iqon Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Why one slice, for same energy he could of had two Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted October 27, 2017 Author Share Posted October 27, 2017 Yes I wondered that! BEB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McG 6969 Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Disculpe, pero... ... I nowe notinge... ... I amme fromme Barcelona... Hasta luego Manuel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted October 27, 2017 Share Posted October 27, 2017 Lad here with a bike and a whole basket full of bread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Lomax Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Posted by David Mellor on 27/10/2017 18:01:06: At school and university we were made to work in 4 systems: Imperial, SI, MKS and CGS. You had to be able to switch seamlessly between them. I was taught (O and A levels late 70's) MKS and my mother (a little over 20 years earlier) was taught Imperial and CGS - she could never get the hang of why "her metric" was different from mine. I thought that MKS and CGS were both subsets of SI - is this not the case? ----- With regard to the comments about my power output by a couple of posters above, it could be that the machine was not accurate, or more likely my memory, it was some time ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wright Stuff Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Posted by Keith Lomax on 30/10/2017 10:16:21: Posted by David Mellor on 27/10/2017 18:01:06: At school and university we were made to work in 4 systems: Imperial, SI, MKS and CGS. You had to be able to switch seamlessly between them. I was taught (O and A levels late 70's) MKS and my mother (a little over 20 years earlier) was taught Imperial and CGS - she could never get the hang of why "her metric" was different from mine. I thought that MKS and CGS were both subsets of SI - is this not the case? Not quite. The SI system is based on exclusively on MKS. Both MKS and CGS are metric, however! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff S Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 The annoying thing is the US call some of their units 'English' when we've never used them (threads for example). I've just thrown away some clevises I thought were 3mm but are probably some strange 'English' thread from a US source because they wouldn't go on some 3mm stainless steel studding I'm using to terminate push-rods on my current project. If I have a US kit with accessories in US threads they go straight in the bin, which is a pity because apart from that, they are usually of good quality. I just hope the current dislike of things European in some quarters doesn't result in our backsliding into Imperial weights and measures. I just wish we'd go the whole hog and go completely metric and leave the US (and apparently Myanmar and Liberia) in the 19th century. Geoff Edited By Geoff Sleath on 30/10/2017 16:55:54 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel R Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Keith no offence intended hope none taken! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy48 Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 Posted by Geoff Sleath on 30/10/2017 16:54:52: I just hope the current dislike of things European in some quarters doesn't result in our backsliding into Imperial weights and measures. I just wish we'd go the whole hog and go completely metric and leave the US (and apparently Myanmar and Liberia) in the 19th century. Geoff Edited By Geoff Sleath on 30/10/2017 16:55:54 Actually in 1668, it was a British cleric and philosopher John Wilkins who first proposed a decimal based unit of length. It was based on a pendulum swing and was 997mm long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 So what size prop for an O.S 52 FS Geoff ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted October 30, 2017 Author Share Posted October 30, 2017 A 300X150 would be OK John BEB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 It would be nice if we could have our gallons back - the odd few pence on a litre allowed the price to rocket without mass protest whereas if the price had gone up in multiples of 5p the fuel companies and government might have had far more trouble sneaking prices up. Much the same happened when we decimalised our coinage... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john stones 1 - Moderator Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 I'm sticking with a 12x6 BEB, i got none of those. Gallons ? how big's a 10 gallon hat ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff S Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 That's what I used, BEB OK, I'm old and my father used imperial measures in his workshop (I wouldn't have minded if he'd used decimal inches but perhaps shouldn't complain about measures like 1/16, 1/32 et al as a former dealer in binary and hexadecimal ) and I still use imperial measures for things like my bike frame size (22.5" and pedal cycles still use old threads for things like bottom brackets but that's just history getting in the way (don't ask me about bicycle wheel and tyre dimensions because they really are based on early 20th century