Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was fortunate in discovering decimal feet early on. It is what Surveyors use and I use it to measure or lay out. I can estimate down to a a tenth of a hundredth of a foot directly with satisfactory results, if I need better control I am forced to use other measuring tools divided into decimal inches only because measuring tools that measure in decimal feet only go down to hundredths of a foot, the advantage of metric is there are measuring tools available that meet machinists requirements, if decimal feet would catch on, the same could be done using that system. In my cad work it is decimal feet and I can use as many decimal places as needed to portray the precision need for the measurement. I convert feet and inches along with their fractions to decimal feet if I need to work with them. That is what your computer does with fractions of any flavor even inches are fractions of a foot, computers work with a Base 10 system which is also a fraction, just one clean to work with.

jud

Here is the wife measuring her reach in 7 month old dog, a tricky non-precise measurement method59caaf7099e0e_Badger002.thumb.jpg.a94dd9dc0a7ae8164a5cf4b13900eb1c.jpg.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jud

 

I'm sorry but I think the dog measuring system will never catch on in my house. Besides the only dog I have available is a Shih-Tzu and that would only work in the smaller scales! Also she is Chinese and i would have to translate the results anyway!

 

Lou

Lou

 

Build logs: Colonial sloop Providence 1/48th scale kit bashed from AL Independence

Currant builds:

Constructo Brigantine Sentinel (Union) (On hold)

Minicraft 1/350 Titanic (For the Admiral)

1/350 Heavy Cruiser USS Houston (Resin)

Currant research/scratchbuild:

Schooner USS Lanikai/Hermes

Non ship build log:

1/35th UH-1H Huey

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

As an engineer, I used calculators of one sort or another all of my working life and for many things I find them much more convenient than firing up a computer.  When I retired I owned a fancy Hp calculator which unfortunately died.  You can still buy inexpensive calculators at big box and chain drug stores for $10 US or less.  I have one on my workbench and consider it to be an essential modeling tool.  In this example, knowing only two facts:  1in = 25.4mm, and the scale of the model, 1:60, height of the scale figure becomes a simple calculation.

 

Roger

Edited by Roger Pellett
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there is also a handy app that helps to reduce errors when converting back and forth: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/model-scaler/id528641484?mt=8

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not just generational. I'm 38 with no cell of any kind (wife, neither). But I suppose we're hardly representative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its not that hard! just look at your build and use common sense. relate figures etc. to doorways and other structures that are pretty standard in our world. always remember though, that all of us already are in possession of the best calculator/convertor in the world; our brain!

 

chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 9/20/2017 at 1:00 PM, lmagna said:
Quote

So looking at the above numbers in the scale used, there is a difference of 3/25" or 3 mm from short to tall, and this is at one of the larger scales being used by builders on this forum. When you run the numbers for smaller scales the difference becomes even smaller of course. I also found it interesting that Englishmen were shorter on the average than American men of the same time period, and Frenchmen even shorter!

I've read somewhere that units of measurement weren't totally standardized at the time.  It came up talking about how the stories of Napoleon being short weren't really true, he was an average height, but with the French measurements the numbers were lower, so it would sound like he was short to someone that only knew the english measurements, and the English just used that for propaganda.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/20/2017 at 1:00 PM, lmagna said:
Quote

So looking at the above numbers in the scale used, there is a difference of 3/25" or 3 mm from short to tall, and this is at one of the larger scales being used by builders on this forum. When you run the numbers for smaller scales the difference becomes even smaller of course. I also found it interesting that Englishmen were shorter on the average than American men of the same time period, and Frenchmen even shorter!

I've read somewhere that units of measurement weren't totally standardized at the time.  It came up talking about how the stories of Napoleon being short weren't really true, he was an average height, but with the French measurements the numbers were lower, so it would sound like he was short to someone that only knew the english measurements, and the English just used that for propaganda.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/20/2017 at 1:00 PM, lmagna said:
Quote

So looking at the above numbers in the scale used, there is a difference of 3/25" or 3 mm from short to tall, and this is at one of the larger scales being used by builders on this forum. When you run the numbers for smaller scales the difference becomes even smaller of course. I also found it interesting that Englishmen were shorter on the average than American men of the same time period, and Frenchmen even shorter!

