Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:04 AM - Knots vs. MPH (Ron Schreck)
2. 06:21 AM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (N395V)
3. 06:45 AM - Re: Re: Knots vs. MPH (Bill VonDane)
4. 06:55 AM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (Kelly McMullen)
5. 06:59 AM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (Charlie England)
6. 07:20 AM - Re: Breather run into exhaust (warning again) (mbick)
7. 07:20 AM - Knots vs. MPH (James H Nelson)
8. 07:32 AM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (Jerry Springer)
9. 08:11 AM - transponder & comm antenna separation RV-6/7 (sarg314)
10. 08:32 AM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (Tedd McHenry)
11. 08:38 AM - RV flight traing in Michigan (Michael Seager)
12. 08:51 AM - Re: Re: Knots vs. MPH (Konrad L. Werner)
13. 09:01 AM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (Konrad L. Werner)
14. 09:03 AM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (Konrad L. Werner)
15. 03:39 PM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (linn Walters)
16. 03:56 PM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (Deems Davis)
17. 04:08 PM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (Larry Pardue)
18. 04:25 PM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (linn Walters)
19. 06:54 PM - Re: Knots vs. MPH (Kevin Horton)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I'm donning my nomex in preparation for the flamers. Here's my question... Why
oh why do RVers continue to use statute miles and MPH? I am currently on a tour
with ten other RV's and we often exchange range and speed while inflight to
keep the various flights in order. I was brought up on knots and nautical miles
and it throws me for a loop when we have a few who insist on calling out
speeds and ranges in MPH and statute miles. All military services use knots,
commercial airlines use knots, aeronautical charts are scalled based on nautical
miles and ATC uses knots. As far as I can determine, the only reason GA has
clung to MPH is because it sounds faster. Maybe it started with the Mooney
201? Sounds better to say your spam can cruises at 201 MPH, rather that 188 knots
(or so). Other than the vanity factor, I see no real good reason to use
MPH and I would hope that those of you currently building your RV's would consider
this when you purchase your airspeed indicator o
r calibrate your whiz bang EFIS.
OK... end of rant. Tell my why not use knots!
Ron Schreck
RV8, "Miss Izzy"
Gold Hill Airpark, NC
on the way to Cody, WY
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
Can't speak for others but eons ago when I trained all the ASIs in the trainers
(Cessnas and Pipers) where in MPH. Same when I was an active CFI.
I converted my brain to knots when I started flying a lot of ifr and like you I
fly using knots/nautical.
If you go to the performance pages on Vans website the RV numbers are in MPH so
I think it natural many builders would follow this convention.
With GPSs and EFISs today there is little benefit re charts to the VFR pilot converting
his brain to think in knots.
Kinda like English vs metric.
I guess it boils down to personal preference.
--------
Milt
2003 F1 Rocket
2006 Radial Rocket
website http://www.excaliburaviation.com
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=117448#117448
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
If you use knots you will be charges higher user fees!! :-D
please do not archive...
N395V wrote:
>
> Can't speak for others but eons ago when I trained all the ASIs in the trainers
(Cessnas and Pipers) where in MPH. Same when I was an active CFI.
>
> I converted my brain to knots when I started flying a lot of ifr and like you
I fly using knots/nautical.
>
> If you go to the performance pages on Vans website the RV numbers are in MPH
so I think it natural many builders would follow this convention.
>
> With GPSs and EFISs today there is little benefit re charts to the VFR pilot
converting his brain to think in knots.
>
> Kinda like English vs metric.
>
> I guess it boils down to personal preference.
>
> --------
> Milt
> 2003 F1 Rocket
> 2006 Radial Rocket
> website http://www.excaliburaviation.com
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=117448#117448
>
>
>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
Maybe because they only have mph on their airspeed indicator and aren't
so good at conversions.
BTW, 201 mph =~ 175kts. ;-p
Ron Schreck wrote:
>
> I'm donning my nomex in preparation for the flamers. Here's my question... Why
oh why do RVers continue to use statute miles and MPH? I am currently on a
tour with ten other RV's and we often exchange range and speed while inflight
to keep the various flights in order. I was brought up on knots and nautical
miles and it throws me for a loop when we have a few who insist on calling out
speeds and ranges in MPH and statute miles. All military services use knots,
commercial airlines use knots, aeronautical charts are scalled based on nautical
miles and ATC uses knots. As far as I can determine, the only reason GA
has clung to MPH is because it sounds faster. Maybe it started with the Mooney
201? Sounds better to say your spam can cruises at 201 MPH, rather that 188
knots (or so). Other than the vanity factor, I see no real good reason to use
MPH and I would hope that those of you currently building your RV's would consider
this when you purchase your airspeed indicator o
> r calibrate your whiz bang EFIS.
