Re: [OT] US Rail Guage...

["Ted Gay" <tedgay@bigpond.com>]

"James Shugg" <jshugg@westpac.com.au> wrote in message
c4c98596.0106072356.4a074a15@posting.google.com">news:c4c98596.0106072356.4a074a15@posting.google.com...
> "Ted Gay" <tedgay@bigpond.com> wrote
>
> > Re: [OT] US Rail Guage...
> >
> > Please , what is a Guage?
> >
> > I cannot find Guage in my Oxford dictionary.
> >
> > Ans don't give me any crap [snip]
>
> Can you find "Ans" in your OED Ted? You know what they say about
> people who live in glass huoses :-)

Ans....   short hand for 'and so'  ....well that's the best I can come up
with amongst all the broken glass!


> Bringing this back on topic, does anyone know why the Irish went for
> 5'3"? Just think of all the angst and inefficiency that could have
> been avoided in Oz over the past 100 years if 4'8.5" really was a
> standard gauge.
>

Was loaned the other night a collection of short stories,  one was titled
'12:10 to Leeds'.  It was about the train service last October (27th?) that
derailed at 115mph due to a broken rail.

The author had an explaination for the gauge of  4'8½".  Most horse drawn
wagon-ways in North East England had a gauge of between 4 and 5 feet.  Any
narrower and the full strength of the horse is not being used, any wider and
the dead weight of the wagon reduces the pay load.  He goes on to give the
reason why ½" was added by Stephenson to an existing track of 4'8".
Photocopied the article and of cause [damn] left it at work, will retrieve
it and start a new thread cross posted to misc.transport.urban-transit, want
to rev-up the Yanks and their horse's ass theory.
My OED has...  ass² = arse'.  He also states that over 60% of all railways
are standard gauge.

Ted