Brexit, for once some facts.

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Meet the New U.K. Government!


View attachment 19892


Well done DUP!! A generous financial package for all,

Corbyn's path into Downing Street blocked by Arlene Foster. His IRA friends blew up her school bus & shot her father.

Justice!!.
Justice? a Corrupt Tory bought a corrupt bunch of second rate politicians, where is the justice in that?
It is simply a Protection racket among Gangsters.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

flecc

Member
Oct 25, 2006
53,152
30,567
And now
"
Grenfell Tower: cladding material linked to fire pulled from sale worldwide
Arconic discontinues Reynobond PE, the material linked to the London blaze, for use in high-rise buildings

Was it because it is highly dangerous material? oh Dear me no!

"The manufacturer said in a statement: “Arconic is discontinuing global sales of Reynobond PE for use in high-rise applications. We believe this is the right decision because of the inconsistency of building codes across the world and issues that have arisen in the wake of the Grenfell Tower tragedy regarding code compliance of cladding systems in the context of buildings’ overall designs.

It's apparently nothing to do with them just our fault with having inconsistent building codes eh?
And there's this of course
"
The decision to stop selling it for use in skyscraper cladding comes after it emerged that the company knew that the less fire-resistant version, Reynobond PE, would be used on Grenfell Tower despite its own guidelines warning that it was unsuitable for buildings above 10m tall. Emails obtained by Reuters showed Arconic was involved in discussions about the use of cladding on the building during 2014.

One of its own brochures states that Reynobond PE should only be used in buildings up to 10m, with more fire-resistant products recommended above that height. Grenfell Tower is more than 60m tall.

Caveat Emptor
Demonstrates once again that Philip Hammond was wrong about the material being banned in the USA and Britain. Not only was it made in the USA and used there, the recommendations for correct use were merely the maker's ones and not in national laws where they needed to be.

Everyone ignores makers recommendations with all manner of products, only laws suffice. Remember seatbelts? Over 90% didn't use them until they were made compulsory.
.
.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and tillson

tillson

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 29, 2008
5,252
3,197
One of its own brochures states that Reynobond PE should only be used in buildings up to 10m, with more fire-resistant products recommended above that height. Grenfell Tower is more than 60m tall.

Caveat Emptor

tillson previously noted

"Yes, some good points in there which I totally agree with. If people are found to have been negligent and overlooked known historical risk factors for financial or reckless reasons, then that is a different story and I hope that they receive the appropriate level of punishment.

Those conditions are clearly met with the statements above, aren't they?
I wouldn't like to pass judgement on the few words which you have posted above. The people involved in the building / planning / construction will have families who will be severely affected by the outcome of this. We need to let the appropriate people look at every aspect in context and allow them to come to an informed decision.

I have never tried to defend anyone, just tried to bring considered thinking to the debate.
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
*sighs*

Again please, links to back that horse manure up??

Or just put up and shut up
Tommie do try not to look foolish with remarks like put up or shut up,horse manure described your posts very well, so take your own advice
"Sighs"

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: oldtom and robdon

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
I wouldn't like to pass judgement on the few words which you have posted above. The people involved in the building / planning / construction will have families who will be severely affected by the outcome of this. We need to let the appropriate people look at every aspect in context and allow them to come to an informed decision.

I have never tried to defend anyone, just tried to bring considered thinking to the debate.
Nothing wrong with that, but clearly all is not well is it?
The people who were burned to death and their relatives who grieve them through decisions made by others have a right to justice too, as do the many people now living in fear and uncertainty.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
 

tommie

Esteemed Pedelecer
Mar 13, 2013
1,760
600
Co. Down, N. Ireland, U.K.
Tommie do try not to look foolish with remarks like put up or shut up,horse manure described your posts very well, so take your own advice
"Sighs"

So no links then??

Ahh.. are you struggling oldcodger?

Can`t you back it up??

...Didn`t think so

Sooo, i suggest you just suck it up and embrace the new government...eh?

little point in howling at the moon is there??!!
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
So no links then??

Ahh.. are you struggling oldcodger?

