The first of two NASA rovers is safely on its way to Mars, but...

The rest of the world uses SI units; it would seem like a good idea for
the US to do so as well!


America is number one, you Brits should learn to do things our way.
rat
~( );

email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address

"Ratboy99" wrote in message
...
The rest of the world uses SI units; it would seem like a good idea for
the US to do so as well!


America is number one, you Brits should learn to do things our way.
rat
~( );

It'll be interesting to see whether "our" Mars rover does any better than
"your" Mars rover :-). At least ours was built in SI units :-).

Regards,

Chris

Chris Marriot wrote:

It'll be interesting to see whether "our" Mars rover does any better than
"your" Mars rover :-). At least ours was built in SI units :-).

Yea, but you forgot to put on some wheels to make it move :-).
--
David W. Knisely
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

**********************************************
* Attend the 10th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 27-Aug. 1st, 2003, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************

Brian Advise wrote:

wrote:


"Mars tends to eat spacecraft. It's a graveyard," Edward Weiler,
NASA associate administrator for space science, said on
Wednesday.

I hope this is a joke, because the failures reside with NASA.


Oh good - I'm sure that Japan & the former USSR will be overjoyed
to have a scapgoat for all their failed missions.



-----------
I was baffled by a NASA commentator saying the spacecraft were

especially checked for potential problems that might affect the
missions and some were found, and fixed.

One would think given the cost of these spacecraft it would be the
rule rather than the exception to check "especially" for
problems that might affect mission success.







--
The future is waiting.

http://marsanomalyresearch.com/
http://www.hermes-press.com/education_index.htm
http://www.newworlds.com/startram.html

You posted:

Nonetheless, that erroneous "19,310 kph" is
NASA's responsibility, and evidence that they haven't learned their
lesson.

Sigh... we aren't certain who transposed the figures, although 19,310
kph is pretty close to 12,000 mph (11,999 mph). Again, any figure like
"12,000 mph" is for U.S. general public reference and *not* for
navigating rovers to the surface of Mars. It isn't really much
"evidence" of anything (except that two units for speed are used in the
U.S.). Again, on NASA's web pages, metric units are being consistently
stated first, followed by the English units in parenthesis.
--
David W. Knisely
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

**********************************************
* Attend the 10th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 27-Aug. 1st, 2003, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 06:04:44 GMT, David Knisely
wrote:

Yes, but this is *only* for the public. Much of the U.S. public is less
than familiar with the metric system, so it makes some public relations
sense to use the more familiar English units.

I worked on the ISS project in the 90's (yes it was called something
else then -- Space Station Freedom), and the edict was that all work
was to be done in English units. I did work in thermo and fluid
mechanics and hated using English units. In fact, I developed all my
tools in SI units and then simply did a conversion of the answer at
the end to English.

I can only hope that NASA has shifted to SI units for all internal
work.

---
Michael McCulloch

Chris Marriott wrote:

Surely the way to familiarise people with metric units is to start using
them; if you never use them on the grounds that they are unfamiliar, then
they will remain unfamiliar!

It's taken 30-odd years for people in the UK to become familiar with metric
units, but these days virtually everybody is happy and familiar with their
use. The rest of the world uses SI units; it would seem like a good idea for
the US to do so as well!

Agreed, but it takes a period of education prior to doing this. NASA is
trying to do that by stating SI units, followed by English units when
they do their press releases. They depend on public support for their
funding, which is why the P.R. people want the English units left in.
It would be best if the *entire* government went over to S.I., but
considering that much of the people who do the budget don't understand
even what a long-term deficit means, that is unlikely anytime soon.
Clear skies to you.
--
David W. Knisely
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

**********************************************
* Attend the 10th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 27-Aug. 1st, 2003, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 05:10:16 GMT, David Knisely
wrote:

You posted:

Nonetheless, that erroneous "19,310 kph" is
NASA's responsibility, and evidence that they haven't learned their
lesson.

Sigh... we aren't certain who transposed the figures, although 19,310
kph is pretty close to 12,000 mph (11,999 mph).

You don't understand where the error lies. The two errors I referred
to were in carrying too many significant digits in the result, and
using an improper symbol. (The "mph" isn't any better, but since the
Fred Flintstone units are no longer supported and updated, I can't
point you to rules saying not to use it as I can for the "kph" used
here.) It should be either 19 000 km/h (or 19 Mm/h or 5.4 km/s) or
19 300 km/h.

Again, any figure like
"12,000 mph" is for U.S. general public reference

How many times do I have to point out to you, this isn't published
just to the U.S. general public? I don't have to prove either
citizenship or residency to access any of their pages.

and *not* for
navigating rovers to the surface of Mars.

If NASA uses different units internally, what was their original
figure, and why did it get lost? It wasn't 19,310 km/h, I'll
bet--unless, of course, the engineers are using mi/h in their work,
and somebody doesn't know how to properly convert 12,000 mi/h.

It isn't really much
"evidence" of anything (except that two units for speed are used in the
U.S.).

