Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 16:08:29 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 10:57:20 -0000 (UTC)
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:03:17 +0100
>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-03-18 10:23:41 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>>>> They do, driver presses the other button.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fair enough. Just sounds like something else to go wrong and delay the
>>>>> service
>>>>>> though.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's decades since I've been on a passenger coach with a manual
>>>>> passenger door, tough they were once commonplace, so obviously the
>>>>> ability to make reliable opening and closing mechanisms for coach doors
>>>>> exists to the extent that the manual varieties that used to exist have
>>>>> been discontinued.
>>>>
>>>> We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a luggage
>>>> compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god knows how
>>>> many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress than a door
>>>> that simply rotates or slides horizontally.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> And yet, every modern coach has them. How strange.
>>
>> Well its good to know that ubiquity means reliability.
>
> They use a simple mechanism, which works reliably. They're much simpler than train doors.

Or indeed than the passenger doors on coaches, which our Wacky friend seems
to think are bound to be inherently more reliable.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:

> It's decades since I've been on a passenger coach with a manual
> passenger door, tough they were once commonplace, so obviously the
> ability to make reliable opening and closing mechanisms for coach doors
> exists to the extent that the manual varieties that used to exist have
> been discontinued.
>
> Robin
ISTR the driver moving something not dissimilar to a Railway point lever
alongside his seat which worked a sliding door on the old coaches that
provided our “bus” service.

GH

Marland <gemehabal@btinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>
>> It's decades since I've been on a passenger coach with a manual
>> passenger door, tough they were once commonplace, so obviously the
>> ability to make reliable opening and closing mechanisms for coach doors
>> exists to the extent that the manual varieties that used to exist have
>> been discontinued.
>>
>> Robin
> ISTR the driver moving something not dissimilar to a Railway point lever
> alongside his seat which worked a sliding door on the old coaches that
> provided our “bus” service.

Yes! On a Bedford OB belonging to Whiteways of Waufawr.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:06:50 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 16:08:29 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 10:57:20 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:03:17 +0100
>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2022-03-18 10:23:41 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>>>>> They do, driver presses the other button.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fair enough. Just sounds like something else to go wrong and delay the
>>>>>> service
>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's decades since I've been on a passenger coach with a manual
>>>>>> passenger door, tough they were once commonplace, so obviously the
>>>>>> ability to make reliable opening and closing mechanisms for coach doors
>>>>>> exists to the extent that the manual varieties that used to exist have
>>>>>> been discontinued.
>>>>>
>>>>> We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a luggage
>>>>> compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god knows how
>>>>> many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress than a door
>>>>> that simply rotates or slides horizontally.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And yet, every modern coach has them. How strange.
>>>
>>> Well its good to know that ubiquity means reliability.
>>
>> They use a simple mechanism, which works reliably. They're much simpler than
>train doors.
>
>Or indeed than the passenger doors on coaches, which our Wacky friend seems
>to think are bound to be inherently more reliable.

In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
knowledge of them so fill us in.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:06:50 -0000 (UTC)
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 16:08:29 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 10:57:20 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:03:17 +0100
>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-03-18 10:23:41 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>>>>>> They do, driver presses the other button.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fair enough. Just sounds like something else to go wrong and delay the
>>>>>>> service
>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's decades since I've been on a passenger coach with a manual
>>>>>>> passenger door, tough they were once commonplace, so obviously the
>>>>>>> ability to make reliable opening and closing mechanisms for coach doors
>>>>>>> exists to the extent that the manual varieties that used to exist have
>>>>>>> been discontinued.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a luggage
>>>>>> compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god knows how
>>>>>> many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress than a door
>>>>>> that simply rotates or slides horizontally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And yet, every modern coach has them. How strange.
>>>>
>>>> Well its good to know that ubiquity means reliability.
>>>
>>> They use a simple mechanism, which works reliably. They're much simpler than
>> train doors.
>>
>> Or indeed than the passenger doors on coaches, which our Wacky friend seems
>> to think are bound to be inherently more reliable.
>
> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>

Well, I do have two more engineering degrees than you do…

Mind you, the mechanism is so simple that even a complete novice like you
should be abe to figure it out.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:06:50 -0000 (UTC)
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 16:08:29 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 10:57:20 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:03:17 +0100
>>>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2022-03-18 10:23:41 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>>>>>> They do, driver presses the other button.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fair enough. Just sounds like something else to go wrong and delay the
>>>>>>> service
>>>>>>>> though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's decades since I've been on a passenger coach with a manual
>>>>>>> passenger door, tough they were once commonplace, so obviously the
>>>>>>> ability to make reliable opening and closing mechanisms for coach doors
>>>>>>> exists to the extent that the manual varieties that used to exist have
>>>>>>> been discontinued.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a luggage
>>>>>> compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god knows how
>>>>>> many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress than a door
>>>>>> that simply rotates or slides horizontally.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And yet, every modern coach has them. How strange.
>>>>
>>>> Well its good to know that ubiquity means reliability.
>>>
>>> They use a simple mechanism, which works reliably. They're much simpler than
>> train doors.
>>
>> Or indeed than the passenger doors on coaches, which our Wacky friend seems
>> to think are bound to be inherently more reliable.
>
> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
> knowledge of them so fill us in.

