On Virgin Train Toilets
March 1, 2017 3:18 AM Subscribe
What the article somehow overlooks is that Virgin trains usually stink of sewage because they placed the septic tank next to the air con.
posted by mushhushshu at 3:34 AM on March 1, 2017 [12 favorites]
posted by mushhushshu at 3:34 AM on March 1, 2017 [12 favorites]
The genius move was that they introduced this two button system on some trains and elsewhere in the country it is just one button to close and lock. If you're used to the second one then it leaves you wide open to just pressing one button, dropping keks and to business before a rude interruption.
posted by biffa at 3:39 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by biffa at 3:39 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
Armstrong and Miller have addressed the wider problem in song.
posted by Paul Slade at 3:42 AM on March 1, 2017 [6 favorites]
posted by Paul Slade at 3:42 AM on March 1, 2017 [6 favorites]
Frankie Boyle also addressed this pressing issue a while back-
"What was wrong with train toilet doors that just locked, instead of this multiple choice system? If anything goes wrong, you'll be sitting there while the whole toilet wall slowly slides away, unveiling you like a prize on a quiz show. For 500 points, a shitting woman!"
posted by Gratishades at 4:03 AM on March 1, 2017 [39 favorites]
"What was wrong with train toilet doors that just locked, instead of this multiple choice system? If anything goes wrong, you'll be sitting there while the whole toilet wall slowly slides away, unveiling you like a prize on a quiz show. For 500 points, a shitting woman!"
posted by Gratishades at 4:03 AM on March 1, 2017 [39 favorites]
Simple answer is this: dickheads. Dickheads can press that button and then quickly exit the loo as the door closes. If this just closes the door, no problem. If it locks the door, such that you need to press a button on the inside (now empty) to open back up? You've just taken the loo out of commission until staff come along. The two button system means that the loo can only lock when someone is inside.
posted by Dysk at 4:24 AM on March 1, 2017 [73 favorites]
posted by Dysk at 4:24 AM on March 1, 2017 [73 favorites]
Huh, Virgin Trains? I guess I didn't know that the UK had corporately run train systems.
posted by octothorpe at 4:28 AM on March 1, 2017
posted by octothorpe at 4:28 AM on March 1, 2017
How have you missed the calls of "nationalise!" in every thread that even tangentially relates to British trains?
(Seriously though, nationalise! Worst trains in northern Europe.)
posted by Dysk at 4:30 AM on March 1, 2017 [28 favorites]
(Seriously though, nationalise! Worst trains in northern Europe.)
posted by Dysk at 4:30 AM on March 1, 2017 [28 favorites]
When does anybody ever want to just close the door, without locking it?
Someone who's arranged for a tryst in the toilet, and is waiting for their partner to join them?
posted by Halloween Jack at 4:33 AM on March 1, 2017 [4 favorites]
Someone who's arranged for a tryst in the toilet, and is waiting for their partner to join them?
posted by Halloween Jack at 4:33 AM on March 1, 2017 [4 favorites]
Well my first thought is that if the button closed and locked, some joker would push the button and dart out before the door closed, leaving the cubicle out of action. If the cubicle detected noone was in there, it might choose to unlock it, but it's safer to have it alert a detected occupant to it being unlocked (and potentially alert an empty cubicle) than to just choose to unlock the door on some poor person with their pants down.
posted by edd at 4:33 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by edd at 4:33 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
Or err, what Dysk said.
posted by edd at 4:34 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by edd at 4:34 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
Wouldn't it just be easier to have the airline style mechanical locks on the restroom door?
posted by octothorpe at 4:35 AM on March 1, 2017 [7 favorites]
posted by octothorpe at 4:35 AM on March 1, 2017 [7 favorites]
Amazingly, trains in Japan avoid this problem rather well with mechanical locks.
posted by Juso No Thankyou at 4:36 AM on March 1, 2017 [10 favorites]
posted by Juso No Thankyou at 4:36 AM on March 1, 2017 [10 favorites]
I also don't understand why this "two-stage process" is so hard to grasp. It's exactly what you do with any other toilet door - close it, then lock it. If anything, it should be a more familiar and comfortable design than one where you just have to assume or take it on faith that the door is in a state where people can't just wander in from outside.
posted by Dysk at 4:37 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by Dysk at 4:37 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
The electronic lock can be simply and easily overridden though, in case of emergency.
This way the "Train Manager" can unlock and open all the doors from one central place.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 4:37 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
This way the "Train Manager" can unlock and open all the doors from one central place.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 4:37 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
Mechanical locks on rotating doors are a major pain unless you invest unnecessary amounts in making the revolving mechanism more accurate than you would otherwise need. A button controlled electromagnet lock avoids having to worry about the variance or tolerances in door position basically at all.
posted by Dysk at 4:39 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Dysk at 4:39 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
I was all set to rag on Pendolino toilets, but the more I think about it, the more I think it's a pretty good design with a number of sensible features.
They're nice and big, wheelchair friendly toilets which allow for a lot of edge cases and pretty decent usability.
I would argue that the door needs to auto close, because people tend not to press the close button on the outside when they leave, and they stay open for several minutes, (if not indefinitely), also they tend to smell bad, as mentioned upthread. Other than that though I think they're pretty good.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 4:44 AM on March 1, 2017
They're nice and big, wheelchair friendly toilets which allow for a lot of edge cases and pretty decent usability.
I would argue that the door needs to auto close, because people tend not to press the close button on the outside when they leave, and they stay open for several minutes, (if not indefinitely), also they tend to smell bad, as mentioned upthread. Other than that though I think they're pretty good.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 4:44 AM on March 1, 2017
The Soviets just jammed the door shut with a pencil.
posted by Dr Dracator at 4:45 AM on March 1, 2017 [47 favorites]
posted by Dr Dracator at 4:45 AM on March 1, 2017 [47 favorites]
What's wrong with a mechanical magnetic lock, then?
posted by phooky at 5:03 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by phooky at 5:03 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
It needs to be a switchable electromagnet. So you need a switch. I mean, I guess you could use a thrown bolt with a switch mechanism on it instead, or a flick switch or whatever, but what would be the advantage? Meanwhile, large buttons have all sorts of usability advantages for people with impaired grip.
posted by Dysk at 5:07 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Dysk at 5:07 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
(And for people with no use of their fingers, prosthetic hands/arms, etc.)
posted by Dysk at 5:08 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by Dysk at 5:08 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
The flush is behind the lid to encourage you to close it. Closing the lid reduces the extent to which the plume of filth sprays all over the rest of the cubicle.
posted by hawthorne at 5:08 AM on March 1, 2017 [5 favorites]
posted by hawthorne at 5:08 AM on March 1, 2017 [5 favorites]
dragging wheely suitcases and folded waterproofs
In this context, is a waterproof an umbrella, or a raincoat?
posted by The Underpants Monster at 5:09 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
In this context, is a waterproof an umbrella, or a raincoat?
posted by The Underpants Monster at 5:09 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
You don't need electricity to make a switchable magnet; you just need two permanent magnets, one of which rotates or slides relative to the other. That's how magnetic chucks work. The accessibility point is a really good one.
posted by phooky at 5:13 AM on March 1, 2017
posted by phooky at 5:13 AM on March 1, 2017
Huh, Virgin Trains?
