Skip to main content

51 replies

Funny History

decoynhdecoynhOGR Forum Member


Subject: Fwd: Railroad gauges 


Might not be true, but a funny read.

 

https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-O6rrbCilEyM/VfshTW3OXiI/AAAAAAAAUTk/EgcQIFsHnmU/s640/RR1.jpeg
 Railroad Tracks 

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 English expatriates designed the U.S. 
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 had used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing.
  
https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-TsvViXiV8tQ/VfshmEpJgWI/AAAAAAAAUTs/CNng-SI-tRA/s640/RR2.jpeg
 
 
 
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.
 
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-dMIq3ByhELM/VfsiDBvSaAI/AAAAAAAAUUE/01EijMm8n6k/s640/RR3.jpg
  
So, who built those old rutted roads?
 Imperial Rome built the first long distance roads in Europe (including England) for their legions. Those 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.
 
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PhjaXIMQa-U/VfsiPRzPLoI/AAAAAAAAUUM/vF3ApF0zu7o/s400/RR4.jpeg
 
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.
 
Imperial Roman army chariots were made just wide enough to accommodate the rear ends of two war horses.
 
 
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bvzUghp3qo4/Vfsijc_kyLI/AAAAAAAAUUU/4atCspzyZxg/s640/RR5.jpeg
 
Now, the twist to the story:
When you see a Space Shuttle sitting on its launch pad, you will notice that 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.
 
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-c2joSKkRwHY/VfsitHUp1EI/AAAAAAAAUUc/WWAgwIiqAJM/s640/RR6.jpeg
 
The engineers who designed the SRBs would 
have preferred to make them a bit larger, 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.
 
 
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sQyUodJWnqU/Vfsi8uC3NMI/AAAAAAAAUUk/v-k974rZW7Q/s640/RR7.jpeg
 
 
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 behind!

Explains a whole lot of stuff, doesn't it?
 
 
 

Virus-free. www.avg.com
Last edited by OGR CEO-PUBLISHER
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

palallinpalallinOGR Forum Member

I'm sorry, but the responsible educator in me makes me do this.

This old chestnut is made up of disconnected factoids, half-truths, and utter nonsense.

It pops up here (and elsewhere) now and then--I believe this is the second time this year on the forum.  Like so much out on the internet, it resembles a classic horror movie monster:  it won't die.  People gather together to lop off each instance, but its core exists always elsewhere, waiting patiently to invade yet another unwary poster or email forwarder, infecting and robbing the victim of brain cells.

Last edited by palallin
AE Alfred E NeumanOGR Forum Member
palallin posted:

I'm sorry, but the responsible educator in me makes me do this.

This old chestnut is made up of disconnected factoids, half-truths, and utter nonsense.

It pops up here (and elsewhere) now and then--I believe this is the second time this year on the forum.  Like so much out on the internet, it resembles a classic horror movie monster:  it won't die.  People gather together to lop off each instance, but its core exists always elsewhere, waiting patiently to invade yet another unwary poster or email forwarder, infecting and robing the victim of brain cells.

Specific citations would better dispel inaccuracies.  Relying on occupation as authority doesn't work.  Once had a teacher tell us the ADA encouraged manufacturers to add sugar to toothpaste to drum up more business for dentists.

What, me worry?

BudkoleBudkoleOGR Forum Member

Seems that the first thing I read was in the original post/quote was, "Might not be true, but a funny read"

That being said...to those that have posted what can be interpreted as seemingly negative comments( U know who U are) LOL....no one makes you read it, every month.  Give it a rest, learn to just move on.  This forum SHOULD be a happy place 24/7.

Funny post,  its like your favorite movie, just like watching it over and over, it never gets old!  Thanks for posting Matt!

As usual, just my 1 cent worth.....carry on

B Buzz5495OGR Forum Member

In a small paperback, titled " Model Railroading"  published by Bantam Book in 1950 and apparently written by the Lionel staff, as it features Lionel products. In chapter 18, "A brisk history of American Railroads", there appears several paragraphs touching on this very subject. In a very condensed version the rail gauge was determined from wagon wheel spacing, which was carried over from wagon wheel spacing in England, which was influenced by Roman war chariot wheel spacing. 

The authors did not go into any detail about equine physiology in their version, but to a very young kid, fascinated by trains and railroads, it did and still does make a lot of sense.

Until someone has the verifiable true origin of this dimension and what it was actually derived from, I think I'll keep believing most of the "wagon wheel" story, which I read, all those many years ago. Unless, of course, I hear of a better one.

Buzz

RS Robert S. ButlerOGR Forum Member

  Here's  what was posted on this subject back on 3/15/18

Well, here we go again.  Hot Water is correct - it is a hoary old pre-internet chestnut that was given new life by instant electronic transfer.  

