transport ± design ± sustainability

Reducing Aviation’s Environmental Impacts One Kilo at a Time

A lot has changed since civil aviation first took off in 1911. For one thing aeroplane weight has increased from around 360kg (Sommer Biplane) to 276,000kg (Airbus 380). Similarly, from just a single passenger global passenger numbers are now forecast to reach 2.57 billion this year. Despite all these changes some things remain. Kerosene is still the favoured fuel and today with a price of $113 per barrel ($40 in 2002), fuel is not only driving the environmental debates the aviation industry faces, it is also profoundly shaping the planes we fly in.

Public debates about aircraft environmental impacts have typically focussed on cutting environmental impacts at the user stage, for example by flying less and offsetting carbon. Behind the scenes, a less well-aired approach to reducing environmental impacts starts with the planes themselves. Even from an historic perspective, aircraft manufacturers have been slowly making air travel more efficient. Looking at the main production models of the largest western airliner manufacturers over the past fifty years we can see significant savings in terms of kilo per passenger kilometre. This is consistently down from over 0.07 kg/person-kilometre in 1960, to less than half (43%) today.

One way efficiency has been delivered is reducing the mass of the planes, or light-weighting. Examples of this approach include reducing the weight of a seat or by using new technologies, and in particular, innovative materials that provide the same properties as currently but for less mass. A summary of some of these approaches in use today and in the near future is below.

But what comes next? Set up in 2001, the Advisory Council for Aeronautical Research in Europe (ACARE) has set targets for European aircraft manufacturers to reduce fuel consumption and CO₂ emissions by 50% for new aircraft produced in 2020 compared to a similar one produced in 2000. These gains are expected to come from improved engines, airframes and air traffic management. More efficient aircraft are expected to bring 20-25% of this improvement. Closely aligned to delivering the ‘2020 Vision’ is the Clean Sky initiative, a public-private partnership between the European Commission and the aeronautical industry.

Clean Sky’s 1.6 Bn Euro budget focuses on multi-disciplinary approaches to bringing advanced aircraft technologies together from design stages to testing and interaction in the real world. Work is organised into six strands.

·      SMART Fixed Wing Aircraft is developing new wing technologies and new aircraft configurations that reduce weight, drag, and noise as well as allowing for new engine mountings.

·      The Green Regional Aircraft theme is reconsidering smaller commercial aircraft from all perspectives. Work streams include all electric options, trajectory management, as well as lower-weight and noise configurations.

·      Demand for Green Rotorcraft is expected to grow significantly. Innovative rotor blades and engine installation for noise reduction, lower airframe drag are major development areas.

·      Sustainable and Green Engines is designing and building five engine demonstrators to integrate technologies for low noise and light-weight low pressure systems, high efficiency and low NOx. A particular focus is the new engine designs (open-rotor and geared-fan engines) that offer opportunities for a step change reductions in CO₂ emissions.

·      The Systems for Green Operations theme balances development in internal aircraft systems such as thermal and electrical systems with green trajectories, mission and SMART ground operations.

·      Rethinking the linkages between aircraft design, production, operation and end of life to optimise the use of raw materials and energy is behind the Eco-Design strand. Concepts such as improved disassembly, whole life management, improved materials and compliance with the EU REACH Directive on chemical components are being systematically applied to reducing aircraft environmental impact.

With current aircraft production cycles already extending beyond 2020, the EU has extended ACURE’s mission to 2050 under the name ‘Flightpath’. Its goal is to reduce CO₂ emissions by 75% per passenger kilometre by 2050. Given a background of 26,000 flights a day in Europe, even 75% cuts won’t be enough to offset the mounting environmental impact if the current 4.5% annual passenger growth rate continues to 2050. Where next? Well perhaps better trajectories, engines and a switch from kerosene can help bridge the gap. 

