Horse's Ass
Kreskin
times in here over the last few years. I recently read a little story
that has a parallel to Y2k history. Enjoy.
===
Here is a look into the corporate mind that is very interesting,
educational, historical and completely true!
The Canada and 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 the
US railroads were built by English expatriates.
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.
Okay! 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? The first long distance roads in
Europe (and England) were built by Imperial Rome for their legions.
The roads have been used ever since.
And the ruts in the roads? The initial ruts, which everyone else had
to match for fear of destroying their wagon wheels, were first formed
by Roman war chariots.
Since the chariots were made for (or by) Imperial Rome, they were all
alike in the matter of wheel spacing. The United States standard
railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches derives from the original
specification for an Imperial Roman war chariot.
Specifications and bureaucracies live forever. So the next time you
are handed a specification and wonder what horse's ass came up with
it, you may be exactly right, because the Imperial Roman war chariots
were made just wide enough to accommodate the back ends of two war
horses. Thus, we have the answer to the original question.
Now the twist to the story..............There's an interesting
extension to the story about railroad gauges and horses' behinds. When
we 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 at Utah.
The engineers who designed the SRBs might 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 had to
run through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through
that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than the railroad track, and
the railroad track is about as wide as two horses' behinds.
So, the major 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! Think about it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
===
Kreskn
Dave Eastabrook
>So, the major 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! Think about it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'll have to get back to working on that humour section. Err, tomorrow
...
:Dave
--
Ain't Y2k hilaryarse - http://www.elmbronze.co.uk/year2000/humour/
Dave Eastabrook; all anonymous donations gratefully acknowledged.
Major credit cards welcome, secure payment facility is on the way.
Neason
wrote:
>I know the subject of how we got into this mess has been rehashed many
>times in here over the last few years. I recently read a little story
>that has a parallel to Y2k history. Enjoy.
>
>===
---snip
>
>So, the major 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! Think about it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>===
>
>Kreskn
I'd heard the first bit before, but not the second. Thanks, Kreskin.
Great story.
Steve
Henry Ahlgrim
>
> I know the subject of how we got into this mess has been rehashed many
> times in here over the last few years. I recently read a little story
> that has a parallel to Y2k history. Enjoy.
>
> ===
>
> So, the major 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! Think about it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> ===
>
> Kreskn
That is one of the best posts I've read in a year on this group. I've
heard pieces of the tale, but never seen it told so skillfully.
Thank You.
--
White, wheat, or raisin
Henry Ahlgrim
****************************************************
A novel approach to Y2K --> http://www2.gol.com/users/doitnow/
****************************************************
Gary L. Smith
: On Sun, 03 Oct 1999 23:37:15 GMT, kre...@rocketmail.com (Kreskin)
: wrote:
: ---snip
:>
:>So, the major 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! Think about it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
: I'd heard the first bit before, but not the second. Thanks, Kreskin.
: Great story.
Yeah, it IS a great story. Too bad there's no truth to it.
--
Gary L. Smith g...@infinet.com
Columbus, Ohio
Christoph Fieberg
http://www.megos.ch/Allgemein/tag2000.htm
Dienstag, 5. Oktober 1999
Spurbreite
...
Kürzlich hat ein gewisser Kreskin in einem Posting in
comp.software.year-2000 ein Beispiel aus der Weltgeschichte gebracht,
das sich wunderbar eignet, um auch Leuten, die nicht mit Informatik
vertraut sind, die unglaubliche Trägheit klarzumachen, die solchen
Dingen innewohnt.
Mir hat es so gut gefallen, dass ich gleich hingesessen bin und
begonnen habe mit Uebersetzen aus dem Englischen.
Spurbreite
Die Spurbreite von Eisenbahnen in den USA und in Kanada (der Abstand
zwischen den Gleisen) ist 4 Fuss 8.5 Zoll. [Dies ist auch der
Spurabstand hierzulande mit 1435 mm.] Das ist eine ausserordentlich
krumme Zahl. Warum wurde gerade diese Sprurbreite verwendet? Weil
Eisenbahnen so in England gebaut worden waren, und die Eisenbahnen der
USA wurden von englischen Auswanderern gebaut.
Warum hatten die Engländer sie so gebaut? Weil die ersten
Eisenbahnlinien von denselben Leuten gebaut worden waren, die im
Vor-Eisenbahn-Zeitalter die Strassenbahnlinien gebaut hatten, mit eben
jener Spurbreite.
Und warum hatten die Strassenbahn-Leute jene Spurbreite benutzt? Weil
sie dieselben Werkbänke und Werkzeuge verwendet hatten wie beim Bauen
von normalen Wagen, welche auch diesen Radabstand hatten.
Nun gut. Aber warum hatten die Wagen genau diesen Radabstand? Weil die
Räder der Wagen sonst zu Bruch gegangen wären beim Fahren auf gewissen
Fernstrassen in England, weil diese Strassen tief eingefahrene Rillen
in diesem Abstand hatten.
Wer hatte diese Strassen gebaut, die so alt waren, dass die Wagen
tiefe Furchen gefahren hatten? Die ersten Fernstrassen in England, wie
überall in ganz Europa, waren vom kaiserlichen Rom für seine Legionen
gebaut worden und immer noch in Gebrauch.
Und die Furchen in den Strassen? Die ursprünglichen Furchen, auf die
jedermann Rücksicht nehmen musste, aus Angst, sonst die Wagenräder zu
Bruch zu fahren, stammten von römischen Streitwagen, von Streitwagen,
die überall im Römischen Reich gleich waren punkto Radabstand.
Die Standard-Eisenbahn-Spurbreite in den USA von 4 Fuss 8.5 Zoll ist
abgeleitet von der ursprünglichen Spezifikation für römische
Streitwagen.
