This is tricky in terms of public relations. Looking in from the outside, one might insist that the minority nations stop using meters and would look upon metric measurement as a villain if most of the world is using feet, especially Russia requiring changing from feet to meters for landing. Just my common sense tells me that's a dangerous situation. The outcome of that contest could prove interesting: in an all-metric world, how quickly, or slowly, do you pull the other nations into using metric for all aviation? The equipment and training implications seem to me to be huge. Literally and figuratively, I would not want metrication to crash and burn on this point.
Paul Trusten, Registered Pharmacist Vice President and Public Relations Director U.S. Metric Association, Inc. www.metric.org trus...@grandecom.net On Jul 10, 2013, at 13:01, "John M. Steele" <jmsteele9...@sbcglobal.net> wrote: > ALMOST world-wide feet. Russia, China and associates (CIS states, North > Korea, Mongolia) were using meters. > > Russia uses meters below transition level (where altimeters are adjusted for > local pressure) but has gone to feet for "flight levels" (no altimeter > adjustment, standard atmosphere is assumed) as part of introducing Reduced > Minimum Vertical Separation at and above 29000 ft . I'm not a pilot and I > can't adequately explain China but at least in RMVS space they assign a > flight level in meters, you have to convert on a government table and fly in > feet on a foot-graduated altimeter. (I don't know what they do below > transition altitude. I'm sure a pilot could explain it better. Almost all > commercial cruise is above 29000 feet and in RMVS space, where the reduced > separations have been introduced. > > In Russia, you have to change from feet to meters for landing (and reverse on > takeoff) but no change if you are overflying. I'm sure the switching > requires extra training. As a non-pilot, it seems risky, but I'm not sure > how much risk it introduces. Russia and China went in somewhat different > directions, each with their "associates" following, so there are two distinct > exception spaces in the world, plus rest-of-world feet. > > From: Paul Trusten <trus...@grandecom.net> > To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu> > Cc: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu> > Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 1:36 PM > Subject: [USMA:53056] Re: FAA must Metricate > > Educate me, folks. I thought that feet were used worldwide in aviation > because of the perceived danger of changing over to metric in some kind of > terrifying interim. Do we in fact have both meters and feet being used in > flight? Talk about your Gimli-Mars tragedies-in-the-making! > > Paul Trusten, Reg. Pharmacist > Vice President > U.S. Metric Association, Inc. > Midland, Texas USA > http://www.metric.org/ > +1(432)528-7724 > trus...@grandecom.net > > > On Jul 8, 2013, at 0:38, Bruce Arkwright Jr <a-bruie...@lycos.com> wrote: > > > What if that poor tired Vietnamese pilot, forget he had hit the convert > > button, after crossing into our air space, but still read meters instead of > > feet as he aproched the landing strip? Will FAA emit to that? At any rate > > its time for FAA to get on board! > > > > > > Bruce E. Arkwright, Jr > > Erie PA > > Linux and Metric User and Enforcer > > > > > > I will only invest in nukes that are 150 gigameters away. How much solar > > energy have you collected today? > > Id put my money on the sun and solar energy. What a source of power! I hope > > we dont have to wait til oil and coal run out before we tackle that. I wish > > I had a few more years left. -- Thomas Edison♽☯♑ > > > > > > >
