I fully agree. The common people have other needs when they measure than scientists. So NO to the abolition of km/h, L, cm, ha, degree Celsius, metric ton, fuel economy in L/100 km, kg/kWh etc. The SI unit for fuel consumption is impractical in the extreme. But of course, down with horsepower, cheval vapeur, calorie, kcal/h, mmHg, kgf/cm2 etc. The BWMA could do a lot with announcements for airline pasengers as given below, that's for sure.
Han ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carter, Baron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, 2002-01-24 20:06 Subject: [USMA:17613] Re: Wind speed Duncan, I couldn't agree more. In aviation if we were to go to the m/s concept then our airspeed indicators would also have to change to m/s and our aeronautical charts would have to change to meters. Our fuel consumption rates would have to be in L/s, or kg/s or even more ridiculous g/s. I just can't wait to make the announcement on a JFK to LAX run: Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen This is your Captain speaking We have just reached our cruising altitude of 12 000 meters the outside air temperature is -57^C We have just 3 785 488 meters to our destination And our present speed is 248 m/s So we'll be arriving in LA in about 15 264 seconds and for those of you who are really interested we are burning approx 1L/84 m Thank you for your attention We hope you have a pleasant flight > Regards > Baron Carter > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Duncan Bath [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, 24 January, 2002 12:00 > To: U.S. Metric Association > Cc: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: [USMA:17608] Re: Wind speed > > > If we want to delay [indefinitely?] the acceptance of SI by the public, we > could do little better than emphasize the scientific/engineering viewpoint. > *People* want to schedule thier driving by knowing how far they can go in > an hour or a day not a second. They insist on an a land-area measure > comparable to an acre. They will accept litres, but not cubic decimetres. > Let's keep a human face on our favorite measuring system even if that face > has a wart or two. > Duncan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gene Mechtly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: January 23, 2002 22:49 > Subject: [USMA:17595] Re: Wind speed > > > >Pat, > > > >I strongly support your advocacy of m/s for speed, but for all speeds, > >not just for wind, aircraft, and for ships at sea. > > > >My extraction of some of your words more exclusively favors m/s only. > > > >Gene. > >................... > >On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Pat Naughtin wrote: > >> > >> ... It is one of the key areas of metrication for the aeronautics and > >> seagoing industries � so we should get it right. ... > > > >> The SI unit for wind speed is metres per second, and its SI symbol is > >> m/s. ... appropriate SI prefix ... gives possibilities such as > >> ... kilometres per second (km/s). ... > > > >> ... It would be best if we used the SI unit � only � ... > > > > >
