I watched Grand Designs tonight. It was the one about the couple who built a 'longhouse' in a remote part of Derbyshire. The building was entirely clad in metal, so inside aerials wouldn't have worked. There didn't appear to be an outside aerial or dish. The place was extremely remote so I doubt if it had fast internet. The inhabitants included two grannies, who would presumably have wanted to watch the telly now and then. But no tellys were in evidence.

On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 20:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
"wrightsaerials@aol.com" <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:

> The inhabitants included two grannies, who would presumably have
> wanted to watch the telly now and then.

Your presumption may be erroneous. My brother only watches 'telly' when
his wife does, he wouldn't bother on his own.

--
Davey.

On 29/09/2022 04:29, wrightsaerials@aol.com wrote:
> I watched Grand Designs tonight. It was the one about the couple who built a 'longhouse' in a remote part of Derbyshire. The building was entirely clad in metal, so inside aerials wouldn't have worked. There didn't appear to be an outside aerial or dish. The place was extremely remote so I doubt if it had fast internet. The inhabitants included two grannies, who would presumably have wanted to watch the telly now and then. But no tellys were in evidence.
I watched it, it didn't cross my mind, but it's a good point.

Often on Grand Designs, after all the effort and procrastination about
finishes and 'look', you'll see a telly, mounted far too high up, and
with all its cables messily on display.

Same with wall lights <face palm>

The other thing that annoys about the programme, is they jump for the
stage where the place is just about water tight, to the finished and
moved in stage.
I can tell you from personal experience, a very interesting and
challenging stage happens in that gap !

On 29/09/2022 08:15, Mark Carver wrote:
> On 29/09/2022 04:29, wrightsaerials@aol.com wrote:
>> I watched Grand Designs tonight. It was the one about the couple who
>> built a 'longhouse' in a remote part of Derbyshire. The building was
>> entirely clad in metal, so inside aerials wouldn't have worked. There
>> didn't appear to be an outside aerial or dish. The place was extremely
>> remote so I doubt if it had fast internet. The inhabitants included
>> two grannies, who would presumably have wanted to watch the telly now
>> and then. But no tellys were in evidence.
> I watched it, it didn't cross my mind, but it's a good point.
>
> Often on Grand Designs, after all the effort and procrastination about
> finishes and 'look', you'll see a telly, mounted far too high up, and
> with all its cables messily on display.
>
> Same with wall lights <face palm>
>
> The other thing that annoys about the programme, is they jump for the
> stage where the place is just about water tight, to the finished and
> moved in stage.
> I can tell you from personal experience, a very interesting and
> challenging stage happens in that gap !

Given that so many people on that program seem to run out of money or
have to take on a mortgage to cover the over spend I often wonder how
much it costs to heat some of those open plan 20 foot ceiling houses in
winter, and with so much plate glass keep them cool in summer.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

Well not much point me watching those sort of shows, however, you do not
know when it was done. It could have been before the final bits were done.
However the smart way would have been to have wired in all the services like
TV and internet as you did the inside finishes. Maybe all the TV was on
Cable. Unless you looked around the area, you would not really know how
close the local node might be. There might be an industrial estate just
around the corner.
There have been many times in shows like that you wanted to ask
supplemental questions. I well remember that one on an island in the Thames
that floated if the tide got too high, one wonders how much maintenance
would be needed to keep that working!

Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"wrightsaerials@aol.com" <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote in message
news:2625e0c7-7660-4338-bf05-721a15c21b50n@googlegroups.com...
I watched Grand Designs tonight. It was the one about the couple who built a
'longhouse' in a remote part of Derbyshire. The building was entirely clad
in metal, so inside aerials wouldn't have worked. There didn't appear to be
an outside aerial or dish. The place was extremely remote so I doubt if it
had fast internet. The inhabitants included two grannies, who would
presumably have wanted to watch the telly now and then. But no tellys were
in evidence.

