2002-07-18 That makes sense, as the FFU basic time unit is the minute and not the second.
John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carter, Baron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, 2002-07-18 08:34 Subject: [USMA:21217] RE: Unit for Speed > Pilots use ft/min not ft/s > > Baron Carter > CFI,CFII,MEI > > -----Original Message----- > From: Carl Sorenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, 17 July, 2002 18:44 > To: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: [USMA:21203] RE: Unit for Speed > > > Gene wrote: > >Would you recommend m/s or km/h for rates of ascent and descent of > aircraft, or > >would you argue that ft/s should be retained because most pilots > (except pilots > >from eastern Europe) are already more comfortable with ft/s? > > Of course I would not argue in favor of ft/s! There is no benefit to > using feet except the pilots are already more familiar with it. > Familiarity, of course, is not likely to be much of an argument to > anyone on this mailing list (including me). That is not the issue as > with km/h vs. m/s. In that issue, I am talking about whether we will > likely be measuring time intervals in hours or seconds. > > I'm not a pilot, but I would imagine they would be interested in both > m/s and km/h. If they want to know how many hours it will take to get > to a city, km/h will probably be more natural. > > >Nevertheless, I want m/s as a "option" relating to closing distances > >and time intervals before a collision. > > I suspect that pilots would entirely agree with this. They are much > more likely to quantitatively analyze closing distances and time > intervals than the average motorist. > > With digital readouts on dashboards now, it would be easy to include the > option of m/s. I wouldn't mind the option of seeing speed in m/s, but I > wouldn't use it all the time. > > Carl > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On > Behalf Of Gene Mechtly > Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2002 5:10 PM > To: U.S. Metric Association > Cc: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: [USMA:21202] Unit for Speed > > > On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Carl Sorenson wrote: > > ... If even the metric countries don't use m/s in cars and on > > highways, it will be a lonely crusade, ... > > Carl, > > Nevertheless, I want m/s as a "option" relating to closing distances and > time intervals before a collision. > > On a related question, we are told that international rules for air > traffic control are being revised. > > Would you recommend m/s or km/h for rates of ascent and descent of > aircraft, or would you argue that ft/s should be retained because most > pilots (except pilots from eastern Europe) are already more comfortable > with ft/s? > > Gene. >