>
> OK... end of rant. Tell my why not use knots!
>
> Ron Schreck
> RV8, "Miss Izzy"
> Gold Hill Airpark, NC
>
> on the way to Cody, WY
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
Ron Schreck wrote:
>
> I'm donning my nomex in preparation for the flamers. Here's my question... Why
oh why do RVers continue to use statute miles and MPH? I am currently on a
tour with ten other RV's and we often exchange range and speed while inflight
to keep the various flights in order. I was brought up on knots and nautical
miles and it throws me for a loop when we have a few who insist on calling out
speeds and ranges in MPH and statute miles. All military services use knots,
commercial airlines use knots, aeronautical charts are scalled based on nautical
miles and ATC uses knots. As far as I can determine, the only reason GA
has clung to MPH is because it sounds faster. Maybe it started with the Mooney
201? Sounds better to say your spam can cruises at 201 MPH, rather that 188
knots (or so). Other than the vanity factor, I see no real good reason to use
MPH and I would hope that those of you currently building your RV's would consider
this when you purchase your airspeed indicato
r o
> r calibrate your whiz bang EFIS.
>
> OK... end of rant. Tell my why not use knots!
>
> Ron Schreck
> RV8, "Miss Izzy"
> Gold Hill Airpark, NC
>
> on the way to Cody, WY
Let's settle this once & for all. Use kilometers. Universal (except in
the US & England), bigger numbers for the speed freaks. Everybody Wins!
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Breather run into exhaust (warning again) |
Thanks all for the great input and the many perspectives. More as an fyi
than expert speak, I initially I ran my breather through the fuselage and
used an air/oil separator. What the separator did was act as a condenser
putting mostly water back into the crankcase. The separator was mounted on
the firewall up high and where it was mounted it remained relatively cool
acting as a condenser. The long tube through the fuselage always seemed to
be restrictive and if you think about it a long tube could clog for any
number of reasons, bugs, gunk.etc. I checked and no clog but restrictive
none the less and probably power robbing. Added to that if you think about
it Lycoming has a tough time not leaking anyway so why add to Leakcoming's
virtues with high crankcase pressures. Anyway I just received the kit from
Summit racing and I am going to do both my Acrosport 1 which has the
inverted system and the RV4. I will let you all know how well it does and
again thanks for all the input. If you know anyone interested in the
Acrosport 1 I am looking to sell it, great little plane I am just ready for
a change.
Take care,
Mike
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Hi Ron,
Its is almost like the guys who put in the dual scale /tas air
speed indicator. Man that is so full of stuff it is hard to read
anything accuratly. I went the simple route and installed the single
scale 0-200 'Knot" airspeed indicator. Added my colored bands and it is
so easy to use that way. Much easier to read for the poor old eyes and
brain to absorb. Flame on---
Jim Nelson
do not archive
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
Because knots are for boats. :) it would be hard for us to have a rope
long enough with knots in it to determine our speed by counting how many
knots are let out in a certain time period.
Jerry (just kidding)
do not archive
Ron Schreck wrote:
>
>I'm donning my nomex in preparation for the flamers. Here's my question... Why
oh why do RVers continue to use statute miles and MPH? I am currently on a
tour with ten other RV's and we often exchange range and speed while inflight
to keep the various flights in order. I was brought up on knots and nautical
miles and it throws me for a loop when we have a few who insist on calling out
speeds and ranges in MPH and statute miles. All military services use knots,
commercial airlines use knots, aeronautical charts are scalled based on nautical
miles and ATC uses knots. As far as I can determine, the only reason GA has
clung to MPH is because it sounds faster. Maybe it started with the Mooney
201? Sounds better to say your spam can cruises at 201 MPH, rather that 188
knots (or so). Other than the vanity factor, I see no real good reason to use
MPH and I would hope that those of you currently building your RV's would consider
this when you purchase your airspeed indicator o
> r calibrate your whiz bang EFIS.
