NOAA Request for Comment - Replace "Feet" with "Meters" as unit of measure???

All - I just received the following email asking for comment on shifting from Feet to Meters for high-seas weather products only.

You can register your comments HERE (https://ocean.weather.gov/survey-proposed-meters/index.php)

My comment was "It's about time....." Sheesh - I was a young pup when this country talked about going metric (Carter Administration). I'm amazed we never did. But I digress - purpose of this post is to give feedback to NOAA, an agency I don't mind supporting with tax dollars.

Peter

Can we please join the rest of the world?

I still think in cables, fathoms and feet. We give up some of the romance of the sea.
However my weather apps are in meters already so as long as it’s high seas only will accept the change.

This is a terrible idea. Inclusion of metric IN ADDITION TO standard is fine. Probably helps out the foreigners coming into US waters. But replacement? No way.

They should. It will take a generation, but the younger gen will adapt. I just wish we could switch across to 230V-50Hz, but that will never happen

The change wouldn't affect me as I am only a coastal boater. However, I think it is a good idea and should be done for all NOAA products. I was able to transition when they switched from fathoms to feet. I can make the switch to metric. I use meters when I boat in Canada after all.

I'm an old dog, but can still learn a few tricks yet.

I just sent a comment to NOAA.

Yeah, not hard at all, 3 and a third feet per meter, 10 feet = 3 meters.

If you think about it, no one invent the Imperial system if it didn't already exist and the Metric system did.

I recently read a business story. I don't remember the fast food companies involved, but one was new to the burger market and introduced a 1/3rd pound hamburger for the same price as the mainstream 1/4th pounders. They advertised the heck out of it. It was a flop. You know why? People didn't realize 1/3rd was bigger than 1/4th. I know, you can't fix stupid, but that type of thing doesn't happen in the metric world.

Peter

mvweebles said:

People didn't realize 1/3rd was bigger than 1/4th. I know, you can't fix stupid, but that type of thing doesn't happen in the metric world.

Click to expand...

But Peter... everyone knows that "4" is bigger than "3".

"dont fix whats not broken"

"Try our new fifth pound burger, only 10% additional charge"

Crap, I was still trying to find out whose foot was used to determine measurements

The real question is what will they use in shallower water? Are we talking depth to a tenth of a meter? If not, why would you choose a less precise measurement? So if AICW (Atlantic Intra Coastal Waterway) depths are going to reflect least depth, does the depth say 1 meter or 5 feet? Remember, your not rounding up (deeper) with least depth.

If they are going to a tenth of a meter, it probably doesn't matter much as who uses NOAA charts as opposed to Aquamaps, Coastal Explorer, or etc, anyway? It will be a long time before the above chart companies don't offer user preference for feet or meters.

Ted

Ted - my assumption was the notice was referring to wave height, not water depth.

The metric system is superior in every way. We should have joined the rest of the world on this decades (or more) ago.

On a related note, try adding 3 7/16 plus 2x 11/32 for a wood or metal project and then try it in millimeters. Its embarrassing that we still cling to Imperial measurements. The absolute only reason we’ve stayed with it is because that’s the way we’ve always done it.

Off the soapbox, but I support any change to metric that is available, including NOAA wave heights.

If you can't get away from knots for wind why go to meters for depth?

For celestial and even routine navigation the British system is easier math. The basic concern is lat/long. The time is through Greenwich England even in U. Distance is nm.
I understand napoleon wanted to make francocentric statement but Britain ruled the waves. I like the 10 based system for science but not for human based activities. My foot is a wee bit over a foot. A distal finger is an inch. My arm span is a fathom. The French metric system does make more sense but it’s unfortunate the basic units weren’t based on human anatomy as was the British system.
I have three sets of tools as I had British sport cars in the past. That’s my real complaint about measuring systems

It makes sense if you were brought up with it. After 50 yrs of doing inches it's tough. But the real PITA is a mix. I have a Volvo truck with a Cummins engine. AARGH !

Hopefully in my lifetime. There was an international agreement back in the 70s to switch, but the US backed out at the last minute because the car industry insisted it would be their ruin. I remember road speed signs starting to be posted in both mph and kph, then they all came down. Meanwhile the rest of the world moved ahead with the change, leaving us behind. And now the auto industry is all metric, as is Deere, Cat, Cummins, etc. But clinging to imperial units just adds to our dinosaur status.

Make the

It doesn't make sense to have some weather reports in one system and others in another system. That will inevitably cause problems. According to this the 60 mile report will be in meters and the 20 mile report will be in feet. No chance of anyone mixing that up.....

To add to the confusion, some NWS/NOAA weather products already use meters and have for many years. HERE is the link to the attached, the most current High Seas chart for the northern Pacific (attached for convenience). It is in meters. Why? I can only guess, but the NWS provides global weather information so I presume that for a global-oriented weather chart, metric makes more sense than the US-centric Imperial system.

