Dear Roy:
I am in complete agreement. As an example, when dealing with antenna
tower evaluation I convert everything about the tower to SI (knowing the
approximate SI density of materials helps to ensure that the conversion was
done correctly), and then do the evaluation. When it comes to the design of
foundations, I need to convert the SI answer back into the other units so
that the skilled trades are able to do their thing.

How silly to have a system that depends on an assumed gravitational
system.

73 Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A.
Home:
"Roy Lewallen" wrote in message
...
Years ago I tracked down a constriction ("resistance") in my house's
water system with a bucket and stopwatch to measure flow ("current") and
a fuel pump pressure gauge to measure water pressure ("voltage") and a
schematic of the "circuit". I kind of chuckled thinking of all the
simplified explanations of electricity using water -- I found it much
easier to convert in the other direction.

As for "pounds", I was always off by the acceleration of gravity squared
in the only two one-semester courses I took which weren't metric,
Statics and Dynamics. I never could remember which of those units --
pounds mass, pounds force, poundals, slugs, aargh, had the acceleration
already built in and which didn't. I finally managed by first converting
each problem to metric, solving it, then converting the result back to
that God-awful system of units.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL