Two horses Arses

Has everyone on here heard the joke about the most advanced engines on earth (the booster rockets or the space shuttle) being based on the width of 2 horses asses. You know because the European road width is based on the width of the two horse Roman chariot. So axles and loads are based on that and eventually railroad axles and then eventually the boosters because they're shipped by rail. So I wonder how Alien Safehold would feel to us readers based on the width of two dragon's asses.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THE POSSIBLE DIFFERENCES IN SCALE OF SAFEHOLD AND HOW IT WOULD FEEL ALIEN TO US TERRANS??

While a good story it is generally considered an urban legend. The widths are similar because there are natural sizes for any vehicle designed to seat 2 human beings side by side, the differences in scale would be no more than you find walking into any old building in Europe. or looking at a collection of old horse drawn vehicles. The size is dictated by the passengers, not the size of the roads. http://www.snopes.com/history/american/gauge.asp

The real difference is how cramped the common folk would be but you can get the same feeling in the poorer part of any town in India, Brazil, China or Indonesia. It's cause by relative poverty not because of stands changing

That's a clever observation. So one day when we meet aliens who've built their society on the backs (and backends) of larger beasts, everything about them will be BIGGER.

Thendisnia wrote:So I wonder how Alien Safehold would feel to us readers based on the width of two dragon's asses.

There's no particular reason to assume road widths of "two dragon's asses" on Safehold. Langhorne & Co maintained some obvious terran-isms in things like the length of an hour, Roman Numerals, and similar measurements and systems. Why would they not continue the standards established by the Romans? After all, I don't believe we've ever seen a pair of dragons in harness, so one dragon-width would be roughly the same as a two-horse hitch, anyway.

FWIW, Standard Railroad gauge of 4 feet 8 inches is the same as the ruts in roman roads. Normal road widths are roughly based on the width of roman roads -- about 20 feet or two 10 ft lanes.

PS: Any feel of "Stranger in a Strange Land" would be more due to a modern person being put in a medieval setting.

Don't recall where I heard this but the minimum width on the Eisenhower Defense highway System , our Interstates, is the width of two main battle tanks. Any one know anything about this? And how wide is the rear end of a dinosaur?

EdThomas wrote:Don't recall where I heard this but the minimum width on the Eisenhower Defense highway System , our Interstates, is the width of two main battle tanks. Any one know anything about this? And how wide is the rear end of a dinosaur?

Don't know about that, but it doesn't surprise me. (Originally) the Eisenhower system stipulated that overpasses outside urban areas had to be a minimum of several (2 or 3) miles apart. This was so that fighters and bombers could be dispersed from airbases if required and operate off any available section of highway.

EdThomas wrote:Don't recall where I heard this but the minimum width on the Eisenhower Defense highway System , our Interstates, is the width of two main battle tanks. Any one know anything about this?

I don't know what they used to decide, but Interstates and US Highways are designed according to a single lane width -- Ten feet, IIRC -- and not according to total width. Interstates are a minimum of two lanes wide, and modern Interstate lanes are much wider than the originals.

Theemile wrote:Don't know about that, but it doesn't surprise me. (Originally) the Eisenhower system stipulated that overpasses outside urban areas had to be a minimum of several (2 or 3) miles apart. This was so that fighters and bombers could be dispersed from airbases if required and operate off any available section of highway.

AFAIK, no US highways (including Interstates) were used or planned as emergency runways. The Autobahn was designed and constructed with emergency airfields in mind, and reinforced sections of highways designated (and used in exercises) as wartime runways can be found all over Europe. But they are just sections; it isn't economically feasible to build highways entirely to the standards required of runways for jet fighters or bombers.

Thendisnia wrote:Has everyone on here heard the joke about the most advanced engines on earth (the booster rockets or the space shuttle) being based on the width of 2 horses asses. You know because the European road width is based on the width of the two horse Roman chariot. So axles and loads are based on that and eventually railroad axles and then eventually the boosters because they're shipped by rail. So I wonder how Alien Safehold would feel to us readers based on the width of two dragon's asses.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THE POSSIBLE DIFFERENCES IN SCALE OF SAFEHOLD AND HOW IT WOULD FEEL ALIEN TO US TERRANS??

This is an urban legend. In fact both carriage and rail widths vary considerably, depending on the needs of the railway and terrain. The use of the "standard" gauge occurred largely as this happened to be (nearly) the width of one of the first very successful passenger lines in England, but this was well after the use of various types of rail system of many different widths. This width is frequently but not exclusively used in commonwealth countries.

Narrower gauges are used when train speeds are lower and where there is need to make tight turns. Wider gauges give a better ride and are used on higher speed lines where the additional stability is important.

What is common is that in the earliest forms, rail carts used in mining and Roman chariots were drawn by pairs of horses, so what you really see is convergent design caused by a common physical constraints.

Taking this to the Safehold context, given that the dragons used in various areas differ due to natural range and seasonal considerations, one would expect that there would be a number of common cart/sled widths based on the differing dragon sizes, even though the high roads are built to a single standard.

Hildum wrote:

Thendisnia wrote:Has everyone on here heard the joke about the most advanced engines on earth (the booster rockets or the space shuttle) being based on the width of 2 horses asses. You know because the European road width is based on the width of the two horse Roman chariot. So axles and loads are based on that and eventually railroad axles and then eventually the boosters because they're shipped by rail. So I wonder how Alien Safehold would feel to us readers based on the width of two dragon's asses.

ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THE POSSIBLE DIFFERENCES IN SCALE OF SAFEHOLD AND HOW IT WOULD FEEL ALIEN TO US TERRANS??

This is an urban legend. In fact both carriage and rail widths vary considerably, depending on the needs of the railway and terrain. The use of the "standard" gauge occurred largely as this happened to be (nearly) the width of one of the first very successful passenger lines in England, but this was well after the use of various types of rail system of many different widths. This width is frequently but not exclusively used in commonwealth countries.

Narrower gauges are used when train speeds are lower and where there is need to make tight turns. Wider gauges give a better ride and are used on higher speed lines where the additional stability is important.

What is common is that in the earliest forms, rail carts used in mining and Roman chariots were drawn by pairs of horses, so what you really see is convergent design caused by a common physical constraints.

Taking this to the Safehold context, given that the dragons used in various areas differ due to natural range and seasonal considerations, one would expect that there would be a number of common cart/sled widths based on the differing dragon sizes, even though the high roads are built to a single standard.

I would think that you might consider that the terraformers had some continuing input into the width of roads and canal paths throughtout Safehold since they built the original ones and "If it was good enough for the archangels, it's good enough for me" is not an uncommon attitude!

Hildum wrote:This is an urban legend. In fact both carriage and rail widths vary considerably, depending on the needs of the railway and terrain. The use of the "standard" gauge occurred largely as this happened to be (nearly) the width of one of the first very successful passenger lines in England, but this was well after the use of various types of rail system of many different widths. This width is frequently but not exclusively used in commonwealth countries.

More to the point, the structure gauge of a railway system (i.e. what's the maximum sized load that can be carried on the railway) is only loosely connected at best to the track gauge (i.e. the distance between the rails).

1st example. Those double-decked Amtrak carriages? They run on standard gauge track, just like that found in London Kings Cross. However if you where to try running such a train out of Kings Cross you would discover that it fouls the platform edge, fouls the overhead power line, probably fouls the footbridge halfway along the platform, probably fouls the track for the next platform and won't fit through the tunnels immediately north of the station!

2nd example. This http://tinyurl.com/nggarratt is technically a narrow gauge locomotive, since it runs on 3ft 6in "gape gauge" track but there's nothing small about it!