Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=207.69.195.63; envelope-from=mldsub@earthlink.net
From: "Sandy" <mldsub@earthlink.net>
To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [FlyRotary] Re: metric system
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2006 18:07:58 -0500
Message-ID: <000001c711af$c0671ac0$6401a8c0@pss6ea5f1dbeb5>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <list-1605087@logan.com>

Let me make sure I have this right.
Two horse's ass's (how do you spell the plural of ass?) determined the
diameter of the Space Shuttle booster rockets.  Is that about it?
--Sandy
PS.  I agree with the points you made. Both (all) systems of measurement
work for someone somewhere.  I regularly use both systems and find it
takes very little effort to switch between the two.


-----Original Message-----
From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On
Behalf Of Steve Thomas
Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 9:12 PM
To: Rotary motors in aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: metric system

I don't get it.  All measurement systems are arbitrary.  The  
"English" system certainly came from some odd roots.  But so did the  
railroad track gauge (it was the width of a horse drawn wagon  
track.)  And guess what else?  The Space Shuttle booster rockets were  
designed around the same gauge so it could be shipped to its final  
destination.  The metric system was designed around what they thought  
was the circumference of the earth.  They got it wrong.  And, 1 cc is  
not the same as 1 ml., though that was the intent.  Now, all  
measurements are based on a metal rod, or other device, residing in a  
refrigerator at a constant temperature in the National Weights and  
Measures office for the US and somewhere in France for metric  
measurements.

OK, the SAE system may be a little convoluted, but once you learn it,  
it works just fine.  Oh, I forgot, we should change just because the  
Europeans use it.  Should we also adopt soccer as our national  
pastime just because the "rest of the world" sees soccer as their  
national pastime?  I mean, almost no one adopts our version of  
football.  Just because "they" do it is not an a-priori reason do to so.

Will we eventually migrate over to metric de-facto even though we  
have rejected a de-juris solution?  Maybe.   But in the interim, SAE  
works just fine, and in the absence of a compelling economic reason  
to do so, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Best Regards,

Steve

____________________________________________________________________


On Nov 25, 2006, at 5:40 PM, Bulent Aliev wrote:

>> I just think it is embarrassing that the US cant seem to adopt the  
>> international system...