Spezifikation und Bürokration sind unsterblich. Wenn Sie also das
nächste Mal irgendeine Spezifikation vorgelegt bekommen und sich
wundern, welcher Pferde-Arsch wohl darauf gekommen ist, könnten Sie
genau ins Schwarze treffen, weil nämlich der römische Streitwagen
genau so breit gemacht worden war, dass er Platz bot für zwei Hintern
von Armee-Pferden. Damit haben wir endlich die Antwort auf die
ursprüngliche Frage.
Es gibt noch eine interessante Fortsetzung dieser Geschichte mit
Eisenbahn-Spurabständen und Pferde-Hintern.
Wenn man sich den Space Shuttle ansieht, wie er auf dem Startplatz
steht, bemerkt man zwei Hilfsraketen an den Seiten des grossen
Haupt-Treibstofftanks. Dies sind Feststoffraketen, "solid rocket
boosters", kurz SRB. Diese SRB werden von der Firma Thiokol in einer
Fabrik in Utah hergestellt.
Die Ingenieure, welche die SRB konzipiert hatten, hätten sich diese
eigentlich etwas dicker gewünscht. Aber die SRB mussten per Eisenbahn
von der Fabrik zum Startplatz transportiert werden. Die entsprechende
Eisenbahnlinie verlief durch einen Tunnel in den Bergen, und die SRB
mussten natürlich durch diesen Tunnel passen. Der Tunnel ist ein wenig
breiter als die Schienen, und die Schienen haben etwa den Abstand von
zwei Pferde-Hintern nebeneinander.
So kommt es, dass ein wichtiges Feature eines der modernsten
Transportsysteme der Welt vor zweitausend Jahren festgelegt wurde mit
Hilfe der Breite des Hintern eines Pferdes.
On Sun, 03 Oct 1999 23:37:15 GMT, kre...@rocketmail.com (Kreskin)
wrote:
>I know the subject of how we got into this mess has been rehashed many
>times in here over the last few years. I recently read a little story
>that has a parallel to Y2k history. Enjoy.
>
>===
>So, the major 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! Think about it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>===
>
>Kreskn
Dr John Stockton
13:00:21 in news:comp.software.year-2000, Christoph Fieberg
<fie...@cologne.de> wrote:
>>Since the chariots were made for (or by) Imperial Rome, they were all
>>alike in the matter of wheel spacing. The United States standard
>>railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches derives from the original
>>specification for an Imperial Roman war chariot.
I believe that is only part of the story, and that there are rock-ruts
in Malta which extend things back 7000 years, though I forget whether
that's BP or BC. Verify before use.
--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. j...@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL: http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
Dates - miscdate.htm Year 2000 - date2000.htm Critical Dates - critdate.htm
Y2k for beginners - year2000.txt UK mini-FAQ - y2k-mfaq.txt Don't Mail News
ch...@my-deja.com
kre...@rocketmail.com (Kreskin) wrote:
... an amazing story!
Where've you got this from, Kreskin? I really would appreciate any
sources of it!
Concerning the booster thing, you wrote " The engineers ... might have
preferred to make them a bit fatter ..." Is that a guess by you (to
illustrate the possible consequences a bit better) or is it a fact
mentioned anywhere?
Thanks a lot,
Chris
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Bob Doyle
> In article <37f7e6a...@news.auracom.com>,
> kre...@rocketmail.com (Kreskin) wrote:
>
> ... an amazing story!
>
> Where've you got this from, Kreskin? I really would appreciate any
> sources of it!
> Concerning the booster thing, you wrote " The engineers ... might have
> preferred to make them a bit fatter ..." Is that a guess by you (to
> illustrate the possible consequences a bit better) or is it a fact
> mentioned anywhere?
You know, there are stories, jokes, tall tales, etc., that circulate 'round
the net (and around BBS's before the net). I see this story (which may well
be true, not sure) every year or so and can remember it popping up on some
BBS's back in the 1980's. Don't bother trying to trace the origins, these
things just fall from the sky and become a permanent part of the electronic
landscape.
Bob Doyle
Kreskin
>In article <37f7e6a...@news.auracom.com>,
> kre...@rocketmail.com (Kreskin) wrote:
>
> ... an amazing story!
>
>Where've you got this from, Kreskin? I really would appreciate any
>sources of it!
A friend e-mailed it to me. As others have stated, it may be a bit of
internet urban legend, but dang, it sure sounded good, eh? :-)
>Concerning the booster thing, you wrote " The engineers ... might have
>preferred to make them a bit fatter ..." Is that a guess by you (to
>illustrate the possible consequences a bit better) or is it a fact
>mentioned anywhere?
It was a part of the article sent to me.
Whether the story has any basis in fact or not, I thought it to be
somewhat related to the evolution of Y2k i.e. why would a standard
developed over 40 years ago still be in such common use well into the
1990's, especially after the constraints on the original standard had
been removed years ago? (Of course, this is but one of the
ponderables)
>Thanks a lot,
>
>Chris
Glad you enjoyed it.
Kreskin
Bradley K. Sherman
Kreskin <kre...@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>A friend e-mailed it to me. As others have stated, it may be a bit of
>internet urban legend, but dang, it sure sounded good, eh? :-)
About a third of the rail in the world does not conform to the 4'8.5"
standard, but interestingly even when another width is chosen it's
still within an order of magnitude of the width of two horses.
Go figure.
--bks
(source E.Britannica)
TheZenith
Yes, it is *truly* amazing that train gauge is not at least 40' 85"
wide.
(source E.BigBrainnica)
--
Zzzzzzzzzzzz...zzzzz..z.z....z....zzzzzzzzz....z.Z
"Even if the date-sensitive equipment blows up
due to a Y2K bug, there'll usually be a
replacement ready to take over." -smpoole7