Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2015 August 8

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 8

Why is the letter Q used at all Railroad crossings in America?

long version of title question in all caps
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
FOR YOU TO SOLVE -- EVERY TIME A TRAIN APPROACHES A CROSSING THE ENGINEER BLOWS/RINGS THE WHISTLE " TOOT TOOT " -- AND ALONG THE RAILROAD BED THERE IS A ROUND, WHITE, SIGN BEFORE EACH CROSSING WITH A LARGE BLACK "W" TO REMIND THE ENGINEER TO BLOW/RING THE WHISTLE -- RIGHT ?? AND SO THEN THE ENGINEER ACTIVATES THE WHISTLE IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER = ( TOOOOOT - TOOOOOT - TOT - TOOOOOT ) OR 2 LONG TOOTS; A SHORT TOOT; AND THEN A LONG TOOT -- RIGHT ?? NOW, WHY IS THAT THE PARTICULAR METHOD USED TO BLOW/RING THE WHISTLE AT EACH CROSSING ?? - BECAUSE IF YOU USE THE MOST OBVIOUS METHOD TO UNDERSTANDING THIS PROBLEM YOU WOULD TURN TO THE INTERNATIONAL MORSE CODE - RIGHT ? AND IN DOING SO YOU WOULD SEE & HEAR THAT ( DAH; DAH; DIT; DAH = Q ) WHY NOT BLOW/RING THE WHISTLE ( DAH; DIT; DAH; DIT = C ) C WOULD STAND FOR CROSSING AND MAKE SENSE - RIGHT ? WHAT DO YOU THINK IS THE REASON AND/OR MEANING THAT THE LETTER Q IS USED AT ALL RAILROAD CROSSINGS IN AMERICA  ??

THANK YOU, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.93.60.29 (talk) 19:45, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Please don't SHOUT your question. I've added a heading for you. I can't explain American practices, though perhaps the driver someone (see Tevildo's answer below) thinks that the pattern means "look out". Morse code is not very widely understood. In the UK, the sound is usually two notes in a descending third. Dbfirs 19:52, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

See Whistle board and Train horn. The US pattern is mandated in Rule 14(l) of the Federal Railroad Administration regulations. Tevildo (talk) 21:40, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

The same pattern is used in Canada too. Most railroad regulations seem to be common to both countries, for fairly obvious reasons.188.247.76.211 (talk) 19:02, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

I found an old railroad rulebook from one US railroad. It included the stated Q or --o- signal for "Approaching public crossings at grade". Specified signals were required for a number of situations, such as o for "Apply brakes. Stop" or --- for "Train parted" down to -----oooooooooo for "Flagman for track No. 10 may return from North." I am reminded of US Civil War bugle signals, as specified in infantry manuals, which gave bugle calls for a great many situations, such as"Charge," "Skirmishers return to formation," "Cannoneers dismount," "or "By the left flank." Train whistles or bugle calls could be heard thousands of feet away and were an effective predecessor to wireless communications for sending unambiguous instructions to those within earshot. They likely chose short and distinctive signals for common and important messages. Edison (talk) 17:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Can't figure out how to buy a product

I was watching a youtube video about "7 Things you didn't know existed" and one of them struck as something I wanted to buy. I went to google and typed it in. I got their website [1]. I don't see any option there to actually purchase it. Okay, maybe they're selling it in hardware stores and so on. So I went to Google shopping and typed it in. I got all kinds of false positives. So I did a regular google search and "buy". Nope. The only thing I can think of is that this is like one of those Kickstarter products that hasn't come to market? If it is they should say that and not have people like me going in circles. Can anyone confirm it's not available to actually purchase?108.46.105.232 (talk) 21:37, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

It was a Kickstarter project. It wasn't funded.[2] Nanonic (talk) 21:47, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

(e/c) Here it says it's currently being funded and needs $130,000. Knowing nothing about such things, I guess that that's a reference to crowdfunding. That was dated 26 June 2015, and it suggests it's not actually released to the market yet. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:48, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I guess it bodes well for the product that at least my interest was raised, but I still find it very annoying it isn't front and center that it's not available.--108.46.105.232 (talk) 22:07, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

The idea of a Kickstarter is that you have an idea - and you need a certain amount of funding in order to bring it to market. You ask people to pledge - and to receive some kind of reward for doing so. If you get pledges for the amount you asked for - Kickstarter bill your backers and hand you the money - if not, then no money changes hands and everyone walks away.

In this case, the project claimed they needed $150,000 to bring the product to market - after 30 days, there was only one question asked about it, only 150 people backed it - and the total raised was about 10% of what they needed. A really disastrous flop.

So - if the inventor(s) still believe it'll sell in large numbers - they'll need something like $150,000 from somewhere - venture capital, second mortgage on their homes...whatever. Personally, I'd say that the monumental failure of the Kickstarter should be a red flag to investors.

I doubt it'll ever be manufactured.

On the other hand, this appears to be nothing more than a bluetooth light switch. If you Google "bluetooth light switch" - you'll find half a dozen companies selling much the same thing. SteveBaker (talk) 05:20, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

We should probably talk about WHY the initial Kickstarter campaign might have failed. I see several disadvantages to the item:

1) Initial cost. I count 25 light switch in my house. If it costs $100 each to upgrade to that new system, that's $2500. That's a huge amount of money for something so minor.

2) Battery life. Looks like they use tiny watch 2 AAA batteries in those switches. Using those to broadcast a signal has to drain them quickly. Imagine the expense and annoyance of having to replace all those batteries on a regular basis. And all those batteries in landfills is bad for the environment. Even if they were rechargeable, you'd still need replace them with freshly charged batteries, and rechargeable batteries tend not to last as long between charges (especially when old). They list 9 months for each pair of alkaline (disposable) batteries and 6 months for each pair of rechargeable batteries. Looking at the disposable batteries, that would mean I would have to replace 50 batteries every 9 months to have every light switch in my home set up this way.

