On Tuesday, 22 January 2019 16:16:58 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 22 January 2019 13:08:10 UTC, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/01/2019 11:19, whisky-dave wrote:
On Monday, 21 January 2019 17:14:11 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Monday, 21 January 2019 13:08:08 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"whisky-dave" wrote in message
...
On Saturday, 19 January 2019 02:59:40 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
"Max Demian" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 18/01/2019 15:37, whisky-dave wrote:
On Friday, 18 January 2019 12:58:35 UTC, Bob Martin wrote:

I'm amazed to find myself agreeing with Rod Speed, but he's
right.
Flight levels are in feet, it's an aviation standard & won't be
changed.

But he;s wrong about the reason.
The american won't change and that's that, NASA had to even
thopugh
they
are american. They won't give up their feet any more than their
guns.

They could change if they needed to. Their military talks about
'klicks'
for kilometres, due, I assume, to their propensity for joining
other
armies for foreign expeditions.

Nope, it isnt for that reason.

Give yourself an education.

https://english.stackexchange.com/qu...military-slang

That says what I said, ****wit.

It proves the USA is going metric,

The USA has always used the metric system in science in modern
times and that doesnt mean that the USA is going metric either.

No it hasn't it NASA only changed in about 1990 to metric.

https://www.space.com/3332-nasa-finally-metric.html

When NASA returns astronauts to the Moon, the mission will be measured
kilometers, not miles.

That implies they used miles during the Apollo missions. On board
calculations used metric but teh atronauts wanted imperial on the
displays including pounds of thrust and miles or feet per second.




and one day aircraft heights may well also be measured in klicks
rather
than miles.

Not a chance, because the flight level system works fine
and there is nothing to be gained by it going metric
because the flight level system has much neater numbers
and more flight levels than doing it metric would do.

Irrelivant you can have the same number of steps and yuo can call them
anything you like.

But end up with (as the closest equivalent) 9900m, 10200m, 10500m,
10800m, which I would consider to be more prone to error

They manage it with other things,

Not where safety is so important.

Like the width of the seats yuo mean they wonlt change those iether.

http://www.traveller.com.au/everyone...imetres-gmbjp7

It's a reflection of the behemoth that is US aviation, and the US still thinks and measures in feet and inches.

Besides the US, the only countries that still use imperial measurements are Myanmar, Liberia and for just a few purposes, Britain.

Australia has used metric measurements since 1970.

You clueless ****ers don;t care anything about safety then.

Another incongruity €“ as well as seat pitch, the seat-back screens on aircraft are also commonly expressed in inches, just like the screens on most satnav devices and iPhones.

So phone and TV sizes are still expressed in inches because of safety and flight levelas are they ?







and they could change the flight levels like they can change anything.

But arent that stupid. Only you are.

They could just as easily go 9K9, 10K, 10k1, 10k2,

Nothing like as safe as flight level 320, 325 with the odds

It's nothing to do with that.



Fortunately no one will ever be silly enough
to ask you how flight levels should be done.