Ivan,

Regarding your question of August 29th @ 6:47 a.m.

‘’Do you know what the official speeds of hurricane categories are?’’

Who cares?

The bitch is over 72 statute miles per hour.

GET OUTTA TOWN!

Info @

http://www.weights-and-measures.com

And topics:

Common Wind Force Scale
Common Wind Speed Scale


72 stt.ml. = 380,160’
24 stt. leagues = 380,160 yd.
12 stt. kens = 380,160 fth.

To those us us who don't have a clue as to what that means, that is a whopping 115 km/h. It is obvious that the weather bureau works in metric to rounded numbers in metric and the media converts.

Daniel, where do you live again? I don't know if you ever mentioned it.

This page would induicate that NOAA actually logs wind speed in m/s, and converts it according to needs of customer. (I had to use a Google cached page as the original NOAA page is down at the moment.)

I guess it is all part of metric government, Customary populace. :)

http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:U4TmNUb1D7kJ:www.ndbc.noaa.gov/measdes.shtml+noaa+wind+measurement+units&hl=en&lr=lang_en
<<
Measurement Descriptions and Units

Note: Station pages display the current hour's measurements in English units by default, but can be changed by the viewer to metric units. When accessing Real Time and Historical data files, the measurements are generally in metric units, as described below, and cannot be changed.
. . .
WSPD Wind speed (m/s) averaged over an eight-minute period for buoys and a two-minute period for land stations. Reported Hourly. See Wind Averaging Methods.
WDIR Wind direction (the direction the wind is coming from in degrees clockwise from true N) during the same period used for WSPD. See Wind Averaging Methods
GST Peak 5 or 8 second gust speed (m/s) measured during the eight-minute or two-minute period. The 5 or 8 second period can be determined by payload, See the Sensor Reporting, Sampling, and Accuracy section.
. . .
>>

Yes, I believe that NOAA does log most data in metric. So does the National Weather Service. This is for the same reason that federal construction must be in metric. I call it the trickle-down theory. The government thinks (or at least, used to think) that if the federal government, with all it's economic might, converts to metric, then industry will be forced to follow along. Of course, it didn't happen, and it instead led to the situation we have today with the government using one system and industry using another, necessitating constant conversion back and forth and causing problems like the Mars rover disaster.

<<The government thinks (or at least, used to think) that if the federal government, with all it's economic might, converts to metric, then industry will be forced to follow along. Of course, it didn't happen, and it instead led to the situation we have today with the government using one system and industry using another, necessitating constant conversion back and forth and causing problems like the Mars rover disaster.>>

I disagree. The automobile industry has less clout than the Federal government economically. It went metric over 30 years ago and forced its supply base to convert. It did not tolerate suppliers who wouldn't convert.

The difference is we don't have a Senator or Representative you can bribe with a large campaign contribution to write a giant loophole into law. (which is what happened in highway and Federal building construction)

We require metric in our contracts and we enforce contingent liability. NASA nominally requires metric, and when the vender screws up, humbly apologizes for not checking his work more carefully. He should have been sued for the replacement cost of the mission. He was in clear violation of the terms and conditions. Had it been automotive, we'd have had his ass.

NASA needs to make clear who is on top in this relationship. Exactly how many Imperial rocket customers are there? When the last one (NASA) goes metric, you convert or go hungry. In the building trades, a company might have enough customers to stay Imperial or Customary. Not true in the rocket business. There are no Imperial rocket customers.

By the way, please don't count ALL industry as being Imperial or Customary. A lot isn't. All the sensor parameters for your engine controls are metric data. If the engine control software was written by the fools NASA hired, your car wouldn't run.

"Yes, I believe that NOAA does log most data in metric. So does the National Weather Service. This is for the same reason that federal construction must be in metric. I call it the trickle-down theory."

Not quite. NOAA is a part of international organizations that exchange weather information world-wide. In order for the transference of important information to be effective and everyone on the same page, a standard set of units was agreed upon and that was metric.

If the use of metric by NOAA to meet its obligations to the world somehow impairs the way the NOAA has to deal with the American public; that is just too bad! If confusion, errors and problems result in the US, then better the US then another country that has its act together. If the US wants to be in a quagmire; wasting time, money, limb and life, better it fall on those who have brought the situation on themselves then on others who are better organized.

<<Yes, I believe that NOAA does log most data in metric. So does the National Weather Service.>>

NWS is a group or office within NOAA.

John, in either case you have to admit that the federal government is more metric than industry. I am sure that the contractors that NASA deals with use primarily English units for their non-government work. Congress believed that if NASA were prohibited from using the same units that its contractors used, the contractors would be forced to switch over. Of course, for the most part that hasn't happened.

In that particular industry I do agree. The contractor in question is Lockheed-Martin, but Boeing bought them, and Boeing is completely Customary with metric conversion only for the catalog.

Parts of the government aren't really as metric as they claim. A group of us got a tour and technology exchange meeting with Oakridge National Lab a few years ago. They had interesting technology, but only suited to low volume manufacture, and while they were nominally metric, it was token metric and they quickly fell back on Customary units when you probed.

On low volume technology, they were machining a 27 lb aircraft spar out of a 5000 lb block of aluminum. (They gave the units in Customary). Because it was machined, not cast, it was going to be the strongest, most perfect spar ever. All they could see was the 27 lb spar. All the automotive guys could see was 4973 lb of aluminum chips on the floor. (This did get recycled, but it was very high grade aluminum, which it wouldn't be after recycling). We were sure we could have cast it near net shape, machined a couple of critical dimensions, and met the strength for 28 lb, maybe 27.5. It was all we could talk about on the plane ride home. We concluded we had little in common.

