3 ms·
> How many of these incidents will we require until we finally get rid of the metric system once and for all! I love you think not other way around.
by ezoe 3y ago
> How many of these incidents will we require until we finally get rid of the metric system once and for all!
I love you think not other way around.
- cmurf 3y agoIt seems nice but it’s difficult in practice. Converting to metric for fuel seems reasonable but measuring fuel in weight (mass) and volume would still lead to errors using only meteric. Distance and speeds use a mix of feet, statute miles, nautical miles, meters and kilometers depending on the context and country. Eliminating the difference would mean new approved flight manuals for each airplane, and quite expensive changes to flight instruments as well. There’s a really good fit with feet for altitude in the U.S. that just works well. 1000’ of separation for opposite direction traffic, and 500’ separation between flight rules in the same direction. Directly converting to meters breaks all the simple math involved. Whereas if we keep the math simple, it alters airspace density and capacity. Anyway, there’s no significant desire or effort to drop any of these units.
- Doxin 3y agogoing for 150m increments instead of 500 feet increments is only an error of ~8 feet. that doesn't seem so bad. On the topic of switching over: obviously you'd not do it all at once, but phasing in metric on new planes would at least fix the issue eventually.
- charles_f 3y agoI love you read not whole comments. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36863874 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36863874