>
>OK... end of rant. Tell my why not use knots!
>
>Ron Schreck
>RV8, "Miss Izzy"
>Gold Hill Airpark, NC
>
>on the way to Cody, WY
>
>
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | transponder & comm antenna separation RV-6/7 |
I just read in my Garmin GTX327 transponder installation manual that I
should "avoid" placing the transponder antenna within 3 feet of any comm
antenna. I assume because transmission on one can disturb reception on
the other.
I was advised by one of the guys at Vans to place the transponder
antenna under the passenger seat at the outboard side and the comm
antenna under the pilot seat just left of the central channel, that is,
in the "channel" adjacent to the central channel.
I like this placement. It keeps the cables fairly short and the antennas
aren't hard to get to. I don't like that it puts the comm antenna
fairly close to the gear legs (about 1/4 wave), but I guess you have to
make some compromises. However it puts the xponder only about 2 ft from
the comm.
Has any one who has done this noticed any interference between the comm
and transponder?
(or for that matter distortion of the comm transmission pattern due to
the gear legs?)
--
Tom Sargent
RV-6A, electrical system.
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
> OK... end of rant. Tell my why not use knots!
While we're on a unit-of-measure rant, why do we measure fuel in units of
volume instead of weight when we're putting it in an airplane? The results
that matter (load, range, and endurance) depend on mass, not volume.
Perhaps at one time fuel pumps actually measured volume. But now the fuel
pumps themselves actually measure mass flow and then convert it to volume using
an assumed density. So to get your fuel load you have to take this approximate
volume number and convert back to weight using another approximation. Crazy!
Tedd McHenry
Surrey, BC
do not archive
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RV flight traing in Michigan |
I will be in Three Rivers Michigan before OSH this year . If you would
like to take training in the factory RV-7 please call Bob Gearhart at 269
445 5102 or 269 816 0163 cell. I will be there July 20 21 22.
Michael Seager
503 429 5103
477RV
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
Bill,
That is knot tru and you know it!
Diesen Spass bitte nicht archivieren...
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill VonDane
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Re: Knots vs. MPH
If you use knots you will be charges higher user fees!! :-D
please do not archive...
N395V wrote:
>
> Can't speak for others but eons ago when I trained all the ASIs in
the trainers (Cessnas and Pipers) where in MPH. Same when I was an
active CFI.
>
> I converted my brain to knots when I started flying a lot of ifr and
like you I fly using knots/nautical.
>
> If you go to the performance pages on Vans website the RV numbers
are in MPH so I think it natural many builders would follow this
convention.
>
> With GPSs and EFISs today there is little benefit re charts to the
VFR pilot converting his brain to think in knots.
>
> Kinda like English vs metric.
>
> I guess it boils down to personal preference.
>
> --------
> Milt
> 2003 F1 Rocket
> 2006 Radial Rocket
> website http://www.excaliburaviation.com
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=117448#117448
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
Jerry,
I always carry a rope with me, as you never know when you get an
opportunity to hang someone with it...
2B or knot 2B
Because knots are for boats. :) it would be hard for us to have a rope
long enough with knots in it to determine our speed by counting how
many
knots are let out in a certain time period.
Jerry (just kidding)
do not archive
Ron Schreck wrote:
<ronschreck@windstream.net>
>
>I'm donning my nomex in preparation for the flamers. Here's my
question... Why oh why do RVers continue to use statute miles and MPH?
I am currently on a tour with ten other RV's and we often exchange range
and speed while inflight to keep the various flights in order. I was
brought up on knots and nautical miles and it throws me for a loop when
we have a few who insist on calling out speeds and ranges in MPH and
statute miles. All military services use knots, commercial airlines use
knots, aeronautical charts are scalled based on nautical miles and ATC
uses knots. As far as I can determine, the only reason GA has clung to
MPH is because it sounds faster. Maybe it started with the Mooney 201?
Sounds better to say your spam can cruises at 201 MPH, rather that 188
knots (or so). Other than the vanity factor, I see no real good reason
to use MPH and I would hope that those of you currently building your
RV's would consider this when you purchase your airspeed indicator!
o
> r calibrate your whiz bang EFIS.