No in depth engineering knowledge of bus and coach construction, but I note
that the luggage doors don’t have windows or the same degree of sound and
heat insulation, making them at least look like they’re much lighter
construction. I don’t know whether the locking mechanisms might be simpler
- possibly not because of the risk to other traffic of luggage falling out
en route rather than the risk to passengers of falling out.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 10:57:20 -0000 (UTC)
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:03:17 +0100
>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2022-03-18 10:23:41 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>>> They do, driver presses the other button.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fair enough. Just sounds like something else to go wrong and delay the
>>>> service
>>>>> though.
>>>>
>>>> It's decades since I've been on a passenger coach with a manual
>>>> passenger door, tough they were once commonplace, so obviously the
>>>> ability to make reliable opening and closing mechanisms for coach doors
>>>> exists to the extent that the manual varieties that used to exist have
>>>> been discontinued.
>>>
>>> We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a luggage
>>> compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god knows how
>>> many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress than a door
>>> that simply rotates or slides horizontally.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> And yet, every modern coach has them. How strange.
>
> Well its good to know that ubiquity means reliability.
>
>

If they were so chronically unreliable as you seem to think, presumably
they wouldn't be so common…

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:49:02 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:06:50 -0000 (UTC)
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> Or indeed than the passenger doors on coaches, which our Wacky friend seems
>>> to think are bound to be inherently more reliable.
>>
>> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
>> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>>
>
>Well, I do have two more engineering degrees than you do…

Oooh, look at you! Doesn't seem to help you follow threads however since I was
replying to Sam.

>Mind you, the mechanism is so simple that even a complete novice like you
>should be abe to figure it out.

And someone like you with no doubt 1st class degrees in stone wheel
construction and advanced flint knapping should have no problem explaining them.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:52:27 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
>> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>
>No in depth engineering knowledge of bus and coach construction, but I note
>that the luggage doors don’t have windows or the same degree of sound and
>heat insulation, making them at least look like they’re much lighter
>construction. I don’t know whether the locking mechanisms might be simpler
>- possibly not because of the risk to other traffic of luggage falling out
>en route rather than the risk to passengers of falling out.

Oh ok. So you were guessing.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:08:31 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 10:57:20 -0000 (UTC)
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 12:03:17 +0100
>>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-03-18 10:23:41 +0000, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com said:
>>>>>>> They do, driver presses the other button.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fair enough. Just sounds like something else to go wrong and delay the
>>>>> service
>>>>>> though.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's decades since I've been on a passenger coach with a manual
>>>>> passenger door, tough they were once commonplace, so obviously the
>>>>> ability to make reliable opening and closing mechanisms for coach doors
>>>>> exists to the extent that the manual varieties that used to exist have
>>>>> been discontinued.
>>>>
>>>> We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a luggage
>>>> compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god knows how
>>>> many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress than a door
>>>> that simply rotates or slides horizontally.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> And yet, every modern coach has them. How strange.
>>
>> Well its good to know that ubiquity means reliability.
>>
>>
>
>If they were so chronically unreliable as you seem to think, presumably
>they wouldn't be so common…

Reliability doesn't seem to be the main priority of a lot of vehicle builders
these days whether they run on roads or rails.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:52:27 -0000 (UTC)
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
>>> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>>
>> No in depth engineering knowledge of bus and coach construction, but I note
>> that the luggage doors don’t have windows or the same degree of sound and
>> heat insulation, making them at least look like they’re much lighter
>> construction. I don’t know whether the locking mechanisms might be simpler
>> - possibly not because of the risk to other traffic of luggage falling out
>> en route rather than the risk to passengers of falling out.
>
> Oh ok. So you were guessing.

Yes, based on observation. What were you basing your comment on when you
said, “We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a
luggage compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god
knows how many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress
than a door that simply rotates or slides horizontally.”?