3) Existing switches. What happens to those ? Do you remove them and try to patch the holes ? I can't see how you could use them along with the new ones, as they would seem to be in series, meaning both would need to be on for you to get power to the light. I've had such switches before, and they are really annoying, in that you try to turn the light on at one switch only to realize it must be turned off at the other switch.

4) Receiving unit. They didn't show it, but I picture a "wall wart", possibly with an antenna. Not an attractive thing, and it might not fit well behind furniture.

5) Range. They listed a 300 ft range, but only if you have an unobstructed line of sight. Sounds similar to the walkie-talkie range claims, which are absurdly overly optimistic, especially when the batteries run low. Having attempted to use a wireless mouse and found the range to be way too short, I'm always wary of that.

6) Interference. Does the signal cause interference in other devices, or do other devices interfere with it ? Always a concern.

7) You can now lose your light switch ! Of all the things you could lose, I bet a light switch wasn't one of them. You could move it and forget where you placed it. Your spouse could move it without telling you. It could have been taken down for cleaning and not remounted yet. Imagine groping in the dark for a switch that isn't there. I also see practical jokers having fun with this, say mounting it on the ceiling.

So, on balance, it seems like a lot of things can go wrong for very limited benefit. Many of those features could be done more reliable with appliance timers, that turn on or cut off the power at an outlet at preset times. Although, having used those and a programmable thermostat, I've found it's usually not worth my time to program such things. Every time your schedule changes you have to reprogram everything, and it's just not worth it. For lights, specifically, a motion detector that turns it on when motion is detected, and back off after some amount of time without motion, is far more sensible, IMHO. I have 2 of those installed now and intend to get many more, when the price comes down (about $15 each now). StuRat (talk) 15:48, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Why would you patch the holes? Isn't that where you put that base switch? Isn't that what the FAQ means when it says "We designed Gecko Switch to fit into the standard 1 gang handy box"? Also how did watch batteries come in to this? The FAQ clearly says the Gecko unit uses AAA batteries. Personally I think these smart home ideas are dime a dozen but, some of your criticism is weird since it sounds like you came up with a big list without even bothering to read a tiny bit about what you're criticising. Nil Einne (talk) 16:29, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

I followed the OP's link and read that page. AAA batteries will last a bit longer, but that's still an issue. If it broadcasts to the old switch location instead of to the outlet, then that brings up another issue that the whole reason to buy this product might have been because the old switch was in an awkward location, say where they wanted to hang a picture, and this won't fix that issue (unless the new switch is flush with the wall). Also, it will then require turning off power to the circuit to rewire the (receiver) switch, which seems like the type of thing somebody who wants this device is trying to avoid in the first place. StuRat (talk) 18:06, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

The FAQ is on the page the OP linked, so apparently you didn't read it much before making a long reply based on little understanding of what you're criticising [3] I presume because you thought it better to come up with random criticisms of an admitedly boring product which you knew almost nothing about. No idea why you think they're targetting people who don't want to turn off the power, they seem to be targetting people who want a easily moveable switch (or more than one for the same base), as well as people who want to move the switch semi-permanently but can't be bothered rewiring their home (which in most developed countries would generally cost significantly more and also take far longer), as well as people who want to be able to use their phones or tablets to control their switches, as well as people who want a little fancier control. As for pictures, it would depend whether or not the picture looks odd when it's not flush against the wall, presuming the picture or frame doesn't cause interference. Clearly having the sender switch does away with the major problem namely that having your switch behind a picture is fairly annoying when it comes to using the switch. Nil Einne (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

BTW, I just watched the video which is directly on the page the OP linked and the base unit looks a lot like the switch unit which sort of suggestions something I was thinking earlier but didn't say because I had no idea at the time if is true, namely that you can probably use the base switch to turn off the light as well, so worst case scenario, you probably only lose the sending/Gecko unit so you have a potentially unnecessary expensive switch, but never a complete lost/no switch. There is also a finding function although I'm not sure if that's possible from the base switch (I would guess yes) or requires a smart phone. It would require the sending/Gecko switch is in range and with sufficient battery life. Nil Einne (talk) 23:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

It would still be quite annoying to enter a room, not be able to find the new switch, have the old switch/new receiver behind a piece of furniture or painting, and have no light to help you find the new switch or move the painting/furniture to access the old switch. Now add in an emergency (maybe there's a tornado warning and you are trying to move into the dark basement for safety).

Conventional light switches offer the option of adding a dim light to the switch, to help people find them in the dark, but that option would drain the batteries even faster here. And, of course, the need to help people find a switch which could never move was quite minimal, whereas with the new movable switch it becomes quite important. StuRat (talk) 18:57, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Again your reply seems fairly confused, since the switch does have a light they in fact make a big deal about being able to choose the icon both in the video and in the main page (so since you didn't view the FAQ and didn't apparently watch the video, I have no idea what you actually read when you claimed above you followed the OP's link). Also, you only seem to be referring to certain fairly specific circumstances, at least one of which seems a quite unlikely use for the switch (even if the switch is used for the basement, the most likely scenario would be intended as an additional switch perhaps above the basement with the switch in the basement intended to also be used as a switch so won't be behind furniture or whatever, this is presuming you even have basements and tornadoes). Any way, I see no point to continue the discussion, if you want to randomly criticise stuff you know nearly nothing about, that's up to you, but probably best to do it outside the RD. Nil Einne (talk) 12:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)