Author Topic: Horse's Ars  (Read 349 times)

Offline mosgood

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1548
Horse's Ars
« on: August 24, 2005, 10:49:11 AM »
The U.S. 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 the U.S. railroads were built by English expatriates.

Why did the English people 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.

Okay! Why did the wagons use that odd wheel spacing? Well, if they tried to use any other spacing the wagons would break on some of the old, long distance roads, because that's the spacing of the old wheel ruts.

So who built these old rutted roads? The first long distance roads in Europe were built by Imperial Rome for the benefit of their legions. The roads have been used ever since. And the ruts? The initial ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagons, were first made by Roman war chariots. Since the chariots were made for or by Imperial Rome they were all alike in the matter of wheel spacing.

Thus, we have the answer to the original questions. The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches derives from the original specification (Military Spec) for an Imperial Roman army war chariot. Military specs and bureaucracies live forever. So, the next time you are handed a specification and wonder what horse's bellybutton came up with it, you may be exactly right. Because the Imperial Roman chariots were made to be just wide enough to accommodate the back-ends of two war horses.

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
Horse's Ars
« Reply #1 on: August 24, 2005, 10:53:14 AM »
sand

Offline Skydancer

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1606
Horse's Ars
« Reply #2 on: August 24, 2005, 01:08:18 PM »
I posted this a long while back and was told it was poop too.

I don't carethough sounds plausible and makes a good tale to tell over a pint when the conversation dies a bit or you get tired of fottball ( US translation: Soccer! :rolleyes: ;) )

Offline Mickey1992

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3362
Horse's Ars
« Reply #3 on: August 24, 2005, 01:16:43 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Skydancer
I don't carethough sounds plausible and makes a good tale to tell over a pint when the conversation dies a bit or you get tired of football ( US translation: Soccer! :rolleyes: ;) )


What, no women in your local to look at?

Offline cpxxx

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2707
Horse's Ars
« Reply #4 on: August 24, 2005, 03:07:22 PM »
In Ireland we have a 5 foot 3 inches gauge which is one of the widest. Probably because the Romans never invaded.:p

I remember once reading about building a railway in Australia. It was started at both ends, intending to meet in the middle. One was built to the Irish gauge and other to the English. Neither knew. I guess you had to change trains at that junction.

Offline Skydancer

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1606
Horse's Ars
« Reply #5 on: August 24, 2005, 06:15:19 PM »
Yeah there are women in my local but they are no competition for my lovely wife.

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Horse's Ars
« Reply #6 on: August 25, 2005, 01:52:17 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Skydancer
Yeah there are women in my local but they are no competition for my lovely wife.


Is she by any chanse looking over your shoulder as you type?

Offline jEEZY

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 259
Horse's Ars
« Reply #7 on: August 25, 2005, 03:05:22 PM »
Believe it or not, the gauge of railroad used this side of Russia, was determined...arbitrarily.

Offline Skydancer

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1606
Horse's Ars
« Reply #8 on: August 25, 2005, 06:19:00 PM »
:lol could be Nilsen though I would still applaud her loveliness even if not! ;)