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:49:02 -0000 (UTC)
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 22 Mar 2022 18:06:50 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> Or indeed than the passenger doors on coaches, which our Wacky friend seems
>>>> to think are bound to be inherently more reliable.
>>>
>>> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
>>> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I do have two more engineering degrees than you do…
>
> Oooh, look at you! Doesn't seem to help you follow threads however since I was
> replying to Sam.
>
>> Mind you, the mechanism is so simple that even a complete novice like you
>> should be abe to figure it out.
>
> And someone like you with no doubt 1st class degrees in stone wheel
> construction and advanced flint knapping should have no problem explaining them.
>

Neil, I know you're very simple, so here's a simple demonstration of how
they work. Note that there's no sliding, and the the trivially simple
lever-arm mechanism is entirely under cover, protected from the weather,
prying hands and even sunlight. The doors themselves are very lightweight
sheets.

https://youtu.be/v42YS-b_c0g

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>>>>>>> We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a luggage
>>>>>>> compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god knows how
>>>>>>> many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress than a door
>>>>>>> that simply rotates or slides horizontally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And yet, every modern coach has them. How strange.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well its good to know that ubiquity means reliability.
>>>>
>>>> They use a simple mechanism, which works reliably. They're much simpler than
>>> train doors.
>>>
>>> Or indeed than the passenger doors on coaches, which our Wacky friend seems
>>> to think are bound to be inherently more reliable.
>>
>> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
>> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>
> No in depth engineering knowledge of bus and coach construction, but I note
> that the luggage doors don’t have windows or the same degree of sound and
> heat insulation, making them at least look like they’re much lighter
> construction. I don’t know whether the locking mechanisms might be simpler
> - possibly not because of the risk to other traffic of luggage falling out
> en route rather than the risk to passengers of falling out.
>
> Sam

The actual mechanism isn’t that dissimilar to that fitted in some kitchen
designs that allow a high cabinet to be lowered so the contents can be
reached without standing on steps, with those they raise into the closed
position whereas the coach ones have gravity with them for the shut
position.

GH

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:35:07 -0000 (UTC)
Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:52:27 -0000 (UTC)
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
>>>> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>>>
>>> No in depth engineering knowledge of bus and coach construction, but I note
>>> that the luggage doors don’t have windows or the same degree of sound and
>>> heat insulation, making them at least look like they’re much lighter
>>> construction. I don’t know whether the locking mechanisms might be
>simpler
>>> - possibly not because of the risk to other traffic of luggage falling out
>>> en route rather than the risk to passengers of falling out.
>>
>> Oh ok. So you were guessing.
>
>Yes, based on observation. What were you basing your comment on when you
>said, “We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a
>luggage compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god
>knows how many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress
>than a door that simply rotates or slides horizontally.”?

If you raise something you're working against gravity unless there's a
counterweight - which I doubt. Which means the mechanism has to work harder
than if its just swinging a door in a semicircle.

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:38:27 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> Oooh, look at you! Doesn't seem to help you follow threads however since I
>was
>> replying to Sam.
>>
>>> Mind you, the mechanism is so simple that even a complete novice like you
>>> should be abe to figure it out.
>>
>> And someone like you with no doubt 1st class degrees in stone wheel
>> construction and advanced flint knapping should have no problem explaining
>them.
>>
>
>Neil, I know you're very simple, so here's a simple demonstration of how
>they work. Note that there's no sliding, and the the trivially simple
>lever-arm mechanism is entirely under cover, protected from the weather,
>prying hands and even sunlight. The doors themselves are very lightweight
>sheets.
>
>https://youtu.be/v42YS-b_c0g

Not sure how it negates anything I said but whatever. Parts of it look
distinctly flimsy. I doubt those thin guide arms would survive too many
encounters with solid heavy suitcases before trouble ensued.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:35:07 -0000 (UTC)
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:52:27 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
>>>>> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>>>>
>>>> No in depth engineering knowledge of bus and coach construction, but I note
>>>> that the luggage doors don’t have windows or the same degree of sound and
>>>> heat insulation, making them at least look like they’re much lighter
>>>> construction. I don’t know whether the locking mechanisms might be
>> simpler
>>>> - possibly not because of the risk to other traffic of luggage falling out
>>>> en route rather than the risk to passengers of falling out.
>>>
>>> Oh ok. So you were guessing.
>>
>> Yes, based on observation. What were you basing your comment on when you
>> said, “We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a
>> luggage compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god
>> knows how many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress
>> than a door that simply rotates or slides horizontally.”?
>
> If you raise something you're working against gravity unless there's a
> counterweight - which I doubt. Which means the mechanism has to work harder
> than if its just swinging a door in a semicircle.

