There was actually some logic behind the nautical mile.  In the 1870’s when
time zones were first being introduced a choice had to be made regarding the
prime meridian – there were two candidates – Greenwich and the French
equivalent.  At the time the best maps were British and that swung the day.
Also, clocks had 12/24 hours, not 10, so 360° was a better choice than 400.

 

Ther you are – blame it on our duodecimal clocks. 

 

  _____  

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Pat Naughtin
Sent: 07 June 2010 06:37
To: U.S. Metric Association
Subject: [USMA:47527] Nautical measures

 

On 2010/06/06, at 17:12 , Martin Vlietstra wrote:





For many years the Daily Telegraph quoted the height of high tide at Dover
in feet without the benefit of a metric conversion, even though the height
indicator at the Dover docks was only in metres, the admiralty charts were
in metres and the published tide tables were in metres.

 

Dear Martin,

 

One of the (several) reasons that the French metric committee chose to use
the Earth as a standard for the length of the metre was that they lived in
an age when shipping and world exploration were extremely important issues.
They intended that the measuring of angles in grades and the measuring of
distances in metres and kilometres would drastically reduce the complexity
of nautical calculations.

 

Consider a quadrant of the Earth divided decimally.

 

1 quadrant = 100 grade = 10 000 kilometres

0.1 quadrant = 10 grade = 1000 kilometres

0.01 quadrant = 1 grade = 100 kilometres

0.001 quadrant = 0.1 grade = 10 kilometres

0.000 1 quadrant = 0.01 grade = 1 kilometres

etc.

 

Unfortunately sailors decided not to go with the simplicity of the decimal
metric system so the transition to the metric system didn't work so far
(from 1770 till 2010).

 

People 'who go to the sea in ships' still cling to the pre-1770 measuring
words. They continue to use:

 

nautical miles for distance

knots for for wind speed

knots for vessel speed

feet for vessel length

inches for rope diameter

etc.

 

Perhaps your example is simply another example of irrational conservatism.

 

Cheers,

 

Pat Naughtin

Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain from
http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html 

PO Box 305 Belmont 3216,

Geelong, Australia

Phone: 61 3 5241 2008

 

Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped
thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric
system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands
each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat
provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and
professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in
Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian
Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the
UK, and the USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com
<http://www.metricationmatters.com/>  for more metrication information,
contact Pat at [email protected] or to get the free
'Metrication matters' newsletter go to:
http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe.

 

Reply via email to