Yes the problem is that they only have a certain time slot,and have to make
it watchable. Some of the processes are as interesting as watching paint, or
render dry, so they skip them.
Have you ever noticed how they nearly always go over budget, nobody
really says what happens in that case, my guess is they sell it and start up
somewhere else while its still looking good, so I stopped watching, or
listening to it,as they all seemed to run to a formula.
Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Mark Carver" <mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:jpkv01FoiavU2@mid.individual.net...
> On 29/09/2022 04:29, wrightsaerials@aol.com wrote:
>> I watched Grand Designs tonight. It was the one about the couple who
>> built a 'longhouse' in a remote part of Derbyshire. The building was
>> entirely clad in metal, so inside aerials wouldn't have worked. There
>> didn't appear to be an outside aerial or dish. The place was extremely
>> remote so I doubt if it had fast internet. The inhabitants included two
>> grannies, who would presumably have wanted to watch the telly now and
>> then. But no tellys were in evidence.
> I watched it, it didn't cross my mind, but it's a good point.
>
> Often on Grand Designs, after all the effort and procrastination about
> finishes and 'look', you'll see a telly, mounted far too high up, and with
> all its cables messily on display.
>
> Same with wall lights <face palm>
>
> The other thing that annoys about the programme, is they jump for the
> stage where the place is just about water tight, to the finished and moved
> in stage.
> I can tell you from personal experience, a very interesting and
> challenging stage happens in that gap !
>
>
>

On 29/09/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff wrote:
> Yes the problem is that they only have a certain time slot,and have to make
> it watchable. Some of the processes are as interesting as watching paint, or
> render dry, so they skip them.

The equivalent of the Blue Peter "here is one we made earlier".

There is a lot of fakery, a friend knew someone went on one of the
programmes where they find people an "ideal home". He never had any
intention of moving and sure the programme people making the programme
know that.

On 29/09/2022 08:50, Brian Gaff wrote:

> There have been many times in shows like that you wanted to ask
> supplemental questions. I well remember that one on an island in the Thames
> that floated if the tide got too high, one wonders how much maintenance
> would be needed to keep that working!

I remember that one and thought the same myself. Get some oil from a
passing boat floating on the water's surface and being trapped in their
(enclosed) basin and and how do you clean it off to get rid of the
stink. Narrow spaces with near still water seem to be a magnet for rubbish.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On 29/09/2022 09:07, MB wrote:
> On 29/09/2022 08:54, Brian Gaff wrote:
>> Yes the problem is that they only have a certain time slot,and have to
>> make
>> it watchable. Some of the processes are as interesting as watching
>> paint, or
>> render dry, so they skip them.
>
>
>
> The equivalent of the Blue Peter "here is one we made earlier".
>
> There is a lot of fakery, a friend knew someone went on one of the
> programmes where they find people an "ideal home".  He never had any
> intention of moving and sure the programme people making the programme
> know that.

But still probably better than some of the American reality programs.

A _very_ rare item appeared on 3 different programs made by the same
production company. In one program the item was randomly found in a
"collectors" junk yard, in another it was purchased sight unseen in a
lock-up disposal auction (lock-up contents purchased for $100s but with
a fictitious profit of $1000s) and the in the third it was brought in
for restoration by someone who had it in the family for generations.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Thursday, 29 September 2022 at 08:13:05 UTC+1, Davey wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 20:29:22 -0700 (PDT)
> "wrights...@aol.com" <wrights...@f2s.com> wrote:
>
> > The inhabitants included two grannies, who would presumably have
> > wanted to watch the telly now and then.
> Your presumption may be erroneous. My brother only watches 'telly' when
> his wife does, he wouldn't bother on his own.
>
> --
> Davey.
Two grannies? What are the chances? When I worked on sheltered housing the number of grannies without a TV was zero.

Bill

On 29/09/2022 04:29, wrightsaerials@aol.com wrote:
> I watched Grand Designs tonight. It was the one about the couple who built a 'longhouse' in a remote part of Derbyshire. The building was entirely clad in metal, so inside aerials wouldn't have worked. There didn't appear to be an outside aerial or dish. The place was extremely remote so I doubt if it had fast internet. The inhabitants included two grannies, who would presumably have wanted to watch the telly now and then. But no tellys were in evidence.

What are the chances of a clutch of contributors to this NG watching the
same prog??? I did as well......

