The return of the paternoster.... sort of
 

http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs...tml?source=rss

No old-style paternosters are now being installed new anywhere in the world.

The return of the paternoster.... sort of
 

John Rowland wrote:
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs...tml?source=rss

So, how long until the first lift collision, if cars are able to move
independently in the same shaft, one wonders?

Neil

The return of the paternoster.... sort of
 

Neil Williams wrote in message
:

John Rowland wrote:
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs...tml?source=rss

So, how long until the first lift collision, if cars are able to move
independently in the same shaft, one wonders?

But that "can't happen" because there's "A sophisticated computer program
and sensors [which] monitor the location of the cars and prevents cars still
in motion from crashing into cars that have stopped to accommodate
passengers."

Yeah, right. Would you trust it?

The return of the paternoster.... sort of
 

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 15:01:14 +0100, Martin Underwood wrote:

So, how long until the first lift collision, if cars are able to move
independently in the same shaft, one wonders?

But that "can't happen" because there's "A sophisticated computer program
and sensors [which] monitor the location of the cars and prevents cars still
in motion from crashing into cars that have stopped to accommodate
passengers."

Yeah, right. Would you trust it?

Ever been on the DLR? Did you trust it?

The return of the paternoster.... sort of
 

asdf wrote:

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 15:01:14 +0100, Martin Underwood wrote:

So, how long until the first lift collision, if cars are able to move
independently in the same shaft, one wonders?

But that "can't happen" because there's "A sophisticated computer program
and sensors [which] monitor the location of the cars and prevents cars still
in motion from crashing into cars that have stopped to accommodate
passengers."

Yeah, right. Would you trust it?

Ever been on the DLR? Did you trust it?

Perhaps the first installation of these new paternoster lifts will
'work' like the early days of the DLR, when the automatic systems
decided - on a fairly frequent basis - that they were on a go slow. In
which case the occupants of such a building would be better off taking
the stairs - so I wonder if this is not some kind of conspiracy to get
the bulging masses to do some excercise?

The return of the paternoster.... sort of
 

Mizter T wrote:

Perhaps the first installation of these new paternoster lifts will
'work' like the early days of the DLR, when the automatic systems
decided - on a fairly frequent basis - that they were on a go slow.

It appeared to be doing that on Monday, which nearly resulted in me
missing my flight - or, it would have done, if my flight hadn't been an
hour late anyway due to no apparent reason...

Neil

The return of the paternoster.... sort of
 

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 15:16:30 +0100, asdf
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 15:01:14 +0100, Martin Underwood wrote:

So, how long until the first lift collision, if cars are able to move
independently in the same shaft, one wonders?

But that "can't happen" because there's "A sophisticated computer program
and sensors [which] monitor the location of the cars and prevents cars still
in motion from crashing into cars that have stopped to accommodate
passengers."

Yeah, right. Would you trust it?

Ever been on the DLR? Did you trust it?

A better analogy would be "Ever been on the Victoria Line? Did you
trust it?", since that is a "closed system" just like this lift shaft
would be. So, minimal outside interference like rain changing stopping
distances or yobs putting concrete on the track. The lift shaft can
have sensors on any maintenance doors that can shut it down if anyone
has entered the working areas and possibly interfered. Therefore it
becomes an extremely easy task to write the program for and thoroughly
test, because you can work out all the possible outcomes and program
and test for them.

So I would certainly trust it.

The return of the paternoster.... sort of
 

Peter Frimberley wrote:

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 15:16:30 +0100, asdf
wrote:

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 15:01:14 +0100, Martin Underwood wrote:

So, how long until the first lift collision, if cars are able to move
independently in the same shaft, one wonders?

But that "can't happen" because there's "A sophisticated computer program
and sensors [which] monitor the location of the cars and prevents cars still
in motion from crashing into cars that have stopped to accommodate
passengers."

Yeah, right. Would you trust it?

Ever been on the DLR? Did you trust it?

A better analogy would be "Ever been on the Victoria Line? Did you
trust it?", since that is a "closed system" just like this lift shaft
would be. So, minimal outside interference like rain changing stopping
distances or yobs putting concrete on the track. The lift shaft can
have sensors on any maintenance doors that can shut it down if anyone
has entered the working areas and possibly interfered. Therefore it
becomes an extremely easy task to write the program for and thoroughly
test, because you can work out all the possible outcomes and program
and test for them.

So I would certainly trust it.

It doesn't make any difference to your argument but I was just
wondering how many Victoria line passengers are aware their trains are
being driven automatically - I suspect it's really not that many.