  The book The American Railroad Network 1861-1890 indicates the following gauges in use in the U.S. and Canada in 1861: (Number of Railroads), Gauge

(14) 6'0"

(21) 5'6"

(2) 5'4"

(63) 5'0"

(39) 4' 10"

(1) 4' 9.25"

(210) 4' 8.5"

 The thing you have to remember about early railroads is that the people who built them viewed them as a way of quicker delivery to THEIR OWN SPECIFIC CUSTOMERS. To that end they had zero interest in anyone else having the means to deliver product quickly to said customers.  Because of this it took quite awhile for people to realize that if you did have a common gauge you would put your immediate customers at risk from the standpoint of losing business but you also had the possibility of expanding your own business way beyond anything you could possibly realize at a local level.  In the U.S. the choice of 4'8.5" was driven by simple economics - more railroads had that gauge than any others and Hot Water's explanation is one of several which address this choice.  

From The American Railroad Network 1861-1890 page 12 we have the following:

"When railroads were first constructed, their engineers experimented with different gauges. Each engineer tended to select the gauge which he thought best suited the needs of his particular road. Early British tramways had been built to varying gauges – as narrow as 3’ 4” to as wide as 4’ 6”. Benjamin H. Latrobe, reporting to Albert Gallatin in 1808, suggested that railroads might be built with a distance of 3.5 feet to 5 feet between the rails. When George Stephenson built his successful steam railroad in England, he finally settled on a gauge of 4 feet 8.5 inches. He was probably influenced in his choice by the English tramway and wagon gauges, but different writers present a number of explanations for his selection of exactly 4feet 8.5 inches."

[and none of them, I might add, mention Roman Chariots]. 

  ...and on page 13 of the same book

  "Most of the early British railroads adopted this gauge, but some experimented with other widths, the most important deviations being those of 5 feet and 7 feet. The latter gauge was adopted by the Great Western on the advice of its engineer, Isambard Kingdom Brunel, a fanatical advocate of the broad gauge. The whole gauge controversy came to a head in Great Britain in 1845 when a Royal Commission was appointed to study the matter. The commission, reporting in 1846, recommended that in all future railroad construction a 4 foot 8.5 inch gauge be used and an Act of Parliament was passed to this effect. Throughout Europe generally the early railroads were built to this gauge. But there were exceptions. In Ireland 5 feet 3 inches was adopted after some experimentation. And on the continent examples of early deviant gauges are the Basle and Strassburg lines, with a width of 6 feet 3 inches, and the line from Ghent to Antwerp, which had a gauge of 3 feet 9 inches. By 1860 the prevailing gauge in Spain was 5 feet 6 inches and Russia’s Moscow line was 6 feet."

B Buzz5495OGR Forum Member

Although none of the books quoted, mention Roman Chariots, the fact that the Roman Empire dominated England from the first century AD until approx. 476 AD, must lead one to wonder about their cultural and mechanical influence on that region for such a long period of time. It was noted that there were and are many different gauges being used in many different areas of the world, Stephenson "settled" on 4'-8.5".  Apparently this was for a good reason. According to my very old book, archaeological excavations in the Babylonian regions reveal preserved cart tracks of the same gauge. So, one can presume that the Roman influence carried over to occupied ancient England also and was apparently a very popular wheel spacing. To disregard these historical facts as a possible influence on our current "standard" gauge, would be turn a blind eye on all possible historical influences on science and mechanics.

Not trying to beat a dead horse, just trying to look at all possibilities with a fair and open mind.

Buzz

RSJB18RSJB18OGR Forum Member SUPPORTING MEMBERDIGITAL SUBSCRIBER

Seen this many times before. Funny! Logic would assume most of this to be true. Each new form of transportation was developed by the same people who were using the existing form of the day.

OK- no one shoot me for this....

WHY RE-INVENT THE WHEEL

PS- Ships were designed only large enough to fit through the original Panama canal so this does make sense. Anything bigger would have to go all the way around South America.

Last edited by RSJB18
TexasSPTexasSPOGR Forum Member DIGITAL SUBSCRIBER

If you take a closer look into history it can be determined Roman chariots had no standard of wheel spacing as there were chariots of different sizes and widths for different uses from different makers. That one fact kills the whole narrative. 

While it may be by some considered cute or funny, being this is the real trains forum which in turn serves to offer facts about real trains, it's really counter productive. It spreads a false narrative much like the rumor that the great wall can be seem from space or that the coriolis effect controls toilet flow.

HW Hot WaterOGR Forum Member
TexasSP posted:

If you take a closer look into history it can be determined Roman chariots had no standard of wheel spacing as there were chariots of different sizes and widths for different uses from different makers. That one fact kills the whole narrative. 

