Re: Numerical Mysteries
| November 28, 2015 10:20AM |
Hi,
There were many railroads that used wider (+0.5") gauges. PRR was the largest, but many used 4' 9" instead.
In fact, the Gainesville Midland here in GA, depending on the year, reported to the Public Service Commision that it was 56.5" one year and 57" the next. Since gauge changes had not occurred, I suspect it was the problem in the 1890's that many secretaries were not literate enough to be able to know how to represent 1/2 and so rounded up. The next few years would report 57" and then you could tell the personnel changed because the reported gauge became 56.5" again.
In radio there is something called signal to noise ratio (SNR) - the larger the number, the smaller the significance of the noise. In my opinion only, the 1/2" in 36" has an SNR of 72 - the signal is 72 times greater than the noise and so the noise is basically not worth worrying about. For 56.5" and 57" the SNR is 113.
It is sort of hard to claim the 4' 9" (Pennsylvania) is not compatable with 4' 8.5" (New York Central) when they interchanged rolling stock very frequently. I suspect that they all had 4' 8.5" trucks. The track gauge was wider on the PRR for some reason. As long as the back-to-back on the wheel flanges matched the clearances in the switch frogs and guardrails, it really would not matter.
Just my opinions.
Doug vV
For your information here are four pages from my DVD data disk of the 1899 Official Railway Equipment Register:
There were many railroads that used wider (+0.5") gauges. PRR was the largest, but many used 4' 9" instead.
In fact, the Gainesville Midland here in GA, depending on the year, reported to the Public Service Commision that it was 56.5" one year and 57" the next. Since gauge changes had not occurred, I suspect it was the problem in the 1890's that many secretaries were not literate enough to be able to know how to represent 1/2 and so rounded up. The next few years would report 57" and then you could tell the personnel changed because the reported gauge became 56.5" again.
In radio there is something called signal to noise ratio (SNR) - the larger the number, the smaller the significance of the noise. In my opinion only, the 1/2" in 36" has an SNR of 72 - the signal is 72 times greater than the noise and so the noise is basically not worth worrying about. For 56.5" and 57" the SNR is 113.
It is sort of hard to claim the 4' 9" (Pennsylvania) is not compatable with 4' 8.5" (New York Central) when they interchanged rolling stock very frequently. I suspect that they all had 4' 8.5" trucks. The track gauge was wider on the PRR for some reason. As long as the back-to-back on the wheel flanges matched the clearances in the switch frogs and guardrails, it really would not matter.
Just my opinions.
Doug vV
For your information here are four pages from my DVD data disk of the 1899 Official Railway Equipment Register:
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
488 stops for water at Los Pinos tank on closing day Oct. 1979. Photo courtesy Don Richter
The NGDF was started by Don Richter and is currently operated in his memory by Nathan Holmes and others. Others who have contributed to the upkeep of this board are (in no particular order): Charles McCandless, Everett Lueck, Ted Wilton, Cole Adams, James Bane, John Moellmer, Jon Bentz, Linn Moedinger, lloyd lehrer, Rod Jensen, John Craft, Steven Forney, Herb Kelsey, Bill Ramaley, Russ Sperry (El Russo Loco), Josh McNeal, John West, Jim Armstrong, Bob Bergstrom, Greg Scholl, Blake Forbes Doug van Veelen and Mark Fuller.