I just assumed that refers to a train that's never been through a tunnel.
In this context, is a waterproof an umbrella, or a raincoat?
I think an umbrella is a "brolly."
posted by Floydd at 5:23 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
I just assumed that refers to a train that's never been through a tunnel.
In this context, is a waterproof an umbrella, or a raincoat?
I think an umbrella is a "brolly."
posted by Floydd at 5:23 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
In this context, is a waterproof an umbrella, or a raincoat?
It's a raincoat.
posted by Joeruckus at 5:32 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
It's a raincoat.
posted by Joeruckus at 5:32 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
You don't need electricity to make a switchable magnet; you just need two permanent magnets, one of which rotates or slides relative to the other.
Aside from the accessibility issues (even weedy magchucks generally require a little force to operate, you can't have that on a door to a disabled toilet) there's the issue of there being no easy override in the case of an emergency. Adding any sort of keyway risks introducing the same sorts of issues as an oldschool mechanical lock (and is less accessible in am emergency) and a centrally controlled/keypadded/other electronic lock risks failing to operate the mechanical switch in the event of power loss - and you're now adding both a mechanical and electronic lock. An electromagnet lock can be easily given an emergency override in the driver's compartment, as well as having the advantage of failing open if the power goes.
posted by Dysk at 5:35 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
Aside from the accessibility issues (even weedy magchucks generally require a little force to operate, you can't have that on a door to a disabled toilet) there's the issue of there being no easy override in the case of an emergency. Adding any sort of keyway risks introducing the same sorts of issues as an oldschool mechanical lock (and is less accessible in am emergency) and a centrally controlled/keypadded/other electronic lock risks failing to operate the mechanical switch in the event of power loss - and you're now adding both a mechanical and electronic lock. An electromagnet lock can be easily given an emergency override in the driver's compartment, as well as having the advantage of failing open if the power goes.
posted by Dysk at 5:35 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
(Also also, don't permanent magnet locks require pretty precise alignment? Not being able to reliably get that is the reason for looking at magnet locks over traditional mechanical locks on the first place!)
posted by Dysk at 5:39 AM on March 1, 2017
posted by Dysk at 5:39 AM on March 1, 2017
I have no personal experience with the setup on Virgin Trains, but the concept of being able to close a door but not lock it is appealing to me, the parent of a fiercely independent 4-year-old who wants to DO IT HERSELF!!!!! but who I'm concerned would not be able to figure out how to unlock the door when she's done.
posted by Liesl at 5:46 AM on March 1, 2017 [5 favorites]
posted by Liesl at 5:46 AM on March 1, 2017 [5 favorites]
I am occasionally a guest on board a 100 year old Pullman car that's been restored to early midcentury. The toilet locks with a mechanical slider below the door handle. It works and can't be locked with nobody inside.
I have photos (of the car, not of the toilet lock because honestly it never occurred to me to take one) but they're on my camera at work; I can post them in a few hours if anybody wants to see.
posted by workerant at 6:11 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
I have photos (of the car, not of the toilet lock because honestly it never occurred to me to take one) but they're on my camera at work; I can post them in a few hours if anybody wants to see.
posted by workerant at 6:11 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
This way the "Train Manager" can unlock and open all the doors from one central place.
Today's metafilter homework: Imagine a scenario in which it would be useful for a train manager to be able to simultaneously unlock all the toilet doors from afar.
posted by sfenders at 6:18 AM on March 1, 2017 [9 favorites]
Today's metafilter homework: Imagine a scenario in which it would be useful for a train manager to be able to simultaneously unlock all the toilet doors from afar.
posted by sfenders at 6:18 AM on March 1, 2017 [9 favorites]
A train accident? A fire? A derailment?
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 6:21 AM on March 1, 2017 [5 favorites]
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 6:21 AM on March 1, 2017 [5 favorites]
I was thinking it'd make more sense for whoever is actually at the toilet to force it open in an emergency, but I guess that'd be slightly slower, as well as less likely to fail.
posted by sfenders at 6:25 AM on March 1, 2017
posted by sfenders at 6:25 AM on March 1, 2017
I was about to enter into a full-throated defense of permanent magnetic locks but I didn't want tomorrow's metafilter post to be TRAIN THREAD DERAILS, DOZENS OF COMMENTS DELETED
the locomotive was hauling several tons of soybeans to be plated at the time
posted by phooky at 6:28 AM on March 1, 2017 [33 favorites]
the locomotive was hauling several tons of soybeans to be plated at the time
posted by phooky at 6:28 AM on March 1, 2017 [33 favorites]
The toilet locks with a mechanical slider below the door handle. It works and can't be locked with nobody inside.
...and it requires a fairly well-aligned door, which is easy with a hinged door, which you can use in a tight space if you don't give a shit about disabled access. It's a number of potential issues in emergency situations, particularly if the person in the locked loo is incapacitated. But hey, it makes good snark, right?
I was thinking it'd make more sense for whoever is actually at the toilet to force it open in an emergency, but I guess that'd be slightly slower, as well as less likely to fail.
Having the person do it themselves is more likely to fail. What if they're unconscious after a crash or derailment? Meanwhile, the emergency override is unlikely to fail in a disastrous way because all it does is cut power to the lock. If the electrics go, your doors unlock. This is what you want in an emergency.
posted by Dysk at 6:38 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
...and it requires a fairly well-aligned door, which is easy with a hinged door, which you can use in a tight space if you don't give a shit about disabled access. It's a number of potential issues in emergency situations, particularly if the person in the locked loo is incapacitated. But hey, it makes good snark, right?
I was thinking it'd make more sense for whoever is actually at the toilet to force it open in an emergency, but I guess that'd be slightly slower, as well as less likely to fail.
Having the person do it themselves is more likely to fail. What if they're unconscious after a crash or derailment? Meanwhile, the emergency override is unlikely to fail in a disastrous way because all it does is cut power to the lock. If the electrics go, your doors unlock. This is what you want in an emergency.
posted by Dysk at 6:38 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
I don't see why you couldn't have a magnetic lock, and also have the locking mechanism look mechanical, preferably a slider for the impaired. It could still read locked / unlocked from the inside and out like on planes.
I always try and do away with verbiage in design. However, I've never had any trouble getting from point A to point B in Europe despite having never used a country's bus / train / rail system before. There is generally fantastic signage. Good luck with that in the States.
Anyway, I relax secure in the knowledge that Trump is on the case...
posted by xammerboy at 6:40 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
I always try and do away with verbiage in design. However, I've never had any trouble getting from point A to point B in Europe despite having never used a country's bus / train / rail system before. There is generally fantastic signage. Good luck with that in the States.
Anyway, I relax secure in the knowledge that Trump is on the case...
posted by xammerboy at 6:40 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
I always try and do away with verbiage in design.