I've read somewhere that units of measurement weren't totally standardized at the time.  It came up talking about how the stories of Napoleon being short weren't really true, he was an average height, but with the French measurements the numbers were lower, so it would sound like he was short to someone that only knew the english measurements, and the English just used that for propaganda.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/20/2017 at 1:00 PM, lmagna said:

So looking at the above numbers in the scale used, there is a difference of 3/25" or 3 mm from short to tall, and this is at one of the larger scales being used by builders on this forum. When you run the numbers for smaller scales the difference becomes even smaller of course. I also found it interesting that Englishmen were shorter on the average than American men of the same time period, and Frenchmen even shorter!

 

 

I've read somewhere that units of measurement weren't totally standardized at the time.  It came up talking about how the stories of Napoleon being short weren't really true, he was an average height, but with the French units of measurement were slightly longer so the numbers were lower, so it would sound like he was short to someone that only knew the english measurements, and the English just used that for propaganda.

 

edit-------------------

https://www.thoughtco.com/was-napoleon-bonaparte-short-1221108

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/03/napolean-bonaparte-having-been-short-is-a-myth/

https://www.entitymag.com/napoleons-height-history/

 

had some time this afternoon and found a couple of links.  Not the most academic sources, but will serve for the purposes of this discussion that model figures can very by several mm and still be considered accurate to scale since measurements weren't exactly as accurate as they are today.  If there is debate over someone like Napoleon's height, then exact measurements of any other historic figure can be taken with a grain of salt.

Edited by Lancer033
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until the general adoption of the metric system, which began to radiate from France in the second quarter of the 19th century, every country had its own definition of inch, foot, mile, pound, ton, etc. It seems tha Napoleon I was about 1.69 m, which was not very tall and smaller than a lot of the people, who surrounded him, judging by pictures. He was also of a more stocky built, which gave probably the impression to be smaller than he really was.

wefalck

 

panta rhei - Everything is in flux

 

 

M-et-M-72.jpg  Banner-AKHS-72.jpg  Banner-AAMM-72.jpg  ImagoOrbis-72.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I visited the NMM back in '07 I saw the display of his uniform and could not believe how small it was.  I probably could of worn it when I was 11 or 12 but 1.69m about 5foot 5inches is now considered pretty small.  It is amazing how big people have gotten since then.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This seems to apply to the industrial nations and the Nordic countries and N-America only. It also depends apparently strongly on the amount of manual labour and nutrition, hence on social class. The working classes seems to have been shorter at all times than the higher echelons of society. As the navies recruted themselves more likely from middle to lower echelons, they were likely to be shorter on average.

 

I am 1.80 m (5'9") and it was a rather interesting experience to walk the streets of say La Paz in Bolivia, where most people seem to be +/- 1.60 m (5'3") ...

wefalck

 

panta rhei - Everything is in flux

 

 

M-et-M-72.jpg  Banner-AKHS-72.jpg  Banner-AAMM-72.jpg  ImagoOrbis-72.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/16/2018 at 6:25 AM, wefalck said:

Until the general adoption of the metric system, which began to radiate from France in the second quarter of the 19th century, every country had its own definition of inch, foot, mile, pound, ton, etc. It seems tha Napoleon I was about 1.69 m, which was not very tall and smaller than a lot of the people, who surrounded him, judging by pictures. He was also of a more stocky built, which gave probably the impression to be smaller than he really was.

 

There were pictures of Napoleon? :o

Chuck Seiler
San Diego Ship Modelers Guild
Nautical Research Guild

 
Current Build:: Colonial Schooner SULTANA (scratch from Model Expo Plans), Hanseatic Cog Wutender Hund, John Smith Shallop
Completed:  Missouri Riverboat FAR WEST (1876) Scratch, 1776 Gunboat PHILADELPHIA (Scratch 1/4 scale-Model Shipways plans)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another factor is that you have to work with what is available.  Unless you make your own figures you have to go what is commercially available and those may not readily allow you to choose between 5feet and 5 feet 6 inches. One technique I have used is to sand off the figures feet (and maybe portion of the leg) to get the right height.  I then use a little sculpy or gesso to remake the feet.  ...a shorter dumpy guy.  Alternatively, cut the feet off, add a little length to the legs and re sculpy the feet. 

Chuck Seiler
San Diego Ship Modelers Guild
Nautical Research Guild

 
Current Build:: Colonial Schooner SULTANA (scratch from Model Expo Plans), Hanseatic Cog Wutender Hund, John Smith Shallop
Completed:  Missouri Riverboat FAR WEST (1876) Scratch, 1776 Gunboat PHILADELPHIA (Scratch 1/4 scale-Model Shipways plans)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...