X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from mail29.syd.optusnet.com.au ([211.29.132.171] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.4) with ESMTPS id 1425242 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:43:47 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=211.29.132.171; envelope-from=lendich@optusnet.com.au Received: from george (d220-236-126-252.dsl.nsw.optusnet.com.au [220.236.126.252]) by mail29.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id k8SNh1nR027434 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2006 09:43:03 +1000 Message-ID: <000a01c6e357$d8000e20$fc7eecdc@george> From: "George Lendich" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Subject: Fuel Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 09:43:03 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0007_01C6E3AB.A8848E10" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0639-3, 27/09/2006), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C6E3AB.A8848E10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Paul or ANYONE, Could you tell me why the US gallon is different to the Imperial gallon = - it has always bothered me. I've searched the conversions and found = that the Imperial system has 20 oz to the pint and the US has 16 oz to = the pint, and we all have 2 pints =3D 1 quart and 4 quarts gallon. It = also seems there is a difference in the value of the ounce. We both have 16 oz to the lb - I wonder if that had anything to do with = some sort of EARLY rationalisation?=20 I would really like to understand the reasoning behind this difference, = there must be some sound reasoning behind wanting to change from what = was THEN considered a universal 'Weights & Measures' system. While your at it could someone tell me why Stone was dropped from the US = weights system i.e. 14 lbs =3D1 Stone. I just figure if I could just understand the reasoning behind these = decisions and if they sound logical - I could better live with them, = like I do with the difference in spelling. Not that I'm so great at = spelling, in fact I used to get in all sorts of trouble by spelling = things phonetically such as in the US system - but they belted that out = of me, however I do understand the logic behind it. Now if I could just = get a handle on the weights issue! George ( down under) ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C6E3AB.A8848E10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Paul or ANYONE,
Could you tell me why the US gallon is = different to=20 the Imperial gallon - it has always bothered me. I've searched the = conversions=20 and found that the Imperial system has 20 oz to the pint and the US = has 16=20 oz to the pint, and we all have 2 pints =3D 1 quart and 4 quarts gallon. = It also=20 seems there is a difference in the value of the ounce.
 
We both have 16 oz to the lb - I wonder = if that had=20 anything to do with some sort of EARLY = rationalisation? 
 
I would really like to understand the = reasoning=20 behind this difference, there must be some sound reasoning behind = wanting=20 to change from what was THEN considered a universal = 'Weights=20 & Measures' system.
 
While your at it could someone tell me = why Stone=20 was dropped from the US weights system i.e. 14 lbs =3D1 = Stone.
 
I just figure if I could just = understand the=20 reasoning behind these decisions and if they sound logical - I could = better live=20 with them, like I do with the difference in spelling. Not that I'm so = great at=20 spelling, in fact I used to get in all sorts of trouble by spelling = things=20 phonetically such as in the US system - but they belted that out of = me,=20 however I do understand the logic behind it. Now if I could just get a = handle=20 on  the weights issue!
George ( down = under)
------=_NextPart_000_0007_01C6E3AB.A8848E10--