fees, which is one reason I continue with
membership as I get very little out of it tobe honest.
I went through the process of getting CEng some years ago, just before
they changed the rules. It was, at that time, relatively easy for someone
who
had been in the industry for a while to gain CEng with evidence of suitable
qualifications, a CV, some references prepared to write nice things about
your work and a personal interveiw at Savoy Place. The new rules are a
complete pain and I would never have gone for it under them (the main
reason for rushing to get my application for registraton in before they
changed). The amount of professional record keeping, references,
personal development records and other pointless bumf you have to
collect now simply makes it not worth the bother as far as I'm concerned.
Chris
> --
> Dave
> So many gadgets, so little time.
bob
I have to say, I find UK immigration officials every bit as bad. That
said, the organisation and staffing levels at UK airports generally
strike me as better than the US, so at least you don't have as much
paper to fill in and such a long queue to wait in (part of that is
having to use the foreigners' queue in the US, but I don't think their
domestic queues are that much faster or shorter).
Robin
Richard Meredith
wrote:
> > The Land of the Free can be surprisingly prescriptive and full of
> > forms.
>
> Their officials have no discernable sense of humour. I say that as
> the result of many unwanted encounters in immigration over the years
> (80s/90s).
While not disagreeing with you for an instant in most cases, I did experience one
at Miami airport about four years ago who had a great sense of humour - going
through immigration that time was a positively surreal experience.
GOK how he avoided the humorectomy that the rest of 'em seem to get.
Theo Markettos
> I went through the process of getting CEng some years ago, just before
> they changed the rules. It was, at that time, relatively easy for someone
> who had been in the industry for a while to gain CEng with evidence of
> suitable qualifications, a CV, some references prepared to write nice
> things about your work and a personal interveiw at Savoy Place. The new
> rules are a complete pain and I would never have gone for it under them
> (the main reason for rushing to get my application for registraton in
> before they changed). The amount of professional record keeping,
> references, personal development records and other pointless bumf you have
> to collect now simply makes it not worth the bother as far as I'm
> concerned.
Thanks, that's a useful perspective. What do you feel being CEng gives you?
You presumably went through the hassle for a purpose, or did you just do it
because it was a now-or-never thing?
Theo
Chris Shore
"Theo Markettos" <theom...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message
news:vQr*qc...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
> Thanks, that's a useful perspective. What do you feel being CEng gives
> you?
> You presumably went through the hassle for a purpose, or did you just do
> it
> because it was a now-or-never thing?
I am involved in customer training and I think, righly or wrongly, that some
kind of professional status carries weight in my business in some part of
the
world.
The now-or-never thing certainly affected my decision to do it at that time
as I would quite simply never have done it if I had delayed any longer.
Chrsi
Jules Richardson
> I think I've met two immigration officials who were friendly and helpful
> and prepared to make funny remarks. One was in Seattle and the other was
> in Boston. In Chicago it's against the rules and they can be fired for
> displaying even the merest hint of a smile. I try not to fly through
> Chicago.
Which, oddly, is the opposite of my experience - I went through Chicago a
lot (including one trip to the grilling tank) and they were always
friendly and helpful and I even encountered a few funny remarks. Always
did strike me as odd, because I'd heard so many stories about Chicago
being one of the worst.
cheers
Jules
Jules Richardson
> Jules Richardson <jules.richa...@gmail.com> considered Tue, 27
> Jul 2010 17:21:48 +0000 (UTC) the perfect time to write:
>
>>I'm not sure what the deal is here with a UPS that sits between the
>>supply and devices - I do know that they sell service panels (consumer
>>units to you) with failover ability here, designed for hook-up to a
>>generator which can take over if the main power goes out, and the
>>procedure for fitting that kind of setup is within the realm of DIY
>>(with associated permits and inspection, of course).
>
> Between the supply and the devices (i.e. plug it in, and plug the device
> into the UPS) isn't a problem. It's if you want to protect the entire
> ring main with a wired in UPS that they go apeshit :)
Admittedly I'm not certain how easy that is here if you want to thow
batteries into the mix - wiring up a generator and a service panel with
automatic failover support isn't a problem, though. (I suspect that the
"generator" part might actually be exempt from inspection though, so in
practice there'd be nothing to stop you adding something that did have
batteries - the inspector will just check service panel, wiring, and the
appropriate connector for the generator feed)
cheers
Jules
Jon Green
> Which, oddly, is the opposite of my experience - I went through Chicago a
> lot (including one trip to the grilling tank) and they were always
> friendly and helpful and I even encountered a few funny remarks. Always
> did strike me as odd, because I'd heard so many stories about Chicago
> being one of the worst.
