PDA

View Full Version : Dinosaur news


Immortal Wombat
12-12-2007, 05:00:08
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44294000/jpg/_44294204_dino_416_120.jpg

More importantly, is that a new London bus graphic that the BBC are using there to do length comparisons? I don't remember seeing it before.

Funko
12-12-2007, 08:55:43
How do the new buses impact on the size comparisons? are they the same size as routemasters?

Immortal Wombat
12-12-2007, 10:30:42
Unclear. I think the bus is intended to be a Routemaster. Part of the trouble is that the Routemaster was standardised to Imperial units (27' 6''), whereas this new bus scaling is apparently metric. For reference, 27.5ft is 8.382m.

The new scale bar seems to use 25 pixels per metre (or 1px = 4cm). But it's also been slightly anti-aliased, so that there is a pixel excess at either end. The bus is 211 pixels long, again with one at either end which may or may not count towards the length.

Assuming for the moment that 1px = 4cm, if we take the length of the bus inclusive of only the single outline (ie. 211 pixels), then we have a bus of 8.44m (a shade under 6cm (1.5 pixels) longer than the Routemaster). Taking the double outline as part of the length, obviously pushes the discrepency up to 14cm.

If we posit that the BBC are just bad at making scale bars, and that the 5m bar is intended to be made up of 3*25 pixels and 2*26 pixels (=127 pixels for 5m -> 25.4px/m), then the bus is 8.307m or 8.386m long depending on pixel count.

This last number strikes me as significant, as it uses a consistant ruling on what counts as length within the image, and produces almost exactly one Routemaster of length.

The alt text of the image suggests it was made by someone outside of the BBC, and then copied and resized down to fit the BBC's ridiculous 416 pixel table width. If the scale factor was co-prime with the original dimensions of the image, it would produce an uneven scale bar and the anti-aliased bus.

So in answer. They apparently don't, and they apparently are.

Immortal Wombat
12-12-2007, 10:37:03
Interestingly, it seems that the height of the bus pictured is not the 14' 4.5'' that Routemasters were. It's some 50cm shorter than it should be.

Funko
12-12-2007, 10:52:44
Regardless of size, it's definitely not a routemaster, it has double doors at the front and side and no rear exit.

Immortal Wombat
12-12-2007, 10:57:48
True. Probably asking the creator would be going too far.

Funko
12-12-2007, 11:01:50
The creator of the image or The Creator?

Immortal Wombat
12-12-2007, 11:04:47
Yes

Funko
12-12-2007, 11:57:03
I think you should.

fp
12-12-2007, 12:57:17
Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Unclear. I think the bus is intended to be a Routemaster. Part of the trouble is that the Routemaster was standardised to Imperial units (27' 6''), whereas this new bus scaling is apparently metric. For reference, 27.5ft is 8.382m.

The new scale bar seems to use 25 pixels per metre (or 1px = 4cm). But it's also been slightly anti-aliased, so that there is a pixel excess at either end. The bus is 211 pixels long, again with one at either end which may or may not count towards the length.

Assuming for the moment that 1px = 4cm, if we take the length of the bus inclusive of only the single outline (ie. 211 pixels), then we have a bus of 8.44m (a shade under 6cm (1.5 pixels) longer than the Routemaster). Taking the double outline as part of the length, obviously pushes the discrepency up to 14cm.

If we posit that the BBC are just bad at making scale bars, and that the 5m bar is intended to be made up of 3*25 pixels and 2*26 pixels (=127 pixels for 5m -> 25.4px/m), then the bus is 8.307m or 8.386m long depending on pixel count.

This last number strikes me as significant, as it uses a consistant ruling on what counts as length within the image, and produces almost exactly one Routemaster of length.

The alt text of the image suggests it was made by someone outside of the BBC, and then copied and resized down to fit the BBC's ridiculous 416 pixel table width. If the scale factor was co-prime with the original dimensions of the image, it would produce an uneven scale bar and the anti-aliased bus.

So in answer. They apparently don't, and they apparently are.

