This blog has a fine and respectable readership, so I was not surprised to discover that Andy Davies, the deputy editor of kbbreview (kitchen, bedroom and bathroom review) was one of your number. Being an expert in the field of urinals (as well as stuff that's in kitchens and bedrooms, but NO OTHER ROOM in the house) he was able to pour urine over my urconal idea. Or more accurately he wasn't able to pour water over my urconal idea, though he does offer a flicker of hope. Here are his expert opinions on the subject (and remember, he is an expert in urinals and thus we should listen to him and respect what he says, even though some might argue that he has wasted his life):
"...the basic problems with urinals comes with flushing. The reason urinals are either the trough type or the stuck-to-the-wall round type is that they are traditionally the most efficient when it comes to flushing the p1ss away." (I find it rather touching that a man who works in a magazine dedicated to toilets is not allowed by his email server to write piss and thus has to write p1ss instead) "The trough because it's, well, just a trough, and the round type because that shape means one jet of water will wash the whole thing without splashing all over the floor.
This is all the theory anyway, anyone who's frequented a pub knows that it doesn't really work that way. The flush works by diluting the urine rather than flushing it away like a number two cubicle toilet. This means that fag ends, cleaning blocks, vomit and comedy flyers block them up and p1ss spills across the floor like a Cornish flood.
But Armitage Shanks still sells millions of them so why bother changing it. I've been to Armitage Shanks incidentally, their warehouse is called 'the Great Wall of China'. Ho ho.
The problem, I suspect with your cone design would be that while p1ssing in to it would be easier and cleaner, finding a way to flush it without water coming back at the user would be very difficult."
Damn it. But wait, here is the nugget of hope:
"I can report though that the future of urinals is looking rosy. There is new bog technology that allows for waterless urinals by flushing everything away using either compressed air or sonic waves. In fact, the new Wembley will have the longest urinals in the world (900m in total), and they will all be waterless.
So, while your urconal would be difficult using traditional flushing methods, it may be possible in the future with advanced p1ssing science."
Andy recommends
http://www.urinal.net for anyone who wants to find out more.
I suggested to Andy that my urconal could just have a lip at the top and flush like a regular sit-down style toilet, but he poo-pooed this idea replying,
"Ah, you've stumbled, metaphorically of course, into the urinal minefield. If you can imagine such a thing.
It's not just the lip stopping the water gushing out all over your bare feet, it's the shape of the bowl governing the flow of water around it. The standard regular toilet has the same principle, when you flush it, the water leaves the cistern and only enters the bowl through one hole, but the shape of the bowl makes the water spread out over the whole thing.
Your cone could have a lip, but the water probably wouldn't clean the whole cone. As a result your gym changing rooms would smell like even more like a bus stop than they may do now.
The posh snooty solution to all this is witnessed, as an example, in the toilets at the Savoy. They have an ornate porcelain trough at floor height, which has probably been there for years. In front of your shoes there is a half-a-foot high perspex screen angled slightly towards you. This gets in the ways of any splashes hitting your lace-ups, when you've left the screen is then wiped by one of the attendants.
Suddenly my job doesn't look quite as degrading."
Yes, very good Andy, but don't get too cocky. If you were any good at knowing about urinals then surely you would be the editor of kbbreview, not just the lowly deputy editor. You'd be the big cheese, calling the urinal shots.
How about this. Every time you have finished a wee in the urconal, you press the "flush" which mechanically brings another demi-cone down from the ceiling, the same dimensions as the first, but this one is the right way up (or upside down if you consider the lower demi-cone to be the norm). It then lock into place, completely sealing the urconal - the hole to the drain is also blocked. Then the urconal fills with water and disinfectant and is swirled around like in a washing machine or something, completely cleaning both cones. The water then drains away and the upper demi-cone returns to its home in the ceiling.
One clean urinal, with no unsightly drippage on the floor. Stick that in your kbbreview and smoke it.
The only slight glitsch I can see with this double demi-conal urinal is that there is a distinct possibility that a patron of the lavatory might press the button at the wrong instant and find he gets his penis trapped by the lowering demi-cone and then spliced off and then (if the urconal is see-through, which I think it should be) he gets to watch his own severed penis swishing around in a load of spinning water, disinfectant and urine. But maybe there is a bloke in the toilets who you pay a pound to before you wee who will stop the machine if that happens with an override system. He doesn't have to save anyone who failed to give him a pound, but can enter into a quick negotiation for a higher amount with any non-payer who finds themself in this unfortunate predicament.
Thus are brilliant inventions finely tuned to perfection. Though I suspect Andy "I know all about urinals" Davies will be coming back with some additional reasons why this plan would not work. Which would be one in the Herring's Eye for old Richard "I know all about penises" Herring.
