I noted the text in the following USAF web page.
www.afsoc.af.mil/panews/conventional_bomb.htm
I know that 21000 lb does not convert exactly to 10 Mg. That confused me a
little but perhaps explosive force is not exact. However, your suggestion
about different 'tons' is plausible. Who knows what
Metric speed limits for trams in the UK:
www.londontransport.co.uk/trams/passengerhelp/safety/safety_index_trams.shtm
l
(beware of line wrap)
Dual metric/imperial signs for height and width. But not length.
www.highwaycode.gov.uk/signs04.shtml
Note also the overhead electrical cable sign. The
www.gordon.army.mil/safety/Local_Files/01-04.pdf
--
Terry Simpson
Human Factors Consultant
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.connected-systems.com
Phone: +44 7850 511794
The Thursday Sidney Morning Herald refers to the bomb's mass as 9545 kg (a
conversion that is both excessively precise and inaccurate -- about 20 kg
too high), so they are probably assuming that the 21 000 lb figure is the
correct one. (It would have been better expressed as about 9500 kg.)
Bill
It's academic, but the DoD says it is a 21,500 lb. bomb...:
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2003/b03112003_bt110-03.html
The Thursday Sidney Morning Herald refers to the bomb's mass as 9545 kg (a
conversion that is both excessively precise and inaccurate -- about 20 kg
too high), so they are
I just received some reports from some fairly extensive blood tests back
(21 tests total). Quite a mish-mash of units, although all but one are metric:
g/dL (shown as gm/dL)
mg/dL
ng/dL
pg/mL
nmol/L
U/L (don't know what this one is)
Jim Elwell, CAMS
Electrical Engineer
Industrial
U/L (don't know what this one is)
micrograms per liter? It is not represented elsewhere in your list.
Of Bill Potts
The Thursday Sidney Morning Herald refers to the bomb's mass as 9545 kg
(a conversion that is both excessively precise and inaccurate
-- about 20 kg too high)
Interesting but beware of using newspapers as sources. They often merely
repeat other references without checking the data.
At 3/13/2003, 05:18 PM, Terry Simpson wrote:
U/L (don't know what this one is)
micrograms per liter? It is not represented elsewhere in your list.
Could be. I've emailed my Dr. and asked him to explain it. I'll post his
reply when I get it.
Jim Elwell
Terry Simpson wrote in USMA 25119:
On the other hand, the following link suggests that US aircraft still
measure load in pounds:
www-ext.tinker.af.mil/tild/to/11b50.pdf
I have examined Terry's reference. My impression is that USAF
aircrafts are built by constructors that use only inch-pound.
2003-03-13
Terry,
I don't think the 21 000 pounds was a measure of its explosive force, but of
its weight. This just goes to show you that with FFU, you really don't know
what the number is attempting to describe by the units. If the numbers had
been kilograms, then we know for sure it is the
At 3/13/2003, 05:18 PM, Terry
Simpson wrote:
U/L (don't know what this one
is)
micrograms per liter? It is not represented elsewhere in your list.
Could be. I've emailed my Dr. and asked him to explain it. I'll post his
reply when I get it.
The doctor says that U/L is units per liter of enzyme
2003-03-13
It stands for units per litre. Now, what do the
units mean?
John
The Body: Project Inform -- Blood Work: A Useful Tool for
... ... Phosphatase (alkaline),
36-125, units/liter (u/L). Bilirubin (total), 0.1-1.2, milligramsper
deciliter (mg/dl). Kidney Function Tests: BUN
2003-03-13
A Google search on U/L + Blood brought these results. Somewhere in all of
this there must be a definition.
John
- Original Message -
From: Jim Elwell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: U.S. Metric Association [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 2003-03-13 11:38
Subject: [USMA:25117]
2003-03-13
21500 is getting closer to 10 Mg, but it is only 9.75 Mg
John
- Original Message -
From: Terry Simpson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: U.S. Metric Association [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 2003-03-13 12:55
Subject: [USMA:25119] Re: metric bombs
Of Bill Potts
The Thursday Sidney
Wouldn't explosive force be in terms of an energy yield -- GJ or TJ -- and
an expression of the energy yield per second -- GJ/s or TJ/s?
Of course, in practice, we know the baseline standard is in tons (FFU) or
metric tons (or tonnes) of TNT.
Bill Potts, CMS
Roseville, CA
http://metric1.org [SI
I had some interesting conversations today. It was a beautiful, sunny day,
and my coworker, who is from Russia, mentioned how warm it is. I looked up
the weather online and it said that it was 23 degrees, by far the warmest it
has been this year. Denis, my coworker, looked at it and said, You
Readers may know that I coach track (hurdles) in
the springtime here in California. I had an interesting "hands-on"
experience yesterday which may be of interest, and which illustrates how
convenient SI is in everyday life.
I was on the track, coaching, when I noticed that a
man who had
Carl Sorenson wrote: I can't wait to see some metric-only labels at the
grocery store!
I was in Vancouver from late Saturday to early Tuesday. In at least one
store (a huge delicatessen on Burrard Street, near Robson Street [the
toniest part of town]), I noted that all produce was marked in price
Bill Potts wrote (in part):
I was also in Shoppers' Drug Mart. I bought some Head and Shoulders shampoo.
It's labeled 400 mL (13.5 FL OZ LIQ.). That was a disappointment, as it's
made by Procter and Gamble, one of the more progressive companies with
respect to metrication. (The label also
I wonder if it reallyhad to be 27 7/8 inches.
1/8th of an inch added would have been 28 inches, divided by7 make4
inches. But for instance dividing 335/8 inches in7 equal parts would
have been another matter. There is no convenient rounding here. If I really had
to use ifp I would convert
21 matches
Mail list logo
