Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [Z_Scale] The Metric System

Expand Messages
  • Chris
    Rather than answer several different posts individually, a few comments. When I was writing a handbook for the US equipment I mentioned in an earlier post, I
    Message 1 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
      Rather than answer several different posts individually, a few comments.

      When I was writing a handbook for the US equipment I mentioned in an
      earlier post, I discovered that there were three different nautical
      miles: international 6080ft, UK: 6000ft and another obscure one that I
      no longer have my documents to be able to give its exact value but I
      suspect that it was a metric mile!

      Talking of model railway scales, go and look at the Wikipaedia article
      at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_railway_scales .

      2009/3/1 David Barnblatt <DBarnblatt@...>:
      > With video, it is based on a electronic frequency... which just
      > happens to be 60hz. So 30 fps would have 1 frame per complete
      > cycle. Now do you want me to explain getting a 24 fps movie to a
      > 60hz broadcast with a 3/2 pulldown?!

      Except that over here we use 50Hz!

      The Imperial measurement system is one that was developed over 100's
      of years, with new units being added as and when required. For
      instance, 'lines' (12=1in) and 'points' (72 to the inch) didn't exist
      until printing came along. The furlong (furrow long) was the length of
      a serf's patch of land and was the length of the plough's (plow's)
      furrow. Chains were used by surveyors, as were rods/poles/perches,
      though I cannot see where the word perch came into it. Even teh metric
      system has changed. When I was a student it was SI (Systeme
      Internationale) and cgs (centimetre and gram and second) system. Then
      it became ISO (international standards organisation) which is mks
      (metre kilogram second) based. My book of conversion factors is a 5mm
      thick quarto size with small print.

      The railway standard gauge can be traced back to the wheel spacing of
      Roman chariots. Who cared that it was 4ft 8.25 inches. It was just the
      length of a piece of wood of an iron bar used by the track layers.

      Hope all that compounds the confusion!!!!

      Chris.

      --
      Chris Manvell
      http://trains.manvell.org.uk, http://family.manvell.org.uk,
      http://skye.manvell.org.uk, http://bahai-faith.manvell.org.uk.
    • Rogerio Neiva
      Yes, and besides that you have earth miles, nautical miles and air miles, each of them with a different value. Lets measure speed in furlongs per quarter.
      Message 2 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
        Yes, and besides that you have earth miles, nautical miles and air miles,
        each of them with a different value.

        Lets measure speed in furlongs per quarter.

        Roger




        On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 8:56 AM, Chris <cmanvell@...> wrote:

        > Rather than answer several different posts individually, a few comments.
        >
        > When I was writing a handbook for the US equipment I mentioned in an
        > earlier post, I discovered that there were three different nautical
        > miles: international 6080ft, UK: 6000ft and another obscure one that I
        > no longer have my documents to be able to give its exact value but I
        > suspect that it was a metric mile!
        >
        > Talking of model railway scales, go and look at the Wikipaedia article
        > at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_railway_scales .
        >
        > 2009/3/1 David Barnblatt <DBarnblatt@... <DBarnblatt%40usa.net>>:
        > > With video, it is based on a electronic frequency... which just
        > > happens to be 60hz. So 30 fps would have 1 frame per complete
        > > cycle. Now do you want me to explain getting a 24 fps movie to a
        > > 60hz broadcast with a 3/2 pulldown?!
        >
        > Except that over here we use 50Hz!
        >
        > The Imperial measurement system is one that was developed over 100's
        > of years, with new units being added as and when required. For
        > instance, 'lines' (12=1in) and 'points' (72 to the inch) didn't exist
        > until printing came along. The furlong (furrow long) was the length of
        > a serf's patch of land and was the length of the plough's (plow's)
        > furrow. Chains were used by surveyors, as were rods/poles/perches,
        > though I cannot see where the word perch came into it. Even teh metric
        > system has changed. When I was a student it was SI (Systeme
        > Internationale) and cgs (centimetre and gram and second) system. Then
        > it became ISO (international standards organisation) which is mks
        > (metre kilogram second) based. My book of conversion factors is a 5mm
        > thick quarto size with small print.
        >
        > The railway standard gauge can be traced back to the wheel spacing of
        > Roman chariots. Who cared that it was 4ft 8.25 inches. It was just the
        > length of a piece of wood of an iron bar used by the track layers.
        >
        > Hope all that compounds the confusion!!!!
        >
        > Chris.
        >
        > --
        > Chris Manvell
        > http://trains.manvell.org.uk, http://family.manvell.org.uk,
        > http://skye.manvell.org.uk, http://bahai-faith.manvell.org.uk.
        >
        >



