Metric & Imperial measurements

[jopsuk]

Message from Moderator: Posts in this topic have been split from http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=22074

"chains" are yet another ridiculous Imperial unit, adding in an extra number base. Base 10 is so much easier to work with, and the sooner the imperial dinosaurs in this country (and the US) either convert or die off (after all, kids have been taught metric since the seventies in the UK!) the better.

In my less than humble opinion, of course

 

[Mojo]

"chains" are yet another ridiculous Imperial unit, adding in an extra number base. Base 10 is so much easier to work with, and the sooner the imperial dinosaurs in this country (and the US) either convert or die off (after all, kids have been taught metric since the seventies in the UK!) the better.

In my less than humble opinion, of course

Couldn't agree more! After all, Metric is the official measurement system of this country, yet we still use Imperial for signage. The Traffic Signs Manual is all based on Metric for the measurements, but insists on signage in Imperial.

 

[jopsuk]

Couldn't agree more! After all, Metric is the official measurement system of this country, yet we still use Imperial for signage. The Traffic Signs Manual is all based on Metric for the measurements, but insists on signage in Imperial.

(off topic) so a 400 yard sign is actually at 437 yards (assuming it's been set up right)?

 

[Mojo]

(off topic) so a 400 yard sign is actually at 437 yards (assuming it's been set up right)?

Yes. It's because the official system of measurement in the UK is Metric, but Imperial measurements are used on signs. Yards and metres are used interchangeably.

 

[bluenoxid]

Wow, I've learnt something new today about highway and transport. Thought I'd exhausted it after the history of roundabouts

 

[moonrakerz]

"chains" are yet another ridiculous Imperial unit, adding in an extra number base. Base 10 is so much easier to work with, and the sooner the imperial dinosaurs in this country (and the US) either convert or die off (after all, kids have been taught metric since the seventies in the UK!) the better.

In my less than humble opinion, of course

Now that this thread has come back to life ..................

I'm afraid jopsuk is yet another exponent of "it works just fine, lets change it !"

Generally, each part of the Imperial system is the best system for the subject in question.

Lets take the base of the decimal system: The number 10.
It is only divisble by unity, itself, two and five.
The base of much of the Imperial system: The number 12.
It is divisible by unity, itself, two, three, four and six - AND two of those divisors can be sub-divided by other divisors. That's why they chose twelve for inches in a foot or pennies in a shilling, in the first place - it is much more flexible !
For a pure numbering system, binary (and its offspring) has to be the font runner, but it wouldn't look too good on the shelves in Tesco.

There can be no other number other than ten where the insertion/mis-insertion of a dot or a dash can multiply/divide that number by ten or a hundred or a thousand, etc, etc - crazy !
I am six ft tall; a quick "typo" and I become 18.288 metres (sixty feet to the "dinosaurs")

The kilo - what a useless measure - that's why the French use the "livre" - the pound, for half a kilo !
Then of course there was the Canadian "metric" airliner which ran out of fuel half way to its destination because the Metric lobby insisted the airline use metric measures rather than Imperial which everyone else used.

Many years ago the metric lobby tried to get the aviation industry to use the metre for aircraft altitude (instead of the foot); it was rejected on the grounds that it was "too coarse" a measure. But they agreed to change it "if a more suitable metric measure became available" ! They are still trying to invent that ! The "pied" perhaps ?

Regrettably, the metric system, was actually first fully described by an Englishman, John Wilkins in 1668. It was another 120 years before the French adopted the system - presumably it took that long because it came from England.
The imperial system developed over thousands of years - and it works !

Yours Faithfully,

T Rex

PS: Greengrocers (I was tempted to put "apostrophe s" there !) can now sell fruit and veg in pounds again without fear of being imprisoned.
The dinosaurs are fighting back !

 

[thelem]

The imperial system developed over thousands of years - and it works !

You're probably just trolling, but I'll respond anyway.

The imperial system only works because that is what you are used to, but is very difficult to learn. Why is the height of a horse measured in hands, but the height of a person in feet? Why is my foot not a foot long? How many inches in a hand? How many centihands in a hand? How many feet in a mile? How many fluid ounces in a gallon?

Sorry, that last one is a bit of a trick question - the answer is 160 in the UK, 128 if you are talking to an American, 130 on the label or American food, or 149 in a US dry gallon.

Someone new to the railways will have no idea how long a chain is, but they will know how long a metre is. Why do you want to force them to learn a new measurement?

 

[Mojo]

I disagree that the 'Imperial' system works well, or indeed that it is even a system; it seems like a random collection of units. You mention that a misplacing of a decimal point in metres could lead to a mistake, but so could the difference between 10' and 10".

Unless you're a maths genius, if I said to you that I was 73 inches tall then how long would it take you to work out what that is in feet without the use of a calculator. If I said that I was 179cm, then you can instantly know that I am 1.79mtrs tall.

Finally, there was never such a rule against selling in anything other than Metric (although it was planned, but dropped by the EU), merely that Metric must be prominently displayed. The so called "Metric Martyr" was prosecuted for using illegal scales, not selling in pounds and ounces.

