Survival Challenge TV for engineers!

[Neil WyattModerator @neilwyatt]

I receieved an unusual email the other day. I’m not putting it in the magazine, but I’ev reproduced it here as it may be of interest to some brave frorum member. It sounds more entertaining than the usual ‘survival TV’…

Neil

 

I am a Producer at The Garden Productions, a well-established television production company based in London. We’re best known for making shows like ‘Squid Game: The Challenge’, ‘24 Hours in A&E’ and ‘24 Hours in Police Custody’. To find out more about us you can go to http://www.thegarden.tv.

We have an exciting new series coming out in September called ‘Apocalypse’ and we are currently casting for potential second series. It’s a survival-based series which imagines what might happen if civilization as we know it came to an end… if you were stripped of light, power, water and heat for whatever reason, what would you do?

We are looking for a cross section of British people who must survive and thrive for 28 days without any of the comforts of the 21st Century. No previous survival experience is necessary – just ingenuity, resilience and courage.

I was getting in touch with you directly as I understand you work with many engineers and enthusiasts, and we feel this series may appeal to people in this field of work. I wondered whether it may be possible for you to share our casting flyer (attached) amongst your colleagues to see whether it may be of any interest to any of them?   Also, if anyone in your team is interested in the series but who is not an engineer, then we also encourage them to apply too!

Anyone that is interested can apply directly via this link https://eu.castitreach.com/ag/itvgarden7/apocalypse/welcome.html

You can also find out more by emailing [email protected].

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

About 10 years ago I had an approach from a TV production company via my professional organisation regarding participation in a TV challenge show. Now I’ve been on TV before so wasn’t that bothered but it was pitched at promoting STEM so I gave them my details. Long story short I was part of the show. I thought I had a pretty good idea of what goes on in the editing but this was a new show so nothing to go on. They filmed lots of good engineering and descriptions etc but 90% of what made the show was “hitting things with a big hammer” and blunders. The final challenge was heavily “handicapped” off – screen and certainly not a fair representation of the engineering (the team I was on won). I wasn’t embarrassed on screen but anyone contemplating participation in any TV show should be aware that they have no control over what actually appears on screen.

Robert.

[Bo’sunParticipant @bosun58570]

Why am I not in the least bit surprised?

[noel shelleyParticipant @noelshelley55608]

Roberts warning is very valid ! Having been loosely involved in Time Team I was surprised at the lack of common sense of the professionals and for the ultimate in Humiliation watch Space Cadets – I was astounded at the gullible ness of some people though this is why they were picked. This latter was claimed as the ultimate TV spoof. Noel.

[BazyleParticipant @bazyle]

They are getting more efficient for cost saving. They used to hire our church for 3 days to film one set of a soap scenes but last week they did it in one day. However sometimes they would turn up a few weeks before with a minibus full producers and continuity people to plan the work. Long days too as I recall a cold March night at 10pm wishing they would finish the grave scene in ‘Not Going Out’ so I could lockup.

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi, I was on Mr. & Mrs in 1985, but we didn’t get the jackpot, I blamed the Mrs for getting all her answers wrong, but we did get £30.00 and a good quality carriage clock, which I still have, although it doesn’t keep going for the eight days it should do, before it needs rewinding, and it very often sits there stopped, I might get it fixed one of these days.

Regards Nick.

[Mark RandParticipant @markrand96270]

Hmm. 28 days with no insulin. I could do with losing the weight, but it’s a bit brutal. 😀

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

As Robert says what actually appears on screen is not always accurate.

Too many TV producers seem to be incapable of researching their subject, resulting in either sloppy descriptions, or downright misleading ones.

And some of the continuty shows glaring failures in editing the timescale of clips together, or maybe Dr Who did it in the Tardis?.

Maybe I am am a pedant, but it is annoying to hear a locomotive described as a train, and some of the other malapropisms.

Plus “Don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story”

Not a lot of confidence in a really accurate portrayal of what actually took place.

Howard

 

[bernard towersParticipant @bernardtowers37738]

It’s air time for air heads

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi Bernard, your opinion may be true of such a challenge, but I found the TV quiz recording that we did was well made, and although the audience saw more than what was shown on TV, it was of cause due to the editing, so for instance, unlike it looked like we walked onto the stage from behind the curtain, that didn’t exactly happen, as it was in a small studio, recording each part was done separately, even with the hosts, i.e. we had to go and stand at a point where it looked as if we were just coming onto the stage, and then on cue we walked up to our position, which was marked by a strip of tape on the stage floor. Yes, the audience were real people, and no canned applause was used, as it really was a live show. It really was an interesting and pleasant experience, and two shows were done on the same day, i.e. six married couples. A get together and refreshments afterwards with the shows hosts, rounded it all up nicely, with photos of each couples taken with the hosts.

Regards Nick.

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

Quizzes, chat shows and the like are better than “reality” TV. but not much.

Robert.

[Graham MeekParticipant @grahammeek88282]

The reality is, every day is a challenge for survival for many of us. This sounds like another programme to avoid.

