Author Topic: MPH or KMH?  (Read 7732 times)

Hot Flatus

  • Mediocre polyglot.Scoutmaster and nudist
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #50 on: January 01, 2021, 07:03:17 pm »
I once spent time on a train in Italy in the company of some Swedish people. We communicated in English.
I spent an evening in a (very good) restaurant in Belgium where everybody was speaking English, but from the accents we were the only English people there.

That was just the Belgians trying to fuck with your head

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #51 on: January 01, 2021, 07:04:32 pm »
Next guess....they were very drunk

Not even remotely. Probably just as well.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

Hot Flatus

  • Mediocre polyglot.Scoutmaster and nudist
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #52 on: January 01, 2021, 07:05:03 pm »
Jeez, that sounds boring

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #53 on: January 01, 2021, 07:06:41 pm »
Jeez, that sounds boring

Yeah, there's a reason I didn't bother going into any further detail with the story.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #54 on: January 01, 2021, 07:17:00 pm »
Km. Measurements went metric on Decimal Day in 1971

They most certainly did not - the only thing that changed on Decimalisation Day was the currency.

Hence, 50 years on, our road signs still show miles and pubs still sell pints.

Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #55 on: January 01, 2021, 07:20:07 pm »

You might want to know those things but it’s not necessary to know them.  Sure you can see distances on signs if you’ve made a wrong turn but you don’t need speed nor distance showing on your GPS.

I do need to know those things. You may not want to know them. But I do. Your prescriptive phrasing quite frankly sucks.

You feel you do not need to know distances in anyway shape or form, that is for you, and only you. Your wording suggests everyone should think the same as you. This is, IMHO. Wrong. Please do not presume for others.

J

No it doesn’t mean I think everyone should do it the same. Not being prescriptive at all. Saying something is necessary is bring prescriptive, saying something is a want is the opposite.  You want those things that’s fine, but they are not necessary.  It’s your choice to do it that way. Just as it’s my choice to do it without them. 

So in your case necessary from a subjective point of view , but not necessary from an objective point of view.

Hot Flatus

  • Mediocre polyglot.Scoutmaster and nudist
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #56 on: January 01, 2021, 07:22:09 pm »
Jeez, that sounds boring

Yeah, there's a reason I didn't bother going into any further detail with the story.

I had a great time with mine, circa 1989 on a train in Spain. I was 20, solo travelling down to get the ferry to North Africa. They appeared in my carriage somewhere near Zaragoza.  We sized each other up, then the drinking started. They were fresh out of national service, decked me out in their army skiing goggles, which I may still have somewhere. Zak, who looked like the swedish chef was exuberant and noisy, until such point as he fell down under the table, legs poking up into the air and fell asleep.  Great memories.

Feanor

  • It's mostly downhill from here.
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #57 on: January 01, 2021, 07:27:24 pm »
Metric for everything.

To convert UK signpost miles into k, I use one of these techniques:

Successive Approximation where I decompose the miles into one of a few touch-stone values I just know:
50 miles = 80k ( and simple multiples of that: 25 miles = 40k )
10 miles = 16k ( so 1 mile is 1.6k, and 100 miles is 160k )

Most conversions can be done to a good-enough accuracy that way.

If the number of miles does not decompose nicely, and I need to decompose to more than 3 components to retain the accuracy I want, then I will use the 'full calculation'.
This is to multiply by 1.6, but there's a trick to how to do this mentally.
Multiply by 16, then divide by 10.
Multiplying by 16 is simply doubling the number 4 times.
This technique is nice because you only need to have one number in your head at any point, you don't need to store previous partial calculations to add together at the end.
And the only calculation is doubling, which is one of the easier calculations to do in your head.


Kim

  • Timelord
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #58 on: January 01, 2021, 07:29:38 pm »
Unless it's an NCN signpost, in which case the algorithm is to think of a random number and double it.
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #59 on: January 01, 2021, 07:30:35 pm »
Some of the ncn signs round here have times.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #60 on: January 01, 2021, 07:33:11 pm »
Those are an illusion, lunchtime doubly so.
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #61 on: January 01, 2021, 07:47:44 pm »
I’ve never timed myself to check. Might do that to see next time. 

FifeingEejit

  • Not Small
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #62 on: January 01, 2021, 08:14:56 pm »
I use both. On my tandem the control panel is in km and the garmin that sits next to it is in miles. I estimate distance on landranger maps in miles, and on explorers by halving the landranger mile.

You convert a Metric map, where every single part of the map key and grid is in metric into imperial?
I get working out the metric value and then converting to imperial, but actually reading such a map in imperial just seems completely wasteful.
I've been told that as a rough estimate for walking, you can consider every time you cross a kilometre grid line to be a mile travelled.

Fairly inefficient paths them.

Some of the ncn signs round here have times.

There's nothing quite like signing a variable as a way of demonstrating the stupidities of the NCN



If anyone can be arsed the law behind weights and measures is
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1985/72/contents

the yard or the metre shall be the unit of measurement of length and the pound or the kilogram shall be the unit of measurement of mass by reference to which any measurement involving a measurement of length or mass shall be made in the United Kingdom; and—
(a)the yard shall be 0.9144 metre exactly;
(b)the pound shall be 0·453 592 37 kilogram exactly.

