KenW Loc: Portland OR

I would think they measured the oval at the bottom of the track and not at the top to come up with the 2.5 mile distance. If you were forced to take most of the turns high, I could see it being over 500 miles after 200 laps.

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

I don't dislike the metric system, I just don't want to use it!!

Wallen Loc: Middle Earth

That would be Imperial Gallon. The US Gallon is only 3.78541 litres.
Confusion in conversions can also happen with the Ton as there is the metric ton (Tonne), Imperial Ton and US Ton.

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

Well I hope I never have to worry about the difference!!

llamb Loc: Northeast Ohio

Just another thought... We have many different systems for measuring weight, length, etc. And really why not? We have different languages, different monetary systems. Different preferred foods. Some people even drive on the wrong side of their roads. ;-) Many names end in son, ton, heimer, stein, ski, tov, or berg.

I can and do use both metric and Imperial, and even some others. If something is this [_______] long it is that [_______] long no matter what you call it.

~Lee

DickC Loc: NE Washington state

I still miss the 'mile' in track, going for the 4 minute mile was exciting, whatever the metric equivalent is, it's ho-hum!!

n3eg Loc: West coast USA

Yeah, that metric system. Give them a cm and they'll take a km. I wouldn't touch it with a 3 meter pole.

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

Quote from Wikipedia - In 1824, Britain adopted a close approximation to the ale gallon known as the imperial gallon and abolished all other gallons in favour of it. Inspired by the kilogram-litre relationship, the imperial gallon was based on the volume of 10 pounds of distilled water weighed in air with brass weights with the barometer standing at 30 inches of mercury and at a temperature of 62 °F. In 1963, this definition was refined as the space occupied by 10 pounds of distilled water of density 0.998859 g/mL weighed in air of density 0.001217 g/mL against weights of density 8.136 g/mL (the original "brass" was refined as the density of brass alloys vary depending on metallurgical composition). This was calculated as 4.546091879 L to ten significant figures.[4] The precise definition of exactly 4.54609 cubic decimetres (also 4.54609 L after the litre was redefined in 1964, ≈ 277.419433 in3) was adopted shortly afterwards in Canada, and in 1976 was adopted in the United Kingdom.[4]

So the English, in an effort to standardize the gallon, defined a gallon and took the ale gallon (almost) and used this to replace all others. The US kept an earlier value (Queen Anne). So this is why there are two different sizes and confusing the world ever since. Obviously the unadaptability of the US started there since they are still the bastion of the gallon whereas the rest of the world has pretty much changed or is part way through the change to metric. Keep fighting it since it is your right to use whatever you like even though it is silly.

Wallen Loc: Middle Earth

why not is because the world has been shrinking and when confusion happens through misunderstanding or conversions, waste and death can happen. Five maple leaves long may sound fine within a small circle of men but it would not cut it in the international scene as maples may have bigger leaves in another country or not exist in another giving them nothing to judge by. Someway somehow, we all need to use a single system to stand for a specific meaning and as of the moment, the metric system is best one we got.

A story comes to my mind with your question. It was a guy asking a girl her number. She kept repeating nein, nein, nein... and the boy wrote down 999 not understanding she was German.

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

You need to watch this youtube re just how bad it can be in the USA.
Particularly round about number 6 or 7 about the metric system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO1_pW666cY

DJphoto Loc: SF Bay Area

This is an interesting thread. It was previously mentioned about using English when communication with air traffic control. English is the universal language of aviation. Some other interesting items are that in much of the world, altitudes are referred to in feet and assigned in thousand foot increments to ensure adequate aircraft separation. Then there is knots (nautical miles per hour) versus statute miles per hour. A nautical mile is 1.1508 statute ("ground") miles and is equal to one minute of latitude. Knots are commonly used to indicate airspeeds, as this is useful for navigation. Aircraft indicated airspeed indicators commonly indicated statute miles per hour up until somewhere around the middle of the last century, and now commonly indicate knots. Since most aircraft are "about speed," it took longer for most general aviation ("small") aircraft to switch to knots. When Mooney decided to release a new model many years ago, they called it to 201, because it could go 201 miles per hour (on only 200 HP). Good marketing, as 201 MPH seems faster than 170 knots and the Mooney 170 doesn't sound as good as the Mooney 170.

Another aviation related item is aircraft ceiling, or how high an aircraft can fly. The commonly used reference is service ceiling, which is generally accepted as the altitude at which the climb rate is down to 100 feet/minute. At that rate, it would take 10 minutes to climb another 1,000 feet (to get to a different assigned altitude - see above), so that is the practical limit. In the parts of the world that use SI units, service ceiling is generally defined as when the climb rate reaches 0.5 meters/second, which works out to about 98.5 feet/second. BTW, the absolute ceiling of an aircraft is not a practical measure, as an aircraft will continue to climb as it gets lighter by burning fuel, so the absolute ceiling is reached when the aircraft runs out of fuel.

I tell my aircraft design students that they have to be "mentally ambidextrous" and able use both systems of measurement, though we work most of our problems using English units.

I'm comfortable using both systems. When I got my engineering degree in 1974, the physics and chemistry classes were using mostly SI units, while the aircraft classes used mostly English units. I think mostly in the English system, but that is "situational." Back when I got my first car, a 1960 Mini, it was a real mixture: 850 cc engine (actually 848), 10 inch diameter wheels......... Then I got a new 1967 Barracuda with a 273 cubic inch V-8 that I considered as a 4.5 liter (actually 4,474 cc), because when I went rallying in it I was in the 3.0-4.5 liter class, mostly competing against Jaguar E-Types of 3.8 or 4.2 liters. I build model airplanes and do some woodworking, and most of the wood is in inches and feet, though I fly 2 meter span radio controlled sailplanes made out of wood that comes in either 36" or 48" lengths. There is a mixture used in the hardware.

BTW Jerry, I use the Gimli Glider incident as an example in one of my classes.