Posted by Ian Buckland 

New Models for Car Clubs

For many people the convenience of owning a car is hard to resist even if it costs them at least £1,800 pa excluding any petrol*. Until the turn of the century alternatives to direct ownership were limited to company cars or rental on a day basis through Hertz, Avis etc. However in 2000, the first British car clubs were launched in Edinburgh and Leeds following the Book/Unlock/Drive/Pay (BUDP) operating model used on the continent. Central to the model is on-line booking (typically in 30 mins intervals) advanced telemetry (to control vehicle access/ and monitor position/ time) and remote back office functions. Simplicity at the point of use is essential with car maintenance, insurance and payment invisible to the user. Usage is encouraged by accessible, on-street locations, easy fee structures and a first rate customer experience. 

The BUDP Model

Although supported by car manufacturers and local authorities, car clubs have not succeeded in moving us away from mass car ownership. Car club membership is prevalent in the existing 25% of households without a car and the recent consolidation in the sector suggests the market may not have been as fruitful as expected. Could it be that the model isn’t yet right? Are these ‘traditional car clubs’ such as Whizzcar, Zipcar and City Car Club ready for a shake up? Here are a few ‘alternatives to the alternative’ models.

Organisation-led car clubs

If you are a large organisation with centralised premises, pool cars or have personal cars used for business then reinventing fleet management as a car club could work for you. This is just what Woking Borough Council did in 2006. Woking realised that the system whereby employee use of their own vehicles on business, in return for financial compensation was in need of review. Not only were expense claims difficult to control, vehicle emissions were potentially excessive, while poor maintenance may negatively impact the council’s ‘duty of care’ to its staff. Research the following year suggested that an externally managed car club would resolve these issues and an external tender was won by Enterprise Rent-a-Car. From year one total mileage and costs were reduced with an overall saving of £4,900. This was nearly doubled after the abolition of Woking’s small pool of leased cars. New lower emissions cars helped cut the council’s carbon footprint by 1.22 tonnes pa, while Enterprise’s hire management, car maintenance and insurance meant that Woking’s duty of care was under control.

The success of the scheme has seen its consolidation within the Council. However usage figures showed the fleet was largely idle at weekends- exactly when car clubs are generally busiest. With no substitute car club in Woking and a centrally located fleet; opening up the scheme offered many benefits to Enterprise, Woking and residents- least of all through cross-subsidy by public hires. After some additional investment by the two partners to refine the hire model, WeCar was publically launched in February 2010.

http://www.woking.gov.uk/transport/wecar

Peer to peer car rental

In an economic downturn what better way of earning some extra cash than by renting your car to neighbours for the roughly 336 days per year it’s not in use. They can enjoy the convenience and get to hire a whole variety of cars at reasonable rates. This is the model behind the peer-to-peer car club launched as WhipCar in April 2010. The scheme incentivised joining by ditching membership fees and offers new starts a £5 voucher on using others’ cars.

Obviously the scheme isn’t for all. Cars are scrutinised to verify age (less than 8 years), insurance class (not highest groups) valid MOT and road tax. Driver history is checked with the DVLA. Central to WhipCar is a first of its kind comprehensive insurance policy that decouples traditional car/driver insurance temporarily replacing the owner’s insurance for the duration of hire. The owner sets the hire rate.

In terms of numbers joining, WhipCar seem successful with a reported 1000 cars nationally in the scheme after its first 6 months. Actual number of hires and earnings per car are less clear but average hire earning is stated as £45.

http://www.whipcar.com/

Vehicle manufacturer sees the opportunity

What if I wanted to commute into town by scooter on Monday, but preferred a bike on Tuesday. On Wednesday I needed to drive to Manchester but then stayed at home the rest of the week. On Saturday I had to move furniture so a van was handy. Car clubs have struggled to offer this flexibility of vehicles and brand reputation. Now Peugeot’s hire service, Mu (based in London and Bristol) can.  Hire periods are longer than other car clubs and vehicles are based at Peugeot dealerships so if proximity is the deal breaker Mu isn’t necessarily for you. Membership is free and otherwise hire parameters like unlimited mileage, group insurance and maintenance are comparable to traditional car clubs. Just don’t ask for a Golf or Astra.

