NASA has gone metric for the moon

[mzkhadir]

Space.com

 

[leftyman]

look out Uranus..

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

About time?

 

[ryan256]

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
About time?

QFT!! Engineering calculations are so much easier in metric.

 

[IGBT]

..isn't that how they goofed up a lenz on the hubble?? some egineer got confused about measurement systems??

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: IGBT
..isn't that how they goofed up a lenz on the hubble?? some egineer got confused about measurement systems??

That and some Mars lander...

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: IGBT
..isn't that how they goofed up a lenz on the hubble?? some egineer got confused about measurement systems??

Not really. Someone goofed up and DIDN'T include the units. That is a bit different from using the wrong number. If everyone used units all the time, it wouldn't matter how many systems there are, everything would be just fine.

But, many people decide to make formulas, programs, etc "easier" by ignoring units. When you ignore units AND put in a different measuring system, you are toast.

Basically, it wasn't the measuring system that caused the problem, it is the reliance on formulas that require units and ignoring to use the units in them. Convert everything to unitless numbers, and your problem is always solved in every system imaginable.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: IGBT
..isn't that how they goofed up a lenz on the hubble?? some egineer got confused about measurement systems??

That and some Mars lander...

..ya. that's right. meters instead of inches. they smacked right into it.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Great, now we'll never get back to the moon.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: IGBT
..isn't that how they goofed up a lenz on the hubble?? some egineer got confused about measurement systems??

That and some Mars lander...

..ya. that's right. meters instead of inches. they smacked right into it.

I think the "lens" problem on the Hubble was a manufacturing flaw in its main mirror. The outer edge of the mirror was too flat by about 4 microns, which caused spherical aberration, focusing the reflected light onto multiple points. This was apparently the result of poor quality control, and not unit conversions.

The Mars Climate Orbiter's problem was caused by Lockheed using English units for thrust, while NASA (and most of the scientific community) was using metric. So the probe wound up flying too close to Mars, skimming into the atmosphere, which slowed it down and ultimately caused it to crash.

 

[sandorski]

Slowly but surely the US will adopt Metric.

 

[mugs]

I don't know why they'd use anything other than metric for anything. They're supposed to be scientists, right?

 

[ElFenix]

i still don't understand why it took us less than 7 years 40 years ago to put a man on the moon, but now it's going to take us 16 years to go back, assuming the 2020 date stands up. i mean, the saturn v design still works. and it's not like much much much bigger rockets weren't designed (the smallest rocket designed to replace it for mars trips could haul 3x the payload).

i suppose we aren't spending 10% of GDP on it, but the development doesn't have to happen either. how much has rocket science changed in the last 30 years? almost looks like it hasn't.

 

[Cristatus]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Slowly but surely the US will adopt Metric.

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Isn't NASA a government organization? If it is, that mean the gov't will see the benefits of changing to metric units, and then expect the rest of the country to change accordingly.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: logic1485

Originally posted by: sandorski
Slowly but surely the US will adopt Metric.

I was thinking the exact same thing.

Isn't NASA a government organization? If it is, that mean the gov't will see the benefits of changing to metric units, and then expect the rest of the country to change accordingly.

maybe over in europe your commie governments force social change top-down, but here in the US change is supposed to be bottom-up. in other words, not likely. i bet congresspeople can't convert metric units in their heads (how many meters are in a kilometer again? and what does it have to do with my computer?).

and i think the military already operates in metric for the things where that is the world standard.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i still don't understand why it took us less than 7 years 40 years ago to put a man on the moon, but now it's going to take us 16 years to go back, assuming the 2020 date stands up. i mean, the saturn v design still works. and it's not like much much much bigger rockets weren't designed (the smallest rocket designed to replace it for mars trips could haul 3x the payload).

i suppose we aren't spending 10% of GDP on it, but the development doesn't have to happen either. how much has rocket science changed in the last 30 years? almost looks like it hasn't.

Maybe now we're doing more for safety? I suppose they could just rebuild the Apollo from the old plans, but it's old technology and might not meet today's standards of safety.

I also don't know how much of the public backs the mission. I don't see much reason to send people to the Moon just yet, and getting people to Mars faces significant roadblocks.

I still favor robotic exploration for some key reasons.
Robots:
- don't need living space
- can be folded up to conserve space - Folded vs deployed
- can endure long-term isolated missions
- can sit (mostly) idle while awaiting instructions from Earth, such as the Mars Exploration Rovers do when the sun gets between Earth and Mars
- no desire to return home
- can be worked to death and won't complain, and will also keep working even when malfunctioning. MER Spirit has a wheel that won't rotate anymore, and the diamond cutters on its rock abrasion tool are worn down. They were hoping for 3 grinds with it, but it managed to do 15 grinds on some very hard rocks. Opportunity reboots occasionally, and its one wheel can't swivel. But they both remain quite mobile and capable.
- are more resistant to radiation than a human
- don't need bulky, water-based food stores
- don't excrete anything
- are cheap, at least compared to the costs associated with sending humans



They say that they want to use the Moon as a launching base for future missions. Well first the materials for a base need to get there. Then the rockets themselves will have to get there, or else the equipment to manufacture entire spacecraft there, which would also be a massive undertaking. And as I understand it, we have enough trouble just keeping the ISS adequately supplied with somewhat important things, like oxygen. If it has a problem, help is nearby. If something goes wrong on the Moon, like say, a meteor impact punching a hole in a biodome, by the time help arrives, anyone there will be vacuum-dried.

