- The purpose of
road signs is to communicate information regarding distance and speed to
motorists and other users. We have such a system: yards, miles and mph.
Metric conversion is therefore not necessary.
A system? FFU does not comprise a
"system". More often then not, unit names have different values in
different locations (eg: gallons) and the use of these units can cause error
and cionfusion.
- Metric signs
are less accurate than customary signs. For example, using metres to
describe the width of bridges (eg 4.4m) achieves an accuracy of only one
tenth of a metre, or four inches. Imperial signs (eg 14'6") are accurate
to within one inch.
It appears the BWMA doesn't know the
difference between accuracy and
resolution. There is no implied accuracy
in the FFU declaration especially if the people who manufacture the signs
don't produce signs to 1 inch increments. If the foot/inch
figure is just a numerical conversion of the metric (which it obviously is),
and the metric is the true design figure, then the 1 inch resolution does
not reflect any greater accuracy. Since British roads are built
metric, then the metric is more accurate and the FFU is actually more of an
error if the converted number is rounded too much. Maybe the
people who produce the signs should follow the BWMA advice and make 14 feet
6 inches as 14 feet 5.228 inches, which is the true equivalent of the
correct 4.4 m
The view
that metric signs help Continental tourists is negated by the corresponding
lack of help to American tourists. In practice, Continental tourists are
often interested by signs showing miles, yards, feet and inches, while
Americans are delighted to discover that they are not alone in using them.
How many Americans drive on British
roads? How many Americans would attempt to drive a car in which the
steering is opposite or they have to drive on the other side? but, to
those that would, the delight of Americans finding miles elsewhere then in
the US must be offset by pulling into a petrol station and finding petrol
sold by the litre and then going into a supermarket and finding a high
volumn of metric products. If anything that has to be confusing.
I also wonder how many Americans come to the UK compared to those from the
Continent and vice-versa. Why doesn't the BWMA insist that all English
speaking countries add FFU signs just for the sake of the
England?
- Dual
yard/metre and mile/kilometre signs should only be allowed in Britain on
the condition that similar signs are adopted across the Continent.
Dual FFU/metric should appear
nowhere. The UK signs should all be metric and then there is not only
harmony with the continent, but with the whole world. I wonder if
British travellors to Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Canada become
upset when they encounter metric only road signs. The BWMA doesn't
seem to like to mention the wolrd, except when they find a remnant or
obscure use of FFU elsewhere.
- Altogether,
there are 2.5 million signs in England alone, of which perhaps 2 million
make some reference to distance or speed. The costs of conversion would be
huge.
This is the most common boogeyman nonsense
ever uttered by members of anti-metric groups. Always some HUGE cost,
but never does one ever see figures of the cost, nor does one ever compare
the cost to other projects that one can really consider wasteful. How
much is it costing the UK to be involved in the Iraq war? Doesn't huge
apply here too?
Of course, the cost of conversion today is
relatively cheap. It can be done with overlay stickers and then as the
signs need replacement from aging, etc, then a new metric sign need be put
in place.
- According to
Gallup, 95% of people in Britain think in miles compared to only 3% for
kilometres. Changing to kilometres would cause misunderstanding, make
enforcement of speed limits more complicated and increase the likelihood
of accidents.
This is only true because the road signs
are in FFU. Remove the FFU with metric only and watch the switch
occur. Over time as people get new cars and get a feel for metric
speeds and distances, the numbers will reverse. This is why they don't
want to see the change. They know it will cause people to forget
miles. The proof can be found in the reaction of people in other
countries that don't see miles used every day.
How many Australians today would say they
think in miles? And then compare this to the
1970s.
I hope others will post their thoughts on
these comments too.