Broadband is not an issue these days. Chances are there would be a cell
mast nearby. A friend of mine lives in a hamlet not far from Jerveaux
Abbey. His landline B/B was 1Mb on a good day. He contacted
SuperfastNorthYorkshire who gave him some contacts. Eventually EE came
and erected a panel antenna on the non-visible side of his property,
installed a cellular router and bingo, he had 20Mb (or was it 40Mb?) off
a cell mast four miles away in Masham.

Being of Derbyshire origin I know there are thin places but this guy was
not lost in the bottom of a deep valley (and there's plenty of them!)
but half way up a hillside and I would guess within LoS to at least
couple of masts!

On Thu, 29 Sep 2022 08:15:13 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>On 29/09/2022 04:29, wrightsaerials@aol.com wrote:
>> I watched Grand Designs tonight. It was the one about the couple who built a 'longhouse' in a remote part of Derbyshire. The building was entirely clad in metal, so inside aerials wouldn't have worked. There didn't appear to be an outside aerial or dish. The place was extremely remote so I doubt if it had fast internet. The inhabitants included two grannies, who would presumably have wanted to watch the telly now and then. But no tellys were in evidence.
>I watched it, it didn't cross my mind, but it's a good point.
>
>Often on Grand Designs, after all the effort and procrastination about
>finishes and 'look', you'll see a telly, mounted far too high up, and
>with all its cables messily on display.
>
>Same with wall lights <face palm>
>
>The other thing that annoys about the programme, is they jump for the
>stage where the place is just about water tight, to the finished and
>moved in stage.
>I can tell you from personal experience, a very interesting and
>challenging stage happens in that gap !
>
The first few series were very much about the construction, but then
many of the techniques being used were unusual or 'experimental' (as
Kevin said), things like undefloor heating, high levels of
insullation, wiring for remote control of lighting, curtains etc, and
how many times can they show that in an interesting way? I get the
impression that what is broadcast distills the essence of what ws
filmed and that most of the work isn't seen by the cameras.
(Just watched the latest GD Australia, a house made of three domes
than cost just over double the estimate.)

On 30/09/2022 09:09, Peter Johnson wrote:
> The first few series were very much about the construction, but then
> many of the techniques being used were unusual or 'experimental' (as
> Kevin said), things like undefloor heating, high levels of
> insullation, wiring for remote control of lighting, curtains etc, and
> how many times can they show that in an interesting way? I get the
> impression that what is broadcast distills the essence of what ws
> filmed and that most of the work isn't seen by the cameras.
> (Just watched the latest GD Australia, a house made of three domes
> than cost just over double the estimate.)

Our Clerk at Works had a low opinion of architects, probably because he
had to spend a lot of time sorting out their mistakes - I think he said
he would not trust most to build a cow shed.

He said that when one came up from Head Office for a site visit, he
would make a slight detour off the A9 and show them a beautiful new
house. He would then explain that no architect was involved in its
design or build, it was built by a man who spent every day digging
ditches with his JCB.

MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 30/09/2022 09:09, Peter Johnson wrote:
>> The first few series were very much about the construction, but then
>> many of the techniques being used were unusual or 'experimental' (as
>> Kevin said), things like undefloor heating, high levels of
>> insullation, wiring for remote control of lighting, curtains etc, and
>> how many times can they show that in an interesting way? I get the
>> impression that what is broadcast distills the essence of what ws
>> filmed and that most of the work isn't seen by the cameras.
>> (Just watched the latest GD Australia, a house made of three domes
>> than cost just over double the estimate.)
>
>
>
> Our Clerk at Works had a low opinion of architects, probably because he
> had to spend a lot of time sorting out their mistakes - I think he said
> he would not trust most to build a cow shed.
>
> He said that when one came up from Head Office for a site visit, he
> would make a slight detour off the A9 and show them a beautiful new
> house. He would then explain that no architect was involved in its
> design or build, it was built by a man who spent every day digging
> ditches with his JCB.
>
>
My impression of most GD builds is that they end up with cavernous spaces,
with hard materials everywhere and are far from being cozy comfortable
living spaces.

