I'm using the Conestoga wagon as my size of the wagon because it's dimensions I can easily find (see https://www.thehenryford.org/collections-and-research/digita... for source). It's virtually impossible to find any hard details on wagon sizes online because search for roman wagon sizes and the stupid story pops up instead.
> If those coal mine gauges came from the dynamics of draft horses
I think coal mine haulage was dominated by hand, not by people (one of the reasons they used track technology--tracks make it easier to handle the heavier loads).
> would you agree with this example showing the idea that “anachronistic technology impacts modern standards?”
Not really. As noted, the track gauge wars occurred well into the development of steam technology (so the horse dimensions played no role), and it turns out for a variety of engineering reasons that the sweet spot for railroad track gauge is around 5'. So track gauges aren't based on anachronistic technology.
And also, as I pointed out, the track gauge didn't play a role in determining the size of loading gauge or tunnel width. And no one has actually ever provided any evidence that the people who designed the booster wanted a larger rocket, but couldn't build it because they were limited by the loading gauges. So it's not even clear that any concerns about the ability to transport by rail played a role in determining the size of the booster.
The only thing you have linking anything here to the size of the booster is this statement:
> The railroad from the factory runs through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than a railroad track, and the railroad track is about as wide as two horses' behinds.
And every single fact in that statement is false: there is a path that doesn't run through a tunnel, so the SRBs don't have to fit through "that" tunnel; and tunnels are not "slightly wider" than railroad track, and railroad track is not "about as wide as two horses' behinds."
> If those coal mine gauges came from the dynamics of draft horses
I think coal mine haulage was dominated by hand, not by people (one of the reasons they used track technology--tracks make it easier to handle the heavier loads).
> would you agree with this example showing the idea that “anachronistic technology impacts modern standards?”
Not really. As noted, the track gauge wars occurred well into the development of steam technology (so the horse dimensions played no role), and it turns out for a variety of engineering reasons that the sweet spot for railroad track gauge is around 5'. So track gauges aren't based on anachronistic technology.
And also, as I pointed out, the track gauge didn't play a role in determining the size of loading gauge or tunnel width. And no one has actually ever provided any evidence that the people who designed the booster wanted a larger rocket, but couldn't build it because they were limited by the loading gauges. So it's not even clear that any concerns about the ability to transport by rail played a role in determining the size of the booster.
The only thing you have linking anything here to the size of the booster is this statement:
> The railroad from the factory runs through a tunnel in the mountains. The SRBs had to fit through that tunnel. The tunnel is slightly wider than a railroad track, and the railroad track is about as wide as two horses' behinds.
And every single fact in that statement is false: there is a path that doesn't run through a tunnel, so the SRBs don't have to fit through "that" tunnel; and tunnels are not "slightly wider" than railroad track, and railroad track is not "about as wide as two horses' behinds."