Interestingly, CrossCountry run the same trains as Virgin but have much better, clearer UI in the bogs. One open/close button, and one button with a picture of a padlock on it with a little light that comes on when the lock is engaged.
posted by Dysk at 6:46 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
Interestingly, CrossCountry run the same trains as Virgin but have much better, clearer UI in the bogs. One open/close button, and one button with a picture of a padlock on it with a little light that comes on when the lock is engaged.
posted by Dysk at 6:46 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
Imagine a scenario in which it would be useful for a train manager to be able to simultaneously unlock all the toilet doors from afar.
At the end of route when all passengers are getting off and the train is being cleaned and inspected ready for the next service the train manager can put the train in service mode. All doors unlock and open.
Guards can eject sleeping folk, cleaners can get on and access all areas with no hinderance. Train turn round times are therefore much quicker.
This happens several times a day.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 6:48 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
At the end of route when all passengers are getting off and the train is being cleaned and inspected ready for the next service the train manager can put the train in service mode. All doors unlock and open.
Guards can eject sleeping folk, cleaners can get on and access all areas with no hinderance. Train turn round times are therefore much quicker.
This happens several times a day.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 6:48 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
Having the person do it themselves is more likely to fail.
Not the person inside the toilet. If they're incapacitated then it likely matters not to them if the door is locked or not, if there's nobody outside to open it or otherwise help. Mechanical toilet locks in public places are typically designed to be not difficult to force open.
posted by sfenders at 6:49 AM on March 1, 2017
Not the person inside the toilet. If they're incapacitated then it likely matters not to them if the door is locked or not, if there's nobody outside to open it or otherwise help. Mechanical toilet locks in public places are typically designed to be not difficult to force open.
posted by sfenders at 6:49 AM on March 1, 2017
Virgin is probably just real committed to maintaining the mystique of the One Meter High Club.
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 6:51 AM on March 1, 2017 [11 favorites]
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 6:51 AM on March 1, 2017 [11 favorites]
It's not like there isn't an override behind a little panel with a shitty wafer or barrel lock (keyed to the train manager/driver's keys) right outside each loo as well. And the rotating doors themselves can be yanked open even when the magnet lock is engaged by a person of average strength and sufficient dedication. There's even a little grip on the door (on both sides) to allow precisely that.
posted by Dysk at 6:53 AM on March 1, 2017
posted by Dysk at 6:53 AM on March 1, 2017
I'm sure it's not exactly a meter, people, but my commitment to factual accuracy in dirty train jokes has a limit.
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 6:53 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by chesty_a_arthur at 6:53 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
1260mm.
In case you wanted to update for accuracy at a later date.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 6:58 AM on March 1, 2017 [4 favorites]
In case you wanted to update for accuracy at a later date.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 6:58 AM on March 1, 2017 [4 favorites]
Wouldn't it just be easier to have the airline style mechanical locks on the restroom door?
But, but...technology!!!™
posted by Thorzdad at 7:02 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
But, but...technology!!!™
posted by Thorzdad at 7:02 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
> But, but...technology!!!™
On that note...
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 7:04 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
On that note...
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 7:04 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
If the multiple buttons confound this author, I'll just say they're lucky they're not going to the moon in a Kubrick film.
posted by radwolf76 at 7:06 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
posted by radwolf76 at 7:06 AM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
octothorpe: Huh, Virgin Trains? I guess I didn't know that the UK had corporately run train systems.
I'm just going to leave this link here, because in my household this is the point in the conversation where I throw up my hands and start wailing and leave my non-British housemates to sort themselves out. :(
posted by daisyk at 7:54 AM on March 1, 2017 [6 favorites]
I'm just going to leave this link here, because in my household this is the point in the conversation where I throw up my hands and start wailing and leave my non-British housemates to sort themselves out. :(
posted by daisyk at 7:54 AM on March 1, 2017 [6 favorites]
Thanks Dysk for solving the mystery! I'd wondered about this for ages.
Now plotting how to ruin a comedy show by shouting out the answer, it seems to have become a staple...
posted by TheophileEscargot at 9:28 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
Now plotting how to ruin a comedy show by shouting out the answer, it seems to have become a staple...
posted by TheophileEscargot at 9:28 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
That list of instructions from 2001 may have been inspired by actual submarine toilet flushing instructions, which also made an appearance in the novelization of the Yellow Submarine cartoon.
posted by Halloween Jack at 9:33 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
posted by Halloween Jack at 9:33 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
If they're incapacitated then it likely matters not to them if the door is locked or not,
There are all sorts of situations and or disabilities which might allow one to crawl or otherwise navigate through an open door where manipulating a mechanical lock would be too much. A mechanical lock is also one more thing to jam in the event of a derailment or similar. One point of using electronic locks is that they are actually simpler, in a state of system failure, than a mechanical equivalent.
But, given that there being good safety reasons for a design decision has never deterred people from complaining about how it's not "common sense", maybe this is a somewhat unproductive argument.
posted by howfar at 10:20 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
There are all sorts of situations and or disabilities which might allow one to crawl or otherwise navigate through an open door where manipulating a mechanical lock would be too much. A mechanical lock is also one more thing to jam in the event of a derailment or similar. One point of using electronic locks is that they are actually simpler, in a state of system failure, than a mechanical equivalent.
But, given that there being good safety reasons for a design decision has never deterred people from complaining about how it's not "common sense", maybe this is a somewhat unproductive argument.
posted by howfar at 10:20 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
I'm willing to overlook everything because of the awesome "don't flush this stuff" message.
posted by freecellwizard at 10:22 AM on March 1, 2017
posted by freecellwizard at 10:22 AM on March 1, 2017
A mechanical lock is also one more thing to jam in the event of a derailment or similar.
Also, what if the person locked inside the toilet in the mangled wreckage of a derailed train suffers from dementia and can't understand why the door won't open, and the person outside is a small child in no condition to even think about working out how to bypass the lock? Nobody else is around, because they're the only survivors. Would you deny them the chance to be of comfort to each other in their dying moments, as they could be if the doors were locked only by electromagnetic devices that failed open? Just because you think it's less trouble to use old-school mechanical locks? Such cruelty.
On the other hand I suspect the fancy sliding door adds more of a potential problem there than a 100% failsafe lock could possibly take away, and the designers of it probably could have stopped somewhere short of making the system so extremely simple that it required hiring voice actors.
posted by sfenders at 11:28 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
Also, what if the person locked inside the toilet in the mangled wreckage of a derailed train suffers from dementia and can't understand why the door won't open, and the person outside is a small child in no condition to even think about working out how to bypass the lock? Nobody else is around, because they're the only survivors. Would you deny them the chance to be of comfort to each other in their dying moments, as they could be if the doors were locked only by electromagnetic devices that failed open? Just because you think it's less trouble to use old-school mechanical locks? Such cruelty.
