If we want to delay [indefinitely?] the acceptance of SI by the public, we could do little better than emphasize the scientific/engineering viewpoint. *People* want to schedule thier driving by knowing how far they can go in an hour or a day not a second. They insist on an a land-area measure comparable to an acre. They will accept litres, but not cubic decimetres. Let's keep a human face on our favorite measuring system even if that face has a wart or two. Duncan
-----Original Message----- From: Gene Mechtly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: U.S. Metric Association <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: January 23, 2002 22:49 Subject: [USMA:17595] Re: Wind speed >Pat, > >I strongly support your advocacy of m/s for speed, but for all speeds, >not just for wind, aircraft, and for ships at sea. > >My extraction of some of your words more exclusively favors m/s only. > >Gene. >................... >On Wed, 23 Jan 2002, Pat Naughtin wrote: >> >> ... It is one of the key areas of metrication for the aeronautics and >> seagoing industries so we should get it right. ... > >> The SI unit for wind speed is metres per second, and its SI symbol is >> m/s. ... appropriate SI prefix ... gives possibilities such as >> ... kilometres per second (km/s). ... > >> ... It would be best if we used the SI unit only ... >