I wonder if it's a seasonal thing? O'Hare at its winter worst is
bitterly cold and generally horrible, which might not improve the moods
of anyone who doesn't spend all their time indoors.
Jon
--
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! To reply in email, replace 'deadspam'
with 'green-lines'.
Blog: http://bit.ly/45cLHw Pix: http://bit.ly/d8V2NJ
Website: http://www.green-lines.com/
magwitch
> On 28/07/2010 14:02, Jules Richardson wrote:
>> Which, oddly, is the opposite of my experience - I went through Chicago a
>> lot (including one trip to the grilling tank) and they were always
>> friendly and helpful and I even encountered a few funny remarks. Always
>> did strike me as odd, because I'd heard so many stories about Chicago
>> being one of the worst.
>
> I wonder if it's a seasonal thing? O'Hare at its winter worst is
> bitterly cold and generally horrible, which might not improve the moods
> of anyone who doesn't spend all their time indoors.
>
> Jon
Immigration conduct their interviews out of doors? :-0
Jon Green
...when it's negative in Fahrenheit, and the prospective arrivals are
dressed for Delhi? Yike!
(BTW, the record for Chicago is -24deg F = -31 Celsius. It gets warmer
than that at the North Pole.)
Jules Richardson
> ...when it's negative in Fahrenheit, and the prospective arrivals are
> dressed for Delhi? Yike!
>
> (BTW, the record for Chicago is -24deg F = -31 Celsius. It gets warmer
> than that at the North Pole.)
We've hit -50F here before... -24 is t-shirt and shorts weather ;-)
The cold and the long, dark winters do have a habit of making people go a
bit loopy, though (I fit right in ;-) so it wouldn't surprise me if
Chicago officals do have a tendency to be more grumpy during the winter
months!
cheers
Jules
Tim Ward
news:i2penu$7hm$2...@news.albasani.net...
>
> Immigration conduct their interviews out of doors? :-0
I seem to recall passing through an entire airport in Hawaii without going
indoors. However I don't think this involved immigration.
--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
Brett Ward Limited - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board - www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Cambridge City Councillor
Tim Ward
news:cec783f6-195d-4a4d...@l14g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
>
> I have to say, I find UK immigration officials every bit as bad. That
> said, the organisation and staffing levels at UK airports generally
> strike me as better than the US, so at least you don't have as much
> paper to fill in and such a long queue to wait in (part of that is
> having to use the foreigners' queue in the US, but I don't think their
> domestic queues are that much faster or shorter).
Tip for Luton: go through the electronic passport queue. The biometrics
don't work, of course, but the manual desk you end up at has a much shorter
queue :-)
Tim Ward
news:vQr*qc...@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...
>
CEng was once the only thing between me and the other guy, so I got the job.
That pays the fees for life.
Duncan Wood
But in that case the isolation's normally more obvious.
Theo Markettos
> I gave it some thought at that time for the same reason but never quite
> got organised to run round and do the paperwork. As you say, the CPD bumph
> needed now is not worth the effort. I've developed all sorts of new (to
> me) skills over the past few years as part of my work but I don't see why
> I should have to write them down. I've almost certainly got enough to
> qualify, but lack any incentive to waste the time gathering up the
> evidence (or the money) to support an application.
Is this the sort of thing that would have been useful to do as you went
along? Say if you spent 5 minutes a week noting down what you did, rather
than having to scrape up the evidence at a later date? Or do you have to
get other people to sign off on stuff (so you have to hassle them about
something which isn't really in their core interest)?
I had a look at the IET and Engineering Council websites and could only
find some salespitchy brochures of why CEng might be a good idea, rather
than the details of what you actually need to do and how much it'll cost.
Theo
Richard Meredith
jules.richa...@gmail.com (Jules Richardson) wrote:
> *From:* Jules Richardson <jules.richa...@gmail.com>
> *Date:* Wed, 28 Jul 2010 16:49:45 +0000 (UTC)
Winters shouldn't be as dark as in Cambridge, it's a fair bit further south..