On the other hand I suspect the fancy sliding door adds more of a potential problem there than a 100% failsafe lock could possibly take away, and the designers of it probably could have stopped somewhere short of making the system so extremely simple that it required hiring voice actors.
posted by sfenders at 11:28 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
The sliding door is the only real solution to providing a properly disabled-accessible toilet in the confines of the available space. The speech is obviously for the benefit of people with sight impairment.
The sheer dedication people have to mocking perfectly reasonable accessibility accommodations never ceases to astound me.
posted by Dysk at 11:36 AM on March 1, 2017 [12 favorites]
The sheer dedication people have to mocking perfectly reasonable accessibility accommodations never ceases to astound me.
posted by Dysk at 11:36 AM on March 1, 2017 [12 favorites]
Amazingly, trains in Japan avoid this problem rather well with mechanical locks.
They make up for it on the long distance trains that use squatty potties. At least if you're firmly seated on a western throne you don't need to counteract the motion of the train with your aim.
posted by mattamatic at 11:38 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
They make up for it on the long distance trains that use squatty potties. At least if you're firmly seated on a western throne you don't need to counteract the motion of the train with your aim.
posted by mattamatic at 11:38 AM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
The speech is obviously for the benefit of people with sight impairment.
Yes, obviously. I'm sure the sight impaired enjoy the necessity of listening to the instructions just as much as the well-sighted enjoy reading them.
posted by sfenders at 11:58 AM on March 1, 2017
Yes, obviously. I'm sure the sight impaired enjoy the necessity of listening to the instructions just as much as the well-sighted enjoy reading them.
posted by sfenders at 11:58 AM on March 1, 2017
That list of instructions from 2001 may have been inspired by actual submarine toilet flushing instructions,
In the link there is a 14-step procedure followed by
posted by ricochet biscuit at 12:20 PM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
In the link there is a 14-step procedure followed by
Note: If these instructions are not followed exactly as above, the contents of the toilet will spill out over and up and down the closet. If you are so careless, you clean it up!Note that it can get worse than this: you could get drowned, or captured by the enemy in wartime..
posted by ricochet biscuit at 12:20 PM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
Yes, obviously. I'm sure the sight impaired enjoy the necessity of listening to the instructions just as much as the well-sighted enjoy reading them.
I for one am pretty glad that actual accessibility and safety concerns trump indignation at being exposed to a few simple instructions in the field of modern British rolling stock design. Would that it were so in more areas.
posted by Dysk at 12:53 PM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
I for one am pretty glad that actual accessibility and safety concerns trump indignation at being exposed to a few simple instructions in the field of modern British rolling stock design. Would that it were so in more areas.
posted by Dysk at 12:53 PM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
Also, what if the person locked inside the toilet in the mangled wreckage of a derailed train suffers from dementia and can't understand why the door won't open, and the person outside is a small child in no condition to even think about working out how to bypass the lock? Nobody else is around, because they're the only survivors. Would you deny them the chance to be of comfort to each other in their dying moments, as they could be if the doors were locked only by electromagnetic devices that failed open? Just because you think it's less trouble to use old-school mechanical locks? Such cruelty.
On the other hand, you've got a pretty good outline for a one-act play right there.
posted by Halloween Jack at 1:15 PM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
On the other hand, you've got a pretty good outline for a one-act play right there.
posted by Halloween Jack at 1:15 PM on March 1, 2017 [3 favorites]
Dysk is doing great work in this thread. I for one withdraw my previous snark.
> and one button with a picture of a padlock on it with a little light that comes on when the lock is engaged.
This could be improved, though. It's never clear to me if the button is lit because I can press it (and lock the door) or because the door is already locked.
posted by Leon at 1:53 PM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
> and one button with a picture of a padlock on it with a little light that comes on when the lock is engaged.
This could be improved, though. It's never clear to me if the button is lit because I can press it (and lock the door) or because the door is already locked.
posted by Leon at 1:53 PM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
Ah, if only the voice messages were part of an initial design which considered the accessibility, and not something bolted-on much later (and with the "look at our jaunty, jolly copywriting" marketing campaign about it all) that makes it obvious it's a pretty poor attempt to paper over the glaring problems everyone has in working out how to use the toilets...
posted by amcewen at 2:03 PM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by amcewen at 2:03 PM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
I don't see how it's in any way more accessible to anybody than would be either a mechanical door latch of one of the types everyone is used to, or, as suggested in TFA, "an electric lock that looks [and operates] like a manual lever".
posted by sfenders at 3:18 PM on March 1, 2017
posted by sfenders at 3:18 PM on March 1, 2017
On the other hand, you've got a pretty good outline for a one-act play right there.
"Death on the Disoriented Express."
posted by The Underpants Monster at 4:11 PM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
"Death on the Disoriented Express."
posted by The Underpants Monster at 4:11 PM on March 1, 2017 [1 favorite]
I don't see how it's in any way more accessible to anybody than would be either a mechanical door latch of one of the types everyone is used to
Just off the top of my head: impaired grip, paralysed, missing or prosthetic hands/arms, or poor motor control (e.g. Parkinson's). Several of these have already been mentioned in thread, and they are real conditions worth considering, especially if the cost is simply that some people will have to get used to a very slightly different interface to a lock. What a burden to bear in the name of accessibility.
posted by Dysk at 5:32 PM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
Just off the top of my head: impaired grip, paralysed, missing or prosthetic hands/arms, or poor motor control (e.g. Parkinson's). Several of these have already been mentioned in thread, and they are real conditions worth considering, especially if the cost is simply that some people will have to get used to a very slightly different interface to a lock. What a burden to bear in the name of accessibility.
posted by Dysk at 5:32 PM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]
Hmm, interesting. Hard to believe it isn't easy to come up with something better. For instance, a big friendly lever of sorts that is pushed left and right to initiate the opening and closing of the door. Same thing inside and outside. Assuming of course that the motion of the door really does need to be done by an electric motor, that the realities of train toilet manufacture prevent the creation of a sliding door that moves smoothly and easily enough for anyone capable of pushing a button or nudging a lever to operate it manually with the slightest touch. The open/close lever could be located roughly where everyone would normally look to find a door handle. Arranging the wiring so that the door control is in the right place should not be too much of an engineering challenge.
It could automatically lock when closed from inside. To prevent the occasional inconvenience of it being locked with nobody in there, add a sensor (acoustic or infrared, or both for extra safety) to detect that. I mean we're going all electronic anyway, what's one more sensor and some signal processing code? It might be complicated by the noise and vibration of a moving train, but I'm not sure there isn't some easy solution. Infrared occupancy detectors usually work by detecting motion, but in such a confined and normally unchanging space couldn't they directly detect infrared emissions indicating life forms present or not? If not, active ultrasound sensors that fire periodically ought to do the job. If conventional techniques can't detect the acoustic signature of an empty toilet, maybe there is an opportunity for some machine intelligence research. Anyway, if the sort of occupancy sensors that think you're not there if you sit perfectly still are really all that's available, they should tend to false positives in such an environment, and when the toilet audio system inevitably does give its verbal warning that the door is about to be unlocked in 60 seconds, rather than comprehend the message that there is a button somewhere that needs to be pressed, all the occupant will need to do is lift an arm, nod a head, or be startled into any kind of motion at all by the unexpected noise.