And thus all Imperial measures are facades of metric

You all use metric you just pretend you don't

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #63 on: January 01, 2021, 08:20:45 pm »
Some of the ncn signs round here have times.

There's nothing quite like signing a variable as a way of demonstrating the stupidities of the NCN

I believe there's decent evidence that putting average walking times on signposts encourages people to walk for short journeys.  Presumably the same applies to cycling.

Obviously this should be in addition to - not instead of - the actual distance, for the benefit of everyone who travels at non-average speed.  Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #64 on: January 01, 2021, 08:28:10 pm »
I’m a child of the 70s and mostly use metric for outdoorsy things, though I can read signs in miles. I blame OS maps before audax.

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
MPH or KMH?
« Reply #65 on: January 01, 2021, 08:28:22 pm »
And thus all Imperial measures are facades of metric

That’s what I was getting at earlier re pints. Obviously the same applies to all types of measures. I only mentioned pints because some people have specifically stated that pints (for beer or milk) are the only non-metric measures they use. Or miles for driving.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #66 on: January 01, 2021, 08:34:40 pm »
So I'm happy with either. I'm less happy about people telling others that they're morons for using one or the other. I can guarantee this will happen in this thread :P

Is ‘backwards barbarians’ close enough?
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

Cudzoziemiec

  • Eating all the pies and drinking all the tea.
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #67 on: January 01, 2021, 08:51:32 pm »
And thus all Imperial measures are facades of metric

That’s what I was getting at earlier re pints. Obviously the same applies to all types of measures. I only mentioned pints because some people have specifically stated that pints (for beer or milk) are the only non-metric measures they use. Or miles for driving.
Pints for beer, litres for milk. Miles for things that are signed in miles, sometimes. Psi for tyres and gear inches for gears. Yards for distances when talking to people who might expect yards rather than metres. Metres, centimetres or feeter ninches for heights of humans, depending on age of interlocutor and mood.
Riding a bike through a city is like navigating the collective neural pathways of a vast global mind.

Salvatore

  • Джон Спунър
    • Pics
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #68 on: January 01, 2021, 08:57:15 pm »
Some of the ncn signs round here have times.

A Swedish sign giving the distance (1 non-Swedish mlle) and also telling me I'm too slow.

Quote
et avec John, excellent lecteur de road-book, on s'en est sortis sans erreur

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #69 on: January 01, 2021, 10:40:17 pm »
Some of the ncn signs round here have times.

Use by?
If you don't like your democracy, vote against it.

Kim

  • Timelord
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #70 on: January 01, 2021, 10:51:40 pm »
Careful, Kim. Your sarcasm's showing...

Feanor

  • It's mostly downhill from here.
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #71 on: January 01, 2021, 11:06:39 pm »
I believe there's decent evidence that putting average walking times on signposts encourages people to walk for short journeys. 

I think there's a risk-aversion thing going on here.

On several hiking sites I use, eg https://www.walkhighlands.co.uk/ the times given seem to assume a zimmer frame is involved.

You need to do enough rides / hikes against their routes to be able to perform a regression to generate a calibration coefficient for yourself.

Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #72 on: January 01, 2021, 11:40:48 pm »
It's a bit like handedness for me. I'm notionally left-handed; I write and play racket sports (badly in both cases) with my left hand. But I play cricket (even worse) right-handed. And some things can be either way; when I occasionally have a go at air rifles or archery with my Scouts, I'm mostly right-handed but have to think about it, especially for archery, and have sometimes gone left instead.

With measures, I'm happy with either, but I think about distances and speed of travel in miles, so I'm always converting Audaxes in my head. My GPS reads in miles. Maybe it's partly because I still occasionally dabble in time trials, which are Imperial. I also think about my weight and height in Imperial, and my metric weight in particular means relatively little to me. On the other hand I did a science degree, which was obviously metric, and if measuring a piece of wood or whatever I'd normally use metric too. And abroad, I just use the metric system because signs, dashboards and everything else have that.

Cooking is like shooting; I can do it either way, and sometimes have to think about which one I'm using, although generally it's whatever the recipe says. I've still got the handwritten book with which my Mum sent me off as a student, and that's mostly Imperial, but obviously newer books tend to be metric. It helps that our kitchen scales have both.

hellymedic

  • Just do it!
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #73 on: January 02, 2021, 02:01:27 am »
I can manage both.
Makes sense to have the same units on your bike computer as are on the roadsigns you'll pass except if you are following an Audax giving metric distances in an area using Imperial units.

T42

  • *** fool in a hurry
Re: MPH or KMH?
« Reply #74 on: January 02, 2021, 08:19:25 am »
We're metric 99% of the time, except that MrsT is in an anglophone running group on FB and so runs/walks in miles unless she's doing a multiple of 5k.  I tend to think and speak metric, although I'll still describe short distances such as 6" in imperial.  And of course a few measurements on the bike are still in imperial - same for telescope eyepiece diameters, although the focal lengths are in mm.

I have an imperial/metric measuring tape some misguided wight gave me 30 years ago. Not only is the abominable thing confusing, the scale you want to use is always on the wrong edge.

Not being one-dimensional I use both and, and the same for weights etc. Keeps the grey matter working.

Also results in spacecraft coming to grief when trying to go into orbit around Mars.
I've dusted all those old bottles and set them up straight.