Except for woodworking, I haven't found many project plans in Canada using metric.
-
Happy World Drowning Prevention Day!🏊🤢🦺🛟🙏🏼
Thoughts on double bladed paddles from a somewhat experienced double blader.
- Thread starter Idiot Savant
- Start date
I rather buy an Imperial gallon @ 2.95 US than a liter @ $1.40 CDN. lol
I heard this the other day,
There are two types of countrys in the world.
Those who use the metric system and those who have put people on the moon. lol
Having worked in a lab all my life, but also having grown up with Imperial, I find my life an odd mix of both.
I have found some plans in metric and TBH and converted them to imperial to build.
I find myself using both measurement systems too, but to be honest, metric is a lot easier if one if fractionally challenged. Most of my students measure their projects in centimetres, although I spend a fair amount of time instructing them in imperial as well.
Just to expand a bit, I suspect a lot of the technical industries use metric, even in the US
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2024
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 4
How about tires (tyres?)?
Tread width in mm, wheel size in inches, aspect ratio of sidewall height vs tread with. Tread depth measured in 32nd of inches, it is all confusing...
Tread width in mm, wheel size in inches, aspect ratio of sidewall height vs tread with. Tread depth measured in 32nd of inches, it is all confusing...
I frequently use a 240cm in my Echo with no issues
Let's not forget a $125M+ math mistake Metric or English. Not just the dollar value of the craft, but science information that was lost and not made up for for many years if ever. Which system are we using anyway?
When NASA Lost a Spacecraft Due to an engineering Metric Math Mistake
In September of 1999, after almost 10 months of travel to Mars, the Mars Climate Orbiter burned and broke into pieces. On a day when NASA engineers were expecting to celebrate, the ground reality turned out to be completely different, all because someone failed to use the right units, i.e., the metric units! The Scientific American Space Lab made a brief but interesting video on this very topic.
The navigation team at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) used the metric system of millimeters and meters in its calculations, while Lockheed Martin Astronautics in Denver, Colorado, which designed and built the spacecraft, provided crucial acceleration data in the English system of inches, feet, and pounds. JPL engineers did not take into consideration that the units had been converted, i.e., the acceleration readings measured in English units of pound-seconds^2 for a metric measure of force called newton-seconds^2. In a sense, the spacecraft was lost in translation.
Anybody used the Bending Branches Versa Lock System? If do did it hold up?
They have models that go from 240-255, 250-265, or 260-275 centimeters.
They have models that go from 240-255, 250-265, or 260-275 centimeters.
The first space telescope, the Hubble, had a similar metric/imperial conversion FU when its mirror was ground. Upon deployment the thing was practically blind. It took a Shuttle mission about a year later to outfit it with some "eyeglasses"
Although a serious mistake, it was not at the same level of the error difference between metric/imperial. The Hubble telescope optical image plane was correctable with an intermediary correcting lens. The trick was defining the precise prescription of the lens from studying the image plane point spread spectrum mis-focus after it was sent off and deployed into orbit. There were two primary mirrors ground for the Hubble, one at Perkin Elmer, and a duplicate spare made at Kodak, in case of breakage of the one at P-E.The first space telescope, the Hubble, had a similar metric/imperial conversion FU when its mirror was ground. Upon deployment the thing was practically blind. It took a Shuttle mission about a year later to outfit it with some "eyeglasses"
During my Air Force engineering career, I witnessed both telescope assemblies and mirror polishings in progress, but I did not have my super fine glasses on my eyes to detect the error when I saw the defective mirror that was to be actually used from P-E. The visually imperceptible error in the P-E mirror was off by only 1.3 mm. An absolutely monstrously huge error in optical terms.
The big mistake was the technicians in charge at P-E felt that the final polishing step went so well that they decided to cancel a costly and time intensive scheduled final optical test that would have absolutely detected the critical expensive error. Later testing proved the Kodak mirror was perfect. The Kodak and similar mirrors in those early days were used in space by the military for a number of cerrtain missions. Maximum size was determined by if they fit into the Space Shuttle cargo bay. We were in the forefront of developing extra large segmented mirror and adaptive mirror optics technology that was later matured enough to be used in civilian telescopes on the ground like the Giant Segmented Mirror Telescope (GSMT) and the much publicized James Web Space Telescope.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2018
- Messages
- 1,761
- Reaction score
- 2,677
No.
Use a single blade... like a man. (sorry, I couldn't resist. OK... I suppose that I could, but what fun is THAT?)
Years ago, I took a canoe paddling lesson from a paddling friend, who was an experienced instructor of the American Freestyle method. A final test was to first find a rectangular floating dock. Then, using a single blade canoe paddle, approach a side of the dock straight on, while remaining perpendicular to it. No need for any extra fancy strokes, but you need to understand how your body, the paddle and the canoe all function smoothly together with the water to precisely control your canoe. Approach the dock until your bow is kept steadily held within two inches from touching the dock. Now, without ever touching the dock, maintain that constant 2 inch bow distance while using the canoe paddle to sideslip along, keeping always perpendicular to the dock edge. Including rounding the corner to the next dock side, keeping the same 2 inch separation and no more to traverse all three exposed sides of the dock. Not too difficult to do it in calm wind, now try again in a slight breeze. How easy would that kind of precision canoe control be using a kayak paddle?
Last edited:
You see the subject of somebody getting/building their first canoe and the long list of wants for this "do everything" canoe that just doesn't/can't exist ... if it did we would just have that canoe, no others would be needed.
Same idea with paddles, they are tools to get the job done, I don't see DBs replacing singles or bent replacing straight ... they each have strengths and weaknesses. Look at the job, look in the tool box and pull out the best items for the job ... if you only carry 1 item in that tool box, you may be able to get the job done, but it may not be the prettiest/best solution.
If I wanted to dance around a dock, I would be reaching for my single , if I was looking to make time over open water, I am reaching for the DB ... I carry both for that reason.
That's right. I carry both too and have never had an issue docking with either.
A great example of the point being completly missed.
When I want to make time over open water, I apply power strokes, staying on one side or the other while paddling in a straight line, bow never wavering by more than a couple of degrees from my destination. I do not waddle like a duck with bow swinging pointing left and right away from the destination with every stroke..
Last edited:
I’ve been paddling open boats with a single blade for almost 60 yrs.
Sry guys, didn’t mean to start an argument.
Sry guys, didn’t mean to start an argument.
No worries. We're just having some fun.