http://www.peugeot.co.uk/about-peugeot/mu-by-peugeot/

Posted by Ian Buckland 

Smart ticketing comes to town

London, Paris, Amsterdam, Bolton! What links these and an increasing number of cities? No, it isn’t Armani shops. It’s that they all now use smart ticketing on their public transport. And the idea is catching on fast. In the UK London’s Oyster card has been around since 2003, but you may not have had time to catch up with the ‘IFF’ card in Cardiff (d’you gettit?), the ‘sQuid’ in Bolton or Transport Scotland’s National Entitlement Card. Don’t worry if you haven’t; with £20M of Department for Transport money behind smart ticketing, you can be sure its coming to a city near you soon.

In the Netherlands smart ticket re-charging happens on the bus

Like any new technology smart ticketing is full of new terms, abbreviations and acronyms. At the end of this piece is a smart ticketing glossary written for everyone, including the person on the Clapham (or any city) omnibus.

What is smart ticketing?

Essentially it’s electronic ticketing based on a reusable plastic 'smart'card containing an embedded RFID* ‘chip’ issued by a transport operator or local authority. The clever bit is that the chip is loaded with Product Entities* or Rights to Travel* which define how the card can be used, eg season ticket, concession card or its ‘purse* value’- if pay-as-you-go etc. When the chip is swiped across a card validator, ETM* information, such as time, location and sometimes personal details are recorded on a nearby pc-style computer. If appropriate the smart card’s chip may also be updated via the validator.

Records from these local computers are regularly uploaded to a depot-wide system which processes the records checking for validity, potential fraud, and performs analysis for financial and service related purposes. Records are also forwarded to a main server or HOPS* where transactions are processed and user/ transport operator accounts reconciled. Customer support functions, often including purse* recharging and card issuing, are based at the HOPS*, but may be outsourced.

Interopera… what?

An important concept behind smart ticketing is system interoperability or the ability for different systems to work together to deliver flexible, transferable ticketing. The UK Government has supported interoperability through the ITSO* standard which is included in all new British smart ticketing systems. Alignment between ITOS* and similar German and French standards is also underway as is increasing their compatibility with credit /debit cards. In the future international (rail/bus) travel and credit/debit card transactions will be via a single card; that is assuming you have the necessary ETM*.

An Oyster card reader on a London bus

What’s in it for me?

Department for Transport research shows the key benefits of smart ticketing are:

1. Easier travel. Travellers no longer need to understand ticketing structures when they buy the ticket. This greater flexibility and increased peace of mind has been shown to encourage public transport use so reducing congestion.
2. Increasing transport revenues. Greater numbers of passenger, more accurate ticketing and fewer ticket frauds will help marginal services be more viable.
3. Quicker boarding. As passengers already possess tickets running times and fuel efficiency can be improved particularly for buses.
4. Fewer paper tickets means less litter. Paperless ticket interoperability potentially opens up the ticketing providers market and reducing the need for operators to run their own schemes. This is happening in South West England with SWAWL*.
5. Better journey information. With better knowledge of passenger numbers and routes taken, transport planning - in terms of capacity, routes and facilities - can be better aligned to actual needs. This is particularly useful in integrated transport planning, allowing seamless ticketing between different operators on the same route.
6. Safer travel. The need for drivers and passengers to carry cash is reduced while a better knowledge of passenger identity and movements is a deterrent to dangerous or unruly behaviour.
7. Transport operators can be reimbursed more accurately for their concessionary fares.

Economically DfT estimates the benefits for implementing nationwide coverage of smart ticketing at around £1.1bn pa, with the investment paid back in less than one year.

