Seasonal designs

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

Ice-velocipedes were popular with inventors before 1900:

http://www.google.com/patents?as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=1&as_miny_is=1860&as_maxm_is=1&as_maxy_is=1901&as_drrb_ap=q&as_minm_ap=1&as_miny_ap=2008&as_maxm_ap=1&as_maxy_ap=2008&q=velocipede+intitle:ice&scoring=2
or http://tinyurl.com/2vyx54

Most ice-velocipedes were timid creatures, with dainty little spikes
that were barely visible:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=s8xdAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=407876

Pitiful! The spikes on that wheel are hardly as big as the teeth on
the chain-sprockets.

***

This cowardly ice-velocipede had no spikes at all, just a weird
worm-drive that rotated a spiral drive like an egg-beater lying flat
against the ice:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=nO9uAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=266945

***

Here's an ice-velocipede whose teeth you could be proud of:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[Tosspot]

carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> Ice-velocipedes were popular with inventors before 1900:

<snip>

> Here's an ice-velocipede whose teeth you could be proud of:
> http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224

Pardon my Spanish, but thats ****ing mental! It looks like it's
*designed* to chop legs off.

[A Muzi]

> carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
>> Ice-velocipedes were popular with inventors before 1900:
> <snip>
>> Here's an ice-velocipede whose teeth you could be proud of:
>> http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224

Tosspot wrote:
> Pardon my Spanish, but thats ****ing mental! It looks like it's
> *designed* to chop legs off.

undocumented feature
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[landotter]

On Feb 10, 2:06 pm, Tosspot <Frank.Le...@esa.int> wrote:
> carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> > Ice-velocipedes were popular with inventors before 1900:
>
> <snip>
>
> > Here's an ice-velocipede whose teeth you could be proud of:
> > http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224
>
> Pardon my Spanish, but thats ****ing mental! It looks like it's
> *designed* to chop legs off.

Trouser clips *are* recommended, I'm sure!

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <13qupcqtm6vcm00@corp.supernews.com>,
A Muzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

> > carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> >> Ice-velocipedes were popular with inventors before 1900:
> > <snip>
> >> Here's an ice-velocipede whose teeth you could be proud of:
> >> http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224
>
> Tosspot wrote:
> > Pardon my Spanish, but thats ****ing mental! It looks like it's
> > *designed* to chop legs off.
>
> undocumented feature

Paper tiger :).

Carl has pointed out how fanciful many of these designs were (a lot of
stuff gets patented that never gets turned into real products; as true
today as in the 19th century).

What I'd like to know is what proportion of these designs were ever
built at all.

For example, let's return to the worm-gear bike for a moment:

<http://www.google.com/patents?id=nO9uAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=266945#PPP1,M1>

It commits the always-fun mechanical sin of trying to drive a worm gear
backwards. I'm no mechanical engineer, and there may be exceptions, but
that never works.

The inventor sort of knew this was the case: they've attempted to fix it
by referring in the text to a few friction-reduction tricks for the worm
gear ("self-oiling exterior surface," etc.), but I'm pretty sure you
still couldn't (or at least wouldn't) build that design without
confronting its gross physical impracticality.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[datakoll]

On Feb 10, 4:00*pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2:06 pm, Tosspot <Frank.Le...@esa.int> wrote:
>
> > carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> > > Ice-velocipedes were popular with inventors before 1900:
>
> > <snip>
>
> > > Here's an ice-velocipede whose teeth you could be proud of:
> > > *http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224
>
> > Pardon my Spanish, but thats ****ing mental! *It looks like it's
> > *designed* to chop legs off.
>
> Trouser clips *are* recommended, I'm sure!

aaahh yes to own one or the railroad cycle-yawl read the book right?
have you had the pleasure of skating on a water power mill pond? or
canal?
many drained, filled or converted to pots at 2008.

http://dnr.state.il.us/lands/landmgt/parks/i&m/main.htm

http://www.nyscanals.gov/maps/index.html

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:06:53 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@gmail.com>
wrote:

>What I'd like to know is what proportion of these designs were ever
>built at all.
>
>For example, let's return to the worm-gear bike for a moment:
>
><http://www.google.com/patents?id=nO9uAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=266945#PPP1,M1>
>
>It commits the always-fun mechanical sin of trying to drive a worm gear
>backwards. I'm no mechanical engineer, and there may be exceptions, but
>that never works.

