Railways To Go Metric

[Railsigns]

Presumably if this does go ahead (if it's not just a Mail on Sunday invention), it would give an opportunity to rationalise the distance measurement system, which at the moment is a muddle of pre-grouping, let alone pre-Beeching, systems. Mileages jump or change direction at long forgotten junctions, for just one example almost the whole Cambrian line is measured from Whitchurch via a long closed line from there to Welshpool.

Yes - and that's what was done when the Cambrian line was being converted to ERTMS. New kilometre posts were installed along the whole route, all measured from either Sutton Bridge Junction or Dovey Junction, thereby eliminating historical oddities (the old mileposts still exist and are used for operating purposes for the time being). I expect the same will happen on other UK routes as ERTMS spreads.

 

[edwin_m]

There's no real reason to get rid of mileposts - they can just be regarded as position markers which help to identify locations rather than worrying about the distance between them. Haven't a couple of routes had both yellow mileposts and blue km posts for some years?

 

[Railsigns]

Haven't a couple of routes had both yellow mileposts and blue km posts for some years?

The only blue kilometre posts I'm aware of are those between King's Cross and Royston, which are now either missing or difficult to spot (see example below). A few other lines have had kilometres posts of various colours installed prior to being electrified. The modern standard for kilometre posts is yellow figures on a black background.

 

[Murph]

I believe "chainage" comes from the historic practice of measuring distances by using chains of known length, presumably one chain long! It is indeed now the pretty much universal civil engineering term for linear distance along a particular route, measured from a defined datum point.

Having done a traditional land survey back in my school days, yes, it's literally a standard length chain dragged along the ground (pulled taut and level when in position). 1 chain is a fairly reasonable standard interval between survey points. If memory serves, the links of the chain are a standard length as well for situations where a fraction of a chain is required.

 

[LesS]

It has been amusing to read this thread. As has been pointed out we made the imperial to metric change more than 40 years ago. There were no issues of concern. We all became accustomed to the new measurements very quickly. The cows continued to give milk. The chickens continued to lay eggs, and the curtains did not fade.

More recently there has been a major problem, a catastrophe in fact, in the railway area.
Here in NSW we needed to obtain a new boiler for locomotive 3801. The locomotive was designed in 1938 in imperial measurements. The construction contract was awarded to DB at Meiningen. The new boiler duly arrived and, it did not fit the frame. Nobody has yet confirmed the issue but it seems that DB did a conversion from imperial to metric and did not use the exact conversion calculation. The boiler was returned to Germany for rectification. It arrived back in Sydney a few days ago. Nobody at the moment is prepared to commit whether or not it will fit the frame; and if not; whether it can be modified to fit.

The message here is that whenever conversions are being made between imperial and metric, due care is essential that accurate conversion calculations are made.

 

[Trog]

There were some blue kilometre posts in the Bedford area back in the 1980's to do with the Midland suburban electrification. Small blue plate with the number on it, attached to an offcut of S&T rodding.

 

[D6975]

So it can, I'd never explored that. But it's quite limited, won't even work in twelfths (for feet and inches) let alone eightieths for miles and chains.

Again, yes it will.
You can force it to work in any fixed fraction you want within reason.
To get it to work in Miles and Chains (80ths) chose one of the fixed fractions - 16ths for example. Then click on Custom. Then, in the type box, edit the format expression from 16 to 80 - simples.
The type box should now read:
# ??/80

 

[DelW]

Again, yes it will.
You can force it to work in any fixed fraction you want within reason.
To get it to work in Miles and Chains (80ths) chose one of the fixed fractions - 16ths for example. Then click on Custom. Then, in the type box, edit the format expression from 16 to 80 - simples.
The type box should now read:
# ??/80

Ha, that's a neat trick! I've used Excel for at least 15 years and never spotted that.

The miles and chains example is not one I'm ever likely to need in earnest, but I do have spreadsheets which work in metric units but need to display results in imperial. Your method might well allow some simplification of those.

 

[D6975]

Ha, that's a neat trick! I've used Excel for at least 15 years and never spotted that.

The miles and chains example is not one I'm ever likely to need in earnest, but I do have spreadsheets which work in metric units but need to display results in imperial. Your method might well allow some simplification of those.

I've been using it for about 20 years, teaching it for 15.
It's amazing how many odds and ends I've picked up from trying to do things that students have asked about over the years.

 

[edwin_m]

RSSB is doing a study into possible hazards from metrication of the operational railway under ERTMS:

http://www.rssb.co.uk/pages/research-catalogue/t1013.aspx

 

[Tony2215]

Why not just display both metric and imperial on signs? Im sure it wont hurt anyone to do that.

 

[Railsigns]

Why not just display both metric and imperial on signs? I'm sure it wont hurt anyone to do that.

Ouch!

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Ouch!

Are the top 3 to tell drivers to switch configs to 3rd rail if going left at them points? Is that photo taken at Ashford?

 

[Joshrowlands]

I personally don't like this idea I didn't listen as much of I should of in maths and now I only know yards and miles all other measurements are like looking at the divinchi code to my eyes

 

[Railsigns]

Are the top 3 to tell drivers to switch configs to 3rd rail if going left at them points? Is that photo taken at Ashford?

The top two signs mean "lower shoes" and the location is Ebbsfleet.

 

[krus_aragon]

I personally don't like this idea I didn't listen as much of I should of in maths and now I only know yards and miles all other measurements are like looking at the divinchi code to my eyes

I shouldn't worry too much. Even being (relatively) fluent with both styles of measurement, I find I favour one system or another in a particular context. In length/distance, I follow:

• mm for tiny measurements
• then either cm or inches as the fancy takes me
• metres for short distances, say as far as the eye can see
• miles for any further journey, as that's what you see on road signs
• but it's meters and kilometers for altitude

You might find you prefer different systems for different occasions as well.