:beer:

A late contender for Post of the Year. :D

maroule
12-12-2007, 14:05:31
the word "stultifying" springs to mind

zmama
12-12-2007, 14:18:42
It gets my vote

Lurker the Second
12-12-2007, 15:23:00
Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Unclear. I think the bus is intended to be a Routemaster. Part of the trouble is that the Routemaster was standardised to Imperial units (27' 6''), whereas this new bus scaling is apparently metric. For reference, 27.5ft is 8.382m.

The new scale bar seems to use 25 pixels per metre (or 1px = 4cm). But it's also been slightly anti-aliased, so that there is a pixel excess at either end. The bus is 211 pixels long, again with one at either end which may or may not count towards the length.

Assuming for the moment that 1px = 4cm, if we take the length of the bus inclusive of only the single outline (ie. 211 pixels), then we have a bus of 8.44m (a shade under 6cm (1.5 pixels) longer than the Routemaster). Taking the double outline as part of the length, obviously pushes the discrepency up to 14cm.

If we posit that the BBC are just bad at making scale bars, and that the 5m bar is intended to be made up of 3*25 pixels and 2*26 pixels (=127 pixels for 5m -> 25.4px/m), then the bus is 8.307m or 8.386m long depending on pixel count.

This last number strikes me as significant, as it uses a consistant ruling on what counts as length within the image, and produces almost exactly one Routemaster of length.

The alt text of the image suggests it was made by someone outside of the BBC, and then copied and resized down to fit the BBC's ridiculous 416 pixel table width. If the scale factor was co-prime with the original dimensions of the image, it would produce an uneven scale bar and the anti-aliased bus.

So in answer. They apparently don't, and they apparently are.

Post of the year.

Lurker the Second
12-12-2007, 15:23:48
:lol: I posted that before scrolling down further. So basically someone needs to log in Lurker the Seconder and second FP's post.

Funko
12-12-2007, 16:35:48
We have people posting here that don't appreciate that post? Weird.

maroule
12-12-2007, 16:47:09
Most people posting here don't appreciate anything posted here

Funko
12-12-2007, 16:49:03
Originally posted by maroule
Most people posting here don't appreciate anything I posted here

Good point.

maroule
12-12-2007, 16:53:18
oh! touché! it could be voted the best quoted joke of the year!

Funko
12-12-2007, 17:06:34
Somebody's being sarcastic.

JM^3
12-12-2007, 17:24:03
I thought this was going to be about one of our posters..

jM

Greg W
13-12-2007, 03:10:19
Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Unclear. I think the bus is intended to be a Routemaster. Part of the trouble is that the Routemaster was standardised to Imperial units (27' 6''), whereas this new bus scaling is apparently metric. For reference, 27.5ft is 8.382m.

The new scale bar seems to use 25 pixels per metre (or 1px = 4cm). But it's also been slightly anti-aliased, so that there is a pixel excess at either end. The bus is 211 pixels long, again with one at either end which may or may not count towards the length.

Assuming for the moment that 1px = 4cm, if we take the length of the bus inclusive of only the single outline (ie. 211 pixels), then we have a bus of 8.44m (a shade under 6cm (1.5 pixels) longer than the Routemaster). Taking the double outline as part of the length, obviously pushes the discrepency up to 14cm.

If we posit that the BBC are just bad at making scale bars, and that the 5m bar is intended to be made up of 3*25 pixels and 2*26 pixels (=127 pixels for 5m -> 25.4px/m), then the bus is 8.307m or 8.386m long depending on pixel count.

This last number strikes me as significant, as it uses a consistant ruling on what counts as length within the image, and produces almost exactly one Routemaster of length.

The alt text of the image suggests it was made by someone outside of the BBC, and then copied and resized down to fit the BBC's ridiculous 416 pixel table width. If the scale factor was co-prime with the original dimensions of the image, it would produce an uneven scale bar and the anti-aliased bus.

So in answer. They apparently don't, and they apparently are. Gunzel!*



*Apparently in Australia it applies to busses as wel as trains.

Immortal Wombat
13-12-2007, 03:27:51
:(

Funko
13-12-2007, 08:49:59
You've produced the best and worst post of the year, in one post! Congratulations. :beer:

MDA
13-12-2007, 12:59:56
:lol:

MoSe
13-12-2007, 13:17:12
Originally posted by Funko
Regardless of size, it's definitely not a routemaster, it has double doors at the front and side and no rear exit.

