- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
rmacqueen said:
If you were in the Government, you'd get extra pay for being 'Bilingual'. ;D
If you were in the Government, you'd get extra pay for being 'Bilingual'. ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
"Bi-measurable"?
"Bi-calculable"?
"Bi-quantifiable"?
:dontpanic:
"Bi-calculable"?
"Bi-quantifiable"?
:dontpanic:
I was struck yesterday by that Dawson College\ student's comment - something like "Missed me by an inch" - going on 40 years and still the inch is what we relate to. As an aside - anyone remember those misplaced distance signs on the 401 to Toronto from Montreal? I also remember the big protests about the cost of gas wayyyyy back in the early 70's - something like 90 cents an imperial gallon - The protest died upon metrification with lots talking of people power and "we showed the government - what was it - 31 cents a liter - couldn't tell people that the price went up- not down. By the way, even in the Euro-union, conversions are necessary. Building measurements are/were in certain units within Poland but the Euro-code requires different metric units. so plans are now marked in both. As a matter of fact - Euro building code must be a southern Europe responsibility as as found out last winter. Eurocode for roof loads didn't take into account the weight of snow - the old code did.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
As a holdout for English measurements who has to exist in a partly metric world, I have done a fair amount of thinking on this subject -- lubricated by beer, of course.
I think the basic problem with the metric system is that it lacks quickly identifiable units for everyday observations.
Like the kid who said the bullet missed him by an inch. What should he have said? The slug missed me by a centimeter? Two-and-a-half centimeters? Not only is centimeter harder to say than inch, the term doesn't mean anything in particular to many people.
Then there's the issue of tradition and the gallon. Gallons seem natural to old farts like me. Liters look like the proper measurement for a jar of peaches or my wife's dill pickles. (mmmm - her dill pickles are fabulous!)
So what's needed is a way to speak metric in short, recognizable words. I have no answers -- only dumb questions.
I suppose four liters could be called a gallon. It is -- almost. After a century or two, no one would know any different.
An inch, though. What could replace that handly little critter?
Seriously, I worked as a mechanic for years. Other than needing standard and metric sized wrenches, it was no big deal. Even metric engine sizes don't bother me. It's 61 cubic inches per liter. What could be simpler? My old 327 Chevy would never admit to being a 5.4 liter mill, but there's always a few cranks out there.
:O
jim
I think the basic problem with the metric system is that it lacks quickly identifiable units for everyday observations.
Like the kid who said the bullet missed him by an inch. What should he have said? The slug missed me by a centimeter? Two-and-a-half centimeters? Not only is centimeter harder to say than inch, the term doesn't mean anything in particular to many people.
Then there's the issue of tradition and the gallon. Gallons seem natural to old farts like me. Liters look like the proper measurement for a jar of peaches or my wife's dill pickles. (mmmm - her dill pickles are fabulous!)
So what's needed is a way to speak metric in short, recognizable words. I have no answers -- only dumb questions.
I suppose four liters could be called a gallon. It is -- almost. After a century or two, no one would know any different.
An inch, though. What could replace that handly little critter?
Seriously, I worked as a mechanic for years. Other than needing standard and metric sized wrenches, it was no big deal. Even metric engine sizes don't bother me. It's 61 cubic inches per liter. What could be simpler? My old 327 Chevy would never admit to being a 5.4 liter mill, but there's always a few cranks out there.
:O
jim
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Well, a meter, sure. A meter means something, even to dinosaurs like me.
Snot-nosed kid: "Grandpa, how long is a meter?"
Me: "A meter? That's easy. It's part of a diabolical measuring system foisted on us by those damn Frogs. A Commie plot, that's what it is. Take my word for it."
Snot: "But how long is a meter."
Me: "Well . . . it's a little longer than a yard."
Sorry, but 2.54 centimeters will never replace the inch in barstool conversations.
Speaking of which. I think it's time for one.
A barstool, I mean.
Jim
Snot-nosed kid: "Grandpa, how long is a meter?"
Me: "A meter? That's easy. It's part of a diabolical measuring system foisted on us by those damn Frogs. A Commie plot, that's what it is. Take my word for it."
Snot: "But how long is a meter."
Me: "Well . . . it's a little longer than a yard."
Sorry, but 2.54 centimeters will never replace the inch in barstool conversations.
Speaking of which. I think it's time for one.
A barstool, I mean.
Jim
- Reaction score
- 305
- Points
- 880
The Airforce (and civil aviation in North America) use imperial measurement. We fly in nautical miles per hour (Knots) at X thousands of feet and measure our fuels quantities in pounds or gallons. Our altimeters are set in inches of mercury (not kilopascals) and our compasses work in degrees (not Mils). All of our aviation charts are scaled in miles and we judge distances using imperial.
To further complicate matters, our Cormorants (being of European design and construction) use the metric system for a majority of their settings. Luckily the altimeters use both inches or KPa, airspeed indicators still show Knots - fueling is done in kilos or liters however.
To further complicate matters, our Cormorants (being of European design and construction) use the metric system for a majority of their settings. Luckily the altimeters use both inches or KPa, airspeed indicators still show Knots - fueling is done in kilos or liters however.
B
baudspeed
Guest
wow...
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
to add to Zoomie's comments, the problem is made worse when many reference materials use metric so you have to switch back and forth to put all the data in either metric or imperial.
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 460
Zoomie..."fueling is done in kilos or liters however."
