Any suggestions for HO gradient?

Yeah, I guess that's why HO is 3.5mm:1'. You need two rulers for that. Grade percentage doesn't care if you use metres, feet, inches, furlongs, cubits, yards, miles or parsecs.

Cheers, John

This won't work if the OP needs to really climb to an upper level of a two (or more!) level layout.

On 2/22/2009 9:02 AM NICHE541 spake thus:

Ah, the "Mystery Spot" approach to model railroading. Could be interesting ...

Of course, if you own an HO scale ruler and dial caliper you can ignore both the metric *and* English systems of measurement, and have the best of *both* worlds...

~Pete (Who wonders why we're arguing about this in the first place.)

Your guess is wrong, at least in Europe. Here HO is 1:87. That approximates 3,5 mm/foot but is not exactly the same. Protypes are in metric too, remember, here. So there is no use for a mm/ foot conversion. We do this since the end of the 18th century. Before USA was there. So there might be some sense in it. Even you, officially, converted to metric. A side-effect of the lack of education is the now and then blow- out of a spacecraft. I hope your children will do better. Incidentally, your system in fact is metric too, since the inch is defined to be exactly 25.4 mm. Which is exactly 0.00254 meter.

On 2/23/2009 11:12 AM Wim van Bemmel spake thus:

No, our system is definitely *not* metric, even though what you say is true. The definition of the basic unit (the inch) has nothing to do with how that unit is used. Doesn't matter whether the length of an inch is based on a wavelength of light, an iridium bar stored in Brussels, or the length of the king's thumb. And since our system doesn't use divisions of 10, it isn't metric.

Unless, of course, you're modelling a US prototype, as many Europeans - and darned near all Americans- do.

The metric system was adopted in April of 1795, some 19 years after we declared our independance in 1776. (Looks as if the metric system is of no help to the uneducated, no matter where they're from.)

Ya know, it's hard to tell whether you're just a run-of-the-mill Eurocentric asshol, or if you're simply deranged -but in either case you're a wonderful example of someone who's willing to say things on Usenet that would get his balls kicked right through the roof of his mouth if he ever dared say them face to face.

Right back at ya. And considering your history for the last few hundred years or so it shouldn't be a difficult task. But face it: you're as self-centered as a gyroscope and there's damned little hope that you or yours will ever evolve out of it.

Yeah, sure.

And by analogy, the Wright flyer came first and was followed much later by the Airbus A380. Therefore (obviously!) the Wright Flyer is an Airbus A380.

This may be a new world's record for dumb statements...

~Pete

I know, I have been a member of NMRA.

Sorry, I underestimated your roots.

I think it was spelled independence.

But, by 1790, there were still only 13 states that adhered. The recognition by France came later even, after Holland even.

Wim van Bemmel skriver:

They are still converting to the mieric system - inch by inch :-)

Klaus

That gives some hope for the future.. At least let them read the instructions before assembling another space vehicle.. ;-)

Oh - I see. here it's 1:87.1

But first they need to learn how to spell "metre", "litre" etc.. ;-)

A meter is a measuring device for things such as gasses, liquids, electricity, a metre is a unit of length. ;-)

-- Cheers.

Roger T. See the GER at: -

Erm, "meter" is the ISO spelling. Even in the UK, the "metre" spelling is drifting away on the tides of receding Empaah.

Now, how do you pronounce "kilometer"? Heh heh.

For Wim and others who think that rational = useful: I grew up metric (in Austria), and Imperial (in England. Came to Canada, used imperial almost exclusively. All my tape measures are metric and imperial -- and I sometimes measure in inches and fractions, and sometimes in cm and mm. Why? Because neither unit is useful for all circumstances. I guess I'm bi-metrical. ;-)

The metric system is usually defended on the grounds that conversion between units is so much easier - one needs to merely shift the decimal point.

Well, first of all, that kind of conversion is rarely needed. I mean do you really want to convert 350 Hl of wine into 350,000,000 ml (350 000

000 ml in ISO)?

Secondly, there are several areas even in science where a decimal system is no better (and sometimes worse) than a non-decimal system of measurement. Eg, astronomy.

Thirdly, most measurements made by most people most of the time are of quantities of stuff that one wants to trade, or use, or make into other stuff. The traditional measurements, oddly enough, were of all such useful quantities. They varied some from one jurisdiction to another, mostly because of politics (ie, taxation) and and devious cross-border trading than with reality.

Fourthly, the e-sizes are all within a few percent of those traditional quantities, as even a superficial acquaintance with the history of brewing (for example) will demonstrate.

Fifthly, for international trade what matters is not the measurement system, but standard sizes and quantities. And those are a mixed bunch still -- oil in barrels (of 45 US gallons), containers of 40 or 53 feet, ship speed in knots, diamonds in carats, etc.

Cheers,

wolf k.

I've always understood HO to be 3.5mm = 1 foot. An interesting cross between two measuring systems.That would be, pasted from Google, (1 foot) divided by (3.5 millimeters) = 87.0857143

J.B.

Exactly. Imperial units are typically of sizes that are "nice" for visualisation and comprehension, whereas many metric are not, eg a cm is too small and a metre is too big to provide a nice reference for many objects.

For men of my size, rather long but not extreme, about 6 ft 5", 1,92 m, a meter is precisely one big step. A cm is the thickness of my pink. An inch is exactly the width of my thumb, which is 2.5 cm. So 10 cm is four thumbs...So a dm (decimeter, 0.1 m) is my hand wide. And the fingers of my right hand spread 20 cm, or 2 dm. "my" fingers, of course, not yours. The feet of me and my wife differ about 50 %. So a foot is no means of measuring. Unless you know that there go 12 thumbs, no, inches, in one foot. And that a pavement tile, here, measures 30 cm, which is slightly less than one foot. Which is 30,5 cm. Be happy with what you are used to, but when it comes to measuring and communicating the results, metric is not that bad. US government requires that, by the way.

The true advantage of the SI system of units is that complex scientific calculations are much easier if SI base units are used exclusively. That is, however, much outside the scope of this group.

Those peculiar mixed-unit scale ratios were, to my knowledge, invented by Henry Greenly of UK in the 1910-1920 period.

Still in use are:

2mm/ft 3mm/ft 3.5mm/ft 4mm/ft 7mm/ft 10mm/ft ... and probably one or two larger ones that I don't remember the exact values for.

While Canada is officially a metric measurement country, it's a mixed bag in reality. My pickup is made in the USA, all Ford cargo vans are made in the USA, all heavy trucks are made in the USA, paint is sold in US gallons converted to litres, carpet and flooring are sold by the square foot, square yard, or square metre. Walk into a lumber store and ask for a

50x100 2.4 metre stud and you receive a blank look. Ask for 2x4 8' stud and you are shown a truck load. We rounded off some measurements such as 1 cup=250mL. True, prototypes are built using metric (most likely in millimetres) and I think it's great. But, some mechanics still insist that a 3/4" socket properly fits a 19mm nut.

Cheers, John