I think one of the places I would least like to spend the winter is the Norwegian
town of Longyearbyen, at latitude 78N - having four months between sunset and
sunrise would drive me stir crazy, especially given the fact that there's almost
nothing there.
Richard Meredith
In.Sig}) wrote:
> *From:* "Dave {Reply Address In.Sig}" <noone$$@llondel.org>
> *Date:* Wed, 28 Jul 2010 21:12:25 +0100
>
> Tim Ward wrote:
>
> > "magwitch" <magw...@invalid.net> wrote in message
> > news:i2penu$7hm$2...@news.albasani.net...
> >>
> >> Immigration conduct their interviews out of doors? :-0
> >
> > I seem to recall passing through an entire airport in Hawaii
> > without going
> > indoors. However I don't think this involved immigration.
> >
> Hilo has shelters against rain, but is otherwise pretty open.
> Honolulu has real buildings, but unlike many places, the walkways
> between places are open.
Iquitos airport in Peru at least has walls, but they don't go up as far as the roof
:-/
The place could do with filling in the gaps and fitting some air conditioning, a
more or less constant 90 degrees and 90% humidity is not an ideal climate..
Chris Shore
"Dave {Reply Address In.Sig}" <noone$$@llondel.org> wrote in message
news:vmj7i7-...@llondel.org...
> to
> get people to sign off on everything you submitted. That's actually the
> bit
> that gave me the biggest problem, because I didn't want to have to track
> down former managers, some of whom had retired.
That is the case with the new rules as far as I recall. It seemed to me that
the
only people who would start on the process these days would be those
starting
out on their careers since the new rules came in who could maintain the
records and get sign-off as they go along until they've got enough. For
someone
in my position, applying 15-20 years after leaving university, it would have
been almost impossible (and definitely way too painful) to document
everything
I had done and waste hours tracking down retired and possibly deceased
ex-managers to sign off on it all.
Chris
Tim Ward
> Tim Ward wrote:
>
>> "magwitch" <magw...@invalid.net> wrote in message
>> news:i2penu$7hm$2...@news.albasani.net...
>>>
>>> Immigration conduct their interviews out of doors? :-0
>>
>> I seem to recall passing through an entire airport in Hawaii without
>> going
>> indoors. However I don't think this involved immigration.
>>
> real buildings, but unlike many places, the walkways between places are
> open.
Yeah, think it was probably Hilo.
--
Tim Ward
www.brettward.co.uk
Jules Richardson
>> The cold and the long, dark winters do have a habit of making people go
>> a bit loopy, though (I fit right in ;-) so it wouldn't surprise me if
>> Chicago officals do have a tendency to be more grumpy during the winter
>> months!
>
> Winters shouldn't be as dark as in Cambridge, it's a fair bit further
> south..
Hmm, I suppose it's more "grey" from cloud cover than dark... but still,
long periods tend to have an effect on many people.
(I think we're even a little bit further south than Cambridge, but that
doesn't stop winter from lasting for 6 or 7 months; I don't think it's
the cold that gets to people, but the lack of 'good' sunlight)
> I think one of the places I would least like to spend the winter is the
> Norwegian town of Longyearbyen, at latitude 78N - having four months
> between sunset and sunrise would drive me stir crazy, especially given
> the fact that there's almost nothing there.
I'd quite like to try that... same with working at one of the poles; it'd
be an interesting experience, but whether I'd want to keep coming back to
do it, I'm not sure!
cheers
Jules
Paul Bird
<snip>
>
> I'd quite like to try that... same with working at one of the poles; it'd
> be an interesting experience, but whether I'd want to keep coming back to
> do it, I'm not sure!
>
> cheers
>
> Jules
Join BAS for a season as an engineer. That ought to do it for you.
