On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 14:29:06 +0000, Martin Gregorie wrote:

> On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 12:30:30 +0000, alister wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 11:05:23 +0000, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>
>>> Not used here, except by scientists, until forced by the EEC. A vast
>>> improvement over the geriatric FPS system, which should have died at
>>> least a century before it did. $DEITY knows why the Yanks still
>>> persist in using it.
>>
>> for the same reason that you still measure distances in miles & prefer
>> to by your beer in pints (& I suspect you know you're height in Feet &
>> Inches & your weight in stone)
>>
> Nope - I wouldn't have a clue about my weight and height in Imperial
> units, but then NZ went metric before the UK did - and did it faster,
> cheaper and with a lot less hassle than happened here. It was quite a
> shock to arrive here and have go back to using outdated Imperial units.
>
> Small side note: actually, I do use some of the old units due to the
> pervasive ICAO influence on aviation. As a glider pilot I measure speed
> and rate of climb in knots, altitude in both feet and meters and
> distance in km (because the Silver, Gold and Diamond badges measure
> distance in km and height in meters).

interesting as a SCUBA diver I use metric (Meters & Bar) because it makes
the maths easier & at 30M+ the brain is not working too well :-)
>
>> 12 inches in much nicer than 0.3m or even 300mm (30cm is not to bad if
>> you want to use a non iso subdivision)
>>
> I disagree about FPS being nicer, but mainly because IMO the hodgepodge
> of conversions it makes necessary are such a PITA and heavily outweigh
> the effect of using some human-sized units.  Besides meters and kg are
> both human scaled in that they give sensible values when measuring
> people.





--
user to computer ratio too high.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05