It's both more and less than that. It is that at least two units for
speed are used in the world; that's the most this can show you. Other
evidence can show you that km/h are used in the United States, but
this does not.

Again, on NASA's web pages, metric units are being consistently
stated first, followed by the English units in parenthesis.

Such consistency would be very surprising in pages submitted by
various divisions of NASA over a period of many years. It doesn't in
fact exist.

Yes, many pages do follow that rule. I'm also pleased to see so many
that are metric only.

It's also a dumb idea if it were true, IMHO. It is the original
measurement which should come first, followed by the conversion. If
both metric and English are equally original, then you could choose to
put metric first.

FRED FLINTSTONE ONLY
Selected Mission Weights
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4029/Apol...on_Weights.htm
http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Education/O...nsttakeoff.pdf
http://uav.wff.nasa.gov/db/uav_index.html
http://www-gte.larc.nasa.gov/trace/TP_APP-I.htm
http://www.odin.nasa.gov/Alterion/Q15/pc_notebooks.html
http://windtunnels.arc.nasa.gov/12ft1.html (even uses degrees Rankine)
http://facilities.grc.nasa.gov/psl/psl_caps.html
http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/BGP...llenge_act.htm
http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/aero/wrigh...ght/work7.html
http://lifesci.arc.nasa.gov/CGBR/cgbr_cent.html (includes "G-lbs";
slugs?)
http://lifesci.arc.nasa.gov/CGBR/cgbr_cent.html
http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/h.../sa-1/sa-1.htm


METRIC ONLY
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/history/...s-supplies.htm
http://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/...atellites.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary.../marsfact.html


METRIC FIRST
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mer/mission/spacecraft.html
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/Hi...009/v4app3.htm
http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/cassini/S...talstats.shtml
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mro/mission/sc_propulsion.html

FRED FLINTSTONE FIRST
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/osf/1998/year...98shuttle.html
http://www-pao.ksc.nasa.gov/kscpao/n...ps/pms013b.pdf
http://www1.msfc.nasa.gov/NEWSROOM/n...96/96-046.html



Gene Nygaard
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Gene_Nygaard/

On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:33:23 GMT, David Knisely
wrote:

Chris Marriott wrote:

Surely the way to familiarise people with metric units is to start using
them; if you never use them on the grounds that they are unfamiliar, then
they will remain unfamiliar!

It's taken 30-odd years for people in the UK to become familiar with metric
units, but these days virtually everybody is happy and familiar with their
use. The rest of the world uses SI units; it would seem like a good idea for
the US to do so as well!

Agreed, but it takes a period of education prior to doing this. NASA is
trying to do that by stating SI units, followed by English units when
they do their press releases. They depend on public support for their
funding, which is why the P.R. people want the English units left in.

When NASA measures vertical distance to the space station in miles
(something nobody else in aviation uses for vertical distances), these
are often converted by the PR people--but not to metric units, only to
a different Fred Flintstone unit that shares the same name. Of
course, neither branch of NASA routinely identifies which of those
miles they are using. If a conversion to metric units is given, then
you can figure out what the person doing that particular conversion
believed them to be--but can you really trust that the person doing
the metric conversion knew, when the original miles are not
specificially identified?

Gene Nygaard
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Gene_Nygaard/

DK
From: David Knisely
DK
Subject: The first of two NASA rovers is safely on its way to Mars, but...
DK
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 18:33:23 GMT
DK
DK Surely the way to familiarise people with metric units is to start using
DK them; if you never use them on the grounds that they are unfamiliar, then
DK they will remain unfamiliar!
DK
DK It's taken 30-odd years for people in the UK to become familiar with metric
DK units, but these days virtually everybody is happy and familiar with their
DK use. The rest of the world uses SI units; it would seem like a good idea for
DK the US to do so as well!
DK
DK Agreed, but it takes a period of education prior to doing this. NASA is
DK trying to do that by stating SI units, followed by English units when
DK they do their press releases. They depend on public support for their
DK funding, which is why the P.R. people want the English units left in.
DK It would be best if the *entire* government went over to S.I., but
DK considering that much of the people who do the budget don't understand
DK even what a long-term deficit means, that is unlikely anytime soon.

In my monthly column PazMiniBits, posted in the NYSkies yahoo
egroup, I use only metrics. I convert oldstyle to metric where only
oldstyle is given in the newsource. However, when both are given I do
spotcheck to see that they are consistent. It's annoying how often the
two aren't.
Since about 1994, when the column began monthly issuance in
Eyepiece, I got essentially NO serious adverse comments about using
metrics. Oh, some one will ask why I do or ask for a quick equivalence
to oldstyle, but every one accepts the exclusive use of metrics in
PazMiniBits.
By the way, the column is fed by home astronomy news from
litterally the whole world, sent to me by email, snailmail,, or
personal meeting. Its primary readers, on the other hand, are
predominantly Americans, who make up the membership of NYSkies.

---
þ RoseReader 2.52á P005004