Is this a joke? If so, forgive me.
It's obvious that the bus and the dinosaur in the picture are facing opposite directions.

(unless your 2nd 'it' quoted above switched the reference to 'routemaster' and no more to the picture bus)

Funko
13-12-2007, 13:24:16
No, not a joke and both the dinosaur and the bus are facing the same direction.

On that style of bus, one door is at the front by the driver so you can pay him when you get on, one door is in the middle for people to get off.

Recently in a lot of places they've stopped having the middle door to stop people jumping on the bus without paying.

http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/londonbus2.jpg

protein
13-12-2007, 13:25:49
which is very easy in london.

MoSe
13-12-2007, 13:35:43
Originally posted by Funko
No, not a joke and both the dinosaur and the bus are facing the same direction.

On that style of bus, one door is at the front by the driver so you can pay him when you get on, one door is in the middle for people to get off.

'scuse me, this makes of course sense, but shouldn't the dent on the right end of the pictured bus represent the engine hood beside the driver's cockpit, in the old model?

protein
13-12-2007, 13:44:33
it represents the engine hood which is at the back of the bus.

Lurker the Second
13-12-2007, 14:13:19
You know it's a good thread when pics of real buses start showing up.

Mr. Bas
13-12-2007, 14:19:01
Indeed, thread of the year for me.

Funko
13-12-2007, 14:26:46
If only I could find one of a real bus and a real dinosaur together.

MoSe
13-12-2007, 14:29:19
http://www.worth1000.com/entries/190500/190589AFhe_w.jpg

Drekkus
13-12-2007, 15:20:38
Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Unclear. I think the bus is intended to be a Routemaster. Part of the trouble is that the Routemaster was standardised to Imperial units (27' 6''), whereas this new bus scaling is apparently metric. For reference, 27.5ft is 8.382m.

The new scale bar seems to use 25 pixels per metre (or 1px = 4cm). But it's also been slightly anti-aliased, so that there is a pixel excess at either end. The bus is 211 pixels long, again with one at either end which may or may not count towards the length.

Assuming for the moment that 1px = 4cm, if we take the length of the bus inclusive of only the single outline (ie. 211 pixels), then we have a bus of 8.44m (a shade under 6cm (1.5 pixels) longer than the Routemaster). Taking the double outline as part of the length, obviously pushes the discrepency up to 14cm.

If we posit that the BBC are just bad at making scale bars, and that the 5m bar is intended to be made up of 3*25 pixels and 2*26 pixels (=127 pixels for 5m -> 25.4px/m), then the bus is 8.307m or 8.386m long depending on pixel count.

This last number strikes me as significant, as it uses a consistant ruling on what counts as length within the image, and produces almost exactly one Routemaster of length.

The alt text of the image suggests it was made by someone outside of the BBC, and then copied and resized down to fit the BBC's ridiculous 416 pixel table width. If the scale factor was co-prime with the original dimensions of the image, it would produce an uneven scale bar and the anti-aliased bus.

So in answer. They apparently don't, and they apparently are. :lol:
Shouldn't this be in the glossary? Or somewhere obvious to scare potential posters away?

mr_B
15-12-2007, 23:17:29
Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Unclear. I think the bus is intended to be a Routemaster. Part of the trouble is that the Routemaster was standardised to Imperial units (27' 6''), whereas this new bus scaling is apparently metric. For reference, 27.5ft is 8.382m.

The new scale bar seems to use 25 pixels per metre (or 1px = 4cm). But it's also been slightly anti-aliased, so that there is a pixel excess at either end. The bus is 211 pixels long, again with one at either end which may or may not count towards the length.

Assuming for the moment that 1px = 4cm, if we take the length of the bus inclusive of only the single outline (ie. 211 pixels), then we have a bus of 8.44m (a shade under 6cm (1.5 pixels) longer than the Routemaster). Taking the double outline as part of the length, obviously pushes the discrepency up to 14cm.