Moot if the thing that’s working against gravity is light and the swinging
thing is heavy.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:35:07 -0000 (UTC)
>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:52:27 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
>>>>>> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>>>>>
>>>>> No in depth engineering knowledge of bus and coach construction, but I note
>>>>> that the luggage doors don’t have windows or the same degree of sound and
>>>>> heat insulation, making them at least look like they’re much lighter
>>>>> construction. I don’t know whether the locking mechanisms might be
>>> simpler
>>>>> - possibly not because of the risk to other traffic of luggage falling out
>>>>> en route rather than the risk to passengers of falling out.
>>>>
>>>> Oh ok. So you were guessing.
>>>
>>> Yes, based on observation. What were you basing your comment on when you
>>> said, “We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a
>>> luggage compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god
>>> knows how many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress
>>> than a door that simply rotates or slides horizontally.”?
>>
>> If you raise something you're working against gravity unless there's a
>> counterweight - which I doubt. Which means the mechanism has to work harder
>> than if its just swinging a door in a semicircle.
>
> Moot if the thing that’s working against gravity is light and the swinging
> thing is heavy.

… and if the thing working against gravity could be balanced by
counterweights or springs.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:35:07 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:52:27 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> In what way are they simpler then? Clearly you have in depth engineering
>>>>>>> knowledge of them so fill us in.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No in depth engineering knowledge of bus and coach construction, but I note
>>>>>> that the luggage doors don’t have windows or the same degree of sound and
>>>>>> heat insulation, making them at least look like they’re much lighter
>>>>>> construction. I don’t know whether the locking mechanisms might be
>>>> simpler
>>>>>> - possibly not because of the risk to other traffic of luggage falling out
>>>>>> en route rather than the risk to passengers of falling out.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh ok. So you were guessing.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, based on observation. What were you basing your comment on when you
>>>> said, “We're not talking about a passenger door, we're talking about a
>>>> luggage compartment which has to raise a large door gullwing style god
>>>> knows how many times a day. The mechanism will be under far more stress
>>>> than a door that simply rotates or slides horizontally.”?
>>>
>>> If you raise something you're working against gravity unless there's a
>>> counterweight - which I doubt. Which means the mechanism has to work harder
>>> than if its just swinging a door in a semicircle.
>>
>> Moot if the thing that’s working against gravity is light and the swinging
>> thing is heavy.
>
> … and if the thing working against gravity could be balanced by
> counterweights or springs.

That would certainly be possible with coach hold doors, but they're
probably not heavy enough to bother. For example, they could have an air
strut to partially balance the weight, which might be useful to help manual
operation if the power operation fails for any reason.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:38:27 -0000 (UTC)
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> Oooh, look at you! Doesn't seem to help you follow threads however since I
>> was
>>> replying to Sam.
>>>
>>>> Mind you, the mechanism is so simple that even a complete novice like you
>>>> should be abe to figure it out.
>>>
>>> And someone like you with no doubt 1st class degrees in stone wheel
>>> construction and advanced flint knapping should have no problem explaining
>> them.
>>>
>>
>> Neil, I know you're very simple, so here's a simple demonstration of how
>> they work. Note that there's no sliding, and the the trivially simple
>> lever-arm mechanism is entirely under cover, protected from the weather,
>> prying hands and even sunlight. The doors themselves are very lightweight
>> sheets.
>>
>> https://youtu.be/v42YS-b_c0g
>
> Not sure how it negates anything I said but whatever. Parts of it look
> distinctly flimsy. I doubt those thin guide arms would survive too many
> encounters with solid heavy suitcases before trouble ensued.
>
>

And yet…

Anna Noyd-Dryver

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:38:27 -0000 (UTC)
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> Oooh, look at you! Doesn't seem to help you follow threads however since I
>> was
>>> replying to Sam.
>>>
>>>> Mind you, the mechanism is so simple that even a complete novice like you
>>>> should be abe to figure it out.
>>>
>>> And someone like you with no doubt 1st class degrees in stone wheel
>>> construction and advanced flint knapping should have no problem explaining
>> them.
>>>
>>
>> Neil, I know you're very simple, so here's a simple demonstration of how
>> they work. Note that there's no sliding, and the the trivially simple
>> lever-arm mechanism is entirely under cover, protected from the weather,
>> prying hands and even sunlight. The doors themselves are very lightweight
>> sheets.
>>
>> https://youtu.be/v42YS-b_c0g
>
> Not sure how it negates anything I said but whatever. Parts of it look
> distinctly flimsy.

Sez the crazy man who would use gullwing doors for the holds!