If it all works out, people would still have to get used to a slightly different mechanism, but it wouldn't be such a poor substitute for the one they're used to. No Braille, instruction manuals, or audio guides being required for the opening and closing of a toilet door is a design goal that can be achieved within our lifetimes, my confidence is undiminished.
posted by sfenders at 8:27 PM on March 1, 2017
It could automatically lock when closed from inside. To prevent the occasional inconvenience of it being locked with nobody in there, add a sensor (acoustic or infrared, or both for extra safety) to detect that. I mean we're going all electronic anyway, what's one more sensor and some signal processing code? It might be complicated by the noise and vibration of a moving train, but I'm not sure there isn't some easy solution. Infrared occupancy detectors usually work by detecting motion, but in such a confined and normally unchanging space couldn't they directly detect infrared emissions indicating life forms present or not? If not, active ultrasound sensors that fire periodically ought to do the job. If conventional techniques can't detect the acoustic signature of an empty toilet, maybe there is an opportunity for some machine intelligence research. Anyway, if the sort of occupancy sensors that think you're not there if you sit perfectly still are really all that's available, they should tend to false positives in such an environment, and when the toilet audio system inevitably does give its verbal warning that the door is about to be unlocked in 60 seconds, rather than comprehend the message that there is a button somewhere that needs to be pressed, all the occupant will need to do is lift an arm, nod a head, or be startled into any kind of motion at all by the unexpected noise.
If it all works out, people would still have to get used to a slightly different mechanism, but it wouldn't be such a poor substitute for the one they're used to. No Braille, instruction manuals, or audio guides being required for the opening and closing of a toilet door is a design goal that can be achieved within our lifetimes, my confidence is undiminished.
posted by sfenders at 8:27 PM on March 1, 2017
Let's not forget This gem from 2015:
Last year Nick Clegg pushed past me to go to the toilet on the train and the person inside hadn’t pressed the button to lock the door. Imagine the terrified look of the person sitting there doing their business, when 1) the automatic door slowly opened 2) the person standing in the doorway was Nick Clegg.posted by rum-soaked space hobo at 2:58 AM on March 2, 2017 [4 favorites]
I tried to diffuse everyone’s embarrassment by remarking on the poor interface design of the toilet locking system, then Nick marched off past me to find another toilet – in a direction I knew for a fact there were no more toilets. A minute later he came back sheepishly and sat back down again. I guess he just held it in for the rest of the journey.
"I'm willing to overlook everything because of the awesome "don't flush this stuff" message."
Meh, this is just standard British post-innocent drinks corporate whimsy.
It's everywhere these days and I find it to be mostly fairly tiresome.
(But that's something of a derail, and I don't bear it enough ill will to really object that much)
So far all of the solutions proposed in the thread to solve the problems of this design are way more complex and way less usable.This design uses standardised buttons that look and act like the other buttons on the train.
I think that makes sense from a usability perspective and from a maintenance perspective.
I mean, there are 462 toilets (7 per train on the remaining 21 9 car trains, and 9 on the 35 11 car trains) each of which needs to be regularly inspected, repaired, maintained and so on.
The UK railway culture is obsessive about safety and right side failing (i.e. when something breaks it breaks in a wway that is safe. i.e. if a signal fails it goes red, not green). This design fails safely. If power fails the door should open. It works as intended.
If the occupancy sensor is required to function to control a door behind which people can be trapped then it's a safety device which requires a daily service check. That's a very big job for a fairly minor benefit.
You have to think in terms of hundreds of units being used constantly every day.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 3:53 AM on March 2, 2017 [4 favorites]
Meh, this is just standard British post-innocent drinks corporate whimsy.
It's everywhere these days and I find it to be mostly fairly tiresome.
(But that's something of a derail, and I don't bear it enough ill will to really object that much)
So far all of the solutions proposed in the thread to solve the problems of this design are way more complex and way less usable.This design uses standardised buttons that look and act like the other buttons on the train.
I think that makes sense from a usability perspective and from a maintenance perspective.
I mean, there are 462 toilets (7 per train on the remaining 21 9 car trains, and 9 on the 35 11 car trains) each of which needs to be regularly inspected, repaired, maintained and so on.
The UK railway culture is obsessive about safety and right side failing (i.e. when something breaks it breaks in a wway that is safe. i.e. if a signal fails it goes red, not green). This design fails safely. If power fails the door should open. It works as intended.
If the occupancy sensor is required to function to control a door behind which people can be trapped then it's a safety device which requires a daily service check. That's a very big job for a fairly minor benefit.
You have to think in terms of hundreds of units being used constantly every day.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 3:53 AM on March 2, 2017 [4 favorites]
It could automatically lock when closed from inside. To prevent the occasional inconvenience of it being locked with nobody in there, add a sensor
Thus speaks a man who hasn't seriously considered maintainance. You've got a minimum wage cleaner checking that room over for maybe two minutes a couple of times a day. If you think that sensor is going to work reliably after a couple months, you are in for some surprises. And while we're at it, have a look at the article upthread about how automating shit with sensors just doesn't work very well. Let's not even mention the cost of putting a fucking sonar system in each loo.
The open/close lever could be located roughly where everyone would normally look to find a door handle. Arranging the wiring so that the door control is in the right place should not be too much of an engineering challenge.
The button is lower down to make it easier for kids and people in wheelchairs. It's far easier for you to reach down than it is for a child in a wheelchair to reach up.
You seem obsessed with everything being "how everyone expects" (which is really what you are used to). Why have a lever instead of a button? Why, it looks like a door handle and so you won't have to get caught out for a split second thinking how to operate a door. For that luxury, you want to make access for anyone with a grip or motor impairment much harder because of your unsubstantiated assertion that a large lever would be just as good. You're creating problems here to 'solve' non-existing ones that ultimately boil down to your aesthetic taste.
Why can't we have what we always have everywhere else? Because what we always have everywhere is else is atrocious for accessibility. Throwing some misguided large lever patches on that because you're not comfortable with a six-word sign being in the loos while you shit is a mind-blowing level of callous selfishness.
posted by Dysk at 4:19 AM on March 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
Thus speaks a man who hasn't seriously considered maintainance. You've got a minimum wage cleaner checking that room over for maybe two minutes a couple of times a day. If you think that sensor is going to work reliably after a couple months, you are in for some surprises. And while we're at it, have a look at the article upthread about how automating shit with sensors just doesn't work very well. Let's not even mention the cost of putting a fucking sonar system in each loo.
The open/close lever could be located roughly where everyone would normally look to find a door handle. Arranging the wiring so that the door control is in the right place should not be too much of an engineering challenge.
The button is lower down to make it easier for kids and people in wheelchairs. It's far easier for you to reach down than it is for a child in a wheelchair to reach up.
