h a l f b a k e r y
This would work fine, except in terms of success.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
or get an account
Airport toilets are almost useless/
unhygenic for those carrying
lugguage who wish to keep their
luggage in range/view.
Cubicles are very often SMALLER than
normal public cubicles. With luggage
it is a performance trying to prevent
baggage getting 'wet' on the floor,
bumping into the
bowl or dropping
items. Who would have guessed that
people in airports would have
Therefore cubicles should be large
(similar to disabled) have a raised
grid or shelf up off the wet floor,
plenty of hooks and preferably a
small handbasin & paper so you can
wash and dry hands immediately
before handling luggage (so not
putting bacteria straight onto your
Urinals should have hooks on the wall
and a DRY high shelf in front plus
adequate space between bays.
Doors should be designed so you can
get in and out without touching
disease-spreading handles - e.g.
washroom has an "in" and an "out"
door that opens in your direction of
travel and has no latch and cubicle
doors have some form of push-
release from the inside.
Ideally there should be a small
number of trolley-traps so people can
enter with their trolley, dump, wash
hands then leave. The exit door to
open much as a fire escape by
pushing the trolley against it.
If one is caught with an urgent call -
"that cannot be recinded, not even
questioned" - when alone with a
trolley full, one is in dire straights.
||I'm thinking a more realistic idea would be toilet-friendly luggage, with a hole in the top, a tank inside, and perhaps a little screen to run around it.
||I have a better solution, why not make a thousands of stalls that are 6' X 6' and staff it with a personal assistant who constantly cleans the room. in the stall there will be plenty of space so one can "repack" or even "refold" all the contents of thier luggage in complete confort.
||Nice idea, but I'm afraid airports won't implement it because it takes more space. It will be easier to convince them to leave the doors off the stalls, so you can "park" your luggage on the opposite wall and watch it while you are at work. That will save the cost of the doors and the Dept. of Homeland Paranoia just can send by an officer to check what is going on in the stalls. That also saves the cost of all the little cameras.
||[kbecker] Yeah, right...alot you
could do if they did lift it while you
were layin' one down!
||"I've started, so I'll finish..."
||[Unabubba] Like it...accompanied
by music from 'flying trapese', 'In
da Club', 'Take 5'...
||//alot you could do// At least you can later tell the friendly flight attendant at the ticket counter that someone may be flying with your luggage and that person will probably be lying about the question "Did you pack all your luggage yourself?". That will immediately trigger all kinds of security alarms and the airport will be closed until you have your luggage back.
||you could take such 'bio breaks' before picking up your luggage from the conveyor, or after checking it in.
||Kind of a "let's all" idea, isn't it? (See help file if you don't know what I'm talking about).
||no why don't we already do this? bun.
||What about married luggage carrying people? And why would luggage be carrying people in the first place?
Agreed that airports won't go for it because of cost/space, but [timbeau] points out a problem in great need of resolution.