What a load of bollards!

[Guest]

Oh god, he's back.....

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Is it really that bad? 

 

Are we seeing the decline of a once Great Britain? Being unable to manage something as basic as a municipal water supply system without resorting to dumping thousands of tons of shit into natural gravity driven watercourses is another clue. 

This sort of thing should have been dealt with decades ago. 

It should have been in a system which saw national infrastructure and services as a priority rather than private profit.

 

See canals, water, rail, NHS, social services, PO, roads, council funding... 😞

Edited January 30 by IanD

[magnetman]

1 minute ago, IanD said:

It should have been in a system which saw national infrastructure and services as a priority rather than private profit.

 

See canals, water, rail, NHS, social services, PO, roads, council funding... 😞

Something we agree about.

 

Privatisation is basically legalised theft. Maybe people like the profits generated but that is at the expense of a gradual degradation of society and everyone must live in society. 

 

 

[IanD]

11 hours ago, magnetman said:

Something we agree about.

 

Privatisation is basically legalised theft. Maybe people like the profits generated but that is at the expense of a gradual degradation of society and everyone must live in society. 

 

 

Except for the ultra-rich, who can hide behind their locked gates and private security, don't use public transport or commercial planes, don't care about power/water/food/council bills because they're a fleabite, and use private medicine so don't care about the NHS. They don't really live in society at all, but in a little isolated bubble of privilege. And they *certainly* like the profits generated, because a lot ends up in their pockets.

 

In other words those who own (most of) the UK press and a lot of TV/radio/streaming channels, and quite a few MPs and lords in the government -- and a lot of the rest are owned/influenced by lobbyists paid for by the same people... 😞

 

Funny how so many subjects all come round to the same problem in the end, isn't it -- I wonder why?

Edited January 31 by IanD

[MtB]

16 minutes ago, IanD said:

 

Except for the ultra-rich, who can hide behind their locked gates and private security, don't use public transport or commercial planes, don't care about power/water/food/council bills because they're a fleabite, and use private medicine so don't care about the NHS. They don't really live in society at all, but in a little isolated bubble of privilege. And they *certainly* like the profits generated, because a lot ends up in their pockets.

 

In other words those who own (most of) the UK press and a lot of TV/radio/streaming channels, and quite a few MPs and lords in the government -- and a lot of the rest are owned/influenced by lobbyists paid for by the same people... 😞

 

Funny how so many subjects all come round to the same problem in the end, isn't it -- I wonder why?

 

 

Yep, because that massive chip you have on your shoulder makes you drag any topic around to suit your agendum. 

 

 

 

[Hudds Lad]

Re: the lack of length to anchor it in the ground, remember it's a proof of concept not the finished article. They are going to be humping it around to various places to get peoples feedback. Only showing the bit you'll see makes more sense for easy transport than the full length hefty item that will need a van, pallet truck and burly blokes to move. This way it can just be chucked in the boot of someone's car and easily set up by one fit chap/chap-ess.

[ditchcrawler]

11 hours ago, magnetman said:

I wonder about that as well hence the bit in brackets. 

 

Maybe the useability of the canals is secondary to making life better by water. 

I think your second paragraph is probably the answer here. 

 

Boats come out of the marina for a break but do not go through locks. 

 

This is a Clever strategy in a number of different ways but not a model which promotes maintenance of moveable structures like locks and some bridges. 

 

 

As the members of the association are disabled boaters who are wanting improved mooring access I think its safe to assume they actually go boating, The lady on the Doggy Boat, sells dog treats, leads collars etc is a continues cruiser and if not blind partly sighted.  

[magnetman]

8 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

Re: the lack of length to anchor it in the ground, remember it's a proof of concept not the finished article. They are going to be humping it around to various places to get peoples feedback. Only showing the bit you'll see makes more sense for easy transport than the full length hefty item that will need a van, pallet truck and burly blokes to move. This way it can just be chucked in the boot of someone's car and easily set up by one fit chap/chap-ess.

Like a tooth without the root?

The base looks a bit like the intention is to bolt it down to concrete rather than have a load more of it under the ground. 

 

It would be great to see the blueprints. 

[IanD]

20 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

Yep, because that massive chip you have on your shoulder makes you drag any topic around to suit your agendum. 

 

 

Does that mean you don't agree with my diatribe about the ultra-rich and their pernicious effect on the UK, then?

 

It does seem to explain *so* many things about the problems of today... 😞

Edited January 31 by IanD

[ditchcrawler]

Surly an equal part of the function of these bollards is to make it absolutely obvious that the moorings are reserved for disabled boaters and that they can be identified at a distance before A) an able body boater has come in to moor and B ) that a disabled boater can see them as they aproach the mooring and not need to go ashore to search for them.

[IanD]

22 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Like a tooth without the root?

The base looks a bit like the intention is to bolt it down to concrete rather than have a load more of it under the ground. 

 

It would be great to see the blueprints. 

 

Bolting the bollard itself down to concrete is fine, so long as the bolts are big enough. The question is what is *under* the surface of the concrete, it needs to be big/deep enough not to be pulled out of the ground or have the bolts pull out, which probably means threaded anchors embedded into a steel reinforcement structure and then embedded in concrete -- like an iceberg, there will probably be more underground than visible. It's all standard engineering design on how to anchor into a hole in the ground, it's not rocket science. It would be an interesting design problem to pose to structural engineering students...