You seem obsessed with everything being "how everyone expects" (which is really what you are used to). Why have a lever instead of a button? Why, it looks like a door handle and so you won't have to get caught out for a split second thinking how to operate a door. For that luxury, you want to make access for anyone with a grip or motor impairment much harder because of your unsubstantiated assertion that a large lever would be just as good. You're creating problems here to 'solve' non-existing ones that ultimately boil down to your aesthetic taste.
Why can't we have what we always have everywhere else? Because what we always have everywhere is else is atrocious for accessibility. Throwing some misguided large lever patches on that because you're not comfortable with a six-word sign being in the loos while you shit is a mind-blowing level of callous selfishness.
posted by Dysk at 4:19 AM on March 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
Dysk, it's probably not much fun for you to point out what must be to you some fairly basic design flaws. If it makes you feel any better, I'm learning a lot from reading the discussion. I am not handicapped. The closest I've come to accessibility problems is living with a very small woman who mostly gets by just fine with a stepstool.
Funny story about me not realizing my size privilege (is that a thing?). I once asked her to shred a cabbage on a mandoline. I would hold the cabbage in one hand and the mandoline in the other, resting the other end of the mandoline on the table at an angle so there's room underneath for the slices to accumulate.
Turns out her hands are smaller than cabbages, so I came back to find her holding the cabbage with both hands and letting the mandoline rest flat on the table. She had to move the cabbage very slowly or it would drag the mandoline across the table. Then after every few slices she'd have to put the cabbage down, pick up the mandoline, and clear out the slices, or else they'd build up and clog the mandoline from beneath.
The point being, it's not easy to imagine constraints you've never had to deal with, and I appreciate you taking the time to review all these proposals.
posted by d. z. wang at 5:37 AM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
Funny story about me not realizing my size privilege (is that a thing?). I once asked her to shred a cabbage on a mandoline. I would hold the cabbage in one hand and the mandoline in the other, resting the other end of the mandoline on the table at an angle so there's room underneath for the slices to accumulate.
Turns out her hands are smaller than cabbages, so I came back to find her holding the cabbage with both hands and letting the mandoline rest flat on the table. She had to move the cabbage very slowly or it would drag the mandoline across the table. Then after every few slices she'd have to put the cabbage down, pick up the mandoline, and clear out the slices, or else they'd build up and clog the mandoline from beneath.
The point being, it's not easy to imagine constraints you've never had to deal with, and I appreciate you taking the time to review all these proposals.
posted by d. z. wang at 5:37 AM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
I'm not convinced that an acoustic occupancy sensor doesn't exist that can withstand some vibration without significant maintenance expense. How is it more likely to stop working than any other of the many pieces of electronics involved? How is adding it to the already substantial daily maintenance checklist any more of a burden that the same for the "lock door" button? There's already a microcontroller, five buttons, some electric motors, probably sensors to detect the door being blocked when it's trying to close, and a sound system. It doesn't add a safety issue: if the sensor fails the worst it can do to an occupant is unlock the door, it's not going to lock anyone in. If it fails in what is probably the less likely way the toilet would be out of order just the same as if any other of its many parts failed.
Another idea for sensors might be optical sensors to detect someone's limb or any other object crossing the door opening as it's closing. It would refuse to close when there's been anything in the doorway after the button is pressed. This kind of sensor is a solved problem, being often used on elevator doors. Reasonably cheap and reliable, and if this one fails now all that can happen is kids become able to lock the toilet with nobody inside. There's usually no obvious sign that it's broken, so if it's kept in working order most of the time we might hope that even when it isn't, nobody will think to mess with it. Anyway if you're going to have a door operated and locked by electric motors, I think it is reasonable to expect it to require some sensors.
Why have a lever instead of a button? Why, it looks like a door handle
You misunderstand. Approximately in the place you'd expect to find a door handle seems like an appropriate place to put a door control, but there's no reason it should look or operate exactly like one. Nobody was complaining about it being too low and easy to reach from a wheelchair, the complaint was that it was in a position that doesn't even make it obvious which door it's controlling. Something behaving and looking like a momentary paddle switch is what I had in mind. Perhaps a rocker switch if you prefer, although that seems like it might conceivably be more difficult to operate if not done carefully. The idea is not to make things work exactly as expected, it's to make things work in some kind of way that's so simple it does not require explanation and cannot easily be misunderstood. It seems a better alternative than having three buttons with labels explaining what they do and a computer voice frequently tell people they've done it wrong.
If automating shit with or without sensors doesn't normally work out well, maybe it's going to take some actual effort to get it right, some willingness to rethink things when you've got something fundamentally wrong even if you've managed to tick all the boxes by adding sufficient warning labels, audio cues, flashing lights, buttons, and instructions.
If my own imagined door control mechanism could use some further refinement, here's another proposal: Just one button on either side of the door. It's the open/close button.
posted by sfenders at 6:09 AM on March 2, 2017
Another idea for sensors might be optical sensors to detect someone's limb or any other object crossing the door opening as it's closing. It would refuse to close when there's been anything in the doorway after the button is pressed. This kind of sensor is a solved problem, being often used on elevator doors. Reasonably cheap and reliable, and if this one fails now all that can happen is kids become able to lock the toilet with nobody inside. There's usually no obvious sign that it's broken, so if it's kept in working order most of the time we might hope that even when it isn't, nobody will think to mess with it. Anyway if you're going to have a door operated and locked by electric motors, I think it is reasonable to expect it to require some sensors.
Why have a lever instead of a button? Why, it looks like a door handle
You misunderstand. Approximately in the place you'd expect to find a door handle seems like an appropriate place to put a door control, but there's no reason it should look or operate exactly like one. Nobody was complaining about it being too low and easy to reach from a wheelchair, the complaint was that it was in a position that doesn't even make it obvious which door it's controlling. Something behaving and looking like a momentary paddle switch is what I had in mind. Perhaps a rocker switch if you prefer, although that seems like it might conceivably be more difficult to operate if not done carefully. The idea is not to make things work exactly as expected, it's to make things work in some kind of way that's so simple it does not require explanation and cannot easily be misunderstood. It seems a better alternative than having three buttons with labels explaining what they do and a computer voice frequently tell people they've done it wrong.
If automating shit with or without sensors doesn't normally work out well, maybe it's going to take some actual effort to get it right, some willingness to rethink things when you've got something fundamentally wrong even if you've managed to tick all the boxes by adding sufficient warning labels, audio cues, flashing lights, buttons, and instructions.
If my own imagined door control mechanism could use some further refinement, here's another proposal: Just one button on either side of the door. It's the open/close button.
posted by sfenders at 6:09 AM on March 2, 2017
Again, see the CrossCountry Pendolinos. You don't see half the moaning about them being difficult to use. Still the same buttons, just only two on the inside - one to open/close the door, one to engage/disengage the lock. The use of buttons over any other kind of switching mechanism is a pretty big deal for accessibility.