"John, in either case you have to admit that the federal government is more metric than industry.'


40 % of American industry is metric.

Re: Hurricane Speeds September 1 2005, 2:21 AM

JS
On low volume technology, they were machining a 27 lb aircraft spar out of a 5000 lb block of aluminum. (They gave the units in Customary). Because it was machined, not cast, it was going to be the strongest, most perfect spar ever. All they could see was the 27 lb spar. All the automotive guys could see was 4973 lb of aluminum chips on the floor. (This did get recycled, but it was very high grade aluminum, which it wouldn't be after recycling). We were sure we could have cast it near net shape, machined a couple of critical dimensions, and met the strength for 28 lb, maybe 27.5. It was all we could talk about on the plane ride home. We concluded we had little in common.


metre
No wonder Airbus outsells them.

<<metre
No wonder Airbus outsells them.
>>

Well, that story was the Federal government at work, at Oak Ridge National Lab (most of their work is top secret, for atomic weapons, but they do precision machining work too). This was something for a military aircraft. It was a new fighter, but I can't recall what. Still, it seems like an expensive way to make aircraft, even for the government. We'd be concerned about 27 lbs of waste in a 5000 lb part; they're making 5000 lb of waste for a 27 lb part. Boggled my mind.

But on Boeing/Airbus, I suspect the fact that Boeing doesn't really understand or use metric is a problem in some sales. I wonder if that has changed from the 80's when we had a company visit. I understand they have have outsourced a lot of parts manufacturing to Japanese companies. All the info on their website looks like it is original inch-pound, with metric data via conversion factors, though.

Re: Hurricane Speeds September 1 2005, 2:21 PM


JS
Well, that story was the Federal government at work, at Oak Ridge National Lab (most of their work is top secret, for atomic weapons, but they do precision machining work too). This was something for a military aircraft.
But on Boeing/Airbus, I suspect the fact that Boeing doesn't really understand or use metric is a problem in some sales. I wonder if that has changed from the 80's when we had a company visit. I understand they have have outsourced a lot of parts manufacturing to Japanese companies. All the info on their website looks like it is original inch-pound, with metric data via conversion factors, though.


metre
Interesting. I followed the argument between Boeing, through government channels, with Airbus about unfair advantage because governments subsidise it. While that is true it is also a known fact that the same happens in a roundabout way in the States. Your story confirms it. Hope you don't get into trouble for it.

If the Boeing contract is big enough Japanese companies will work in USC to fulfill it.

Interestinly, in days gone by I went with JAL to Chicago and was permitted to visit the cockpit. Talking about metrication with all those feet gauges around me the captain said they take their fuel and express airccraft weight in "punds". Funny it did not fall out of the sky. Still have one of his nautical maps as souvenier.

So lets get this right.

Some people here (well one) thinks that boeing lose out to airbus not on quality, not on marketing, not on value - but on if the word "pound" and "inch" is used.


Yup, I could see CEO's of easyjet and air kazakstan mulling it over now!

Air Wales won't be invited though, they have an obsolete language AND obsolete measures! X-D

<<Air Wales won't be invited though, they have an obsolete language AND obsolete measures!>>

Only getting the safety lecture in Welsh would be a problem.

It's a legal requirement to be in English & Welsh.

["Welsh? What's Welsh?" lol]

BTW - Air Wales got told off (then, I believe, forgiven) for only employing staff of 5ft 10in or lower!

(The planes they use are quite short)

<<BTW - Air Wales got told off (then, I believe, forgiven) for only employing staff of 5ft 10in or lower!

(The planes they use are quite short)

>>

To reach one of our plants, I had to take "Aereo Servicio de Leo Lopez," which is Spanish for Leo's plane, the last 250 miles. The tube for the passenger compartment wasn't over 5' in diameter. I had to duck waddle down the aisle. The pilot sized you up as you boarded the plane and gave you a seat number. At least it had two engines.

The EU's policy on minoity languages is to safeguard their use. However, when it comes to safety matters, the EU policy is to use metric units which are language-independent. The text "50 km/h" is the same in German, Italian, Yiddish, Welsh or any other European language. This is well illustrated if you visit:

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/el/consleg/pdf/1980/el_1980L0181_do_001.pdf

Nice tangent, martin!

BTW - there is no "k" in Welsh.

<<The EU's policy on minoity languages is to safeguard their use>>

You keep telling us that imperial is only spoken by a minority of the World's inhabitants!

;-)

excerpt from your document:

Όγκος
Fluid ounce 1 fl oz = 28,41 · 10&#8722;6 m3
Gill 1 gill = 0,1421 · 10&#8722;3 m3
Pint 1 pt = 0,5683 · 10&#8722;3 m3
Quart 1 qt = 1,137 · 10&#8722;3 m3
Γαλλόνι 1 gal = 4,546 · 10&#8722;3 m3

Steve wrote

<<
Nice tangent, martin!

BTW - there is no "k" in Welsh.
>>

You might have noticed that apart from the symbols used, the entire docuemtn was in greek letters, not latin letters.

Also, no words in Italian start with either "k" or "h" - apart from the symbol "km/h" on car dashboards.

<<You might have noticed that apart from the symbols used, the entire docuemtn was in greek letters>>

I was wondering why it all seemed like Greek to me. :)