Re: [Z_Scale] The Metric System
> The railway standard gauge can be traced back to the wheel spacing ofMostly urban legend I'm afraid. You can start with the fact the Britons
> 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.
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.
- 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,
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.
- 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 :}
Jack of All Trades, Master of Some
From: David K. Smith <david@...>
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.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
My dad didn't even consider Swiss German a language at all. He always
called it a throat disease. :-)
Daniel Baechtold wrote:
> 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 :-)
> <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.
- Hello Manfred,
> My dad didn't even consider Swiss German a language at all. He always...you must have misunderstood something there...
> called it a throat disease. :-)
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
- 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.
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