Regards

Gray,

[Howard Lewis]

On Howard Lewis Said:

As Robert says what actually appears on screen is not always accurate.

Too many TV producers seem to be incapable of researching their subject, resulting in either sloppy descriptions, or downright misleading ones.

And some of the continuty shows glaring failures in editing the timescale of clips together, or maybe Dr Who did it in the Tardis?.

Maybe I am am a pedant, but it is annoying to hear a locomotive described as a train, and some of the other malapropisms.

Plus “Don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story”

Not a lot of confidence in a really accurate portrayal of what actually took place.

Howard

 

I definitely agree with what you say about “Don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story”.  Creating ‘drama’ (often out of nothing) is the hallmark of modern TV and it is shameful.

 

However, if someone saying “Train” on a television programme that isn’t aimed directly at railway enthusiasts annoys you, then amongst your many qualities (I have read many an insightful post from you on here), there is definitely the terrible sin of pedantry.

I’d encourage you to save your energy to get cross about things on TV that truly matter.  The degeneration of science programming, the lack of good fictional drama, and most egregious of all, the loss of test matches from terrestrial television.  I mean, they didn’t even need to deal with the expense of providing commentary, we all turned down the telly sound and had TMS on anyway (Sorry Ritchie, you were very good, but Johnners et al. were better)

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

Nothing wrong with a bit of pedantry, presenters on programmes with technical content should know what they are talking about, or at least their scriptwriters should. I’ll accept simplified descriptions/terminology, but not wrong as they so often are.

[Howard LewisParticipant @howardlewis46836]

The annoying thing is when they ham up the content, for drasma, telling us what disasters can befall if anything goes slightly wrong. (Who wouldn’t expect a load to fall off a lorry if it wasn’t correctly alogned when being winched on board.)

Obviously unaware of the force of gravity.

Do they think that we as big idiots as they are?

I watch, but with a large salt celler beside me!

Howard

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi, a train is rolling stock, pulled by a power unit, be it a Tractor, a traction engine, a Locomotive or various other power units. Nothing pedantic about that, so how are children going to learn if the correct terms are not used. There are other terms for a train, but Locomotive is not one.

Regards Nick.

[Nicholas Farr]

On Nicholas Farr Said:

Hi, a train is rolling stock, pulled by a power unit, be it a Tractor, a traction engine, a Locomotive or various other power units. Nothing pedantic about that, so how are children going to learn if the correct terms are not used. There are other terms for a train, but Locomotive is not one.

Regards Nick.

Does Joe or Jane Average and their children care? No. It is just entertainment like Formula One or football.

I was told at work never to talk to the press or media. They are not interested in you or facts, just a story.

Anyway, for me every day is an adventure at the age of 80.

JA

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi JA, so if you booked up and paid for a train for a special occasion for you and a group of friends and family, and just a Locomotive turn up, you would be happy with that, after all it’s just an occasion.

Regards Nick.

[JAParticipant @ja]

I don’t think I am Joe Average even if my initials are JA. I would not be happy with a locomotive since I probably could not get into the cab.

JA

[Nicholas Farr]

On Nicholas Farr Said:

Hi JA, so if you booked up and paid for a train for a special occasion for you and a group of friends and family, and just a Locomotive turn up, you would be happy with that, after all it’s just an occasion.

Regards Nick.

I would be very angry, either at:

At the pedantry shown by business owner for punishing me for my loose use of language.

Or

At the rank stupidity of the business owner for not checking my requirements or at the least not listening to me when I made my booking.

In any case, it’s a stupid example, as any business that operated in this fashion, would quickly go out of business.

Most people see railways as utilities.  Not as things they have to watch their vocabulary about.

Most people treat the kind of pedantry some members on here enjoy so much, at best as an annoyance to be tolerated when required, to maintain basic courtesy, and at worst as a sign that the pedant is an utter bell-end, overcompensating for a significant lack of non-onastic physical intimacy.

In any case, when some loco-fondler dismissively says [cue nasal tone]:

“Pfft… that’s not a train, that’s a locomotive“,

anybody listening immediately hears:

“Model engineers?   Pompous idiots who are dull, irritating, and patronising, and care about all the wrong things.  Don’t be a model engineer”

…and we wonder why people don’t join Model Engineering Societies…

 

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Just for the sport of it … here’s a question for the pedants:

Does “Train” include the Locomotive … or is it like the train on a dress ?

🙂

Be careful what you ask for !

MichaelG.

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi MichaelG, a locomotive pulls rolling stock, therefore a Train does include the locomotive.

Regards Nick.

[noel shelleyParticipant @noelshelley55608]

In a double headed train the engine nearest the load is the train engine. An engine pulls a train ?  Noel.

[southernchapParticipant @southernchap]

I should mitigate some of the harshness in my last post a little, by granting that the mechanical/functional aspects of locomotives (things like the valve gear systems, boiler design, suspension, etc.) can be fascinating, and also very useful in terms of transferrable knowledge.

But only if they’re explained with humility, and compassion for those not especially interested in locomotives specifically.

[Author]

Posts