And optical door sensors are easy to fit to elevators because elevators have hulking thick doors, and are expected to be more expensive than a train loo. The primary constraint on British rolling stock is space. Tunnels and other track infrastructure make this a pretty much fixed constraint. Every solution you come up with is going to make the footprint of the door and attendant mechanism bigger. This is not an option.
posted by Dysk at 6:29 AM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
And optical door sensors are easy to fit to elevators because elevators have hulking thick doors, and are expected to be more expensive than a train loo. The primary constraint on British rolling stock is space. Tunnels and other track infrastructure make this a pretty much fixed constraint. Every solution you come up with is going to make the footprint of the door and attendant mechanism bigger. This is not an option.
posted by Dysk at 6:29 AM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
I'm not convinced that an acoustic occupancy sensor doesn't exist that can withstand some vibration without significant maintenance expense. How is it more likely to stop working than any other of the many pieces of electronics involved?
They're more expensive, more delicate, require more regular servicing, can fail in all sorts of inconsistent or unpredictable ways, and I can practically guarantee that you'd see at least as much moaning about the stupid desire to automate everything that could be simple. Buttons are pretty bloody simple, both mechanically and electrically. Anything else is going to be more complex, which means more failure-prone, bigger, more expensive, and harder to service. And a train bog is hardly the least tough of environments on, well, everything inside and comprising them. There's a limit to how regular and thorough a servicing you can realistically expect to see on them, too. Things need to be as simple as possible (and definitely not reliant on hoping kids don't mess with it, or having train staff making judgements about whether or not that locked toilet is empty and in need of unlocking because kids will mess with locking systems if you give them half a chance, especially on trains where they're cooped up, bored, and unsupervised.)
posted by Dysk at 6:37 AM on March 2, 2017
They're more expensive, more delicate, require more regular servicing, can fail in all sorts of inconsistent or unpredictable ways, and I can practically guarantee that you'd see at least as much moaning about the stupid desire to automate everything that could be simple. Buttons are pretty bloody simple, both mechanically and electrically. Anything else is going to be more complex, which means more failure-prone, bigger, more expensive, and harder to service. And a train bog is hardly the least tough of environments on, well, everything inside and comprising them. There's a limit to how regular and thorough a servicing you can realistically expect to see on them, too. Things need to be as simple as possible (and definitely not reliant on hoping kids don't mess with it, or having train staff making judgements about whether or not that locked toilet is empty and in need of unlocking because kids will mess with locking systems if you give them half a chance, especially on trains where they're cooped up, bored, and unsupervised.)
posted by Dysk at 6:37 AM on March 2, 2017
I mean sure, they're not perfect, there are a lot of problems with them, but none of this is for lack of thought.
They refit the whole fleet in 2013 and made a lot of positive changes.
But there are a lot of complexities that are involved in railway engineering and in accessibility engineering that are easily mocked yet hard to spot.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 6:38 AM on March 2, 2017
They refit the whole fleet in 2013 and made a lot of positive changes.
But there are a lot of complexities that are involved in railway engineering and in accessibility engineering that are easily mocked yet hard to spot.
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 6:38 AM on March 2, 2017
The point being, it's not easy to imagine constraints you've never had to deal with
Amen. Weird how people who've never had any experience in the field tend to suddenly think they know better than engineers and accessibility designers who do deal with this shit, whether in a personal or professional capacity.
posted by Dysk at 6:39 AM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
Amen. Weird how people who've never had any experience in the field tend to suddenly think they know better than engineers and accessibility designers who do deal with this shit, whether in a personal or professional capacity.
posted by Dysk at 6:39 AM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
I don't know, photoelectric sensors have gotten a lot smaller than they used to be and a fair bit cheaper. Take a look at some of these things, and that's just the first that google turns up. There's plenty of space in the door frame.
Wiring for controls placed on the door itself seems more likely to be where I went too far.
posted by sfenders at 6:47 AM on March 2, 2017
Wiring for controls placed on the door itself seems more likely to be where I went too far.
posted by sfenders at 6:47 AM on March 2, 2017
Remember that the door you're talking about is less than an inch thick, and has to meet targets for manufacturing costs and structural integrity. A sensor might be small and cheap, but there are a lot of costs associated with fitting them to a train door than that. All for what? Making it so the door automatically locks when you close it? Half your users aren't going to expect that behaviour (I mean, how many bathrooms have you been in with doors that slam locked?) which will cause its own usability problem. And again, you've now got an additional failure state for your bogs - locked empty.
posted by Dysk at 6:57 AM on March 2, 2017
posted by Dysk at 6:57 AM on March 2, 2017
That link didn't work so well it appears and now I can't find the one I was looking at, but less than an inch is no problem. You can get ready-made single-beam photodetectors designed with exactly this purpose in mind with casing and mounting hardware and such all included coming in under two centimetres, easy. You'd need at least four or five I guess, to make them not easy to defeat, but they are small and I've got to think reasonably cheap when buying in bulk, given how simple the hardware involved is.
"Slam locked"? If they're not thinking about it, the person who closed the door won't even realize it's locked, just like they don't notice it's unlocked now. If they are thinking about it and looking for a way to lock the door, at least the surprise they get on discovering they don't need to do anything will be more of a pleasant one and better-timed than the one they get now. Perhaps if there's still going to be a sound system, a subtle "clunk" locking sound effect could be added, but it doesn't seem worth the trouble.
posted by sfenders at 7:14 AM on March 2, 2017
"Slam locked"? If they're not thinking about it, the person who closed the door won't even realize it's locked, just like they don't notice it's unlocked now. If they are thinking about it and looking for a way to lock the door, at least the surprise they get on discovering they don't need to do anything will be more of a pleasant one and better-timed than the one they get now. Perhaps if there's still going to be a sound system, a subtle "clunk" locking sound effect could be added, but it doesn't seem worth the trouble.
posted by sfenders at 7:14 AM on March 2, 2017
What's stopping you reaching between the sensors and slapping the button? How are you accounting for the curvature of the door and the path it travels? How much in additional manufacturing costs for each and every door that is now no longer a simple single-piece mould? For extra control systems being developed and tested? There are a lot of costs associated with large-scale manufacture of this kind beyond simply looking at a parts cost and eyeballing that it'll fit.
posted by Dysk at 8:16 AM on March 2, 2017
posted by Dysk at 8:16 AM on March 2, 2017
Retro-reflective Photoelectric Sensor. Vibration resistant, shock resistant to 30g, waterproof, tolerant of heat and cold, over spec in range for extra reliability, easy to install, easy to design into a manufacturing process, kinda expensive at £21.92 each but what the hell.
What's stopping you reaching between the sensors and slapping the button?
It only takes a few of them, aimed at the space where you'd need to reach through, to stop that. I was thinking they could be mounted in the ceiling somewhere, aimed at wide-angle retroreflectors made of something suitably durable placed in the obvious-looking location along the sides of the door frame if there's no space for them to be better hidden. I did forget to account for the curvature of the door, but its curvature looks to be slight enough that the space inside its concave section might be negligable? If not, it's probably possible to make the geometry work out okay if the button is anywhere other than on the actual door. It only needs to protect the relatively small plane through which you'd have to reach to press the button from outside, not the entire doorway.
