Jump to content
 

Level crossing stupidity...


Recommended Posts

When I was going through Tech College (remember those?) I was taught in Imperial. One thing still stands out - threads! (And I worked in electronics....). We had different threads for different purpose; eg Pipe threads for pipes, BA threads for small machine work, etc etc. There was a bit of an uproar I remember when we went metric, as it was stated that that the BA threads were very suited to small scale engineering, and the replacement metric threads were not as finely suited for that purpose, not capable of holding things as tight. I strongly believe that metrication is done for changes sake, though parts may have merit; it is always worth rembering that historically things were done a certain way for a purpose!

 

Stewart

Edited by stewartingram
  • Like 5
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Well I'm also using cubits aka a breeze block length, that is lengths of 18 inches to build a garage at the moment, Oh what joy tomorrow... foundations...

  • Friendly/supportive 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 17/04/2019 at 08:48, Porkscratching said:

Sorry but I think and work in imperial, the trouble with metric is you soon end up with crazy unwieldy numbers, its a bit like a quid equals 85597.4 lira or something, a daft example but you see what I mean. 

 

Equally daft is the imperial side of my ruler which has various inches marked out in 1/10th, 1/12th, 1/16th and 1/32nd inch.

 

Neither system is perfect...

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
15 minutes ago, Steven B said:

Equally daft is the imperial side of my ruler which has various inches marked out in 1/10th, 1/12th, 1/16th and 1/32nd inch.

 

Neither system is perfect...

Any of them can be potentially useful. 10ths for decimals, 12ths because of the number of easy fractions of it and 16ths and 32nds for when it's convenient to keep halving sizes.

Edited by Reorte
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Drive on the left or on the right? I have been lucky there, driving on the right instead of the left was only a problem when I came home, in that case Hull. Driving in mph or kph was more of a problem as my first trip abroad was from Hull to the south of France in a Morris Minor. My 1961 model only had a speedo in mph. I used the method of taking the number on a roadside notice and if it was 50 kph, I halved  that number and added a little, 30! I drove at about 28 mph to be on the safe side. The speedo below has spent a good many years hanging on my workshop wall as it is more than life expired.412018999_Copyofmph001.jpg.103a47fec5342f7d608f470882b7bbc4.jpg

412018999_Copyofmph001.jpg.103a47fec5342f7d608f470882b7bbc4.jpg

 

 

As to Malta when we asked our driver taking us from the airport to our hotel which side of the road was used there, he told us most drivers favoured driving in the shade. 

  • Like 6
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 17/04/2019 at 18:29, stewartingram said:

 We had different threads for different purpose; eg Pipe threads for pipes,

 

Stewart

Which are a minefield just by themselves.

Based on the inside diameter of the nominal steel tube, which of course didn't have a standardised wall thickness!

 

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I am surprised no-one mentioned numbered drills. Another arbitrary set of dimensions neither exactly imperial nor exactly metric as far as I can see.

Re that Norfolk accident, is the driver taking NW to court for lack of duty of care for putting a level crossing in the road?

Jonathan

Edited by corneliuslundie
Typo corrected
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

When I was in France someone was complaining about having to use these presumably Imperial metric A series paper sizes, presumably assuming that they were because the lengths were an odd number of mm. It's actually based on A0 having an area of 1 square metre and the area halving but the aspect ratio remaining constant every time it's folded in half. Quite a clever system IMO.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 4
  • Informative/Useful 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
8 minutes ago, Reorte said:

When I was in France someone was complaining about having to use these presumably Imperial metric A series paper sizes, presumably assuming that they were because the lengths were an odd number of mm. It's actually based on A0 having an area of 1 square metre and the area halving but the aspect ratio remaining constant every time it's folded in half. Quite a clever system IMO.

 

Bring back foolscap. All is forgiven. At 13" x 8", common 4mm track templates fit on there just great: https://www.octopus-office.co.uk/foolscap-legal-paper/

 

Martin.

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
52 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

And we can blame the whole thing, other than paper sizes i suppose, on Napoleon.

 

 

The metric system really got underway as a project of the Académie des sciences in 1790, building on proposals that had been rumbling away for he preceding century. At that point Napoleon Bonaparte was a junior artillery officer. It wasn't until his key role in driving the British out of Toulon in 1793 that his career really got underway, and it wasn't until 1799 that he was the effective ruler of France, by which time the platinum metre des archives and kilogramme des archives had been made. However, it was under Napoleon that the metric system became legal, though he later revoked that law in favour of a mixed system. The metric system was re-imposed in the time of the citizen-king Louis Phillipe. 

 

If you want to believe in the superiority of British technology, it's worth knowing that the present International Prototype Kilogram was made by Johnson, Matthey & Co. of Hatton Garden in the 1880s - the firm is still in the business of providing copies - although it is shortly (20 May this year) to be replaced by a definition of the kilogram in terms of fundamental constants of nature, a change made possible through the work of British scientist Bryan Kibble.

  • Informative/Useful 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
50 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Bring back foolscap. All is forgiven. At 13" x 8", common 4mm track templates fit on there just great: https://www.octopus-office.co.uk/foolscap-legal-paper/

 

Martin.

Which Foolscap, Which Legal? Even these could vary.

e.g. Foolscap can be 13.5" x 17", legal can be 8.5" x 14", hardly a "standard"!

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...