Can`t you back it up??

...Didn`t think so

Sooo, i suggest you just suck it up and embrace the new government...eh?

little point in howling at the moon is there??!!
Links to what exactly? are you incapable of checking the histry of the DUP and the Tory party for yourself?
OK here is the DUP Manifesto
http://www.mydup.com/publications/view/dup-manifesto-2016
This bit is cute
Prioritise spending on the Health Service - increase the budget by at least £1bn and employ at least 1,500 more nurses & midwives and 200 more consultants.
And the Money has been raised by Blackmailing the Tory Party!, but where are you going to get nurses and midwives?
You really haven't worked that out, have you?
They have become an endangered species due to Brexit.
Do you realy believe the Tory party will honour the pledge of £1Billion to the province?

Everything is working out as expected and Brexit will be an abject failure, as will this Tory "We buy any Seat" Government. That has allied itself with Creationist nutters in the vain hope it will enable them to carry our Murdoch's agenda.

If you imagine anyone in either Northern ireland or Eire is intended to benefit from the actions of this governent, you are very gullible.
You will become collateral damage as intended, and the Tory party will discard the DUP as soon as it can.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

Kudoscycles

Official Trade Member
Apr 15, 2011
5,566
5,048
www.kudoscycles.com
i cannot believe that Theresa May bought the votes of the DUP at £100 million per MP. Predictably ( I assume May also predicted) that the Welsh and soon the Scots and soon the poorer areas of the U.K. will all want the same deal for the rest of the U.K.,and why not?
I calculate that at £6.5 billion in total,if the Barnet formula is respected.
If I was Corbyn I would add an amendment to the Queens Speech to force the government to pay to the devolved governments.
Funny how the money tree gets money for the DUP but has no money on the tree for nurses wages?
It only needs a few Tory rebels (13 Scots Tories) and the Queens Speech will not be carried.....what happens then ??????
Is Brexit worth all this hassle?
KudosDave
 

tillson

Esteemed Pedelecer
May 29, 2008
5,252
3,197
i cannot believe that Theresa May bought the votes of the DUP at £100 million per MP. Predictably ( I assume May also predicted) that the Welsh and soon the Scots and soon the poorer areas of the U.K. will all want the same deal for the rest of the U.K.,and why not?
I calculate that at £6.5 billion in total,if the Barnet formula is respected.
If I was Corbyn I would add an amendment to the Queens Speech to force the government to pay to the devolved governments.
Funny how the money tree gets money for the DUP but has no money on the tree for nurses wages?
It only needs a few Tory rebels (13 Scots Tories) and the Queens Speech will not be carried.....what happens then ??????
Is Brexit worth all this hassle?
KudosDave
It's an outrage. On the plus side, this can only intensify people's loathing of her.
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
i cannot believe that Theresa May bought the votes of the DUP at £100 million per MP. Predictably ( I assume May also predicted) that the Welsh and soon the Scots and soon the poorer areas of the U.K. will all want the same deal for the rest of the U.K.,and why not?
I calculate that at £6.5 billion in total,if the Barnet formula is respected.
If I was Corbyn I would add an amendment to the Queens Speech to force the government to pay to the devolved governments.
Funny how the money tree gets money for the DUP but has no money on the tree for nurses wages?
It only needs a few Tory rebels (13 Scots Tories) and the Queens Speech will not be carried.....what happens then ??????
Is Brexit worth all this hassle?
KudosDave
NO
 
  • Like
Reactions: robdon

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
It's an outrage. On the plus side, this can only intensify people's loathing of her.
Agreed!
It reminds me of a line from Robbie Burns regarding the time that England literally bought control of Scotland after the failed Darien Scheme

"We're bought and sold for English Gold what a parcel o' Rogues in a nation"
What is worse is that she has done it with OUR (Public that is) money.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: robdon and oldtom

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
I agree. If something can't be made safely, then it shouldn't go into production.

Just because the panels were known to be flammable from the rear side may not have been sufficient to stop them from being used. It may have been reasonably envisaged that the manner in which the panels were fitted and the way in which they would be used would reduce the risk of heat being applied to the rear face to an acceptably low level.

