Standard US railroad gauge spec'd for Roman war chariots?

[UtahPete]

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?

Well, because that's the way they built them in England, and English engineers designed the first US railroads.


Why did the English build them like that?

Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the wagon tramways, and that's the gauge they used.


So, 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 same 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 more often on some of the old, long distance roads in England . You see, 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 (including England ) for their legions. Those roads have been used ever since.


And what about the ruts in the roads?

Roman war chariots formed the initial ruts, which everyone else had to match or run the risk 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 this?', 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......

 

[Joel The Biker]

Unfortunately, that is made up folklore. Here is a summary of some scientists findings.
The gauge between the ruts is very similar to that adopted by George Stephenson for the Stockton to Darlington railway in 1837 and a ‘Wall myth’ developed that he took this gauge from the newly excavated east gate. There is a common link, but it is more prosaic and the ‘coincidence’ is explained by the fact that the dimension common to both was that of a cart axle pulled by two horses in harness (about 1.4m or 4ft 8in). This determined both the Roman gauge and Stephenson’s, which derived from the horsedrawn wagon ways of south Northumberland and County Durham coalfields.

 

[larryd]

I live in central PA where coal was KING not too long ago...We have MANY Narrow Gauge tacks, 3' 6"...Some still in use...I know there are advantages to narrow gauge tracks in tough terrain...It often made me wonder why they built two different width systems that required different wheel spacing on cars and locomotives??? If the narrow gauge tracks did not go the destination where the coal was needed, was the coal reloaded onto standard gauge cars???

larryd

 

[UtahPete]

Unfortunately, that is made up folklore. Here is a summary of some scientists findings.
The gauge between the ruts is very similar to that adopted by George Stephenson for the Stockton to Darlington railway in 1837 and a ‘Wall myth’ developed that he took this gauge from the newly excavated east gate. There is a common link, but it is more prosaic and the ‘coincidence’ is explained by the fact that the dimension common to both was that of a cart axle pulled by two horses in harness (about 1.4m or 4ft 8in). This determined both the Roman gauge and Stephenson’s, which derived from the horsedrawn wagon ways of south Northumberland and County Durham coalfields.

It was on Facebook, so it has to be true ... hyea:

 

[EdMat]

It was on Facebook, so it has to be true ... hyea:

:2thumbs:

 

[RayBJ]

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......

...as do our contemporaries!

 

[Joel The Biker]

It was on Facebook, so it has to be true ... hyea:

:roflblack:Facebook is a joke. I used to use it alot like most people, but have learned to avoid it. I dont even have it on my phone anymore.

 

[askitee]

Here in Australia in our State Capital Sydney we have two rail gauges, one that exists for one line only - which requires its own separate Workshop for maintenance. These electric passenger rail cars cant be used anywhere else - such as when 80 thousand people attend a concert and extra wagons are taken from low volume lines to help. The cars themselves are smaller too so all the tunnels, platforms, cuttings that these things travel through would have to be redone to allow our standard gauge cars to fit. Absolute Zero consideration for the long term of our rail system. This came from the same Premier (our elected state leader) who advised that double deck passenger trains carry less than single.

 

[Steve W.]

It was on Facebook, so it has to be true ... hyea:

A couple of alternate names might be more appropriate.

Fakebook.

Faecesbook.

.