Well, from my end of the stick when it comes to fuel, jetfuel (here) is asked for in Pounds and calculated in liters, not kilos. We in the gas passing "bidness" still have to convert gallons to litres (for our US friends) and kilos to pounds (for our Euro friends). Or reverse. NATO fuel codes (F-34/37) to civie equivelent (Jet A/A-1). i.e. 10K (10,000lbs)=5655lts.
cheers
Well, from my end of the stick when it comes to fuel, jetfuel (here) is asked for in Pounds and calculated in liters, not kilos. We in the gas passing "bidness" still have to convert gallons to litres (for our US friends) and kilos to pounds (for our Euro friends). Or reverse. NATO fuel codes (F-34/37) to civie equivelent (Jet A/A-1). i.e. 10K (10,000lbs)=5655lts.
cheers
- Reaction score
- 15
- Points
- 230
In the navy we use all sorts of measurements, for example:
We calculate distance in yards, cables and nautical miles.
We calculate barometric pressure in millibars.
We calculate fuel amounts and other liquid amounts in litres and cubic metres.
Height is still in feet (hundreds above sea level).
Speed in knots (a result of the interestingly accurate division of the earth into the whole minutes - decimal (metric?) minutes world)
Weight in metric tonnes... hmm?
Length is definetly in metres as well as beam and draught (draught! Ack! Imperial word with metric measure?!)
...
We calculate distance in yards, cables and nautical miles.
We calculate barometric pressure in millibars.
We calculate fuel amounts and other liquid amounts in litres and cubic metres.
Height is still in feet (hundreds above sea level).
Speed in knots (a result of the interestingly accurate division of the earth into the whole minutes - decimal (metric?) minutes world)
Weight in metric tonnes... hmm?
Length is definetly in metres as well as beam and draught (draught! Ack! Imperial word with metric measure?!)
...
Navy measures depths in metres.
Navy uses Nautical Miles (NM) 1 NM = 2025.372 yards = 1852 meters. Additionally 1 NM = 1 minute of latitude, thus there is 60 NM for each degree of latitude... however 1 minute of latitude is 1861.57 meters at the poles and 1842.90 meters at the Equator....
However for close measurement, a NM is 2000 yards. Also known as a tactical mile. With 1 cable being 0.1 NM or 200 yards. Confused yet?
You might ask why use degrees and nautical miles instead of KMs and mils? Because trigonometry is based on circles and since 1 radian is ~ 60 degrees (1 radian = 57.2957795 degrees) It makes the trig easy enough to do in your head. So if the ship you are supposed to be in station with bears 006 and in station it will bear 000. If you are 500 yards away, then you are 6 degrees * 8 yards/degree = 48 yards Port of station. Similarly if you are navigating and your leadmark bears 218 and it should bear 220 and it is 2 miles away. If you are off 100 yards off for three degrees at a mile, then you are 133 yards starboard of track. There are lots of other trig stuff like Closest Point of Approach that trig is useful for and a system based on a circle makes things a lot easier.
And for all you kids out there that think that Trig is useless and who uses that stuff anyway... the answer is MARS officers.
Navy uses Nautical Miles (NM) 1 NM = 2025.372 yards = 1852 meters. Additionally 1 NM = 1 minute of latitude, thus there is 60 NM for each degree of latitude... however 1 minute of latitude is 1861.57 meters at the poles and 1842.90 meters at the Equator....
However for close measurement, a NM is 2000 yards. Also known as a tactical mile. With 1 cable being 0.1 NM or 200 yards. Confused yet?
You might ask why use degrees and nautical miles instead of KMs and mils? Because trigonometry is based on circles and since 1 radian is ~ 60 degrees (1 radian = 57.2957795 degrees) It makes the trig easy enough to do in your head. So if the ship you are supposed to be in station with bears 006 and in station it will bear 000. If you are 500 yards away, then you are 6 degrees * 8 yards/degree = 48 yards Port of station. Similarly if you are navigating and your leadmark bears 218 and it should bear 220 and it is 2 miles away. If you are off 100 yards off for three degrees at a mile, then you are 133 yards starboard of track. There are lots of other trig stuff like Closest Point of Approach that trig is useful for and a system based on a circle makes things a lot easier.
And for all you kids out there that think that Trig is useless and who uses that stuff anyway... the answer is MARS officers.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
A couple of points to add to this discusion, the US army arty.operates on a 6400 mil circle but
the Canadian arty uses a circle of 3200 mils. east or west from 0 ,this required all our panoramic
sights to be modified when we first purchased the M109.
IMHO the real advantage of the metric system is the time it takes to teach kids to operate in a system
were everything is in units of tens as opposed to the dogs breakfast that I was forced to learn when
I was at school.
Regards
the Canadian arty uses a circle of 3200 mils. east or west from 0 ,this required all our panoramic
sights to be modified when we first purchased the M109.
IMHO the real advantage of the metric system is the time it takes to teach kids to operate in a system
were everything is in units of tens as opposed to the dogs breakfast that I was forced to learn when
I was at school.
Regards
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
time expired said:
Agreed, I often work in metric measurements when I have to do fractions. After all, what is 0.63 of an inch?
The most important measurement we need to consider though, is still in imperial and that would be the lowly pint :cheers:
- Reaction score
- 3,104
- Points
- 1,160
Ah, but which one? Some bars will try to burn you by giving you an inferior, weak, US pint (16 oz). A REAL pint in a REAL pub is 20 oz.
