Slaters wheel sizes

DafyddElvy said:
This 59 year old wippersnapper grew up with millimeters and has done nothing but struggle in life with feet, inches, chains and a whole raft of other forms of measurement.
I recall when I started on the railway here, the overhead line is all in metric whereas everything else was and is imperial, it still confuses me, we produce track designs in meters and order rail in feet.

Totally agree it would be helpful if slaters noted the actual wheel diameter in millimeters, the reference to the relevant scale the wheels are made for though is required to ensure someone wanting wheels for 7mm scale didn't buy wheels for say Gauge 3 because they would be incompatible with their track.

Viva la revolution, let's adopt the metric system in britain :)
Click to expand...
Nah we have left the common market now, bring back feet and inches together with pounds shillings and pence. Those are the things that made Britain great.
 
dunnyrail said:
Nah we have left the common market now, bring back feet and inches together with pounds shillings and pence. Those are the things that made Britain great.
Click to expand...
And theres me thinking britain wanted to become a modern society.

And by the way, I still think the post office in england fiddled me out of money when we emigrate from Wales to erthfordshire (they don't use the letter H there) when the monetary system changed.

Viva la revolution for the straightforward easy to use and understated metric system. Unfortunately their isn't an emoji for C'mon la revolution :-) 8-)
 
I work in metric but I still think in feet & inches. I need to think in inches to estimate what size a bolt, nut or rod would look like, but then draw it up in millimetres. Don't use centimetres or decimetres way too hard for my brain.
Mixed measurements will be around until the USA eventually change back to metric again.
Around here it is mostly metric but the old tradies are trying to change like when getting wood from the store a guy came in and asked for "1.8 metres of .. um! 2 by 4".
As railway tracks are defined in feet & inches (excluding Europe metric ones) and old drawings are in imperial then mixed scales are the easiest way for an old imperialist like me to work.
 
DafyddElvy said:
Viva la revolution, let's adopt the metric system in britain :)
Click to expand...
Bah humbug - we can still go to the builder's merchant and ask for 2.4m lengths of 4" x 2" :D:D:D:D:D

I actually started work on the cusp of change, with many building drawings in imperial and college courses in metric.

I can handle both - just about, but what I can't abide is centimetres - these are not an SI unit and I cannot understand or visualise them - I struggle even to convert them quickly to millimetres.
 
Rhinochugger said:
I can handle both - just about, but what I can't abide is centimetres - these are not an SI unit and I cannot understand or visualise them - I struggle even to convert them quickly to millimetres.
Click to expand...

10mm or just over 3/8" (13/32") :)
 
Rhinochugger said:
...what I can't abide is centimetres - these are not an SI unit and I cannot understand or visualise them...
Click to expand...
You need my oft-repeated lesson on Why Centimetres Are Bastard Measurements: it is frequently received in hushed silence, but I think that is due to Sir using the 'B' word. Or it was; I haven't used the argument for many years and would probably lose my job now if I did. And then there's the uproar when the Fourth Form get onto male and female threads...

It is interesting that we are used to -and, dare I say it, enthusiastically support- 4mm/foot, but would question fuel consumption in litres per mile or gallons per kilometre...
 
Northsider said:
You need my oft-repeated lesson on Why Centimetres Are Bastard Measurements: it is frequently received in hushed silence, but I think that is due to Sir using the 'B' word. Or it was; I haven't used the argument for many years and would probably lose my job now if I did. And then there's the uproar when the Fourth Form get onto male and female threads...

It is interesting that we are used to -and, dare I say it, enthusiastically support- 4mm/foot, but would question fuel consumption in litres per mile or gallons per kilometre...
Click to expand...
When I fuel up my car I always do it by volume and not the amount, I work on the basis my fuel tank holds 60l and knowing my average fuel consumption I know how many l/km I can do.
When out walking with my wife I have to convert things back to miles for her.
Being a british national educated overseas and use to the metric system even now folk, on this non metricated island, look at me strange when I convert things metric so that I can understand them.

And don't get me started on order materials, go to habbycraft's website and basswood is listed in metric, go in to the shop and the label is in imperial. Buy brass sections from some folk and they sell imperial sizes, while others sell true metric sizes, this is my biggest bug bear, it's a flaming nightmare.