I typically quote my height in imperial measurements as that's what everyone expects me to use. But tell me the weight of a newborn baby in pounds and ounces and it means nothing at all to me.

Consider yourself lucky that you weren't raised in the days of 12 shillings to a pound, 8 pints to a gallon, 22 yards to a chain, 16 ounces to a pound, but 14 pounds to a stone! (No, neither was I; I had to look several of those up.)

 

[Greenback]

I personally don't like this idea I didn't listen as much of I should of in maths and now I only know yards and miles all other measurements are like looking at the divinchi code to my eyes

I'm sure that many people, like me, did listen and have far more of an understanding of and empathy with metric measurements than imperial.

I was at school 40 years ago and metric was being used in lessons then. As a result, I have no idea what a rod or chain are.

 

[Murph]

I was at school 40 years ago and metric was being used in lessons then. As a result, I have no idea what a rod or chain are.

Likewise, but we also literally used physical surveyor's chains, so did learn about them in addition to metric. It's pretty much hit or miss how much someone was taught about imperial in the 70s and 80s, tending towards very little in the digital 90s and later. Metric was guaranteed to be taught, but there was no guarantee that imperial would be completely excluded, so it varies depending on the individual schools and individual teachers.

 

[hounddog]

I was at junior school in the run up to decimalisation so I started off using pounds, shillings and pence and the switch all seemed straightforward at the time (I was about nine-and-a-half).

I don't remember doing science in anything other than SI units but I still think mostly in imperial units (or, when shopping, 'big' and 'small').

 

[D1009]

Consider yourself lucky that you weren't raised in the days of 12 shillings to a pound, 8 pints to a gallon, 22 yards to a chain, 16 ounces to a pound, but 14 pounds to a stone! (No, neither was I; I had to look several of those up.)

I certainly know what a gallon of beer means!

 

[najaB]

I personally don't like this idea I didn't listen as much of I should of in maths and now I only know yards and miles all other measurements are like looking at the divinchi code to my eyes

You're 19 years old and only understand miles and yards?! I didn't even think they still taught in old measures any more anywhere outside the USA (except possibly Liberia and Burma).

 

[krus_aragon]

I'm sure that many people, like me, did listen and have far more of an understanding of and empathy with metric measurements than imperial.

I was at school 40 years ago and metric was being used in lessons then. As a result, I have no idea what a rod or chain are.

I was in a school's maths storeroom recently, and found a set of hardbound "advanced mathematics" textbooks hiding on the top shelf. They proudly declared they were the "Metric Edition"!

 

[w1bbl3]

I personally don't like this idea I didn't listen as much of I should of in maths and now I only know yards and miles all other measurements are like looking at the divinchi code to my eyes

Interesting is this based on road signs by any chance?
As mile markers are not actually at mile intervals they are in fact 1600 metre intervals some 9.3 metres (or yards 10 short). Equally 100 yard measurements are in fact either 90 metres or 100 metres. The true distance being 91.4 metres.

 

[Hyphen]

I personally don't like this idea I didn't listen as much of I should of in maths and now I only know yards and miles all other measurements are like looking at the divinchi code to my eyes

Apparently not in English either

 

[D6975]

Consider yourself lucky that you weren't raised in the days of 12 shillings to a pound, 8 pints to a gallon, 22 yards to a chain, 16 ounces to a pound, but 14 pounds to a stone! (No, neither was I; I had to look several of those up.)

12 Shillings to a pound???

That would make a ten bob note a very unusual creature....

 

[krus_aragon]

12 Shillings to a pound???

That would make a ten bob note a very unusual creature....

Er, yeah... :blush:

That should be 10 shillings (24 pence each), not twelve 20d shillings. I suppose it helps prove my point about having to remember non-standard subdivisions.

As first to spot the mistake, I award you a cookie!

 

[Zoidberg]

Er, yeah... :blush:

That should be 10 shillings (24 pence each), not twelve 20d shillings. I suppose it helps prove my point about having to remember non-standard subdivisions.

As first to spot the mistake, I award you a cookie!

I'm left a bit confused after reading that. There were:

12 pennies to the shilling
20 shillings to the pound (£)

And so there were ten florins ( 2/- ) to the pound and eight half crowns ( 2/6d ) to the pound.

Is my age showing?

 

[fandroid]

I remember driving around Ireland when the signposts gave distances in km (without saying so) and the speed limit signs were in mph !

It's about time the railways joined the rest of the engineering world in metric measurements. I am a retired engineer. I worked in metric (SI Units to be specific) for my whole career.

I thought I understood that LUL do their distances in km.

I just hope that NR don't have an extreme fit of tidiness and melt down all those cast distance markers. It would be nice if a few were left in place for industrial archaeological reasons. (Although I'm sure that there is a market for such things too).

 

[PeterY]

I'm left a bit confused after reading that. There were:

12 pennies to the shilling
20 shillings to the pound (£)

And so there were ten florins ( 2/- ) to the pound and eight half crowns ( 2/6d ) to the pound.

Is my age showing?

Only 240 pennies, and a whopping 960 farthings (1/4d) to the pound.

Who remembers guineas £1 & 1 shilling (£1.05) ? Often mentioned in very old films for things like suits.

 

[Zoidberg]

Only 240 pennies, and a whopping 960 farthings (1/4d) to the pound.

Who remembers guineas £1 & 1 shilling (£1.05) ? Often mentioned in very old films for things like suits.

Ah, yes, guineas. The posh shops priced things in quineas, particularly tailors and dress shops ... and I remember seeing that in the '50s and '60s.