While it may be by some considered cute or funny, being this is the real trains forum which in turn serves to offer facts about real trains, it's really counter productive. It spreads a false narrative much like the rumor that the great wall can be seem from space or that the coriolis effect controls toilet flow.

Exactly!  Yes, it may be "funny", but it sure isn't "history".

Farmer_BillFarmer_BillOGR Forum Member
Alfred E Neuman posted:

Once had a teacher tell us the ADA encouraged manufacturers to add sugar to toothpaste to drum up more business for dentists.

What, me worry?

My dentist voted for it!  And keeps telling me to brush more often so I have to return four times each year.  Kids in college, new cars - you know dentists have lots of bills to pay these days. 

 

BudkoleBudkoleOGR Forum Member
RonH posted:

Thanks for posting the story, true is not it is interesting and funny.

For those of you who replied that it was a repeat/not true.
You folks proved my theory why there is a shortage of horses heads in the country.
Reason is that there are to many horses A _ _'s.

Just kidding, I hope I did not offend anyone.
Love this forum.

I like it!   

I second.....

overlandflyeroverlandflyerOGR Forum Member

this is a huge internet problem.  ever try to change a Wikipedia entry that you know is wrong?  within a day you get a barrage of people quoting that misinformation from many other sources who have copied it from W followed by the original author deleting your information and changing it back.

i've been thinking about a profession that has definitely felt the impact of the internet and might desperately be looking for some augmentation to their profession.  what are Librarians doing these days?  those are the people i used to go to for information and believe it or not, i used to get plenty of free help with research.

it would sure be refreshing to see some intelligence behind the internet vs the guy with the biggest stick dictating his/her "truth".

Last edited by overlandflyer
BudkoleBudkoleOGR Forum Member

I say lets just ask Moulder & Scully, they specialize in these type cases!  The truth is out there...LOL. 

@xfiles

...

 

 but seriously....maybe try actual documents/books at your local the library.   Amazon has a great book selection.

Like OverlandFlyer paraphrased, google/web info/wiki is most often useless.  

Im still amazed at how many subject matter experts are made in just a few minutes with the almighty google search feature!  

 

 

 

 

overlandflyeroverlandflyerOGR Forum Member
Moonson posted:

And where exactly would you, OVERLANDFLYER, recommend going for "truth"? Which resources specifically ?

I'm serious in my inquiry, and am not trying to be argumentative, but practical.

FrankM

when i was assembling information on an early Empire Builder i tapped many different sources of information from books like the PFM/ Woods text and even joining the GNRHS to purchase back issues of The Goat  for further dates, car names and data.  comparing this to the Wikipedia listing, i could see their mistake(s) and my correction even took that into consideration.

not that i really cared, but as i said, my changes lasted a day or two.

in other cases i have inserted either an alternate opinion based on published material or added a completely new entry (typically under the heading of Cultural References) and have often had those deleted, too.

as a writer i strive to choose my words carefully.  if you had read more carefully, you will note that the "truth" i am speaking of is only that dictated by narrow minds.

cheers...gary

Last edited by overlandflyer
BudkoleBudkoleOGR Forum Member
overlandflyer posted:
Moonson posted:

And where exactly would you, OVERLANDFLYER, recommend going for "truth"? Which resources specifically ?

I'm serious in my inquiry, and am not trying to be argumentative, but practical.

FrankM

when i was assembling information on an early Empire Builder i tapped many different sources of information from books like the PRM/ Woods text and even joining the GNRHS to purchase back issues of The Goat  for further dates, car names and data.  comparing this to the Wikipedia listing, i could see their mistake(s) and my correction even took that into consideration.

not that i really cared, but as i said, my changes lasted a day or two.

in other cases i have inserted either an alternate opinion based on published material or added a completely new entry (typically under the heading of Cultural References) and have often had those deleted, too.

as a writer i strive to choose my words carefully.  if you had read more carefully, you will note that the "truth" i am speaking of is only that dictated by narrow minds.

cheers...gary

Very well put!  But I especially like that last part!

Last edited by Budkole
Next

Add Reply

Views: 2,808
Post

Membership Required

We're sorry. You must be signed in to continue. Sign In or Register
×
Are you sure you want to remove from your Block List?
×
Loading...
×
When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.
Note: if you proceed, you will no longer be following .
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×

Access to this requires an OGR Forum Supporting Membership

OGR Forum Supporting Membership

Help support this forum with an OGR Forum Supporting Membership.
You will be able to watch the videos in the INSTRUCTIONAL VIDEO FORUM!
A one-year OGR Forum Supporting Membership is only $12 per year, so sign up now!


    OR     


Access the ALL the OGR VIDEO FORUMS AND  over 300 back issues of OGR
with a DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTION!



$12.00 per 12 Months (plus tax if applicable)
×