Oct 19, 2010, 04:52 AM Metric FTW! Yeh its just depends on what you grew up with. I guess the hard part about imperial for me is when converting between units, like pounds to ounces, feet to inches. Not that its that hard but with metric its only the decimal place that changes.
Oct 19, 2010, 07:43 AM
So I'M meant to be in control?
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Draknkep For myself.... I LIKE working to one thousandth of and inch (or smaller)....millymeters just don't work for me. SteveT

Quote:
 Originally Posted by AvistarAddict I couldn't agree more Steve. My Dad was a machinist back in days when Canada still used imperial and when I learned things, he taught in imperial. I now have all his micrometers to measure things and mention of millimeters just confuse me. I can't visualize it.
I was a child of the change... I grew up with Imperial at home, but in school and when an apprentice, worked in Metric (and was glad to). The overall effect is that I measure anything smaller than an inch in millimetres! I can visualise 0.35mm much better than 14 thou, but can visualise 8" better than 203mm (must be some reason for that ). And as for working out which of 25/64", 3/8" or 0.3800" is the larger, it just seems like too much work and margin for error to me, whereas it is obvious to anyone which from 9.922mm, 9.525mm or 9.652mm is the larger.......

(Not that the UK has fully embraced the metric system - we buy fuel in litres, but still work out consumption in mpg.....)
 Oct 19, 2010, 07:58 AM Its all fun The clincher for me was when I found out that by switching to the metric system, Australian kids gained a WHOLE YEAR in progress with their mathematics during their school attendance. In Oz, we have no problems talking litres/100 kilometres. (and there is only one litre )
Oct 19, 2010, 07:59 AM
SENTA A PUAAA!!!
Quote:
 Originally Posted by ErcoupeEd That's why I am thankful for my fuel sipping Ercoupe at about 4.5 to 5 gallons per hour! Yep, avgas 100LL is around \$4.50 a gallon here, give or take a little. My buddie's Stinson 108-3 with a Lycoming O-540 ( 235 horsepower) in it burns 12 to 15 gallons per hour -OUCH!!! But it climbs like a homesick angel and cruises at about 140 to 160 mph. I tool along at 90 to 105 mph. with an 85 horsepower Continental 4 cylinder.
You are darn lucky Ercoupe. Here in Brazil a single liter of avgas is R\$4.70 wich gives us US\$2.94 due today's currency. Doing the math our fuel gallon costs US\$ 11.10.

Wich lead me to think: lucky me I don't have a full scale plane ( The University's scholarship wage pays US\$150/month).
 Oct 19, 2010, 09:18 AM Registered User The local warbird museum had some nice weather and had a 'new' aircraft (I have never seen it before yesterday here), an AT-6 up yesterday. Sounded like he must have just bought it because he was running the heck out of it beating up town (nice thing about a little town). Foo
Oct 19, 2010, 09:27 AM
Registered User
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Toddi and my calculation was wrong anyway. so a US gallon is \$4,50 = €3,21 3.78 Liters are €5,29 = \$7,41 Still quite a difference, but not as much as 10 years ago. But i don't mind getting back to topic. cheers, Toddi
Remember, he's talking about aviation fuel. Automobile gas is about \$2.60/gallon or 1.85 Euro/gallon.
Oct 19, 2010, 11:50 AM
Registered User
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Colonel Blink I was a child of the change... I grew up with Imperial at home, but in school and when an apprentice, worked in Metric (and was glad to). The overall effect is that I measure anything smaller than an inch in millimetres! I can visualise 0.35mm much better than 14 thou, but can visualise 8" better than 203mm (must be some reason for that ). And as for working out which of 25/64", 3/8" or 0.3800" is the larger, it just seems like too much work and margin for error to me, whereas it is obvious to anyone which from 9.922mm, 9.525mm or 9.652mm is the larger....... (Not that the UK has fully embraced the metric system - we buy fuel in litres, but still work out consumption in mpg.....)
Also a child of the change:
The last year or two of school we started to learn the metric system.
As the change was taking place here in Canada.
Highway signs changed to KPH from MPH just before I started driving.
However I took my pilot's licence before driving cars (they use Knots).
Using both systems for many years now; I've found.
I can visualise:
Speed~MPH or KPH doesn't matter.
Distance~ on a map I can use either; but pefer Imperial.
Distances ~smaller than a football field imperial. Includes the size of a room how big my model table is. down to including fraction sizes and xx thou.
People~ weight & height imperial.
Volume~ is kinda a weird one for me.
Since there is no metric gallon. it's 4 liters, (milk jug size) or a US gallon (they are real close)
I go ml/oz/cup/litres/US gallon. But a 5 gallon bucket and a 45 gallon barrel go back to Imperial. (the last one goes back to flight training; calculating the weight of fuel in the aircraft before flight.)
 Oct 20, 2010, 09:34 AM check for reversed controls Regarding metric vs American measuring systems. A Canadian born American machinist once told me ," America is the only country to put a man on the Moon, and we did it in feet and inches"
Oct 20, 2010, 10:20 AM
Hey Guys, Watch This.......
Quote:
 Originally Posted by alpea 41 Regarding metric vs American measuring systems. A Canadian born American machinist once told me ," America is the only country to put a man on the Moon, and we did it in feet and inches"
Didn't we have a Mars probe awhile back that missed the planet entirely due to a mix match of metric and standard?
Mike
Oct 20, 2010, 01:20 PM
Registered User
Quote:
 Originally Posted by mike2663 Didn't we have a Mars probe awhile back that missed the planet entirely due to a mix match of metric and standard? Mike
Actually it was just the opposite, the probe smashed into the planet. If memory suerves me, the programming was metric and the measurements were taken in standard units, or vice versa.
 Oct 20, 2010, 01:24 PM Formerly "vonJaerschky" Probably the most famous Canadian "oopsy" when we switched from Imperial to metric was the "Gimli Glider" incident where an Air Canada Boeing 767 ran out of gas in mid flight and became a glider. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider So if the 767 can do it, Dag's B-36 should be able to do it, too. (Just thought I'd relate this to the thread somehow!)
Oct 20, 2010, 02:04 PM
Foam abuser!
Quote:
 Originally Posted by mike2663 Didn't we have a Mars probe awhile back that missed the planet entirely due to a mix match of metric and standard? Mike
Quote:
 Originally Posted by rcmigpilot Actually it was just the opposite, the probe smashed into the planet. If memory suerves me, the programming was metric and the measurements were taken in standard units, or vice versa.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by vonJaerschky Probably the most famous Canadian "oopsy" when we switched from Imperial to metric was the "Gimli Glider" incident where an Air Canada Boeing 767 ran out of gas in mid flight and became a glider. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider So if the 767 can do it, Dag's B-36 should be able to do it, too. (Just thought I'd relate this to the thread somehow!)
How odd is this. In reading the Air Canada incident posted by vonJaerschky, at the botton in "See Also" is the Wiki page on the Mars probe incident.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_Climate_Orbiter

Pat
 Oct 20, 2010, 03:39 PM Registered User Actually Mars Surveyor HIT Mars due to the math conversion error, it failed to slow down and impacted the planets surface. Foo
Oct 20, 2010, 03:44 PM
Perfect 3pt inverted landing!
Quote:
 Originally Posted by alpea 41 Regarding metric vs American measuring systems. A Canadian born American machinist once told me ," America is the only country to put a man on the Moon, and we did it in feet and inches"
Actually we did it with dollars and cents.
Oct 21, 2010, 01:24 AM
Registered User
Quote:
 Originally Posted by teookie Actually we did it with dollars and cents.
IF you did it ;-)