The Smart Ticketing Glossary*

Click here to download:

glossary.pdf (91 KB)

(download)

Click here to download:

glossary.pdf (91 KB)

Posted by Ian Buckland 

The Brunswick Centre scores on the doors (part 2)

The Brunswick Centre is a unique, Grade II listed 1970s ‘megastructure’ in the middle of London. Prominent, in this mixed use development are the two, eight-storey blocks built on a distinctive modular construction mainly around two A-section internal spaces. The blocks contain 560 flats altogether as well as a small number of studio spaces. In the first part of this three-parter I discussed the blocks’ quirky numbering system which confuses both residents and visitors. In this part we take a peak at block internal orientation. In part three I’ll round off by considering the internal signage.

Block entrance is controlled by a resident entry-phone system coupled with a portable RFID key system.  Visitors dial the unit number at the entrances and on approval are buzzed in. Residents have learnt that buzzing-in is just the start of getting visitor to their door. The real challenge is to manage their visitors’ expectations of building layout, clear waymarking and the numbering system. This visitor/resident orientation joust commences by actively pushing directions usually via a muffled intercom, for example;

A typical entrance door

 The entry-phone rings…

Resident - Are you at door 7 next to Strada and the Cinema? [door 7 is the nearest entrance door but door numbers are not obvious]

Visitor - No, it says Hunter Street [a Hunter Street sign is across the road from door 6]

Resident – OK, I’ll buzz you in. It’s an automatic door so watch out it swings towards you.

Take the stairs immediately on your left to the second floor. When you get there the space opens out . Turn left.

We're the fourth door on the left hand side. [let's hope they don’t count the ground floor as 1] 

Even forgetting dodgy intercoms and imperfect instructionvisitor orientation can become compromised by;

• a disconnection between the building’s freshly painted, bold exterior and the mean, poorly maintained, often dirty concrete lobbies. This is heightened by opaque roof-lights which eliminate a view of the outside elevation from the lobbies
• information overload- community notice boards and informal posters cover the lobbies’ walls.
•  numerous route possibilities include corridors left and/or right as well as dead-ends, lifts (at two entrances only), stairs. Route priority can be difficult to understand.
• variability in lobby layout means returning visitors may not recognise earlier routes (and pushed orientation information must be highly specific). Colour coding lobby the upper walls was added roughly eight years ago but entrance numbering/naming is still absent internally and colour coding is not followed through the building.
• the absence of general floor/flat orientation information. Only once in each block (inside one of the two lifts) is the floor/flat information found. Signage for immediate ground floor flats can be found in entrance lobbies. However this is superfluous for most visitors, and could actually add to overall confusion due to the complexity of the number system.

 For many people asking a local is a short-cut to orientation in any city. This universally trusted approach won’t help here – residents don’t understand the numbering system themselves. Surely there’s some directional signage in the building to help? More on this in the next part.

Posted by Ian Buckland 

Five Fun Facts About Ferries

The fashionable focus for sustainable crossing to the Continent has been on the Channel Tunnel and the future development of hi-speed connections with the German and Dutch rail networks. It's easy to forget that 41 million passengers preferred to cross to the continent and Ireland by ferry last year. I travelled on a ferry for the first time since the 80s recently and they’ve changed enormously. The twelve companies linking us to our neighbours have invested significantly in the latest vessels and boost modern standards of service and design. Obviously facilities vary between boats but here’s five great things about ferries.

Red Sea Ferry? Stena Line Poster 

.        Hassle free. No worries about going over your baggage allowance or taking your four-legged friend or bike with you. The check-in queues are to die for. What about sailing overnight? Get a well appointed, yet affordable cabin (with proper shower) and start the next day already abroad.

.        Facilities. Plenty of room to relax, stretch your legs, stroll on deck, shop, eat and drink just when YOU want.  Larger ferries have cruise-like facilities such as suites of restaurants/cafes/bars, free wireless, cinemas, gyms and dedicated children’s fun rooms.

.        Simplicity. Ferries offer fair, flexible and transparent pricing and are increasing their services just as full-service airlines are beginning to mimic the low-cost carriers by charging for seat selection and catering. I paid £4 for a miserable paper cup of tea on SAS this year.

.        Convenience. Foot passengers can normally take a train directly to the quayside. Car owners can drive directly onto roll-on/roll-off ferries avoiding the hassles and often hefty price tags attached to destination car hire and airport parking.  