On 30/09/2022 10:24, MB wrote:
> On 30/09/2022 09:09, Peter Johnson wrote:
>> The first few series were very much about the construction, but then
>> many of the techniques being used were unusual or 'experimental' (as
>> Kevin said), things like undefloor heating, high levels of
>> insullation, wiring for remote control of lighting, curtains etc, and
>> how many times can they show that in an interesting way? I get the
>> impression that what is broadcast distills the essence of what ws
>> filmed and that most of the work isn't seen by the cameras.
>> (Just watched the latest GD Australia, a house made of three domes
>> than cost just over double the estimate.)
>
>
>
> Our Clerk at Works had a low opinion of architects, probably because
> he had to spend a lot of time sorting out their mistakes - I think he
> said he would not trust most to build a cow shed.
>
> He said that when one came up from Head Office for a site visit, he
> would make a slight detour off the A9 and show them a beautiful new
> house.  He would then explain that no architect was involved in its
> design or build, it was built by a man who spent every day digging
> ditches with his JCB.
>
Depends of course what you're trying to build, but if it's a run of the
mill build with nothing revolutionary, the most useful thing about an
architect is often their relationship with the local planning dept, and
getting notification of any issues before the council publish their
verdict. I spent less than 1% of total build cost on the architect.
They only produce 5 or 6 drawings, and only one or two of those get
printed out by the builder (A3 size if you're lucky) and sellotaped to
something vertical on the site.

Get a decent builder that has good relationships with the local
architects, and also importantly with the local building control officer.

Easier said than done of course  !

On 30/09/2022 10:33, Tweed wrote:
> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 30/09/2022 09:09, Peter Johnson wrote:
>>> The first few series were very much about the construction, but then
>>> many of the techniques being used were unusual or 'experimental' (as
>>> Kevin said), things like undefloor heating, high levels of
>>> insullation, wiring for remote control of lighting, curtains etc, and
>>> how many times can they show that in an interesting way? I get the
>>> impression that what is broadcast distills the essence of what ws
>>> filmed and that most of the work isn't seen by the cameras.
>>> (Just watched the latest GD Australia, a house made of three domes
>>> than cost just over double the estimate.)
>>
>>
>> Our Clerk at Works had a low opinion of architects, probably because he
>> had to spend a lot of time sorting out their mistakes - I think he said
>> he would not trust most to build a cow shed.
>>
>> He said that when one came up from Head Office for a site visit, he
>> would make a slight detour off the A9 and show them a beautiful new
>> house. He would then explain that no architect was involved in its
>> design or build, it was built by a man who spent every day digging
>> ditches with his JCB.
>>
>>
> My impression of most GD builds is that they end up with cavernous spaces,
> with hard materials everywhere and are far from being cozy comfortable
> living spaces.
>
And almost death traps for young children. Odd, given the wife seems to
end up pregnant before the end of the build.
Funny that, now then who's the common person in every episode ? ;-)

On 30/09/2022 10:33, Tweed wrote:
> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>> On 30/09/2022 09:09, Peter Johnson wrote:
>>> The first few series were very much about the construction, but then
>>> many of the techniques being used were unusual or 'experimental' (as
>>> Kevin said), things like undefloor heating, high levels of
>>> insullation, wiring for remote control of lighting, curtains etc, and
>>> how many times can they show that in an interesting way? I get the
>>> impression that what is broadcast distills the essence of what ws
>>> filmed and that most of the work isn't seen by the cameras.
>>> (Just watched the latest GD Australia, a house made of three domes
>>> than cost just over double the estimate.)
>>
>>
>>
>> Our Clerk at Works had a low opinion of architects, probably because he
>> had to spend a lot of time sorting out their mistakes - I think he said
>> he would not trust most to build a cow shed.
>>
Architects aren't actually required to know how to build what they
design, just that what they specify can be built and work as intended.

Of course some architects try to duck even that by making the builder
responsible for delivering a workable result regardless of what's shown
in the plans and specifications.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

I've never watched the programme, it's not remotely my style of viewing,
but architects now ...

On 30/09/2022 12:12, Robin wrote:
>
> On 30/09/2022 10:33, Tweed wrote:
>>
>> MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Our Clerk at Works had a low opinion of architects, probably because he
>>> had to spend a lot of time sorting out their mistakes - I think he said
>>> he would not trust most to build a cow shed.
>
> Architects aren't actually required to know how to build what they
> design, just that what they specify can be built and work as intended.
>
> Of course some architects try to duck even that by making the builder
> responsible for delivering a workable result regardless of what's shown
> in the plans and specifications.