As for why one should bother at all, I think it's worth it. If we're going to have automated paper towel dispensers, let them roll out a continuous sheet of paper so long as whatever mechanism activates it is engaged, up to a generous limit. If we're going to have water faucets that come on only when your hands are under them, let the sensors that detect this be more sophisticated by whatever degree is required to let them work properly. If we need to have toilet doors that open and close by electric motor, let their operation require as few button presses as possible and provide the kind of affordance that people can not only get used to, but enjoy. For the people building it, it may (or may not) ending up costing a few extra pennies, but for society as a whole it is eminently worthwhile.
posted by sfenders at 8:53 AM on March 2, 2017
What's stopping you reaching between the sensors and slapping the button?
It only takes a few of them, aimed at the space where you'd need to reach through, to stop that. I was thinking they could be mounted in the ceiling somewhere, aimed at wide-angle retroreflectors made of something suitably durable placed in the obvious-looking location along the sides of the door frame if there's no space for them to be better hidden. I did forget to account for the curvature of the door, but its curvature looks to be slight enough that the space inside its concave section might be negligable? If not, it's probably possible to make the geometry work out okay if the button is anywhere other than on the actual door. It only needs to protect the relatively small plane through which you'd have to reach to press the button from outside, not the entire doorway.
As for why one should bother at all, I think it's worth it. If we're going to have automated paper towel dispensers, let them roll out a continuous sheet of paper so long as whatever mechanism activates it is engaged, up to a generous limit. If we're going to have water faucets that come on only when your hands are under them, let the sensors that detect this be more sophisticated by whatever degree is required to let them work properly. If we need to have toilet doors that open and close by electric motor, let their operation require as few button presses as possible and provide the kind of affordance that people can not only get used to, but enjoy. For the people building it, it may (or may not) ending up costing a few extra pennies, but for society as a whole it is eminently worthwhile.
posted by sfenders at 8:53 AM on March 2, 2017
I am totally confused now. People have coped with locking toilet doors themselves for generations. I cannot see a single earthly reason why using a button to do so, rather than a (frequently fiddly) catch, is so abhorrent that we need complex technical solutions to make sure no one ever need do it. I mean, I like elegant design as much as anyone, but I can think of roughly fourteen thousand things I would prioritise over building a shitter fit for Jony Ive.
posted by howfar at 9:15 AM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by howfar at 9:15 AM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
If we're going to have automated paper towel dispensers, let them roll out a continuous sheet of paper so long as whatever mechanism activates it is engaged, up to a generous limit.
Not in train toilets because again, cost, size, complexity.
Meanwhile, the faucets and doors solve actual accessibility issues (grip impairment most notably) but yes, the tap thing is not a great solution - unsurprisingly, a button would be better (even as that introduces some issues with intuitive usability, these can be mitigated dramatically by design considerations - as is the case with the Pendolino toilets in general, with Virgin being the exemplar of bad usability design compared to CrossCountry).
posted by Dysk at 9:24 AM on March 2, 2017
Not in train toilets because again, cost, size, complexity.
Meanwhile, the faucets and doors solve actual accessibility issues (grip impairment most notably) but yes, the tap thing is not a great solution - unsurprisingly, a button would be better (even as that introduces some issues with intuitive usability, these can be mitigated dramatically by design considerations - as is the case with the Pendolino toilets in general, with Virgin being the exemplar of bad usability design compared to CrossCountry).
posted by Dysk at 9:24 AM on March 2, 2017
I remember the faucets controlled by a mechanical button-like mechanism. They were ... also not great. But yeah a button that actually works sounds good there.
posted by sfenders at 9:50 AM on March 2, 2017
posted by sfenders at 9:50 AM on March 2, 2017
Huh, Virgin Trains? I guess I didn't know that the UK had corporately run train systems.
As a recent transplant, there is a surprising level of neoliberal bullshit here. And that's coming from an American.
posted by HumuloneRanger at 5:07 PM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
As a recent transplant, there is a surprising level of neoliberal bullshit here. And that's coming from an American.
posted by HumuloneRanger at 5:07 PM on March 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
I'm actually mostly surprised that a private company could figure how to make money running passenger trains. I didn't think that was possible.
posted by octothorpe at 5:30 PM on March 2, 2017
posted by octothorpe at 5:30 PM on March 2, 2017
The idiotic tendering system renders many routes captive market monopolies, so it's just a matter of fleecing rail users, and especially commuters. That said, passenger rail isn't the abject disaster it is in America in Europe generally, neither in terms of function or finance.
posted by Dysk at 6:38 PM on March 2, 2017
posted by Dysk at 6:38 PM on March 2, 2017
I'm actually mostly surprised that a private company could figure how to make money running passenger trains. I didn't think that was possible.
Once you take into account all costs, subsidies, network costs and track costs blah blah blah:
Virgin Trains East Coast currently gets paid 2.4p per passenger per mile by the government.
For Virgin Trains West Coast it's 6.5p per passenger per mile.
(or £365000000 for the 2015/16 financial year)
Interestingly East Coast was formerly run by Directly Operated Railways (DOR), which was a state owned Operator. They ended up running it after the previous private operator withdrew from their contract.
Under DOR (in 2013/14) East coast had a total subsidy of -£19.9 million in (i.e. they paid the government basically £20 million). Currently under Virgin East coast has a subsidy of £80 million. So the private company is doing £100 million pa worse.*
There was a bit of an upset when it was revealed that the profitable East Coast was being refranchised out.
But Tories gonna Tory y'know.
*This is a bit of a simplification and using worse case figures, so bear in mind complicating factors etc etc etc.
But.. still....
Also, oh look, Graphs!
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 4:17 AM on March 3, 2017 [2 favorites]
Once you take into account all costs, subsidies, network costs and track costs blah blah blah:
Virgin Trains East Coast currently gets paid 2.4p per passenger per mile by the government.
For Virgin Trains West Coast it's 6.5p per passenger per mile.
(or £365000000 for the 2015/16 financial year)
Interestingly East Coast was formerly run by Directly Operated Railways (DOR), which was a state owned Operator. They ended up running it after the previous private operator withdrew from their contract.
Under DOR (in 2013/14) East coast had a total subsidy of -£19.9 million in (i.e. they paid the government basically £20 million). Currently under Virgin East coast has a subsidy of £80 million. So the private company is doing £100 million pa worse.*
There was a bit of an upset when it was revealed that the profitable East Coast was being refranchised out.
But Tories gonna Tory y'know.
*This is a bit of a simplification and using worse case figures, so bear in mind complicating factors etc etc etc.
But.. still....
Also, oh look, Graphs!
posted by Just this guy, y'know at 4:17 AM on March 3, 2017 [2 favorites]
« Older "It tastes like mothballs and old library books." | A refreshing and spontaneous talent Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Leon at 3:21 AM on March 1, 2017 [2 favorites]