If we posit that the BBC are just bad at making scale bars, and that the 5m bar is intended to be made up of 3*25 pixels and 2*26 pixels (=127 pixels for 5m -> 25.4px/m), then the bus is 8.307m or 8.386m long depending on pixel count.

This last number strikes me as significant, as it uses a consistant ruling on what counts as length within the image, and produces almost exactly one Routemaster of length.

The alt text of the image suggests it was made by someone outside of the BBC, and then copied and resized down to fit the BBC's ridiculous 416 pixel table width. If the scale factor was co-prime with the original dimensions of the image, it would produce an uneven scale bar and the anti-aliased bus.

So in answer. They apparently don't, and they apparently are. Post of the year.

Shining1
16-12-2007, 04:08:31
Originally posted by Funko
Regardless of size, it's definitely not a routemaster, it has double doors at the front and side and no rear exit.

The lack of a rear exit could prove fatal in the case of a velociraptor attack. Stay away from those things.

Funko
17-12-2007, 09:15:48
It's ok, the back window comes out as an emergency exit. I think velociraptor attack qualifies as an emergency.

C.G.B. Spender
17-12-2007, 09:32:43
http://62.15.226.148/fot/2007/02/02/4268991.jpg

zmama
17-12-2007, 11:24:24
I had one of those!

MoSe
17-12-2007, 11:34:36
I think I could have had one too.
Gifted my whole model cars garage to my niece a few years ago, must ask her to check.

C.G.B. Spender
17-12-2007, 11:43:57
Originally posted by zmama
I had one of those! Me too!

MoSe
17-12-2007, 11:45:57
and Prosper!

MDA
17-12-2007, 11:55:49
Just photoshop a silhouette (sp?) of a dinosaur into one of the advertising spaces on the picture you have. Well, part of the dinosaur, gotta keep it to scale.

MDA
17-12-2007, 11:56:30
or just take the image originally posted and use that for your banner ad

Immortal Wombat
18-12-2007, 19:31:25
It occurred to me last night that there was no need for the previous confusion. The dinosaur was of known length (13m), and known pixel length (327px), which clearly gives us the correct m/px ratio (ie 25.4px/m)

I didn't want to make another long post about this to bore you all, but as I was checking this today, I noticed a still more shocking development, and felt obliged to bring it to your collective notice.

The article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7138782.stm) is using a new image, with a new bus.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44299000/gif/_44299323_dinosaur_416in.gif

This is certainly an in-house graphic from the BBC, with its classic grey faux-vector stylings, and no image credit in the alt text. The dinosaur used is the same as on the previous image (although scaled by a factor of 0.908ish), but the bus is new. A quick check confirms that the bus is now larger by a factor of 1.033ish, and thus larger than the "Routemaster" in the first image. How much larger is again in confusion, because the scale bars are messed up again, with 2m being shown as half of 5m.

This time it is easy to check against the dinosaur.
5m = 92px would give a length of dinosaur = 16.14m - too long.
2m = 45px gives the correct dino length of 13.2m. We conclude that the number at the end of the scale bar should be 4m.

This gives us a bus which is 9.78m or around 32' 1''. Being more interested in the scaling used than the bus model, I will leave it to a proper gunzel to inform us as to the bus model. And then I suppose I should update my unit conversion page with this information. It seems the BBC has moved on and embraced the new London bus (and perhaps with it the metric system).

(Also, if anyone has any links to previous articles which have used the new bus, do let me know)

Seriously Serious Bot
18-12-2007, 19:40:01
You may recognise the genus name Carcharodontosaurus from its similarity to the genus name of the Great White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias). Carcharodon comes from the Greek words karcharos, which means "sharp" or "jagged", and odous, which means "tooth". Saurus of course, means "lizard".

Lurker the Second
18-12-2007, 22:36:56
We knew that. Please try to come up with something a bit more informative. This isn't poly, you know.

MoSe
19-12-2007, 08:39:35
you can also see the saurasswiper mounted in front of the bus, now!

Funko
19-12-2007, 08:58:36
After some quick research I think it's a Dennis Dart SLF

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Dart

Which comes in lengths of 9.2m, 10m and 10.6m.

