2001-03-29
Today I received my Mar-Apr 2001 issue of Metric Today. Very interesting
feature article Metric Mayhem by Michael Milstein publish originally in the
Feb-Mar issue of Air & Space; a publication of the Smithsonian Institute.
I think someone from the USMA should reprint it to the list for all to read.
I'm sure someone must have it on disk in some text file format that can be
cut and pasted here.
I like the fact that someone picked up on my invention of the FFU term, even
though my name wasn't mentioned. That's ok, as long as it is gaining
acceptance. Maybe it will become the official name for non-SI someday. I
hope.
In the same paragraph as my FFU term is a nasty comment by someone at NASA.
I will post this paragraph here:
MIXTURE OF METRIC AND INCH-POUND IS COSTLY
The article lists some of the inch-pound units, stating that most of them
have no logical relationship to one another. The author says that metric
advocates call inch pound units Fred Flintstone Units (FFU). He also notes
that US insistence on using those FFUs shows a lack of backbone which
resulted in the International Space Station's being constructed in metric
units, except for the US portion which is inch-pound.
NOT GET THIS FOLKS (Emphasis mine):
Kyle Herring of NASA's Johnson Space Centre in Texas, is quoted as stating
that, after the US acquires control of the International Space Station, only
inch-pound units will be used.
What is this? For sure a clear violation of NASA's own directives and
Federal laws. Is there something WE can do about this? Can our European
friends contact their respective governments and demand to know why European
money is supporting a project that is anti-European by forcing Europeans to
adapt to non-SI at a time when the US is suppose to be metricating to meet
the 2010 deadline?
The European partners should withhold funding and further co-operation
unless metric units are used on the space station.
What an outrage!!!!
John
Keiner ist hoffnungsloser versklavt als derjenige, der irrt�mlich glaubt
frei zu sein.
There are none more hopelessly enslaved then those who falsely believe they
are free!
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pat Naughtin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, 2001-03-29 20:33
Subject: [USMA:11939] Re: NASA's units
> Dear Karl, and All
>
> Sitting in Australia we perceive that from time to time a space station
has
> the potential to drop on our heads.
>
> The score so far is one hit (Skylab) and one miss (Mir).
>
> On the available evidence it would seem that versts (km) are better than
> miles (international, statute, survey, or nautical?) from an Australian
> point of view.
>
> However, from a Northern Hemisphere viewpoint I don't suppose it matters
all
> that much. Whether you use versts, miles, or even kilometres, the used
space
> stations still fall 'safely' in the Southern Hemisphere.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Pat Naughtin CAMS
> Geelong, Australia
>
> on 2001-03-28 06.59, Karl G. Ruling at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > At 11:59 3/27/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >> NASA must be using, or continues to allow to be used, the word miles as
the
> >> lingo in which its astronauts routinely converse. I suppose the
Russian on
> >> board is learning to use miles too. Who knows which 'mile" they mean
> >> because it doesn't matter since accuracy doesn't matter with Americans
even
> >> if they are scientists or aviators.
> >
> >
> > Are the Americans getting used to the Russians using versts? That would
> > seem to be only fair.
> >
> > A verst is pretty close to a kilometer, so at least if the Russians did
use
> > versts, it wouldn't be too hard to convert to a unit that isn't archaic.
> >
>