technology). My grandfather's watch making bench stocked BA size screws in sizes as tiny as 20 or smaller but I'm almost certain despite BA standing for British Association the dimensions were metric. But mechanical watches are really history and no longer the cutting edge technology they were when Harrison was designing his incredible ship's chronometers. For all intents and purposes SI is the way to go. Geoff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted October 30, 2017 Share Posted October 30, 2017 How strange - I've noticed that all my 12 x 6 APCs have got those same 300X150 numbers moulded into them. Anyone know what they might mean? I've often wondered why the SI system didn't adopt 100 or 1000 degree graduation of a circle - 360 is just so Imperial...could it be that it facilitates a better range of divisors? Suddenly 240 pence to the pound makes much more sense although spending less than a pound is a lot more difficult than it was in 1971 (99p shops excepted)! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iqon Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Posted by john stones 1 on 30/10/2017 22:31:57: I'm sticking with a 12x6 BEB, i got none of those. Gallons ? how big's a 10 gallon hat ? any size you want from 6 7/8" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Green Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Seem to recall an old college joke: watt is the unit of power - Yes it is. Has to be said out loud otherwise what/Watt gives the game away. On the subject of college jokes: There are 10 types of people in this world, those that understand binary and those that don't. Taking that one further: There are 10 types of people in this world, those that understand binary and those that don't, and those that confuse it with ternary. Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy48 Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Posted by Martin Harris on 30/10/2017 23:07:40: I've often wondered why the SI system didn't adopt 100 or 1000 degree graduation of a circle - 360 is just so Imperial...could it be that it facilitates a better range of divisors? Suddenly 240 pence to the pound makes much more sense although spending less than a pound is a lot more difficult than it was in 1971 (99p shops excepted)! You can get the NATO mils, which is a circle divided into 6400mils. Much more sensible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Harris - Moderator Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Funny old thing though - in theory it should have approximately 6283.185 graduations around a circle...the Swedish streck seems far more accurate at 6300. Mind you, if a bullet has just gone through your bonce it isn't much compensation to know that the sniper was really just approximating... Edited By Martin Harris on 31/10/2017 10:52:59 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Lomax Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Posted by Nigel R on 30/10/2017 17:35:18: Keith no offence intended hope none taken! None at all!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Lomax Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Because I grew up in a primarily Imperial home and was educated in Metric, I was taught a number of helpful rhyming hints: - A litre of water's a pint and three quarter - Two and a quarter pounds of jam weighs about a kilogram I had a lengthy debate once when I was working for an American multi-national company and I reported to an American director who was doing a placement in Europe. He insisted that "A pint weighs a pound, the World around". Until I pointed out that an Imperial pint is 20 ounces. The ensuing discussion revealed why European cars get more mpg than US ones (even if you exclude the preference for huge capacity engines). He also didn't know what a Fortnight was, and I risked the sack (or at least a reprimand) by telling him that it was English for two weeks. Don't get me started on paper sizes!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Lomax Posted October 31, 2017 Share Posted October 31, 2017 Posted by Martin Harris on 30/10/2017 23:07:40: I've often wondered why the SI system didn't adopt 100 or 1000 degree graduation of a circle - 360 is just so Imperial...could it be that it facilitates a better range of divisors? Suddenly 240 pence to the pound makes much more sense although spending less than a pound is a lot more difficult than it was in 1971 (99p shops excepted)! My first scientific calculator at school had a function for switching between degrees, radians and grads (?). Degrees we all know. Radians are such that an segment of a circle with an angle of one radian has a part circumference equal to the radius (ie about 57.3 degrees); these make trigonometry easier. Grads have 100 divisions per QUARTER circle - not sure of the logic of why it is not a whole circle, and I never found it used anywhere. Degrees, of course, split into 60 minutes, each of 60 seconds for the sub division. One minute arc of the equator is one nautical mile - measured to the accuracy available in the early 1500's, or just over 1850 metres. The Earth rotates 15 minutes of angle in one minute of time - again, you can't fault the logic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.