Slashdot Mirror
Another English/Metric "Spacecraft" Problem
SuperDry writes "There's been another spacecraft failure that's been attributed to an English/Metric units problem, this time at Tokyo Disneyland's Space Mountain. An axle broke on a "spacecraft" (a.k.a. roller coaster train) mid-ride, causing it to derail (nobody was hurt). The final investigation report has been released, and the root cause has been determined to be a part being the wrong size due to a conversion of the master plans in 1995 from English units to Metric units. In 2002, new axles were mistakenly ordered using the pre-1995 English specifications instead of the current Metric specifications. Apparently size does matter, even if it's only a 0.86mm difference."
It's more like an English spelling problem, no?
I could care less, but not without a lobotomy
How come everything Disney does ends up so Mickey Mouse?
The Japanese who, like the rest of the modern world, switched to metric years ago?
Or the American designers who couldn't even do simple multiplication in order to convert from English to Metric?
I have been pwned because my
I'm Canadian, so I have to assume that 'proble' is the... imperial spelling... of problem?
"I get five rods to the hog's head!"
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
We need a one world government with one way of doing things! How many more people have to die because we have to hang on to old ways of doing things? Stop this madness now! Surrender your nationalist ideals. Borders exist in the minds of dimwitted politicians. Borders can't be see from space. We must unite and work together to advance mankind.
Support the New World Order now!
From the Article:
In September 1995, the design specifications for the size of the axle bearing for Space Mountain vehicles was changed from inches to the metric scale. Accordingly, the axle diameter was also changed, in this case from 44.14 mm to 45.00 mm. However, appropriate action to revise and maintain the design drawings was neglected. Consequently, two different drawings existed within our company after the changes were made and the old drawing showing the 44.14 mm diameter was used to order (in August 2002) the axles that were delivered in October 2002.
They actually changed the specs. The conversions were all done correctly but they failed to update everyone.
I don't know about you, but us English call the measurement system the Imperial system. Isn't the American version slightly different, in respect to fluid units, etc?
Why do you call them 'English' units, when everyone else knows them as Imperial units? :-) We stopped using most of them some time ago.
It wasn't mentioned in the article, but for my own reference, I'm wondering how many Rods to the Hogshead this ride gets?
Or if that info. isn't available, how many stone per fortnight this ride has in lifting capacity.
TDz.
In the automotive industry being off by that 'gigantic' mile of a discrepancy can be the difference between an entirely safe system or a potentially dangerous event just waiting to happen.
Anything from rubbing away the lining of important wires or hoses, different stress locations resulting in tear apart pieces that shouldn't be tear apart can happen by being off by that much...
0.86mm might at well be 3 feet off. A part that comes out that far off is nothing but scrap material. (Well at least in our area of automotive work.)
If you ignore the other uses of a tool, does that make the tool less useful, or you less useful?
Please don't say English/Metric units. The UK is effectively metric now, all schoolchildren are only taught metric units and everything has to be priced in metric units. I don't even have intutitions about how long feet are or how heavy a stone is. Pretty much everyone under the age of 25 only deals with litres, metres and kilograms. The only exception is vehicle speed, which is still measured in mph (and hence all our road signs are in mph). You won't, however, catch any British Engineers or scientists using Imperial units.
Better ways to describe them would be "Imperial" (what we call them), "American" or "Archiac". I think it's about time the US caught up with the rest of the world and ditched these stupid and difficult-to-remember units once and for all.
>Apparently size does matter, even if it's only a 0.86mm difference. At this very moment there are hundreds of geeks around the world trying to think of a great punchline for this.
Left 4 Dead Gaming Group - http://www.l4dgg.com
If you had read the article, you would know that the problem was, while converting to metric, they also changed the specification of the axle size, but didn't record the new axle size correctly. So, the problem really had nothing to do with any mathematical error, just an error in incorrect documentation.
A modern day witchhunt.
The US needs to catch up to the rest of the world. The entire world uses Metric people. And it makes an infinite amount more sense to use Metric than the US system. If we don't, trade will continue to suffer as well as accidents such as this one.
http://www.laughingplace.com/News-ID108300.asp
Great set of columns, by the way. I've always been a fan of how some of the disney technology was invented and implemented.
HAHAHAH! No one uses hands anymore to measure distance! How ARCANE!
We use feet.
A side note: in New Zealand (and possibly other Commonwealth countries - I haven't checked) they don't even refer to "English units". Their term is "Imperial units". Which tells you how long it's been since they made the switch...
