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."

15 of 748 comments (clear)

  1. Proble? by waitigetit · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's more like an English spelling problem, no?

    --
    I could care less, but not without a lobotomy
  2. Disney by abh · · Score: 5, Funny

    How come everything Disney does ends up so Mickey Mouse?

  3. Miscommunication by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  4. English units? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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?

  5. How many Rods to the Hogshead?... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  6. 0.86mm? That's a HUGE difference! by cnelzie · · Score: 5, Informative

    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?
  7. It had nothing to do with the conversion directly. by bluprint · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.
  8. The US needs to catch up by Listen+Up · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  9. The Japanese did the conversion. by mookoz · · Score: 5, Informative
    Bob Gurr (ex-Disney Imagineer) tells the story of the Tokyo Disneyland conversion here:

    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.

  10. Just use google calc by beej · · Score: 5, Funny
    10 meters = 98.4251969 hands

    HAHAHAH! No one uses hands anymore to measure distance! How ARCANE!

    We use feet.

  11. About time America left the stone age by GileadGreene · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Sigh. When is America going to ditch its archaic measurement system and use the same standard as everyone else? I work in the space industry, and I see this idiocy going on all the time: half the team works in metric, the other half in english. Most of the time everyone manages to keep it straight. But every now and then, a mistake happens. Scientists all use metric. Most engineers are trained in metric. Let's just switch to metric for everything and be done with it.

    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...

  12. Re:Imperial, not English... by deitel99 · · Score: 5, Funny

    For example, the inch is now _defined_ as 2.54 cm, it has nothing to do with some king's thumb or anything.

    Personally I think 2.54cm is pretty arbitrary. Then again, cm are based on a fraction of a wavelength of a certain coloured light, which is, yet again, arbitrary.

    The first attempts for standardising the inch were many hundreds of years ago, since it's so vital to have correct measurements for trade. Despite what most posts here seem to think, the Imperial Inch does not change every time the English monarch does.

  13. America versus the rest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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?

  14. Re:Who's at fault here, really? by Rhubarb+Crumble · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Hey, I like the metric system. I really do. But sticking to the english system has never caused an aircraft to run out of fuel at altitude, a roller coaster to break, or a spacecraft to crash. The zeal to enforce metric conversion, however, has caused all of those things.

    Hey, I like the imperial/english/mediaeval/whatever system. I really do. But sticking to the metric system has never caused an aircraft to run out of fuel at altitude, a roller coaster to break, or a spacecraft to crash. The zeal to make specifications understandable to people who think in terms of the size of kings' thumbs and the area of land that can be ploughed by an ox in a morning, however, has caused all of those things.

    The simplest argument in favour of the metric system is that it's base-10... (or base-10^3 if you want to be picky...) Of course once all our civilisation is outsourced to India and China I guess we'd better get used to counting in 10^4 or 10^5... (wans and lakhs)

  15. Re:Who's at fault here, really? by hoofie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually you are wrong !!!

    In 1983 an Air Canada flight ran out of fuel mid-flight. Disaster was averted due to a long-enough disused runway being available.

    Its now know as the "Gimli Glider" named after the abandoned air-force base where it landed. It was luck that one of the pilots was a glider pilot. Apart from the complete-cock up, it showed some fantastic flying and emergency management.