 

[moonrakerz]

You're probably just trolling

I'm not, honest ! I just find enforced metrication along with all the other "changes" foisted on us to be a bit of a con.
I love seeing 195 miles 3 chains painted on railway bridges !
We used to have a County Council where I live, then we were told that "change" would improve everything. So we had a District Council as well - and got our dustbins emptied half as often. We have just had another "change" which will make everything better - we are back to a County Council again !

Me, cynical ? - course not !

Why do you want to force them to learn a new measurement?

I don't - my point was why was metrication forced on us in the first place ? Metric is most definitely the "new" measurement.
A chain is a most sensible measurement. It's origin is most sensible - as indeed is the hand's !


Mojo - if you need a calculator to divide 73 by 12, I rest my case !

 

[Mojo]

73 divided by 12 is 6.083. Can you get that accuracy in your head in about 2 seconds, and then convert the values after the decimal places to the remaining inches in the same time?

And even then you are expected to remember what number you have to divide by in the first place; there are different numbers for comparisons between each unit.

 

[90019]

73 divided by 12 is 6.083. Can you get that accuracy in your head in about 2 seconds, and then convert the values after the decimal places to the remaining inches in the same time?

And even then you are expected to remember what number you have to divide by in the first place; there are different numbers for comparisons between each unit.

I got it as approx. 6'1 in my head.
If someone tells me that's their height, why would I need to know it to 4sf?

But the simple fact of the matter is that you dont just do it in inches, for example, I'm 6', my brother is 6'3, my friend's dad is 5'11. I never say I'm 72", no one does.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm not, honest ! I just find enforced metrication along with all the other "changes" foisted on us to be a bit of a con.
I love seeing 195 miles 3 chains painted on railway bridges!

Everyone I know uses imperial, and personally I have no intention of changing from imperial just because someone else finds that metric is more logical to them.
If someone doesn't understand imperial, that's their own problem not mine. I understand both of them as well as I need to, and I prefer using imperial.

 

[Mojo]

Might not say that you are 72 inches tall, but what if something is measured in that distance? I can also say that where I used to work I often had people declare their height in inches on the application forms which had to be returned as invalid! As a side point the application form read:

[ ] ft [ ] [ ] ins or [ ] [ ] [ ] cm

but the computer wanted Metric measures in metres, so we had to "correct" any forms!

I personally think it's in everyone's interest to make the switch, although a lot of it is down to business and government's partial Metrification. Education is being undermined because children are being taught mostly in Metric but see references to Imperial in the media. Petrol is sold in litres but fuel efficiency is measured in miles per gallon. Road signs read Imperial but the actual distances are in Metric.

Metric is a much easier system to work with and sets a world standard, the overwhelming majority of our international trade being with countries using such a system.

 

[90019]

Might not say that you are 72 inches tall, but what if something is measured in that distance?

Then you either work in inches or work it out in feet.

 

[Mojo]

Then you either work in inches or work it out in feet.

Not very accurate though is it? Fortunately it's not much of a problem now many kitchen appliances are measured in mm.

 

[thelem]

What benefits does the imperial system have, other than "I'm used to it"? To counter "people don't measure height in inches", Americans measure body weight in pounds.

Back on topic:

Manchester Exchange to Manchester Victoria,same platform

Did the same service stop at both stations? If not, then it doesn't count.

 

[jopsuk]

The base of much of the Imperial system: The number 12.

No it isn't.

16 oz in a pound

20 fl oz in a pint

In fact, look at the definition of a chain:
"A chain is a unit of length; it measures 66 feet or 22 yards or 4 rods or 100 links. There are 10 chains in a furlong, and 80 chains in one statute mile. An acre is the area of 10 square chains (that is, an area of one chain by one furlong)"

Not one number in there is divsible by twelve!

There is no common number base running through the imperial "system".

Then comes the utter mess when you start talking about measures, especially fluid, with our American cousins- whereby 1 Gallon (Imp) is 1.2 Gallons (US, Wet) or 1.02 Gallons (US, Dry).

Amusingly, the Pound has, in the UK, the pound has been legally defined in terms of a decimal fraction of a kilo since 1889!

 

[tbtc]

I know this is getting pretty off-topic, but nobody would invent something as confusing as Imperial measurements today - the only reason for them is that "that's the way things have always been".

And as for going back to "pounds, shillings and pence"... bonkers!

 

[Muttley]

Not very accurate though is it? Fortunately it's not much of a problem now many kitchen appliances are measured in mm.

The Yanks managed to put a man on the moon using feet and inches. And calculated the fuel required to lift him off in pounds.

200yds from AWS magnet to signal, much easier than 183 mtrs.

Perhaps we should go back to teaching imperial in schools.

 

[Mojo]

That's only because they decided to measure it as 200yds from magnet to signal, conversely you could say that Eurostar's 186mph is more difficult than 300kph or the 56mph speed limit for certain vehicles is harder than the 90kph.