We put hundreds of tonnes of a dangerous and volatile liquid into an aircraft, we then sit on top of it, and hurtle along a strip of tarmac at 180 knots in the certain knowledge that if any one of a hundred moving parts fail, we are likely to meet with a fiery death.

We do similar with our cars. We put upwards of 50 litres of an even more volatile and dangerous liquid into them. Then we put those that we love and care about the most into a confined space just a few centimetres away from the petrol and propel them around at speeds that would prove fatal if something went wrong.

We do these things, which sound crazy and dangerous when described as above, because we perceive the risk to be acceptable. We think that the dangerous material (petrol and JET A1) has been managed and used in a safe way. It is only when freak incidents occur, the plane crashes or the car impacts and ruptures the petrol tank, that we see the danger and the flames. Exactly the same reasoning and principles apply with the tower cladding. It may have been known to be flammable (like the JET A1), but it was still used because it was thought to be safe under the circumstances in which it was put to use.

You have this habit of revisiting the incident and applying what you have learnt as a result of it to an earlier time. You then criticise with the benefit of hindsight.

I am not trying to defend anyone. All I am saying is that we should be fair to the designers, engineers and planners and judge them on what they knew at the time the decision to install the panels was taken.
.the fuel in aeroplanes and cars . is a good analogy, there is always a risk and reward in play. One of the factors in the introduction of diesel fuel into domestic cars, was the perception that it was less likely to ignite in a fault situation. Again hazard management would be about substituting a less risky for a more risky alternative.
Hazard rating equals probability of event X severity of consequence.
Had those types of panel been bolted securely to an inert concrete wall, there would have been little opportunity for ignition, but they were not.. and in that, the fault lies with the specifier. As the designer they are expected to consider possibilities not immediately obvious. The building regs or other codes of practice, where available, act as a Valid defense, but not an absolute one. Professionals are expected to use expert judgement,
The building regs do not include an instruction not to pour kerosine down the sides of buildings , why?
 

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
This was my original sentence: "Well if you worked in a design department, you will know that cost is one of, if not the most important, design consideration."

Could you point out where I suggested that cost is THE ONLY criterion in an R&D department? I've looked but I can only find where I have said "one of" or "the most" important factor, never the only. Are you able to help?


Cost is exactly as I have stated. If the thing is going to cost too much, it doesn't get made.

As for the rest of your post, design being a consideration of a multitude of factors is what I have been saying repeatedly right from the outset.

I'm not sure what you are getting at with Design 101. Is that an attempt to insult me? Why would you want to do that? Are you insecure?
I value my insecurities, they are what make me..
We are approaching engineering design from opposite view points. In my universe, the primary requirement is that the product or process functions, if it does not the company gets mired in extensive and expensive lawsuits. Next is will the client or public wear the cost, if not can they be induced to by making the product more attractive and then can we make enough of them to be profitable. Linked into this is a whole family of product certification, test design, diagnostic tools etc.
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
It would appear as many suspect that the Daily Mail is working for some enemy state with revelations like this one
"The Royal Navy's largest ever warship squeezed under the Forth Bridge late last night after the captain had to wait for the right tide. HMS Queen Elizabeth (right and inset), which weighs 65,000 tonnes, made its way under the iconic bridge in Scotland just before midnight (left). But fears were raised last night that Britain's new aircraft carrier could be vulnerable to a cyber-attack after it emerged the ship was still using the outdated computer software used by the NHS. Navy chiefs boasted the defence system on the UK's biggest ever warship, the HMS Queen Elizabeth, will be NASA standard - rather than like the NHS system that was hacked into several months ago. But computers in the flying control room on the £3.1billion state-of-the-art carrier showed the system was still running on Windows XP. The vast majority of NHS computers hit by a global cyber-attack in May this year were running Windows XP, which can have serious security flaws."

I'm sure this has brightened Mr Putin's morning.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

Croxden

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 26, 2013
2,134
1,384
North Staffs
Some work gone into that production, if only the same effort went into government.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and flecc

Advertisers