In Scotland the railway is measured in miles and yards, go across the border and they work in miles and chains, track gauge is 4ft 8.5 inches, flangeways are 48mm, what the heck.

Viva la metric revolution, c'mon let's start the change here 8-)
 
JimmyB said:
10mm or just over 3/8" (13/32") :)
Click to expand...
So SWMBO says to me, 'what's 70 cm look like?' and I have to then convert to 700 mm and can visualise it as just under 2ft 6".

But as Patrick (Northsider) says, a centimetre is a bastard unit, as the SI system is predicated on thousands and thousandths.

So, for example, in the building trade, if somebody says that the door height is 1981 it matters not whether they add the unit or say 1.981, because it is never going to be 1,981 metres, nor is it going to be anything as conceivably small as 1,981 micrometres.

Sadly, it is many of us British people who have latched on to the centimetre as being a 'useful' unit as they perceive millimetres to be too small, and thus have caused unnecessary confusion.
 
I blame these:

1644422226917.png
If we start off wrong, we'll never be right. Why do we give them to our youngest schoolchildren?
 
I think rulers ought to be 500mm long, marked in millimetres, and probably 100's (of millimetres) as well.

Though I can see a 300mm rule, being a better 'fit' for carrying around in education..
:wondering::nerd::nerd:
 
I appreciate the drift, but I remember during my apprenticeship, "Go Metric" campaign as we moved to metric, all the old drawings were imperial (very few new ones) and everything done in metric units. Oh what fun :)
 
JimmyB said:
I appreciate the drift, but I remember during my apprenticeship, "Go Metric" campaign as we moved to metric, all the old drawings were imperial (very few new ones) and everything done in metric units. Oh what fun :)
Click to expand...
Yes, early construction drawings that were produced in metric units were simple conversions of feet and inches - thus, grid lines were distances like 10.542 metres and so on. Barking mad :mad:
 
Melbournesparks said:
A ratio works with whatever measurements you like, you don't need to mix and match metric and imperial in some ungodly union that requires years of study to understand.
Click to expand...
I whole heartily agree!:clap: But making scale easily understandable by the masses takes away all the mystic!
 
Wow this is going to go on and on who would ever have thought? I guess we just have to accept that those uf us olders ones grew up learning it and now thinking ft and inches and yards, Younger that learnt metric and think in that. Plus all the other things tyat came in at metrification, decimalisation etc. Oh and 4mm to the foot etc. oh and don't get me on about temperature, I can never get used to Centigrade having spent some 50 years with Farenheight that is locked into my phsyci even though we have gibe on another 20 or whatever amount of years with news having dropoed to duplication, I now go around listening to the news weather reports or reading it without a clue of what the temperature is in my head other than by what my body tells me. Yes I know you can do a sort of calculation but my head will not remember how to do that and why should it, I only have so much ram in there so why clog it up with stuff I don’t feel I need or care about? Happy days.
 
dunnyrail said:
Wow this is going to go on and on who would ever have thought? I guess we just have to accept that those uf us olders ones grew up learning it and now thinking ft and inches and yards, Younger that learnt metric and think in that. Plus all the other things tyat came in at metrification, decimalisation etc. Oh and 4mm to the foot etc. oh and don't get me on about temperature, I can never get used to Centigrade having spent some 50 years with Farenheight that is locked into my phsyci even though we have gibe on another 20 or whatever amount of years with news having dropoed to duplication, I now go around listening to the news weather reports or reading it without a clue of what the temperature is in my head other than by what my body tells me. Yes I know you can do a sort of calculation but my head will not remember how to do that and why should it, I only have so much ram in there so why clog it up with stuff I don’t feel I need or care about? Happy days.
Click to expand...
Strangely, the mathematical conversion from Fahrenheit to Centigrade and vice-versa is one of the few things that I can remember from school :smoke::smoke:
 
dunnyrail said:
Oh is it?
Click to expand...
Yep :nod:

The calculation from F to C is to deduct 32, divide by 9 and multiply by 5

The calculation from C to F is to divide by 5, multiply by 9 and add 32

For -40 you only have to do the calculation once ;);)

So let's start with -40C

Divide by 5 = -8

Multiply by 9 = -72

Add 32 = -40F
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top