And as we learnt above, 200yds signs on the roads are actually 200mtrs from the obstruction

 

[90019]

conversely you could say that Eurostar's 186mph is more difficult than 300kph or the 56mph speed limit for certain vehicles is harder than the 90kph.

But then 125mph is easier than 201.2km/h, 70mph is easier than 112.7km/h, 30mph is easier than 48.3km/h, 40mph easier than 64.4km/h, etc.

 

[Mojo]

But surely that's down to the measure in use at the time. When Ireland moved from mph to kph (or km/h, whatever you prefer) on their road signs they didn't just convert to Metric. I'm therefore saying that Muttley's argument doesn't stand up because at the time that was the chosen system.

 

[Muttley]

But surely that's down to the measure in use at the time. When Ireland moved from mph to kph (or km/h, whatever you prefer) on their road signs they didn't just convert to Metric. I'm therefore saying that Muttley's argument doesn't stand up because at the time that was the chosen system.

And thats the point. Whether you`re 200 yards or 200 metres from an obstruction is largely irrelevant as long as you know that its yay far away (thats an even older Yorkshire measurement).

The Yanks chosen system, that appears too complicated for many nowadays, got them further than any man has gone before, and lets not forget, back again.

And lets be honest, IF, and i do mean if, somebody gave you a distance in km, i bet theres very few people wouldn`t be getting there 5/8th`s times table ready.

 

[Mojo]

And lets be honest, IF, and i do mean if, somebody gave you a distance in km, i bet theres very few people wouldn`t be getting there 5/8th`s times table ready.

Well I wouldn't say it as an "if," it's something I deal with all the time. Metric is the official system of measurement in this country and transport plans, say you are planning a new railway line are all in kilometres, this is something I have to do quite a lot because of my degree. OS maps have used Metric since the 1940s.

All the food and drink I buy, with the exception of certain drinks in pubs is sold in Metric and I can compare price tags easily to check I'm getting the best deal.

H Class submarines might have helped us win the war, but you wouldn't catch anyone suggesting they be used today. In fact, NASA now works in Metric! With components being bought from all over the world it's important that all suppliers produce their components to the same specifications.

 

[Muttley]

Ain`t that just typical...

the people who build the railways work in km`s
the people who work the railways work in miles.


Sometimes you just have to sit back and be thankful it works at all.

 

[Aussie_Rail]

We use the Metric system here in Australia, all signage is Metric, railways roads etc. The only thing that is seemingly not metric is when people refer to their height, people still say 5tf 9 etc.

I think when the USA finally get on board and stop being so ancient then things will become more easy to understand, then I'll be able to watch the odd episode of 'The Biggest Looser' without needing a calculator.

Then after they deal with getting rid of the Imperial system they can fix the way they write the date.

People here still think that 9/11 is the 9th of November. It should be written as 31/12/2009 not 12/31/2009.

What idiot puts the month first then the day??

 

[gordonthemoron]

it makes no sense for computers to store imperial units as they work in base 10 (although the data may be store in base 2, 8 or 16).

Consequently, pre-decimillisation (sp?), monetary amounts were stored in pennies.

Similarily, I can't see tesco's storing (loose) stock data in anything other than kgs and litres.

Here in germany, they also call half a kilogram a 'pfund' (pound) and half a litre of beer is much the same quantity as you'd get for a pint in an english pub (because our glasses are oversized and you don't get short measures).

 

[Oswyntail]

......People here still think that 9/11 is the 9th of November. It should be written as 31/12/2009 not 12/31/2009....

Actually, it makes more sense to write it 2009/12/31. Increasing granularity, like TOPS numbers, so that they are easier to file sorted.
Basically, no system of measurement is more accurate than any other. We are measuring real objects, and what is there does not alter whether we use miles, metres, or parasangs. So long as a) all parties to a communication understand what is said and b) the accuracy is sufficient for the current needs then any system will do

 

[jopsuk]

People here still think that 9/11 is the 9th of November. It should be written as 31/12/2009 not 12/31/2009.

What idiot puts the month first then the day??

Oddly, NOT the US military, who as far as I'm aware use dd/mm/yyyy on official documents, contrary to the rest of the US. But then dates aren't metric or imperial. Oswyntail is right, mind- would be even more logical to go YYYY:MMD:hh:mms for a unified date/time system.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Strangely enough, a DB2 (database) timestamp is held as:

CCYY-MM-DD-HH.MM.SS.TTTTTT

 

[mumrar]

The main difficulty with imperial measures is the different countries having their own definitions. I think we can all agree it would be easy to communicate worldwide with one common language, but imperial is like the language barriers. You may be able to quantify what you say, it doesn't mean other people will. It was deliberately cited that 10 can only be divided by 1,2,5 and itself. But this made complete ignorance to multiplication. Both are major functions in measurement, so to compare lets do a speed test. I have 100m of rope that I need to divide into 250 sections. How long is each section in the most convenient metric measure? I also have a 100yard piece of rope that I need to divide into 250 pieces. So how long is each section in the most convenient imperial measure? I look forward to your answers, please don't use a calculator, and imperial please show the ridiculous working out required to get that into a lower imperial unit.