Some things that would be nice to standardize (but will probably not happen in my lifetime)
- imperial - metric
- Letter paper - A4
- Fahrenheit - Celcius
- AM/PM - 24 hr notation
- month/day/year - day/month/year
Anything I left out?
(And the right term for "metric" is "SI").
SI units are legal in the United States and have been for a very long time. The inch was set at precisely 25.4 mm _by definition_ in July 1959.
The additional units, such as inches, miles, quarts, pounds, etc. which I believe are all legally defined by reference to SI units, are officially and properly referred to as "U. S. Customary" units. They have, of course, a strong historical connection to English units.
Unofficially, "Metric" and "English" are the U. S. customary designations for "SI" and "U. S. Customary."
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
If the U.S. hates the french so much, they should dynamite the Statue of Liberty, because that was a gift from the french to the U.S.
It would serve the french and the americans right!
See how stupid all this french or american bashing is?
Grow up, people.
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
Bzzzzt. Thanks for playing!
From boson.physics.sc.edu :
At the beginning of the eighteenth century, the Danish astronomer Ole Roemer (famous for making the first measurements that showed that the velocity of light is finite) devised a temperature scale of his own for use with the alcohol-in-glass thermometers that he constructed. His thermometers attracted the attention of Gabriel Fahrenheit (1686-1736), a manufacturer of meteorological instruments in the Netherlands. In 1708 Fahrenheit traveled to Copenhagen to meet Roemer and see his thermometers, which were based on two reference points. For one reference Roemer used a mixture of ice, water, and salt to reach the lowest temperatures then attainable in the laboratory, which he called zero. His other reference was the boiling point of water, which he arbitrarily designated as 60 degrees.
Fahrenheit returned home to make thermometers like Roemer's. In 1714 he overcame technical difficulties with alcohol thermometers by substituting mercury as the expanding liquid. The use of mercury extended the range of temperature measurements from well below Roemer's zero to well above the boiling point of water. Furthermore, mercury expanded and contracted more uniformly than the other liquids then in use. As a result, Fahrenheit could mark his mercury thermometers more accurately and with finer divisions.
By 1724 Fahrenheit had adopted a new scale, similar to Roemer's but with much finer divisions. For the zero point he chose the same reference as Roemer. However, since his thermometer was intended for meteorological observations, he wanted a second reference point that would be nearer the maximum observed temperature for weather. He chose the normal temperature of the human body as the upper reference point, which he called 96. Fahrenheit gave no reason for his choice of 96, but it may have been due to his desire for a finer scale and because 96 is evenly divisible by 2, 3, 4, 8, and 12.
Why didn't Fahrenheit choose the freezing point of water for his zero reference, as Newton had done before him and as Celsius did later on? Perhaps Fahrenheit was influenced by Roemer, or he may have wanted to avoid the inconvenience of repeatedly using negative temperatures during winter. Also, in the early 1700s it was widely believed that water did not always freeze at the same temperature. Soon, using his newly calibrated thermometers, Fahrenheit learned that water always froze at 32 on his scale. He immediately added this third reference point to his instruments.
Any sufficiently well-organized Government is indistinguishable from bullshit.
Is that the metric system is flawed. It is defined in terms of the size of 18th century railroad tie sizes, which is totally arbitrary.
Mmm-hmm. So, clearly, defining length in terms of the feet of a 1200-year old dead Frankish king is a better choice?
Don't give me that crap about how much better the US economy performs than the EU. The median standard of living in the EU is higher than in the US. The US economy is great at producing wealth at the top, but conservative Americans have an aversion to using the economy to solve social problems ("communism! class war!"). I think this is a major reason why Europeans view the US as "backwards". Yes, both the US and the EU have economies that have solved the problems of food, shelter, and medicine. But the US has not seen to distributing those solutions to the people.
Many Americans have an ingrained sense that the only job of the economy is to grow. Things like social nets and environmental protections interfere with the ability of the (total) economy to grow at the fastest rate possible, so they must be inherently bad. This is the unifying economic philosophy of the conservative Republicans: government itself is inherently bad precisely because it siphons money (taxes) away from investment and consumption. If you believe in Reaganomics ("a rising tide lifts all boats") this makes some sense. But in the real world, it leads to a morally bankrupt society obsessed with money.
</rant>
So in conclusion, there are 36 inches in a yard.
Gates' Law: Every 18 months, the speed of software halves.