        --
        RN


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Daniel Baechtold
        David in fact swiss german is the easiest language of the world. no grammatic, just present, future and past perfect; and if you misspell a word just say it s
        Message 3 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
          David

          in fact swiss german is the easiest language of the world. no grammatic, just present, future and past perfect; and if you misspell a word just say it's another swiss accent :-)

          Daniel


          <1b. Re: The Metric System
          < Posted by: "David K. Smith" david@... dks2855
          < Date: Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:28 pm ((PST))<<
          <
          <5280 feet in one mile. Very simple? Err... what about nautical miles?
          <Tons or metric tons? Ounces or troy ounces? All of those arbitrary
          <conversion numbers--5280, 12, 4, 3, etc.--must all be memorized. For
          <metric, *everything* is based on 10. Nothing to remember. It cannot
          <get any simpler.
          <
          <It's like saying English is the easiest language in the world. Well,
          <it is only if you already know it! (The Cambridge Grammar of the
          <English Language book is 1860 pages.) Spanish is actually considered
          <one of the easiest languages in the world. Why? Virtually no
          <exceptions. The same rules apply in all cases. Simple. Just like 10s.
          <
          <I'm really very sorry the US did not convert to metric when it was
          <proposed all those years ago. The government cowtowed to a population
          <of pig-headed people who simply refused to accept a superior system.
          <What a waste.
          <
          <--David<
          <
          <http://jamesriverbranch.net/
          <http://1-220.blogspot.com/

          --
          daniel baechtold
          ahornstrasse 3
          ch-4313 moehlin

          daniel.baechtold@...
          http://www.caribou.lake.ch.vu/

          Computer Bild Tarifsieger! GMX FreeDSL - Telefonanschluss + DSL
          für nur 17,95 ¿/mtl.!* http://dsl.gmx.de/?ac=OM.AD.PD003K11308T4569a
        • Alan Cox
          ... Mostly urban legend I m afraid. You can start with the fact the Britons were using chariots before the Romans (in fact the word car comes from the
          Message 4 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
            > The railway standard gauge can be traced back to the wheel spacing of
            > Roman chariots. Who cared that it was 4ft 8.25 inches. It was just the
            > length of a piece of wood of an iron bar used by the track layers.

            Mostly urban legend I'm afraid. You can start with the fact the Britons
            were using chariots before the Romans (in fact the word 'car' comes from
            the Brythonic) and then look at early dramroad/waggonway history and the
            story all falls apart.

            The nearest anyone has gotten to sanity on this is that it looks like a
            lot of wooden waggonways would have been 5' wide measured across the
            outside edges and that being about right for a horse.

            People tend to remember the 7' gauge and the 4'8" but forget the
            large amounts of other gauges early on before railways began to link up
            and break of gauge became a problem.

            In the UK collieries did often use something in the 4'0-5'0 range but
            there were a huge mix, while some of the Welsh ones used quite narrow
            tracks even before steam.

            The Pen Y Darren locomotive (Trevithick) was believed to be 4'6" gauge
            as the inside of the flanges was recorded as 4'2" while Puffing Billy was
            5' gauge. Blenkinsops engines at Middleton colliery ran on 4'1" gauge
            track (with an outside rack). It is only the early Stephenson railways
            that any kind of consistency begins to emerge.

            I was under the impression the US , particularly southern US was similar
            in this respect.
          • Chris
            Hi Alan. I bow to your superior knowledge. I have to admit, I was alwasy a bit uneasy about it but it was cited by so may that I just assumed it was, in some
            Message 5 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
              Hi Alan.

              I bow to your superior knowledge. I have to admit, I was alwasy a bit
              uneasy about it but it was cited by so may that I just assumed it was,
              in some way, correct. However, this myth was perpetuated by several
              eminent railway authors at the time of my youth. I wonder how may
              books on railways still quote it - I have no time nor wish to follow
              it up now.

              All the best,
              Chris.

              2009/3/1 Alan Cox <alan@...>:
              >> The railway standard gauge can be traced back to the wheel spacing of
              >> Roman chariots. Who cared that it was 4ft 8.25 inches. It was just the
              >> length of a piece of wood of an iron bar used by the track layers.
              >
              > Mostly urban legend I'm afraid. You can start with the fact the Britons
              > were using chariots before the Romans (in fact the word 'car' comes from
              > the Brythonic) and then look at early dramroad/waggonway history and the
              > story all falls apart.