Dear Ryan,

Next you'll criticize the gigantic four-sided egg-beater pedals on the
model with the big teeth:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224

Hard-to-please posters like you are why I saw no ice-bikes today:
http://i28.tinypic.com/1zbciz5.jpg

:-)

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

[datakoll]

http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/19-century/us-canals.jpg

There are complete canal maps. The canals follow many large streams
and rivers in the NE, the effect of a spider web layed over a map
surface.
I was friends with a Pennsylvania highlands general store owner and
operator of a horse and wagon delivery service, whose world view was
toward the Erie Canal not Philadelphia or Pittsburgh.
And NYC? before I-80 getting to the Delaware from NYC was time
consuming.

[Werehatrack]

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:29:23 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net may have
said:

>On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:06:53 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>What I'd like to know is what proportion of these designs were ever
>>built at all.
>>
>>For example, let's return to the worm-gear bike for a moment:
>>
>><http://www.google.com/patents?id=nO9uAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=266945#PPP1,M1>
>>
>>It commits the always-fun mechanical sin of trying to drive a worm gear
>>backwards. I'm no mechanical engineer, and there may be exceptions, but
>>that never works.
>
>Dear Ryan,
>
>Next you'll criticize the gigantic four-sided egg-beater pedals on the
>model with the big teeth:
> http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224
>
>Hard-to-please posters like you are why I saw no ice-bikes today:
> http://i28.tinypic.com/1zbciz5.jpg

I suspect it has more to do with the impracticality of using anything
at all on ice as thin as the rime on that water. That, and the fact
that in your neck of the woods, ice is doubtless regarded as something
to stay the heck off of.



--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <5iqvq3hgii581gpiv2m3il37i4ie6gvvu0@4ax.com>,
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:

> On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:06:53 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >What I'd like to know is what proportion of these designs were ever
> >built at all.
> >
> >For example, let's return to the worm-gear bike for a moment:
> >
> ><http://www.google.com/patents?id=nO9uAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=266945#PPP1,M1>
> >
> >It commits the always-fun mechanical sin of trying to drive a worm gear
> >backwards. I'm no mechanical engineer, and there may be exceptions, but
> >that never works.
>
> Dear Ryan,
>
> Next you'll criticize the gigantic four-sided egg-beater pedals on the
> model with the big teeth:
> http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224

Hm. I found that less unreasonable, perhaps because I use Egg Beaters on
my CX bike.

But at least those four-sided pedals would, you know, go around!

I took my 'cross bike out for a short ride in the snow today, more to
test some nifty new winter shoes (cheap and apparently functional!
Hooray for the Exustar E-SM450), and once again demonstrated that
cyclocross and icy packed melting snow don't mix.

On the other hand, the amount of surface around that would have been
suitable for an ice velo was a pleasing zero. Maybe something at higher
elevations.

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@gmail.com http://www.wiredcola.com/
"In other newsgroups, they killfile trolls."
"In rec.bicycles.racing, we coach them."

[carlfogel@comcast.net]

On Tue, 12 Feb 2008 01:22:36 -0600, Werehatrack
<rault00@earthWEEDSlink.net> wrote:

>On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 23:29:23 -0700, carlfogel@comcast.net may have
>said:
>
>>On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 22:06:53 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>What I'd like to know is what proportion of these designs were ever
>>>built at all.
>>>
>>>For example, let's return to the worm-gear bike for a moment:
>>>
>>><http://www.google.com/patents?id=nO9uAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=266945#PPP1,M1>
>>>
>>>It commits the always-fun mechanical sin of trying to drive a worm gear
>>>backwards. I'm no mechanical engineer, and there may be exceptions, but
>>>that never works.
>>
>>Dear Ryan,
>>
>>Next you'll criticize the gigantic four-sided egg-beater pedals on the
>>model with the big teeth:
>> http://www.google.com/patents?id=JVtIAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=369224
>>
>>Hard-to-please posters like you are why I saw no ice-bikes today:
>> http://i28.tinypic.com/1zbciz5.jpg
>
>I suspect it has more to do with the impracticality of using anything
>at all on ice as thin as the rime on that water. That, and the fact
>that in your neck of the woods, ice is doubtless regarded as something
>to stay the heck off of.

Dear Werehatrack,

You'd never see me out on the ice, but . . .

It actually gets thicker than you'd expect in the upper reaches of the
reservoir.

When the Arkansas freezes and then thaws above the reservoir, it often
floats three-foot thick ice floes up above the dropping water level to
line its own banks

A friend saw this coyote at--

Er, on Blue Mesa Reservoir:
http://i25.tinypic.com/21j6dfp.jpg

Cheers,

Carl Fogel