Log in

View Full Version : Four foot, eight and a half inches...why?


Stingo
31-03-09, 07:34 AM
Read this and you will know.

Railroad tracks.


The US standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet 8.5 inches. That's an exceedingly odd number.
Why was that gauge used? Because that's the way they built them in England, and English expatriates built the US railroads.
Why did the English build them like that? Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and that's the gauge they used.
Why did "they" use that gauge then? Because the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.
Why did the wagons have that particular odd wheel spacing? Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagon wheels would break on some of the old, long distance roads in England, because that's the spacing of the wheel ruts.

So who built those old rutted roads? Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (and England) for their legions. The roads have been used ever since.
And the ruts in the roads? Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagon wheels. Since the chariots were made for Imperial Rome, they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing. Therefore the United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches is derived from the original specifications for an Imperial Roman war chariot. Bureaucracies live forever.
So the next time you are handed a Specification/ Procedure/ Process and wonder "What horse's ass came up with it?" you may be exactly right.

Imperial Roman army chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the rear ends of two war horses (two horses' asses).

Now, the twist to the story:

When you see a Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, there are two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank. These are solid rocket boosters, or SRBs. The SRBs are made by Thiokol at their factory in Utah. The engineers who designed the SRBs would have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site.
The railroad line from the factory happens to run through a tunnel in the mountains,
and the SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and the railroad track, as you now know, is about as wide as two horses' behinds. So, a major Space Shuttle design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was determined over two thousand years ago by the width of a horse's ass.

And you thought being a horse's ass wasn't important?
Ancient horse's asses control almost everything....and CURRENT horse’s asses are controlling everything else.:D

John 675
31-03-09, 08:02 AM
Lol that's awesome, I liked that :)

petevtwin650
31-03-09, 08:06 AM
So if I were to truss up Lissa and lay her on the tracks, imagine black and white old stlyee flicker films here folks, all the oncoming train would do is give her a haircut or trim her bunions :D

Ok, back to square one then. :cool:

Bluepete
31-03-09, 08:12 AM
He's right too! We went to Hadrian's wall last summer and found the same thing out.

This is a pic of the East gate at Houseteads, the tracks worn into the stone of the gate floor is the measurement we have stuck with ever since...

http://i276.photobucket.com/albums/kk24/conker51/DSCF4442.jpg

Pete

RichT
31-03-09, 08:12 AM
:D Genius....

keithd
31-03-09, 08:22 AM
interesting fact of the day thread...? :D

Stingo
31-03-09, 09:22 AM
interesting fact of the day thread...? :D
This indeed is a fair point well made and something I confess that I overlooked.:oops:

AndyL
31-03-09, 10:31 AM
Cheered me right up that has :D

yorkie_chris
31-03-09, 10:48 AM
So if I were to truss up Lissa and lay her on the tracks, imagine black and white old stlyee flicker films here folks, all the oncoming train would do is give her a haircut or trim her bunions :D

Ok, back to square one then. :cool:

http://www.hotink.com/wacky/pitstop/hclaw.gif
Your secrets out pete.

Milky Bar Kid
31-03-09, 10:51 AM
Too much time......but it was good! :D

metalangel
31-03-09, 12:44 PM
This gets passed around every once in a while, Snopes says it's largely false and coincidence... horses haven't changed in size, after all.

It's apparently a shame that this won out over the Broad Gauge (as intended by the great Brunel himself) as it would have allowed for bigger, wider trains that went faster.

plowsie
31-03-09, 12:50 PM
Theres 5 mins of my life I will never get back, plus the 10 mins of passing it on :D

Biker Biggles
31-03-09, 01:19 PM
This gets passed around every once in a while, Snopes says it's largely false and coincidence... horses haven't changed in size, after all.

It's apparently a shame that this won out over the Broad Gauge (as intended by the great Brunel himself) as it would have allowed for bigger, wider trains that went faster.


Wasnt Brunels broad guage 7ft 1/4 inch???
How odd is that for a size?Perhaps it stemmed back to the width of two of Hannibals elepants arses???:smt102

ophic
31-03-09, 01:23 PM
are these measurements to the centre, outside or inside of each rail? surely that might account for the "odd" part inches floating about?

metalangel
31-03-09, 02:28 PM
Yup, because the distance between the inside of the rail faces is measured, that's the gauge and what makes them sound like such odd choices. Because it's the flanges (steady on) on the wheels that keep the train on the tracks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gauge_EN.svg

Stingo
31-03-09, 02:41 PM
Flanges.... *shudders*....

metalangel
31-03-09, 02:49 PM
They minimise the squealing of the train's wheels on tight bends by fitting a little dispenser to the track which dispenses...

ready for it...

flange lubrication.

http://nestaquin.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/300px-kennethwilliams.jpg

Kinvig
31-03-09, 04:28 PM
interesting fact of the day thread...? :D

only if it's a fact not a porkie pie!!!!

http://www.snopes.com/history/american/gauge.asp

metalangel
31-03-09, 04:45 PM
To be even more geeky, even though both the UK and North America use the same gauge tracks, the loading gauge (that is, the possible dimensions that the rail vehicles themselves can be without hitting any trackside objects like platforms, bridges and tunnels) is much, much bigger in North America. Hence a train from the UK could be run on an American track with no problems, but an American locomotive would smash the crap out of the UK infrastructure as it's just so BIG.

embee
31-03-09, 05:29 PM
....and then there's the profile of the wheels and tracks.......... GEEK ALERT, GEEK ALERT! (http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:1JjpumQEuZcJ:www.rtu.mmu.ac.uk/pubs/Persson%2520Iwnicki%2520-%2520OPTIMISATION%2520OF%2520RAILWAY%2520WHEEL%252 0PROFILES.pdf+conical+railway+wheels&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk)

(see the pdf version for all the diagrams, they don't show in the HTML version)