(British Antarctic Survey)
PB
Jules Richardson
>>> Between the supply and the devices (i.e. plug it in, and plug the
>>> device into the UPS) isn't a problem. It's if you want to protect the
>>> entire ring main with a wired in UPS that they go apeshit :)
>>
>> Admittedly I'm not certain how easy that is here if you want to thow
>> batteries into the mix - wiring up a generator and a service panel with
>> automatic failover support isn't a problem, though. (I suspect that the
>> "generator" part might actually be exempt from inspection though, so in
>> practice there'd be nothing to stop you adding something that did have
>> batteries - the inspector will just check service panel, wiring, and
>> the appropriate connector for the generator feed)
>
But don't you still need a special consumer unit in the UK with
appropriate gubbins to handle the switch-over and ensure nothing gets
back-fed to the grid? It's the latter they really worry about here,
because there have been cases where power-line workers have shut things
off for maintenance and someone's homebrew generator setup has put power
onto the lines and zapped them.
cheers
Jules
RobertL
> "Dave {Reply Address In.Sig}" <noon...@llondel.org> wrote in messagenews:vmj7i7-...@llondel.org...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Theo Markettos wrote:
yes, I have a C.Eng. from decades ago when the BCS started dishing
them out. t seems a bit pointless to maintain it (i don't work in IT)
but what keeps me paying the fees is the difficulty of getting it
again if I ever had to.
Robert
Duncan Wood
UPSs have the switching built in, & in any reasonable domestic situation
they're post the consumer unit, hence the isolation requirements. If you
want to use a generator then you have to instaLL it via an isolating
contactor panel, but they're not complicated.
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Richard Meredith
wrote:
> *From:* Paul Bird <pa...@NOSPAMcamtutor.co.uk>
> *Date:* Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:43:03 +0100
Be careful here they send you! None of BAS's bases are anything like as as far
south as Longyearbyen is north - the only one nearer the pole is the one at
Ny-Ålesund on Svalbard, some 50 miles north of Longyearbyen.
As someone who has visited both of them - there isn't all that much at Longyearbyen,
but there is at least some sort of town and if you get bored with it and feel like
some Soviet-era chic the Russian base at Barentsburg isn't that far along the fjord.
Ny-Ålesund is much prettier but there's almost nothing there at all. You can't even
go for a walk safely because of the risk of polar bears..
Fred
>
>yes, I have a C.Eng. from decades ago when the BCS started dishing
>them out. t seems a bit pointless to maintain it (i don't work in IT)
>but what keeps me paying the fees is the difficulty of getting it
>again if I ever had to.
>
>Robert
Exactly.
I have some updates from this thread and further research.
Getting MIET is now a doddle - bascically "ask your friend to join.
All we want is the money."
Getting CEng is MUCH more difficult, and not part of getting MIET/MIEE
(as it was for me). I didn't have a formal training course, but
substituted responsible experience for training on a 2 for 1 basis -
as was then the rule.
You can get the requirements from Engineering Council and IET
websites.
So I decided to call the Eng Council, saying: "I am leaving the IET
(absolutely totally worthless), and wish to pay my Eng Council fees
directly to you."
The reply was: "Sorry, we can only accept our membership fee through a
recognised instittion. If you don't like the IET, find another."
Proof that it's all a self-maintaining quango and it needs putting a
stop to.
Fred
Theo Markettos
Thanks for raising the question, and for everyone who commented. That was
certainly useful. I think my current reasoning might be that I'll try to
keep the records and then I can decide whether to go for it at a later date.
On a related note, is it worth being a member of the IEEE (the American
version)? Discounted conference registration and access to (a subset of
the) publications behind their paywall is a reason some people take out
membership, but I've so far avoided needing either of those. Some of the
'societies' (eg Computer Society, Antennas and Propagation Society) look
interesting, though I'm not sure how useful the publications are (I already
get spammed enough incomprehensible paper journals in fields I barely worked
in but once went to a conference and got stuck on the mailing list).
I can get student membership so am tempted to try it for a year to see if
it's worthwhile.
Theo
Jon Green
> On a related note, is it worth being a member of the IEEE (the American
> version)?
I did join for a few years, and they still keep nagging me to rejoin.
Never really found enough to justify the subscription, although
sometimes there were interesting articles in the journals. They did
provide access to eBooks that were fairly interesting.
You have to pay extra to join the special interest group societies, and
to get the publications (even online-only, which I think is a cheek!).
> I can get student membership so am tempted to try it for a year to see if
> it's worthwhile.
Don't join until 17th August, so you get the best bang for your buck.
(Beware of joining on the 16th; if you do so before it's the 16th
somewhere in a US timezone, you might get only half-year membership.)