> I doubt those thin guide arms would survive too many
> encounters with solid heavy suitcases before trouble ensued.

Do you really think the manufacturers of hold doors know even less about
them than the man who's apparently never even seen one open?

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 23:33:48 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> Not sure how it negates anything I said but whatever. Parts of it look
>> distinctly flimsy.
>
>Sez the crazy man who would use gullwing doors for the holds!

"Sez"? You trying to get down with the kids grandpa? Anyway, the luggage doors
on my school buses opened like that. I haven't been on a coach in 30 years
so obviously things have changed.

>> I doubt those thin guide arms would survive too many
>> encounters with solid heavy suitcases before trouble ensued.
>
>Do you really think the manufacturers of hold doors know even less about
>them than the man who's apparently never even seen one open?

I do know buses are built to a price like every other vehicle. They'll make
them strong enough to last beyond the warranty period and thats it.

On 24/03/2022 16:30, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 23:33:48 -0000 (UTC)
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> Not sure how it negates anything I said but whatever. Parts of it look
>>> distinctly flimsy.
>>
>> Sez the crazy man who would use gullwing doors for the holds!
>
> "Sez"? You trying to get down with the kids grandpa? Anyway, the luggage doors
> on my school buses opened like that. I haven't been on a coach in 30 years
> so obviously things have changed.
>
>>> I doubt those thin guide arms would survive too many
>>> encounters with solid heavy suitcases before trouble ensued.
>>
>> Do you really think the manufacturers of hold doors know even less about
>> them than the man who's apparently never even seen one open?
>
> I do know buses are built to a price like every other vehicle. They'll make
> them strong enough to last beyond the warranty period and thats it.
>

Must be good warranties then, buses tend to last quite a long time.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 24/03/2022 16:30, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 23:33:48 -0000 (UTC)
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> Not sure how it negates anything I said but whatever. Parts of it look
>>>> distinctly flimsy.
>>>
>>> Sez the crazy man who would use gullwing doors for the holds!
>>
>> "Sez"? You trying to get down with the kids grandpa? Anyway, the luggage doors
>> on my school buses opened like that. I haven't been on a coach in 30 years
>> so obviously things have changed.
>>
>>>> I doubt those thin guide arms would survive too many
>>>> encounters with solid heavy suitcases before trouble ensued.
>>>
>>> Do you really think the manufacturers of hold doors know even less about
>>> them than the man who's apparently never even seen one open?
>>
>> I do know buses are built to a price like every other vehicle. They'll make
>> them strong enough to last beyond the warranty period and thats it.
>>
>
> Must be good warranties then, buses tend to last quite a long time.
>

I've had luggage carried in coach holds all over the world, in coaches
built in many countries, and the hold doors have never been a problem.
Coaches do seem to be pretty reliable machines.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 23:33:48 -0000 (UTC)
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> Not sure how it negates anything I said but whatever. Parts of it look
>>> distinctly flimsy.
>>
>> Sez the crazy man who would use gullwing doors for the holds!
>
> "Sez"? You trying to get down with the kids grandpa? Anyway, the luggage doors
> on my school buses opened like that. I haven't been on a coach in 30 years
> so obviously things have changed.
>
>>> I doubt those thin guide arms would survive too many
>>> encounters with solid heavy suitcases before trouble ensued.
>>
>> Do you really think the manufacturers of hold doors know even less about
>> them than the man who's apparently never even seen one open?
>
> I do know buses are built to a price like every other vehicle. They'll make
> them strong enough to last beyond the warranty period and thats it.
>
>

Surely if they all broke immediately after the warranty expired, operators
would soon enough start ordering vehicles without?

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Fri, 25 Mar 2022 12:46:29 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 23:33:48 -0000 (UTC)
>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> Not sure how it negates anything I said but whatever. Parts of it look
>>>> distinctly flimsy.
>>>
>>> Sez the crazy man who would use gullwing doors for the holds!
>>
>> "Sez"? You trying to get down with the kids grandpa? Anyway, the luggage
>doors
>> on my school buses opened like that. I haven't been on a coach in 30 years
>> so obviously things have changed.
>>
>>>> I doubt those thin guide arms would survive too many
>>>> encounters with solid heavy suitcases before trouble ensued.
>>>
>>> Do you really think the manufacturers of hold doors know even less about
>>> them than the man who's apparently never even seen one open?
>>
>> I do know buses are built to a price like every other vehicle. They'll make
>> them strong enough to last beyond the warranty period and thats it.
>>
>>
>
>Surely if they all broke immediately after the warranty expired, operators
>would soon enough start ordering vehicles without?

How long do you reckon the average bus would last without regular maintenance
at the depot?