Edwards air show B-1 speed record attempt

Personally, I'd think that capturing the record for 10,000km at 1 and
maybe 2,000 kg. payloads might be doable, given ideal conditions and very
precise
flying rather than any improvement in engine sfc. But maybe the 10,000km/no
payload record was already on the edge of what could be physically achieved

I think any 10,000 km distance is too far for the Bone if they push it up to
break the BUFF record. I don't think they'll make it fuel wise.




BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"

"PosterBoy" Wrote:

"Regnirps" wrote in message
Oh, crap! The table uses that French system with the km/hour I can never
make
sense of!

-- Charlie Springer

I think you mean that nearly universal system with the km/hour. Try: anip

My 1952 Unabridged Dictionairy calls it "The French System" as it was for the
previous 100 years, and as a physicist I find it convenient for mental
calculations, but for every day hunam scale use it sucks. It was
developed for scientific ellites. I'm sure you know that the units larger than
one use Latin prefixes and those smaller use Greek, something easily noticed by
a classically educated scientist of the 1880's. But for Mr. Goodwrench today?
An 8 mm bolt in grade 8.8 comes in three standard thread pitches and you say
"point seven oh" or "8mm with one point two five mm pitch" instead of "one
quarter twenty four". Fooey. Have you ever tried to shout French measurements
to someone in a noisy constructiuon environment? You can wind up with a doorway
three inches high.

It was officialy adopted by the US more than a hundred years ago. Do you think
it hasn't caught on because people are stuborn or because it has usability
problems (like similar sounding names for various units)? Would you try to make
everybody drive cars they don't like for 150 years? A km is what, the distance
from pole to equator divided by 15,000? What's a nautical mile?

-- Charlie Springer

"Regnirps" wrote in message
...
"PosterBoy" Wrote:

"Regnirps" wrote in message
Oh, crap! The table uses that French system with the km/hour I can
never
make
sense of!

-- Charlie Springer

I think you mean that nearly universal system with the km/hour. Try:
anip

You have misquoted me. Please correct.

Thanks, and..

Cheers.

On 21 Oct 2003 04:26:44 GMT, (Regnirps) wrote:


Have you ever tried to shout French measurements
to someone in a noisy constructiuon environment?

Yes, and metric was the lingua franca of measurement when I last worked on
building sites here in the UK 15-16 years ago.

You can wind up with a doorway
three inches high.


One doesn't when the term of measurement is always expressed in
millimetres, no decimal points, no fractions and a lot more convenient and
accurate for general construction use than feet and inches, the nearest mil
being approximately 1/25th of an inch.


greg
--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.

Regnirps wrote:


My 1952 Unabridged Dictionairy calls it "The French System" as it was for the
previous 100 years,


1952 ... a great up-to-date source ;-). Anyway, it's called "Système
Internationale" or SI. So its _name_ is indeed French.

and as a physicist I find it convenient for mental
calculations, but for every day hunam scale use it sucks.


No, it doesn't ... I've used it all my life.



It was developed for scientific ellites.


Not at all. It was developed to have a common system of measurement
all over Europe at a time when almost every country (and sometimes
village!) had its own pound, mile, etc.

I'm sure you know that the units larger than
one use Latin prefixes and those smaller use Greek,


vice versa

something easily noticed by
a classically educated scientist of the 1880's. But for Mr. Goodwrench today?
An 8 mm bolt in grade 8.8 comes in three standard thread pitches and you say
"point seven oh" or "8mm with one point two five mm pitch" instead of "one
quarter twenty four". Fooey. Have you ever tried to shout French measurements
to someone in a noisy constructiuon environment? You can wind up with a doorway
three inches high.


Not any easier than with U.S. or Imperial units. BTW, a few years
there was this unfortuante incident involving a multi-million $ NASA
space probe and incompetent usage of U.S. units of distance ;-) ...



It was officialy adopted by the US more than a hundred years ago. Do you think
it hasn't caught on because people are stuborn


Yes. People can be unbelievably stubborn when it comes to giving up
old habits even if newer alternatives would be an improvement.

or because it has usability
problems (like similar sounding names for various units)?