.        Environmental impact. The exact impact varies between routes, loads and transport mode however below are two examples of typical ferry journeys. For four people, flying is two and a half times greater than travelling by car/ferry and one and half times greater for two people. Although travelling entirely by train is slightly less carbon-intensive, foot-passenger train/boat combinations are sometimes an even lower-carbon approach.

Space and finishes ago-go on the Stena Hollanica

Posted by Ian Buckland 

Have you taken on the new Equalities Act?

Wanted; SMARTER travel officer- must have clean driving licence

While this headline paraphrases a recently seen ad', the original got me thinking. Not only about how paradoxical it is to need a clean driving licence to do a job essentially encouraging others to give up their cars, but also how far we still have to go to stamp out discrimination in recruitment. And this comes from a major UK company.

The DDA the Disability Discrimination Act (2004) was superseded in October by a new, holist, Equalities Act (2010) designed to bring together 119 existing pieces of legislation as well as bring the UK in line with international commitments. A good time then to look at what had changed, particularly in recruitment, and what sources of advice are now available.

According to the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, who now have a central role to advise Government and to police the legislation, the principal changes are:

1. Strengthening disabled people’s protection from discrimination
2. Protecting people from dual discrimination, discrimination by association and perception
3. Single Public Sector Equality Duty covering all nine protected characteristics. The protected characteristics are:             Age/ Disability / Gender reassignment / Marriage and civil partnership / Pregnancy and maternity / Race / Religion and belief / Sex / Sexual orientation
4.  Public Procurement Duty using public sector spend to prevent inequality
5. Positive Action with greater scope to address deficits in the workforce
6. Strengthening the powers of employment tribunals
7. Strengthening the protection for pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers
8. Banning discrimination in private members’ clubs
9. Requiring gender pay and employment equality publishing if necessary

Although final guidance on good practice for job adverts is awaited from the EHRC, the general principles remain. You don’t have to advertise at all, however if you advertise in a way that won’t reach people with a particular protected characteristic, this might in some situations lead to indirect discrimination, unless you can objectively justify your approach.  For example, it would be justifiable to require a clean driving licence in bus driver vacancy advertising.

I spoke to EHRC specifically about our earlier example. Their preliminary advice was that the advert was probably discriminatory for two reasons. First, by stating the requirement for a driving licence disabled people, who are more likely to be non-drivers, would be indirectly discriminated against and would be less likely to apply for the job. EHRC pointed out that in any case the company would be losing out on potentially good recruits by including the clause.

Secondly it is illegal to state or imply that a job is unsuitable for disabled people generally or a disabled person with a particular type of impairment for example people with epilepsy or visual impairment who may not be able to drive. Apart from the advert content the recruiting company should have realized that since 2004 companies have a duty to provide reasonable adjustments to allow for disability in the workplace. In this case intra-site buses, taxis, teleworking etc -the meat and bones of the job -could be appropriate adjustments.

Following the EHRC’s further advice I also spoke to the role’s current incumbent to understand why they believed the job required a driving licence. Yes, the job covered several sites, but damningly it was felt that a car was ‘convenient’ as moving between the 3 sites the role coved (all within 30 miles) was ‘difficult’. While I’m sure we all wish for a life free from difficulty and full of convenience, when applied to recruitment such subjectivity is enough to let prejudice in the back door.

Individuals are free to tackle potential employers directly about potentially discriminatory adverts, however the EHRC does police job adverts directly if alerted. All information in this case has been passed to them. Did you see it too? I’ll let you know what happens.

PS

The original advert was also signed off with the following discrimination disclaimer:

Company X does not discriminate on the grounds of age, race gender, disability, creed or sexual orientation and complies with all relevant UK legislation.

Legal protection now applies to all nine protected characteristics. If you see (or have) a disclaimer missing some of these groups- get its language changed or make sure all protected characteristics are included.

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/starter-kit/advertisements_...

