Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elizabeth line testing ways of banishing its "ghosts in the walls"

ianvisits.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 155 posts

Re: Elizabeth line testing ways of banishing its "ghosts in the walls"

#31

Post by some-human »

jeroenhd wrote: post #21
petesergeant wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is hostile about the architecture here? The armrests?

If the (quite useless) armrests weren't there to prevent the homeless from sleeping on them, people wouldn't be sitting in the exact same spot every time, causing a light smear instead of defined person-like shaped on the wall.

People without a home do not have access to the platforms that these seats are on. These seats are on the underground, past the ticket barriers, and they would quickly be removed for trespassing on private property, as all TFL stations are staffed.

Typically in London, People without a home would be found outside the station, or occasionally in the concourse.

Re: Elizabeth line testing ways of banishing its "ghosts in the walls"

#32

Post by DrBazza »

jeroenhd wrote: post #21
petesergeant wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is hostile about the architecture here? The armrests?

If the (quite useless) armrests weren't there to prevent the homeless from sleeping on them, people wouldn't be sitting in the exact same spot every time, causing a light smear instead of defined person-like shaped on the wall.

I don't think I've ever seen a homeless person sleeping in a London Underground station in 30 years of commuting, and many of them have benches without armrests.

Re: Elizabeth line testing ways of banishing its "ghosts in the walls"

#34

Post by martyvis »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #26
lhnz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very difficult to make thousands of up-front planning decisions perfectly. It'd be even more costly to try to perfect every aspect upfront within the planning stage and it'd be more reasonable to make best attempts but to provide for the ability (and budget) to retrofit bespoke alterations to fix problems that arise at a later date.

But surely it should be simple enough to look at what alterations have been made on other lines already and start off from a basis that is at least as good.

With a constant rotation of contractors and the government staff overseeing them, offering innovative solutions at a better price than the next bidder, opportunities to learn from experience are difficult to achieve with large multi year projects

Re: Elizabeth line testing ways of banishing its "ghosts in the walls"

#35

Post by lhnz »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #26
lhnz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very difficult to make thousands of up-front planning decisions perfectly. It'd be even more costly to try to perfect every aspect upfront within the planning stage and it'd be more reasonable to make best attempts but to provide for the ability (and budget) to retrofit bespoke alterations to fix problems that arise at a later date.

But surely it should be simple enough to look at what alterations have been made on other lines already and start off from a basis that is at least as good.

The design and planning process for UK infrastructure is already notoriously expensive and we already do significantly more "planning" than we used to do 100 years ago (when we were actually capable of rapidly building high quality infrastructure).

I would expect there to already be consultants doing similar to what you've suggested however the work is complex and many will be quite cut-off from the build process or only around in the short-term.

Re: Elizabeth line testing ways of banishing its "ghosts in the walls"

#37

Post by helboi4 »

some-human wrote: post #31
jeroenhd wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the (quite useless) armrests weren't there to prevent the homeless from sleeping on them, people wouldn't be sitting in the exact same spot every time, causing a light smear instead of defined person-like shaped on the wall.

People without a home do not have access to the platforms that these seats are on. These seats are on the underground, past the ticket barriers, and they would quickly be removed for trespassing on private property, as all TFL stations are staffed. Typically in London, People without a home would be found outside the station, or occasionally in the concourse.

Bro you've clearly never ridden the tube. Homeless people are on it all the time begging. They slip in behind other people through the barriers at busy or unmanned stations.

Re: Elizabeth line testing ways of banishing its "ghosts in the walls"

#38

Post by petesergeant »

jeroenhd wrote: post #21
petesergeant wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is hostile about the architecture here? The armrests?

If the (quite useless) armrests weren't there to prevent the homeless from sleeping on them, people wouldn't be sitting in the exact same spot every time, causing a light smear instead of defined person-like shaped on the wall.

> to prevent the homeless from sleeping on them

Seems very unlikely that’s why they’re there, given the station is covered in CCTV, highly staffed, and the train itself would be much more comfortable to sleep on

> (quite useless) armrests

Very useful for apportioning space on the seats for multiple people to sit

Re: Elizabeth line testing ways of banishing its "ghosts in the walls"

#39

Post by KptMarchewa »

Havoc wrote: post #17

I noticed some other weird design choices in the new tube stations as well. Eg air vents that are very fine and visibly clog up. It’s like they designed it to look shiny for day one but ignored decades of practical experience

Might be better to clean the vents often than have something inside break due to debris.

Of course, it requires to actually clean the vents...

Re: Elizabeth line testing ways of banishing its "ghosts in the walls"

#40

Post by Wytwwww »

lhnz wrote: post #23
Havoc wrote: post #17

I noticed some other weird design choices in the new tube stations as well. Eg air vents that are very fine and visibly clog up. It’s like they designed it to look shiny for day one but ignored decades of practical experience

It's very difficult to make thousands of up-front planning decisions perfectly. It'd be even more costly to try to perfect every aspect upfront within the planning stage and it'd be more reasonable to make best attempts but to provide for the ability (and budget) to retrofit bespoke alterations to fix problems that arise at a later date.

> difficult to make thousands of up-front planning decisions perfectly.

So don't. Just use something well tried and tested and don't try to be innovative (in areas we you can't dedicated significant amounts of resources for up-front planning)

Post reply on HN