The last time I used an architect to come up with a design for anything,
I took one look at his plan for the bathroom and rejected it, on the
grounds that I had no desire to stand with my left leg in the toilet
when I was at the basin cleaning my teeth.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

In article <th6jm8$107bu$1@dont-email.me>,
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:

> The last time I used an architect to come up with a design for
> anything, I took one look at his plan for the bathroom and
> rejected it, on the grounds that I had no desire to stand with my
> left leg in the toilet when I was at the basin cleaning my teeth.

Bah Lefties.

Bet you'd have been fine with it had it been the right in the toilet.

:-)

Bob.

On 30/09/2022 12:50, Bob Latham wrote:
>
> In article <th6jm8$107bu$1@dont-email.me>,
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> The last time I used an architect to come up with a design for
>> anything, I took one look at his plan for the bathroom and
>> rejected it, on the grounds that I had no desire to stand with my
>> left leg in the toilet when I was at the basin cleaning my teeth.
>
> Bah Lefties.
>
> Bet you'd have been fine with it had it been the right in the toilet.
>
> :-)

Says the man who has claimed times beyond counting to have plonked me,
thus proving yet again what a shameless liar he is.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On 30/09/2022 10:33, Tweed wrote:
> My impression of most GD builds is that they end up with cavernous spaces,
> with hard materials everywhere and are far from being cozy comfortable
> living spaces.

Isn't it a general rule that architects build houses with a view to get
an award for it from other architects. If the budget is big enough, if
not then they throw up a house as cheaply as possible.

They often seem to buy nice old houses for themselves, the sort of place
most of us would choose to live if we could afford them.

On 30/09/2022 12:12, Robin wrote:
> Architects aren't actually required to know how to build what they
> design, just that what they specify can be built and work as intended.

Many fail to do even that, you can learn a lot about architects from
clerks of works!

In article <th6lie$10csg$1@dont-email.me>,
Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> On 30/09/2022 12:50, Bob Latham wrote:
> >
> > In article <th6jm8$107bu$1@dont-email.me>,
> > Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> The last time I used an architect to come up with a design for
> >> anything, I took one look at his plan for the bathroom and
> >> rejected it, on the grounds that I had no desire to stand with my
> >> left leg in the toilet when I was at the basin cleaning my teeth.
> >
> > Bah Lefties.
> >
> > Bet you'd have been fine with it had it been the right in the toilet.
> >
> > :-)

> Says the man who has claimed times beyond counting to have plonked
> me, thus proving yet again what a shameless liar he is.

Sense of humour failure?
I sometimes have a look in the bin in threads with no war.

Bob.

On 30/09/2022 14:37, Bob Latham wrote:
>
> In article <th6lie$10csg$1@dont-email.me>,
> Java Jive <java@evij.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> Says the man who has claimed times beyond counting to have plonked
>> me, thus proving yet again what a shameless liar he is.
>
> Sense of humour failure?

Yet another honesty failure on your part.

> I sometimes have a look in the bin in threads with no war.
Which are precisely the ones that could safely be ignored, so
unsurprisingly I, and probably no-one else, will believe you.

--

Fake news kills!

I may be contacted via the contact address given on my website:
www.macfh.co.uk

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 10:41:31 +0100, Mark Carver
<mark.carver@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>Depends of course what you're trying to build, but if it's a run of the
>mill build with nothing revolutionary, the most useful thing about an
>architect is often their relationship with the local planning dept, and
>getting notification of any issues before the council publish their
>verdict. I spent less than 1% of total build cost on the architect.
>They only produce 5 or 6 drawings, and only one or two of those get
>printed out by the builder (A3 size if you're lucky) and sellotaped to
>something vertical on the site.
>
>Get a decent builder that has good relationships with the local
>architects, and also importantly with the local building control officer.
>

A long time ago I read, in a newspaper, that a competent builder could
build a straightforward extension using the building control plans and
without the need for an architect.
So about ten years ago, when I wanted a straightforward extension I
followed that advice, paid a local guy for building control drawings
that the builder used to do the job. When it was completed I got a
completion certificate from BC. (It was a permitted development.)
If I was doing it now I might do it differently but at the time it was
what I wanted and I've been very satisfied with it.