Posted by Ian Buckland 

Unicycles forget the clowning around

Are we entering a new age of personal mobility based on the electric unicycle? If the interest in this mode and the trend towards single person households are anything to go by we could be seeing a lot more single-wheelers in the future.  Until recently, the unicycle was the reserve of circus performers and cycling showoffs but the recent conjunction of gyroscopic, battery and electric drive improvements has seen enthusiasts and transport manufacturers looking at the unicycle as fertile ground for innovation. At the same time across the western world households are getting smaller* making the four-seater family car even less relevant for many short journeys in congested cities.

Of the several unicycle prototypes that have appeared recently it’s Honda’s that marks the move to the big time for the unicycle. But as interest has grown the sector has also become more savvy with segmentation ready to exploit new markets. For instance, there’s the sporty Flyrad; urban transport RYNO, and Honda has focussed on retirees with its U3-X.

Most of the unicycles, with the exception of the Flyrad have ‘Segway’ style gyroscopic speed and directional control that responds intuitively to body position. However given the £5000 price-tag for a Segway (compared to £1500 for a 50cc Honda scooter) competitive pricing for the electric unicycles may be elusive and will ultimately distance them from a mass market break through.  Perhaps then niche markets (which sidesteps the use restriction that have dogged the Segway’s wider take up) will allow the electric unicycle to find a new role in the sustainable mobility mix which is distinct from the scooter.

*By 2031, 18 per cent of the total population of England is projected to live alone, compared with 13 per cent in 2006

What all the excitement's about.

Honda U3-X

SBU (self-balancing unicycle)

FlyRad

RYNO

Micycle

Posted by Ian Buckland 

The Brunswick Centre scores on the doors (part 1)

The Brunswick Centre is a unique, Grade II listed 70s ‘megastructure’ in the middle of London. Increasingly its becoming known for its central pedestrian shopping precinct, arthouse cinema, eateries and supermarket. Less well known, but more prominent, are the Brunswick Centre’s two, eight-storey blocks of mainly public housing; Foundling Court and O’Donnell Court. The blocks comprise 560 flats and several small work units built on a distinctive modular construction mainly around two A-section internal spaces. Architectural value does not always mean excellence all round and at the Brunswick Centre internal block wayfinding is a case in point with visitors frequently becoming lost. But where do we go from here? Does poor wayfinding and signage, become acceptable when put in a preservation context?  In this first part we'll take a look at the crux of the issue.

Your number's up

The blocks were conceived as part of a comprehensive redevelopment stretching away to the Euston Rd in the North. While this 60’s vision was shelved, an enduring peculiarity is that unit (flat) numbering ignores the multi-storey numbering convention. Instead of flat numbering being tied to its storey, eg flat 701 being on the 7^th floor, numbers meander upwards from 1 to 290 in stacks.* Stacks are associated with individual stairs/ building entrances- a scheme that ignores the buildings’ excellent lateral permeability and variety of entrance options. Altogether this leaves a numbering system where most residents only know the number of their immediate neighbours and are unable to navigate around the building by numbers.

(download)

Click here to download:

a-sign-of-heritage-or-failure-mjIwokcdjwvhDHcHIDdg.zip (131 KB)

Active and passive orientation

While residents seldom need to orientate by flat number, deliveries, emergency services (10% of flats are sheltered accommodation) and visitors need an easy to use and fast wayfinding system. For these groups, orientation largely relies on residents ‘pushing’ often complex internal route planning information prior to arrival or negotiating it via the muffled entrance door intercom system. In this instance the first step is verifying which door/intercom point a visitor is speaking from.

Passive journey planning is only available from a basic numbers/floor sign mounted in a recess outside the entrance doors. These orientation signs are specific to the nearest stacks and sometimes don't even cover the whole stack the door serves. As well as being partially hidden in a recess, bizarrely these signs invert the information so that flat numbers for the highest storey are at the bottom. Despite five entrances this information is duplicated only once inside O’Donnell Court inside just one of the lifts. 

The next part considers navigation inside and offers a solution. 