 

(we had to design and build a wall-mounted metal truss to support a load offset from the baseplate, with scoring for weight, material and construction costs and load at failure...)

 

I expect the blueprints are being developed as we speak... 😉

Edited January 31 by IanD

[magnetman]

Canals are so aesthetically pleasing it seems a shame to add things which don't fit into the picture. 

 

They allow terrible wide beans so I guess nothing is sacred. 

[IanD]

3 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

Surly an equal part of the function of these bollards is to make it absolutely obvious that the moorings are reserved for disabled boaters and that they can be identified at a distance before A) an able body boater has come in to moor and B ) that a disabled boater can see them as they aproach the mooring and not need to go ashore to search for them.

Presumably why they're proposing to paint them bright yellow with blue knobs on... 😉

[Arthur Marshall]

14 hours ago, magnetman said:

Priorities change over time. 

 

One wonders how people who can't tie a Boat to a normal mooring bollard or post would be able to deal with the rather arduous task of going up or down a lock. 

The able bodied one does that. The moorings are intended to make it easy to get a wheelchair, or any physically disabled person, on and off the boat. I may disagree with its practicality, but I can the justification. I've seen an increasing number of couples on boats, one with a wheelchair.

2 hours ago, Hudds Lad said:

Re: the lack of length to anchor it in the ground, remember it's a proof of concept not the finished article. They are going to be humping it around to various places to get peoples feedback. Only showing the bit you'll see makes more sense for easy transport than the full length hefty item that will need a van, pallet truck and burly blokes to move. This way it can just be chucked in the boot of someone's car and easily set up by one fit chap/chap-ess.

And it's made from bits of old pipe. It's a concept, not the finished article. Wasn't it Magritte who said "C'est non un bollard"?

Edited January 31 by Arthur Marshall

[Ronaldo47]

Almost correct! 

[Hudds Lad]

13 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Wasn't it Magritte who said "C'est non un bollard"?

You're confusing Magritte with Kennedy, who said "Ich bin ein Poller!"  

[Ronaldo47]

What Kennedy should have said to say he was from Berlin is "Ich bin Berliner".  By adding the "ein" he was saying he was a type of spicy bun, an illustration of the dangers of translating word-for-word. 

[David Mack]

13 minutes ago, Ronaldo47 said:

What Kennedy should have said to say he was from Berlin is "Ich bin Berliner".  By adding the "ein" he was saying he was a type of spicy bun, an illustration of the dangers of translating word-for-word. 

And a good job he didn't say he was from Hamburg or Frankfurt.

[Hudds Lad]

23 minutes ago, Ronaldo47 said:

What Kennedy should have said to say he was from Berlin is "Ich bin Berliner".  By adding the "ein" he was saying he was a type of spicy bun, an illustration of the dangers of translating word-for-word. 

I thought it was a sausage? Its been a while since GCSE History to be fair  

 

 

I had to google it   

 

There is a widespread misconception that Kennedy accidentally said that he was a Berliner, a type of German doughnut. This is an urban legend which emerged several decades after the speech, and it is not true that residents of Berlin in 1963 would have mainly understood the word "Berliner" to refer to a jelly doughnut or that the audience laughed at Kennedy's use of this expression – if nothing else because this type of doughnut is called "Pfannkuchen" (literally: Pan cake) in Berlin.[4]"

Edited January 31 by Hudds Lad
add link and guff

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

I thought it was a sausage? Its been a while since GCSE History to be fair  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ich_bin_ein_Berliner

 

There is a widespread misconception that Kennedy accidentally said that he was a Berliner, a type of German doughnut. This is an urban legend which emerged several decades after the speech, and it is not true that residents of Berlin in 1963 would have mainly understood the word "Berliner" to refer to a jelly doughnut or that the audience laughed at Kennedy's use of this expression – if nothing else because this type of doughnut is called "Pfannkuchen" (literally: Pan cake) in Berlin.^[4]

[Jim Riley]

On the subject of accessibility, Salter Hebble Guillotine has instructions in Braille. Not sure how that could be used safely by a blind person, how would they know when to hit the emergency stop etc. 

2 hours ago, ditchcrawler said:

Surly an equal part of the function of these bollards is to make it absolutely obvious that the moorings are reserved for disabled boaters and that they can be identified at a distance before A) an able body boater has come in to moor and B ) that a disabled boater can see them as they aproach the mooring and not need to go ashore to search for them.

How does that work then, waterpoints are highly visible but can still be moored on for days. The trick would be to make them Entitled Idiot proof. 

[Barnham]

Time demands change, even on historical sites.

[Jon57]

3 hours ago, IanD said:

Presumably why they're proposing to paint them bright yellow with blue knobs on... 😉

Sky blue pink with yellow knobs on them to please all gendas is the way to go. 🥴

[ditchcrawler]

31 minutes ago, Jim Riley said:

 How does that work then, waterpoints are highly visible but can still be moored on for days. The trick would be to make them Entitled Idiot proof. 

You and I both know that's impossible 

[magnetman]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

The able bodied one does that. The moorings are intended to make it easy to get a wheelchair, or any physically disabled person, on and off the boat. I may disagree with its practicality, but I can the justification. 

How does the bollard make it easier to get a wheelchair on and off? 

 

i'm in favour of making things accessible but I don't see how a tall fancy bollard helps in this regard. 

 

Surely if the able bodied person does the locks then they can also tie the Boat up.