 

[bluemax]

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
About time?

QFT!! Engineering calculations are so much easier in metric.

Okay.... 11.34 inches, 3 feet, 17 yards, 2 rods, 13.8 drachmas, 13.998 pecks

Yeah. Let's stick to metric.

 

[Schadenfreude]

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: fuzzybabybunny
About time?

QFT!! Engineering calculations are so much easier in metric.

 

[LostWanderer]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Slowly but surely the US will adopt Metric.

I used to think so, but now I'm beginning to have my doubts. Until they just completely drop the outdated English units, we're never gonna get there. They were headed that way in many ways, but the lobby of lazy SI 'haters' has won out and slowly any gains made in previous years are being erased. As an example, some state DOT's went metric on their roadways and construction plans. They posted speeds in both systems and everyone ignored the SI ones. Contractors just hired some kid outta school to convert every measurement on the plans to english before they built it. We gotta change our mindset and think in SI instead of converting to it.

I wish they would just teach it in school, make the all the signs metric, make anything non life threatening metric, and make the jump all at once to force us there. I can see keeping both units around for some things like medicine dosages etc., but for the rest, forget all this conversion nonsense and go with SI already! We would be a lot better in the long run.

:Q

 

[Shawn]

finally! I really wish the US would switch to metric.

 

[bluemax]

The govemmint kin take muh YARD if they want - but they's gonna' FIGHT me for my FEET!

 

[DieHardware]

Canada switched over to metric in the mid-70s, but along with that camethe switch from Fahrenheit to Celsius, the jumps are too big in the scale.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: DieHardware
Canada switched over to metric in the mid-70s, but along with that camethe switch from Fahrenheit to Celsius, the jumps are too big in the scale.

I do hope you're not serious.
Surely you've been made aware of the recent mathematical advance of "decimals." It makes it possible to have fractions of a degree, or even fractions of other numbers. If one wishes to express a figure somewhere between 1 and 2, it is possible to express it as 1.2 or 1.7. Amazing concept, no? I believe it's been applied to the Fahrenheit system as well, namely with body temperature - 98.6F

 

[Tom]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: DieHardware
Canada switched over to metric in the mid-70s, but along with that camethe switch from Fahrenheit to Celsius, the jumps are too big in the scale.

I do hope you're not serious.
Surely you've been made aware of the recent mathematical advance of "decimals." It makes it possible to have fractions of a degree, or even fractions of other numbers. If one wishes to express a figure somewhere between 1 and 2, it is possible to express it as 1.2 or 1.7. Amazing concept, no? I believe it's been applied to the Fahrenheit system as well, namely with body temperature - 98.6F

too bad our bodies and the Earth were designed before the metric system. :laugh:

The old measurements are a lot cooler for everything but science.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: ElFenix
i still don't understand why it took us less than 7 years 40 years ago to put a man on the moon, but now it's going to take us 16 years to go back, assuming the 2020 date stands up. i mean, the saturn v design still works. and it's not like much much much bigger rockets weren't designed (the smallest rocket designed to replace it for mars trips could haul 3x the payload).

i suppose we aren't spending 10% of GDP on it, but the development doesn't have to happen either. how much has rocket science changed in the last 30 years? almost looks like it hasn't.

Maybe now we're doing more for safety? I suppose they could just rebuild the Apollo from the old plans, but it's old technology and might not meet today's standards of safety.

I also don't know how much of the public backs the mission. I don't see much reason to send people to the Moon just yet, and getting people to Mars faces significant roadblocks.

I still favor robotic exploration for some key reasons.
Robots:
- don't need living space
- can be folded up to conserve space - Folded vs deployed
- can endure long-term isolated missions
- can sit (mostly) idle while awaiting instructions from Earth, such as the Mars Exploration Rovers do when the sun gets between Earth and Mars
- no desire to return home
- can be worked to death and won't complain, and will also keep working even when malfunctioning. MER Spirit has a wheel that won't rotate anymore, and the diamond cutters on its rock abrasion tool are worn down. They were hoping for 3 grinds with it, but it managed to do 15 grinds on some very hard rocks. Opportunity reboots occasionally, and its one wheel can't swivel. But they both remain quite mobile and capable.
- are more resistant to radiation than a human
- don't need bulky, water-based food stores
- don't excrete anything
- are cheap, at least compared to the costs associated with sending humans



They say that they want to use the Moon as a launching base for future missions. Well first the materials for a base need to get there. Then the rockets themselves will have to get there, or else the equipment to manufacture entire spacecraft there, which would also be a massive undertaking. And as I understand it, we have enough trouble just keeping the ISS adequately supplied with somewhat important things, like oxygen. If it has a problem, help is nearby. If something goes wrong on the Moon, like say, a meteor impact punching a hole in a biodome, by the time help arrives, anyone there will be vacuum-dried.

..they really are better off with bots. They go from the drawing board to launch pad faster and more off the shelf technology can be used.