C.G.B. Spender
19-12-2007, 09:06:07
The number of doors doesn't match

C.G.B. Spender
19-12-2007, 09:07:53
http://www.swiatowy.org/bilety/2006/man_202.jpg

Looks like a MAN NL 202, but the 202 is 11.5 m long

Funko
19-12-2007, 09:16:23
I know, that is a problem. It appears you can get a 2 door 'skin' for any bus this size.

Here's the technical specification:

http://www.alexander-dennis.com/brochure_downloads/spec_sheets/enviro_200dart_specsheet.pdf

You'll see that under doors it says:

"Two door models are available with various middle door options".

Also, they do lots of lengths these days. I guess ours would be the 9.5m or 10.2m model.

Funko
19-12-2007, 09:16:48
Originally posted by C.G.B. Spender

Looks like a MAN NL 202, but the 202 is 11.5 m long

The number of doors doesn't match.

C.G.B. Spender
19-12-2007, 09:18:45
http://www.omnibusclub.de/mannl202.jpg

The 202 also comes with only 2 doors (or 4)

Funko
19-12-2007, 09:22:55
The doors are on the wrong side! The main problem is that it's too long.

If we're talking MAN it'd probably be the Lion City M, at 10.5 meters. But even that seems a bit long.

http://www.man-mn.co.uk/mn-prod/man2/master/datapool/imagepool/900/lions_city_thumb.jpg

There are a few other options if we move up to the 11m+ single decker category, and some other competitors at the 'small minibus' level. Volvo have one.

Provost Harrison
19-12-2007, 10:42:57
I think you're forgetting about the magic that is the bendy bus ;)

Funko
19-12-2007, 10:44:06
I'm not forgetting, but it's clearly not a bendy bus in that image is it?

mr_B
19-12-2007, 10:52:05
the only GOOOOOD bus is a dead bus - FACT!!!

Funko
19-12-2007, 11:02:07
Go head a tram.

Provost Harrison
19-12-2007, 11:04:38
Originally posted by Funko
I'm not forgetting, but it's clearly not a bendy bus in that image is it?

It is not, hence I stated you'd forgotten it. They are fun...the way they can trap and squish random passers by underneath them and no one finds out until later :D

MoSe
19-12-2007, 11:08:34
Originally posted by Provost Harrison
They are fun...the way they can trap and squish randy passers by underneath them

beware

Provost Harrison
19-12-2007, 11:11:25
You make them sound like Venom ;)

Funko
19-12-2007, 11:20:00
Originally posted by Provost Harrison
It is not, hence I stated you'd forgotten it.

Huh? They are completely irrelevant to identifying the bus in the graphic. That doesn't mean they are forgotten.

Provost Harrison
19-12-2007, 11:30:11
Well they should! :bounce:

Tizzy
19-12-2007, 11:34:23
Should be forgotten? Then shhhh!

C.G.B. Spender
19-12-2007, 11:36:26
I think we should write a letter to the BBC so they can identify the bus for us.

MDA
19-12-2007, 13:51:01
Originally posted by mr_B
the only GOOOOOD bus is a dead bus - FACT!!!

What if its a bus full of eskimos?

MoSe
19-12-2007, 13:59:12
a Polar Bus

MoSe
19-12-2007, 13:59:49
Originally posted by C.G.B. Spender
BBC so they can identify the bus for us.

"OK, you busted us, we made it up"

Immortal Wombat
19-12-2007, 14:56:53
Originally posted by Funko
After some quick research I think it's a Dennis Dart SLF

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Dart

Which comes in lengths of 9.2m, 10m and 10.6m.
Good work :beer:

Scabrous Birdseed
19-12-2007, 15:16:09
I agree, based on the number and placement of the windows the Dart seems likely.

Scabrous Birdseed
19-12-2007, 15:20:15
In fact, since it looks much more like the original Dart than the SLF, considering the windows (again) and the ground clearance, it is likely to be the 9.8 m version (which would work with IW's original calculations).

Though why they would chose such an old bus (1989-95) for a supposedly modern comparison is slightly puzzling.

King_Ghidra
19-12-2007, 17:11:57
Thread of the Year

Funko
20-12-2007, 09:23:13
Excellent teamwork everyone. :beer: