Do Americans use metric system?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


Put men on the moon in a spacecraft whose guidance computers was making calculations using the metric system…
 
The US does use the metric system, as all units' legal definition have been in terms of the metric system since 1893. See https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/SP/nistspecialpublication1038.pdf

And the Federal Aviation Regulations went metric in the mid 80's with InFerial measurements in parentheses.

Two examples of why the US should enter the 20th century measurements wise are the Gilmi Glider which ran out of fuel due to a conversion error (in Canada by Canadians) and the NASA Mars Climate Orbiter (MCO). This was a space probe launched by NASA in 1998. It was loaded with scientific measurement instruments, and it was supposed to enter orbit around Mars, gather data, and then communicate its findings back to Earth. Instead, it disintegrated.

The orbiter completed a 286-day journey to Mars, and then fired its engine to push itself into orbit. However, something went wrong - on September 23, 1999 NASA lost contact with the orbiter.

What happened? NASA organised an investigation with a Mishap Investigation Board (MIB), which produced a detailed report. The root cause? Failure to use the metric system. Here's a highlighted section from the NASA report:



All systems were supposed to use metric measurements, but a single software file was using English units instead. As a result, thruster measurements were miscalculated, and the orbiter was hundreds of kilometres off course, causing it to (most likely) disintegrate in the Martian atmosphere. NASA handled the failure pretty well, at least externally. Rather than point the finger at Lockheed, whose engineers had programmed the software, they acknowledged that, while the software measurement error was the root problem, it was their responsibility to validate and verify the measurement systems to identify any such errors.



*********************************

One of my favourite examples of the idiocy of the inFerial system multiple units of the same name having different properties such as having a volume unit depend on what is contained in said volume... Both the Brits and the US have this idiocy though the Brits, unlike the US, have reduced this idiocy over the last several hundred years.

As an example there are seven different barrel sizes currently used in the USA, with the size being dependent on the contents and using different measurement units as the determining factor. Their names and metric equivalents are as follows: US cranberry (95.5 litres), US dry (115.628 litres), US liquid (119.24 litres), US federal (117.348 litres), US federal proof spirits (151.416 litres), US drum (208.4 litres), US petroleum (135 kg.), US petroleum statistical (158.99 litres). The Brits naturally also had a range of units with differing capacities and the reason the US gallon and Imperial gallon are different is that, when the US was invaded by the Brits, the Brits had three different units called gallons. The US standardised on one of those and the Brits later standardised on a different one.

Note that the term inFerial for the bastardised version of the Imperial system used in the USA under the name "US Customary Units". "Inferial" is a portmanteau of "inferior/infuriating" and "Imperial".
 
Main use of the metric system by Americans is when we want to shoot someone.

One advantage the SAE system has over metric is that the screw sizes make so much more sense. If you are wondering what the screw is measure the diameter and count the threads per inch; with metric screws that don't work so good.

I use both daily. Working on airplanes, especially those with Rotax engines, I have to have complete sets of SAE and Metric.
I keep nothing but SAE wrenches and sockets at the hangar and separate toolbox drawers for SAE and metric at home.

You have to be careful with torque wrenches to make sure you are reading the correct scale for those that have both. Some years ago the USAF went through eradicating all torque wrenches with Metric scales to make sure of that.
 

What is so difficult in measuring the thread OD (same measurement as with SAE) and then the distance between each thread in mm? You do know that on all common (4mm dia and above from memory) they do not use anything but full or half treads per mm so it is not like you have to count 4.3mm per thread.

It is easier than counting the number of threads in an inch - especially on fine threads like 4-40, 8-32, 10-32 and 10-24. And metric does not switch from gauge diameters to mm diameters like SAE does.
 
When I worked as a draftsman at Kaiser I had an Engineer tell me "with Metrics we could be More Accurate"
This was someone who found it difficult to find the exit of his office!!!!!!

That is because he was mentally converting 7/128th to decimal as he walked.

You will note that all precision measurements on inFerial drawings are in decimals - the metric version of inFerial. No-one every makes a precision measurement in inFerial. The thought of having to measure 13/128 +1/512 makes me shudder.
 
Last edited:
I'm more comfortable with Imperial too. I am, however, becoming more fluent in Metric. My ex has grasped the concept of the mile.
FWIW The Chrysler Imperial was my favorite car when I was growing up. No foolin'.
 
I'm more comfortable with Imperial too. I am, however, becoming more fluent in Metric. My ex has grasped the concept of the mile.
FWIW The Chrysler Imperial was my favorite car when I was growing up. No foolin'.

Which was a Roman metric measurement. 1,000 paces of a Roman Legionary on the march. Britain took the mile as a standard, and probably as its very first standard, because the Romans left thousands of mile posts spread all over the Roman controlled parts of England so they were already there and did not need replacing. Some are still in existence over 2,000 years later.
 
And the US picked up them Mile markers.
Ever looked at those white marked paddles along a highway?
Mile markers. In trouble, call services and give them the numbers on the closest paddle.
BAM, they know where you are.
 
the distance between each thread in mm
!!!!???!!! Must be nice to have a LASER INTERFEROMETER handy to measure such teeny tiny things! And you do not have to count a whole inch worth of threads. A quarter inch or so will do fine.

Saw where some guy said the US will never ever go metric. He said all those little screws used to secure switchplates in US homes do not have a metric equivalent.

I had one odd thing occur. I was replacing the voltage regulator on my Toyota and overtorqued a mounting screw. The regulator was secured using some rubber grommets and thus the screw did not get tighter and tighter but just broke. So I removed the remainder of the screw and went to a large, very old fashioned hardware store and told them I needed another. The guy measured it and told me it was 1/4-28. I was very surprised, since I figured it had to be metric. So I bought a 1/4-28 screw and took it home, where I found it did not fit the car. Turns out that the original metric screw got stretched out by the overtorquing to essentially the same as a 1/4-28.
 

Right now in the shop I have a CTSW and an Avid. The CT is all metric and the Avid has a SAE airframe and metric engine. I need a full set of both on hand in the hangar. As far as torque wrenches, simple math gets me from newton meters to inch or foot pounds, even though a couple of mine have both SAE and metric scales on them.
 

28 TPI = 0.907mm

Standrad pitch for M6 is 1.0mm.

Doubtful that it streteched.

1/4" = 6.35mm. Not surprised it didn't fit into the M6 hole.

For measuring thread pitch you can get a pitch guage, or you measure 5 or 10 threads with a rule.
 

Users who are viewing this thread