Huh?? "Meter" isn't any more similar to "gram" than, say, "foot" is to
"ounce". If you refer to the common prefixes, this is the big
_advantage_. If you know that a kilometer is 1000 meters, you
immediately know that a kilogram is 1000 grams, a kilovolt is 1000
volts, etc. No need to memorize all the factors to convert inches -
feet - miles, ounces - pounds, and whatever.

Would you try to make
everybody drive cars they don't like for 150 years? A km is what, the distance
from pole to equator divided by 15,000?


Roughly the circumference of the earth divided by 40,000. I don't know
the origin of the (statute) mile, but I'm sure you'll tell me that its
defintion is _way_ more intuitive ;-).

What's a nautical mile?


1852 meters ;-).

Andreas

"Andreas Parsch" wrote in message
...
Not any easier than with U.S. or Imperial units. BTW, a few years
there was this unfortuante incident involving a multi-million $ NASA
space probe and incompetent usage of U.S. units of distance ;-) ...

Naw, it was because some idiot provided some of the terms in
metric instead of proper units.

Huh?? "Meter" isn't any more similar to "gram" than, say, "foot" is to
"ounce". If you refer to the common prefixes, this is the big
_advantage_. If you know that a kilometer is 1000 meters, you
immediately know that a kilogram is 1000 grams, a kilovolt is 1000
volts, etc. No need to memorize all the factors to convert inches -
feet - miles, ounces - pounds, and whatever.

But nobody weighs things in "grams", it's always "kilograms".
Nor do the measure things in "meters" (as was stated concerning
building a house) they measure in "milimeters".

"PosterBoy" wrote in
news:WnMkb.131957$9l5.102654@pd7tw2no:

"Regnirps" wrote in message
...
Oh, crap! The table uses that French system with the km/hour I can
never make sense of!

I think you mean that nearly universal system with the km/hour.

Known as the SI system, which derives from its French name "Système
Internationale [d'Unités]" (International System [of units]).

From Websters Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913):
Metric system - a system of weights and measures originating in France...

John Keeney wrote:

"Andreas Parsch" wrote in message
...

Not any easier than with U.S. or Imperial units. BTW, a few years
there was this unfortuante incident involving a multi-million $ NASA
space probe and incompetent usage of U.S. units of distance ;-) ...


Naw, it was because some idiot provided some of the terms in
metric instead of proper units.


It wouldn't have happened if they had used proper (i.e. _metric_ ;-) )
units consistently.


Huh?? "Meter" isn't any more similar to "gram" than, say, "foot" is to
"ounce". If you refer to the common prefixes, this is the big
_advantage_. If you know that a kilometer is 1000 meters, you
immediately know that a kilogram is 1000 grams, a kilovolt is 1000
volts, etc. No need to memorize all the factors to convert inches -
feet - miles, ounces - pounds, and whatever.


But nobody weighs things in "grams", it's always "kilograms".


Nonsense. It depends - of course - on the size of the items.


Nor do the measure things in "meters" (as was stated concerning
building a house) they measure in "milimeters".


And so what? The OP said metric units had "usability
problems (like similar sounding names for various units)". Neither
"meter" nor "millimeter" sound similar to other non-distance metric units.

Andreas

John Keeney wrote:
it was because some idiot provided some of the terms in
metric instead of proper units.

Lockheed Martin Astronautics failed to provide metric units as
specified by NASA.

The official investigation report says:
"The MCO MIB [Mars Climate Orbiter Mishap Investigation Board] has
determined that the root cause for the loss of the MCO spacecraft was
the failure to use metric units in the coding of a ground software
file, "Small Forces," used in trajectory models. Specifically,
thruster performance data in English units instead of metric units was
used in the software application code titled SM_FORCES (smallforces).
The output from the SM_FORCES application code as required by a MSOP
Project Software Interface Specification (SIS) was to be in metric
units of Newton-seconds (N-s). Instead, the data was reported in
English units of pound-seconds (lbf-s). The Angular Momentum
Desaturation (AMD) file contained the output data from the SM_FORCES
software. The SIS, which was not followed, defines both the format and
units of the AMD file generated by ground-based computers."
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codeq/...mib_report.pdf

Pat Norton wrote:

John Keeney wrote:

it was because some idiot provided some of the terms in
metric instead of proper units.

Lockheed Martin Astronautics failed to provide metric units as
specified by NASA.

The official investigation report says:
[snipped]

Hey, thanks :-)!!


Andreas