              --
              Chris Manvell
              http://trains.manvell.org.uk, http://family.manvell.org.uk,
              http://skye.manvell.org.uk, http://bahai-faith.manvell.org.uk.
            • Michael Duggan
              I was caught up when the schools were teaching metric. The problem was that the whole emphasis was on teaching conversions. How many feet is a meter? How
              Message 6 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
                I was caught up when the schools were teaching metric. The problem was that the whole emphasis was on teaching conversions. How many feet is a meter? How many pints in a liter? How many mph is 65 kph?

                If we'd just ditched imperial and taught metric people would have been fine. The conversions killed us. That and it being invented by the French :}

                Michael Duggan
                Jack of All Trades, Master of Some
                http://www.pawofabear.com




                ________________________________
                From: David K. Smith <david@...>
                To: z_scale@yahoogroups.com
                Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 7:28:24 PM
                Subject: [Z_Scale] Re: The Metric System

                I'm really very sorry the US did not convert to metric when it was

                proposed all those years ago. The government cowtowed to a population
                of pig-headed people who simply refused to accept a superior system.
                What a waste.

                --David








                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Thomas Welsch
                I prefer my Z scale ruler for Z scale !!!!! Thom Welsch
                Message 7 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
                  I prefer my Z scale ruler for Z scale !!!!!

                  Thom Welsch
                • Manfred G
                  Daniel, My dad didn t even consider Swiss German a language at all. He always called it a throat disease. :-) Manfred
                  Message 8 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
                    Daniel,

                    My dad didn't even consider Swiss German a language at all. He always
                    called it a throat disease. :-)

                    Manfred

                    Daniel Baechtold wrote:
                    > David
                    >
                    > in fact swiss german is the easiest language of the world. no grammatic, just present, future and past perfect; and if you misspell a word just say it's another swiss accent :-)
                    >
                    > Daniel
                    >
                    >
                    > <1b. Re: The Metric System
                    > < Posted by: "David K. Smith" david@... dks2855
                    > < Date: Sat Feb 28, 2009 4:28 pm ((PST))<<
                    > <
                    > <5280 feet in one mile. Very simple? Err... what about nautical miles?
                    > <Tons or metric tons? Ounces or troy ounces? All of those arbitrary
                    > <conversion numbers--5280, 12, 4, 3, etc.--must all be memorized. For
                    > <metric, *everything* is based on 10. Nothing to remember. It cannot
                    > <get any simpler.
                    > <
                    > <It's like saying English is the easiest language in the world. Well,
                    > <it is only if you already know it! (The Cambridge Grammar of the
                    > <English Language book is 1860 pages.) Spanish is actually considered
                    > <one of the easiest languages in the world. Why? Virtually no
                    > <exceptions. The same rules apply in all cases. Simple. Just like 10s.
                    > <
                    > <I'm really very sorry the US did not convert to metric when it was
                    > <proposed all those years ago. The government cowtowed to a population
                    > <of pig-headed people who simply refused to accept a superior system.
                    > <What a waste.
                    > <
                    > <--David<
                    > <
                    > <http://jamesriverbranch.net/
                    > <http://1-220.blogspot.com/
                    >
                  • Uwe Liermann
                    Hello Manfred, ... ...you must have misunderstood something there... Just imagine a nice slender girl reaching you a sweet Swiss Schoggi ... ...and you will
                    Message 9 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
                      Hello Manfred,

                      > My dad didn't even consider Swiss German a language at all. He always
                      > called it a throat disease. :-)

                      ...you must have misunderstood something there...

                      Just imagine a nice slender girl reaching you a sweet Swiss "Schoggi"...

                      ...and you will see that it is the most beautiful language of the
                      world....

                      ;-)))


                      --
                      GreetingZ
                      Uwe
                    • Manfred G
                      AHHHhh. Well if you put it that way I can see that it is a very nice language. Heck I m so broad minded that I will even say that it wouldn t matter what
                      Message 10 of 16 , Mar 1, 2009
                        AHHHhh. Well if you put it that way I can see that it is a very nice
                        language. Heck I'm so broad minded that I will even say that it wouldn't
                        matter what language she was using. I would like it very much. ;-D

                        I wonder if that is due to the girl or what she is holding? Nah, better
                        not to analyze to much.

                        Manfred

                        Uwe Liermann wrote:
                        > Hello Manfred,
                        >
                        >
                        >>My dad didn't even consider Swiss German a language at all. He always
                        >>called it a throat disease. :-)
                        >
                        >
                        > ...you must have misunderstood something there...
                        >
                        > Just imagine a nice slender girl reaching you a sweet Swiss "Schoggi"...
                        >
                        > ...and you will see that it is the most beautiful language of the
                        > world....
                        >
                        > ;-)))
                        >
                        >
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.