On 2010/11/14, at 13:57 , James R. Frysinger wrote: > Pat, > > I gently suggest that you have not done your usual careful reading of the > article that you cited. > > The article does NOT suggest, as you assert, "that the nuclear industry has > chosen the same measuring path as that used for the Mars Climate Orbiter in > 1998." Rather, the article says that UK Nuclear Installations Inspectorate > (NII) has identified the issue you quote as being one of "tens of areas that > are at risk of becoming outstanding issues post June-2011." > > That date was the goal date set for completion of generic reactor plan > reviews. The NII states that the metrication issue in Westinghouse's AP1000 > design submittal is a problem that threatens completion of this review and > approval process. > > Thus, it sounds to me that the UK authorities are choosing NOT to follow the > MCO into a death spiral caused by measurement confusion. Let us celebrate > NII's impetus to have things done correctly -- and in metric units. > > Jim
Dear Jim, I take your point. My concern is simply that here we are in 2010 when a nuclear enquiry is saying: >> … and metrication—many of the AP1000 submissions have been in Imperial, >> rather than metric, units. I think it was the word, many, that got to me. Surely, users of nuclear energy know that multiple measuring methods are not a wise way to go. I used the Mars Climate Orbiter as a parallel because multiple measuring methods are not the wise way to go there either. Cheers, Pat Naughtin Geelong, Australia > On 2010-11-12 1734, Pat Naughtin wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> I doubt that you will be pleased to know that the nuclear industry has >> chosen the same measuring path as that used for the Mars Climate Orbiter >> in 1998. You will recall that the Mars Climate Orbiter crashed on the >> surface of Mars, at a cost of 328 million dollars, because one part of >> the project team was using old pre-metric inches, ounces, pounds, and >> miles while another section was using metres and kilograms. >> >> This article from "/Nuclear Engineering International/" at >> http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectioncode=132&storyCode=2058146 >> <http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectioncode=132&storyCode=2058146> >> states (in the final paragraph): >> >> … and metrication—many of the AP1000 submissions have been in Imperial, >> rather than metric, units. >> >> I suppose that we can now expect nuclear reactor "/crashes/" like the >> Mars Climate Orbiter as soon as someone makes a conversion error. > > -- > James R. Frysinger > 632 Stony Point Mountain Road > Doyle, TN 38559-3030 > > (C) 931.212.0267 > (H) 931.657.3107 > (F) 931.657.3108 > Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, see http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html Hear Pat speak at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lshRAPvPZY 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 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.