The NWS/NHC and NOAA view their remit as a global data provider. Of the 195 countries in the world, only a few have the resources to invest in weather forecasting. Like it or not, this information is available to all 195 countries via the internet but the relationships go much deeper: in many instances, these US agencies provide deep and insightful analysis and detailed weather modeling. In Mexico, for example, when a hurricane approaches, it's the NWS/NHC providing the base data though the Mexican authority choses how to disseminate it. Why do we do this for the world? Perhaps because the US has marine interests in every nook and cranny of the world. Clearly there are military reasons for highly accurate forecasting. And it doesn't hurt that, rightly or wrongly, the US views itself as a benevolent lead-actor on the world stage. It's one of the tentacles of discussion that will pop-up as we collectively grapple with isolationism vs globalism.

Occasionally there is a poll on TF about age of contributors. At 63, I'm in the middle of the pack, perhaps a bit on the younger side. We are a group of old dogs. Eventually, the US will go metric - question is when, not if. We missed the wave 35-years ago when the Carter Administration set metric as a priority which was quickly extinguished by the Reagan Administration (BTW - it's a very expensive and difficult conversion to do nationally). Collectively, we TF'ers were in our early 20s back then and I'd guess much more supportive of going metric than the old-dog version of ourselves. Maybe it's time to pass the torch to our younger selves.

Peter

guy with a boat said:

The metric system is superior in every way. We should have joined the rest of the world on this decades (or more) ago.

On a related note, try adding 3 7/16 plus 2x 11/32 for a wood or metal project and then try it in millimeters. Its embarrassing that we still cling to Imperial measurements. The absolute only reason we’ve stayed with it is because that’s the way we’ve always done it.

Off the soapbox, but I support any change to metric that is available, including NOAA wave heights.

Click to expand...

Your math problem is very simple, even using fractions. But convert to decimal and it’s even easier.
Imperial fractions to millimeters is apples to oranges.
I prefer using thousands of an inch, but that’s just the machinist in me.

Bmarler said:

Your math problem is very simple, even using fractions. But convert to decimal and it’s even easier.
Imperial fractions to millimeters is apples to oranges.
I prefer using thousands of an inch, but that’s just the machinist in me.

Click to expand...

Imperial vs Metric is apples/oranges to the extent that Metric is 'base-10' units of measure whereas Imperial is 'base 12.' Thousandth's of an inch is an interesting example as it's a hybrid - a 'base 10' overlay of a 'base 12' unit of measure and speaks to the limits of Imperial and the elasticity of Metric. I can only imagine the fractional equivelent of 5/1000s of an inch. Given the example of people thinking a 1/4-lb burger was bigger than a 1/3-lb burger, what could possibly go wrong if Imperial fractions were used instead of 1000ths?

Resistance to change is the only thing keeping Imperial alive - no one would invent it in favor of metric.

Peter

I have a 32.2 cubit LOA, approximately

mvweebles said:

Imperial vs Metric is apples/oranges to the extent that Metric is 'base-10' units of measure whereas Imperial is 'base 12.' Thousandth's of an inch is an interesting example as it's a hybrid - a 'base 10' overlay of a 'base 12' unit of measure and speaks to the limits of Imperial and the elasticity of Metric. I can only imagine the fractional equivelent of 5/1000s of an inch. Given the example of people thinking a 1/4-lb burger was bigger than a 1/3-lb burger, what could possibly go wrong if Imperial fractions were used instead of 1000ths?

Resistance to change is the only thing keeping Imperial alive - no one would invent it in favor of metric.

Peter

Click to expand...

Lol, 5/1000 of an inch is exactly that fraction. You don’t have to imagine it.
I deal with conversions all the time, my mind works well using the thousands system. I could go either way as it’s all decimal equivalent, but it’s harder for me to visualize .0254 mm vs. .001 inches.

Anyway, back to the original post, using meters for offshore wave forecasting seems ok to me. Having a global standard seems very sensible.

OK then, when the US switches to metric will it be liter OR litre.
Only the US as far as I know spells it liter.

I have noticed a swing to metric measurements in new shows and movies over the last few years.

Here is a bit of irony. Canada has been metric for decades. Meat products sold by Kg. However in the past few years grocery stores are labelling with pounds. I actually thought we were heading back to imperial and that was a test. no one noticed or cared it seems.

And Draft beer in Canada, when advertised as a "pint", is legally required to be an imperial pint (568 mL)

We are after all bilingual.

mvweebles said:

Note that this proposed change is ONLY for the High Seas products, NOT the Coastal Waters (within 60 nautical miles of the coast) or the Offshore Zone Waters.

Click to expand...

The only thing worse than clinging tenaciously to the "old way" is introducing the "new way" incrementally and mixing your units of measurement. Examples of mixing liters and gallons abound, such as the "Gimli Glider." Or your GPS, which reports degrees (60), minutes(60), and decimal thousandths.

...or hectopascals/millibars/inches of mercury