Well, I'll be! I had an exchange with the ARRL's editor for QST a year
or two ago about increasing the use of the metric system. That "for
accuracy in duplication" was part of my spiel. Not because the metric
system is inherently more accurate, but because it's easier to measure
metrically without making mistakes.
I also fussed mightily that I had bought the limited edition hardbound
Handbook and was really irritated that this Handbook for the future
seemed hung up on historical units instead of cutting edge, or at least
modern, practices. The basis for that point was that hams historically
have led the field and that it was insulting to treat us as if we
couldn't learn and use something as "new-fangled" as the metric system.
Amateur radio operators ("hams") are the people who pushed for spread
spectrum communications and packet radio in the civilian world. At the
time, his reply was a bit, shall we say, testy.
I also pointed out that it was silly to build a 10 m antenna in feet
instead of meters. What an oxymoron.
Who knows, maybe my drop of water had a little effect. I can at least
claim credit for trying, if not for making it happen.
Jason, I really like your idea about an ARRL metric ruler. It could be
hawked as something essential for laying out antennas and radial fields.
Jim (WB1ELJ)
James-Jason Wentworth wrote:
>
> Hello All,
>
> I've been reading the 2001 edition of the ARRL Handbook, the "bible"
> for ham (amateur) radio in the US. I'm pleased to report that its
> metric usage has greatly increased. New antenna projects use
> millimeter dimensions ("for accuracy in duplication"), and the text
> uses mostly a hard-metric (soft-converted FFU) format.
>
> Some of the older material covering large wire antennas uses feet "so
> that US hams can use their English rulers and tape measures to build
> them," which gave me an idea: What if the ARRL sold metric-only tape
> measures and rulers with their logo? These items would be an
> additional source of income for the ARRL, and they would free US hams
> from the fool's errand of having to calculate antenna dimensions in
> meters and then having to convert them to feet and inches. No other
> hams on the planet are saddled with this unnecessary chore.
>
> I believe there are a few hams on the USMA list. What do you think?
>
> Jason
--
Metric Methods(SM) "Don't be late to metricate!"
James R. Frysinger, CAMS http://www.metricmethods.com/
10 Captiva Row e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Charleston, SC 29407 phone/FAX: 843.225.6789
