I watch a lot of Cricket and some Tennis (Wimbledon) and the use of mph is to 'feel' the speed. For example - imagine the hulking figure of Andrew "freddy" Flintoff running at you and throwing a hard heavy ball at 95mph right at you!!
km/h is used on sport in other countries and the same is true there - they equate/compare the speed with speed they can drive at.(for instance). It's just entertainment. > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: [USMA:47003] Re: FW: Special Employee Advisory: Message from Joe > Boardman > Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 21:25:03 +0100 > > > In cricket and tennis (and I imagine baseball), the speed of the ball is > often measured in mph (though when England is playing cricket in Australia, > km/h are sometimes shown). These could (and should) be converted to m/s - I > have never seen a cricket ball or a tennis ball travel for one kilometre > (and certainly not one mile) under its own steam. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of [email protected] > Sent: 30 March 2010 19:25 > To: U.S. Metric Association > Subject: [USMA:47001] Re: FW: Special Employee Advisory: Message from Joe > Boardman > > > Wind speeds and the speeds of athletes (runners and swimmers) are easily > visualized and can be understood in m/s by the general public, and even > vehicle stopping distances and times for safety from speeds in m/s are > reasonable. There is no good reason to discard speeds in m/s in favor of > km/h. The planning of long trips and travel times is usually done at > leisure, not in emergencies. Coherent SI units are best. > > ---- Original message ---- > >Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 04:56:01 -0700 (PDT) > >From: "John M. Steele" <[email protected]> > >Subject: [USMA:47000] Re: FW: Special Employee Advisory: Message from Joe > Boardman > >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > > > > For a train, plane, car, etc, I recommend we NOT > > belabor "coherent units" and just focus on using > > correct symbols, km/h. I can pretty well guarentee > > the public DOESN'T want to know the speed in meters > > per second and carry out a division by 3.6 (or 3600) > > to estimate "when do we get there." > > > > You are certainly (technically) correct that > > kilometers per hour isn't coherent units. However, > > for the most common calculation done with the data, > > it is more useful in everyday life. That is > > probably why the BIPM explicitly allows the hour to > > be used with the SI. > > > > If AP doesn't accept the authority of the SI > > Brochure, NIST SP330 and SP811, etc, there is not > > much we can do to convince them. Since the AP Style > > Guide requires online subscription or purchase, I > > don't have it. But we need someone who has it to > > analyze it's metric usage against the defining SI > > documents and call the errors to AP's attention. It > > might also make sense to check whether the > > Government Printing Office is correct on the same > > points that AP is wrong on. That might strengthen > > the case. > > > > ------------------------------------------------ > > > > From: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> > > Sent: Mon, March 29, 2010 8:43:20 PM > > Subject: [USMA:46998] Re: FW: Special Employee > > Advisory: Message from Joe Boardman > > > > Of course, speed in SI is in units of m/s or in its > > multiples by SI prefixes, e.g. km/s of a spacecraft. > > "km/h" is not coherent SI, and "kph" is *certainly > > not acceptable* in any version of units. Who has the > > clout to correct the AP? > > ---- Original message ---- > > >Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 19:28:54 -0400 > > >From: "Carleton MacDonald" <[email protected]> > > >Subject: [USMA:46997] FW: Special Employee > > Advisory: Message from Joe Boardman > > >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > > > > > > Arrrgh. The Associated Press Stylebook strikes > > > again ... > > > > > > > > > > > > Carleton > > > > > > > > > > > > From: MacDonald, Carleton > > > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 12:59 > > > To: Employee Communications > > > Subject: RE: Special Employee Advisory: Message > > from > > > Joe Boardman > > > > > > > > > > > > The Associated Press Stylebook is rather clueless > > - > > > in fact, flat-out wrong - on a number of issues > > > regarding metric measure, and this is one of the > > > more egregious ones. > > > > > > > > > > > > For one thing, there is no unit of distance > > called a > > > "k". Capitalized, "K" is the SI (International > > > System of Units = the metric system) symbol for > > > "Kelvin", the base unit of thermodynamic > > > temperature. This is of course not what is meant > > > here. The unit of length being used here is the > > > kilometer, and its symbol - its only symbol - is > > > "km", and the way to show distance over time is > > > "km/h". "kph" in SI is meaningless, but no doubt > > > they're deriving it from "mph", under the wrong > > > assumption that as the "m" stands for "mile", the > > > "k" stands for "kilometer". > > > > > > > > > > > > The fact that AP and many other users have no > > idea > > > how to properly express metric units has other > > > examples too, such as "5K" road races (a 5-kelvin > > > race?). > > > > > > > > > > > > All of this of course stems from the fact that > > the > > > USA stubbornly resists joining the rest of the > > world > > > in measuring intelligently. > > > > > > > > > > > > That said: at least we mentioned the speed in SI > > as > > > well as in old units, and that is good. > > > > > > > > > > > > Carleton MacDonald > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > From: Employee Communications > > > Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 10:41 > > > To: MacDonald, Carleton > > > Subject: RE: Special Employee Advisory: Message > > from > > > Joe Boardman > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the input. But, according the > > Associated > > > Press Stylebook, kph is acceptable in all > > > references. > > > > > > > > > > > > Kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > From: MacDonald, Carleton > > > Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 3:38 PM > > > To: Employee Communications > > > Subject: RE: Special Employee Advisory: Message > > from > > > Joe Boardman > > > > > > > > > > > > One tiny minor thing: kilometers per hour is > > > expressed "km/h". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > From: Employee Communications > > > Sent: Friday, March 19, 2010 15:32 > > > Subject: Special Employee Advisory: Message from > > Joe > > > B. > > > > > > > > > > > > Attached is a Special Employee Advisory from > > > President and CEO Joe B.. Please post on all > > > bulletin boards. > > > > > > > > > > > > special employee advisory > > > > > > March 19, 2010 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dear Co-workers, > > > > > > > > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > > > Specifically, this department will work on the > > > planning and development activities that will > > allow > > > us to significantly increase operating speeds > > above > > > 150 mph (240 kph) on the Northeast Corridor. It > > will > > > also pursue partnerships with states and others > > in > > > the passenger rail industry to develop > > > federally-designated high-speed rail corridors > > such > > > as the new projects moving forward in California > > and > > > Florida. > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ Got a cool Hotmail story? Tell us now http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/