(download)

Click here to download:

a-sign-of-heritage-or-failure-haGCDfAxkxHIcsvpgioh.zip (82 KB)

* The precise number of flats varies between the two blocks

Posted by Ian Buckland 

Think before you click before you fly

The sustainability of air travel for many of us boils down into debates around carbon efficiency, landuse (in terms of airport growth) and air quality. It's easy to forget, as we pass into the second century of air transport, that passenger and ground-based safety is not established to the same degree all over the planet. Qantas proudly boasts of no fatalities in 90 years of flying, but in Africa, parts of Asia and South America the product responsibility aspect of aviation sustainability ie safety, is still very much on the agenda. For Europeans the almanac of poor product safety is the List of Airlines Banned in the EU http://ec.europa.eu/transport/air-ban/list_en.htm  This impressive and regularly updated (last time September 10) list contains 262 airlines whose safety record -not simply in terms of fatalities or accidents-  but through regular safety inspections at EU airports - suggests that they are: "operating in conditions below essential safety standards."

(download)

Click here to download:

think-before-you-click-before-you-fly-yJlrncChHHmqiJivCchi.zip (947 KB)

EU banned airlines use internet commerce like any other

Not all of these airlines are small, domestic, wing and a prayer outfits. Several are national flag carriers such as Sudan Airways, PAL- Philippine Airlines, Zambian Airways and Iran Air. More worryingly in these days of individual travel booking, global exploration and internet commerce is that in a matter of minutes anyone can unwittingly book using the internet onto  established regional and domestic operators banned from Europe such as Hewa Bora in DR Congo or Merapti in Indonesia.

Of course flying on these airlines does not automatically mean disaster and for a review of safety incidents and fatalities I recommend cross checking your airline with  http://aviation-safety.net/database/operator/  Then again if your personal safety is even slightly compromised, isn't that just another reason not to fly.

The crossing out of Paris and Brussels on the Hewa Bora route map gives a clue to its status

Appendix

Posted by Ian Buckland 

The Design Research Unit show is a must-see

(download)

Click here to download:

the-design-research-unit-show-is-a-must-see-IzAlshGzmAiEgiBtougA.zip (743 KB)

With interest in all things mid-century running high, the show on the Design Research Unit currently (until 24th Oct, then travelling) at London’s Cubitt Gallery is right on the money.  Don't miss this small but perfectly formed collection of the Design Research Unit's work which showcases forty years of British graphic design excellence.  Iconic projects for the Festival of Britain, the Victoria Line and Westminster’s street signs are well represented, however it is the DRU’s identity work for Watneys, ICI, Ilford film and the 1964 British Rail design guidelines (with Kinnear & Calvert typography) that steal the show.

(download)

Click here to download:

the-design-research-unit-show-is-a-must-see-wFqjAtHpdfjkHbeIaubc.zip (1.31 MB)

Festival of Britain 

The exhibition's coverage of BR identity just gives a taster of the full project but even so it reflect well on the bravery and conviction of one of the largest government sponsored public design projects ever. A prescient reminder of the impact that a forward thinking design-savvy government can have in proudly shaping thousands of public spaces, billions of journeys and delivering mind-bogglingly large amounts of information through leading edge signage, posters, timetables and other collateral design. Who knows, perhaps we'll also look back with nostalgia at the East Coast livery.

(download)

Click here to download:

the-design-research-unit-show-is-a-must-see-bCHFqlBvFxEyGEfueJGd.zip (1.75 MB)

BR launch newsletter, Euston Station Signage, Routemaster showing guidelines for June '76 livery

Cubbitt Gallery, 8 Angel Mews, London N1 9HHThe show continues round the country at;

Norwich, 30 Oct - 27 Nov 2010, Norwich University College of the Arts

Birmingham, 13 Jan - 12 Feb 2011, International Project Space, Bournville

Thereafter

St Ives, Tate. Liverpool, John Moores University. Nottingham, Bonnington Gallery

Posted by Ian Buckland