Live data from Hacker News

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

ianvisits.co.uk

51–60 of 155 posts

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

#51

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.

And even if they weren't there for hindering homeless people, they're still hostile for overweight people - the ones, aside geriatrics, that most need the seats.

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

#52
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Londoner for 24 years. I don't know what to tell you, 'Bro'. Yes beggars walk down tube trains trying to get money, but they don't tend to set up shop on the platform which is what we're talking about here. I'm also pretty sure most of the people that have asked me for a quid on the tube were not homeless people, just chancers and drug users. Besides which, once you were past the barrier, sleeping on the tube train i…

Not unknown to see people sat at the bottom of stairs with a “homeless and hungry” signs

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

#53
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Londoner for 24 years. I don't know what to tell you, 'Bro'. Yes beggars walk down tube trains trying to get money, but they don't tend to set up shop on the platform which is what we're talking about here. I'm also pretty sure most of the people that have asked me for a quid on the tube were not homeless people, just chancers and drug users. Besides which, once you were past the barrier, sleeping on the tube train i…

Some of the small, outer, (above ground) tube stations I use have periods where staff leave the gates open and leave the public areas. They even do this during busy periods. It is easy to get onto the tube network at these places.

There's also stations that share common areas with overground trains that don't even have gates (West Ruislip, for example). And then people also squeeze through the pram/wheelchair gates or closely follow someone through. It's easy to do because the ticket offices are closed and whatever skeleton staffing they have is busy elsewhere. These gates (and stations) are effectively unmanned in this context.

But I agree. It's actually very rare to see people begging on the underground compared to other cities. I don't think access is the issue. Maybe the BTP spend all their time on it?

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

#54
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

Very many older (and not even that old) tube stations have glossy tiled walls[1], presumably because they're easy to clean with just a cloth.

Choosing bare concrete looks cool, and you don't need to pay a tiler to install them, but anyone who has ever done any amount of cleaning ever will tell you a smooth, porous surface like that will look grungy soon enough and be basically impossible to clean by hand.

[1]: not only the London Underground: glossy wider-than-long tiles aren't generally called "metro tiles" for nothing

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

#55
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, the material they chose for the station walls is a sort of porous cement that is likely uncleanable.

Also hostile architecture - benches with no backrests.

The wall is the backrest.

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

#58
post #14

Funny that it's so noticeable because of the hostile architecture.

What hostile architecture? This is on the underground. Nobody is going to be sleeping on these seats.

The hostile architecture in this instance is the choice to use benches instead of seats with back support.

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

#59
post #3

Don't clean stuff... Just hide the dirt!

I would guess that the kind of plastic resin that's used for the walls reacts with heat and can easily be permanently marked.

It is very very very unlikely that they would build an underground pedestrian station that had walls that reacted to heat, unless it was to absorb heat in case of fire.

I'd also think that plastic resins are not the best thing to be reacting to heat.

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

#60
I used to work in a building that was once a factory, the room I was in was once a break room. For years workers would come in for their lunch and lean back against the walls. Years of (probably Brylcreme'd) heads being placed against the walls led to a situation where no amount of painting would cover it up. All these little brownish-grey spots appearing on the walls a few hours after each painting.

Then one day the room was properly refurbished and management paid the decorators to put in a special barrier layer and the grease spots finally dissipated.

Post reply on HN