X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from access.aic-fl.com ([204.49.76.2] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1c.4) with ESMTP id 1425258 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:57:46 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=204.49.76.2; envelope-from=unicorn@gdsys.net Received: from b9k4u9 (unverified [204.49.76.85]) by access.aic-fl.com (Rockliffe SMTPRA 4.5.6) with SMTP id for ; Thu, 28 Sep 2006 18:54:43 -0500 Message-ID: <000c01c6e36a$a823e100$554c31cc@b9k4u9> From: "Richard Sohn" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" References: Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Fuel Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 18:57:39 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0009_01C6E32F.F83F8BC0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C6E32F.F83F8BC0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ----- Original Message -----=20 From: George Lendich=20 To: Rotary motors in aircraft=20 Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 4:43 PM Subject: [FlyRotary] Fuel=20 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) Use metric and you don't have that kind of problems. Richard Sohn N-2071U ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C6E32F.F83F8BC0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 George=20 Lendich
Sent: Thursday, September 28, = 2006 4:43=20 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Fuel =

Paul or ANYONE,
Could you tell me why the US gallon = is different=20 to the Imperial gallon - it has always bothered me. I've searched the=20 conversions and found that the Imperial system has 20 oz to = the pint and=20 the US has 16 oz to the pint, and we all have 2 pints =3D 1 quart and = 4 quarts=20 gallon. It also seems there is a difference in the value of the=20 ounce.
 
We both have 16 oz to the lb - I = wonder if that=20 had anything to do with some sort of EARLY=20 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=20 'Weights & 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=20 live with them, like I do with the difference in spelling. Not that = I'm so=20 great at spelling, in fact I used to get in all sorts of trouble by = spelling=20 things phonetically such as in the US system - but they belted = that out=20 of me, however I do understand the logic behind it. Now if I could = just get a=20 handle on  the weights issue!
George ( down under)
 
Use metric and you don't have that = kind of=20 problems.
 
Richard Sohn
N-2071U
 
 
------=_NextPart_000_0009_01C6E32F.F83F8BC0--