>
>OK... end of rant. Tell my why not use knots!
>
>Ron Schreck
>RV8, "Miss Izzy"
>Gold Hill Airpark, NC
>
>on the way to Cody, WY
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
Charlie,
I took my a good 10yrs to get used to MPH. Don't now make me waste
another 10yrs to go back to Km/h. do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: Charlie England
To: rv-list@matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2007 7:58 AM
Subject: Re: RV-List: Knots vs. MPH
<ceengland@bellsouth.net>
Ron Schreck wrote:
<ronschreck@windstream.net>
>
> I'm donning my nomex in preparation for the flamers. Here's my
question... Why oh why do RVers continue to use statute miles and MPH?
I am currently on a tour with ten other RV's and we often exchange range
and speed while inflight to keep the various flights in order. I was
brought up on knots and nautical miles and it throws me for a loop when
we have a few who insist on calling out speeds and ranges in MPH and
statute miles. All military services use knots, commercial airlines use
knots, aeronautical charts are scalled based on nautical miles and ATC
uses knots. As far as I can determine, the only reason GA has clung to
MPH is because it sounds faster. Maybe it started with the Mooney 201?
Sounds better to say your spam can cruises at 201 MPH, rather that 188
knots (or so). Other than the vanity factor, I see no real good reason
to use MPH and I would hope that those of you currently building your
RV's would consider this when you purchase your airspeed indicato
r o
> r calibrate your whiz bang EFIS.
>
> OK... end of rant. Tell my why not use knots!
>
> Ron Schreck
> RV8, "Miss Izzy"
> Gold Hill Airpark, NC
>
> on the way to Cody, WY
Let's settle this once & for all. Use kilometers. Universal (except in
the US & England), bigger numbers for the speed freaks. Everybody
Wins!
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
While everyone has different opinions about why, I can only guess:
Ron Schreck wrote:
>
>I'm donning my nomex in preparation for the flamers. Here's my question... Why
oh why do RVers continue to use statute miles and MPH?
>
Because their instruments are in miles?
> I am currently on a tour with ten other RV's and we often exchange range and
speed while inflight to keep the various flights in order. I was brought up
on knots and nautical miles and it throws me for a loop when we have a few who
insist on calling out speeds and ranges in MPH and statute miles.
>
I think it boils down to what you're used to and comfortable with, what
instruments you have onboard.
> All military services use knots, commercial airlines use knots, aeronautical
charts are scalled based on nautical miles
>
>
Actually aeronautical charts are based on a scale of 1:20 or something like that
.... I don't have one handy ..... and has both a nautical and statute scale
at the bottom.
> and ATC uses knots.
>
This I didn't know.
> As far as I can determine, the only reason GA has clung to MPH is because it
sounds faster. Maybe it started with the Mooney 201? Sounds better to say your
spam can cruises at 201 MPH, rather that 188 knots (or so). Other than the
vanity factor, I see no real good reason to use MPH and I would hope that those
of you currently building your RV's would consider this when you purchase
your airspeed indicator or calibrate your whiz bang EFIS.
>
Marketing probably was a factor ..... and sounds credible. It's also
what car drivers are comfortable with. I guess it's the same as the
argument about going metric.
>OK... end of rant. Tell my why not use knots!
>
I have three airplanes, and the Grumman and Pitts have airspeeds
calibrated in MPH. The Traumahawk, however, came with an A/S calibrated
in knots. When our 'group' goes somewhere (usually for food ;-) ) we
have the same problem. I( have Anywhere Map so I can switch back and
forth between MPH and KTS ..... some of the other planes have a GPS
fixed in MPH but airspeed in KTS .... and some have the reverse. We
don't find it a hindrance ..... just that we perceive some A/C closer or
farther away than they really are!!! No big deal, since we always wait
for the stragglers (some have fast airplanes and some have pokers) to
arrive anyway. So, no flames from me ..... but if that's the only
frustration you have when flying as a group .... I'd let it go.
Linn
do not archive
>
>Ron Schreck
>RV8, "Miss Izzy"
>Gold Hill Airpark, NC
>
>on the way to Cody, WY
>
>
>
>
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
I think it has it's roots in the Man himself. go to Van's website and
check how he/they publish performance specs. One of the 1st things that
every RV builder wants to know once they are flying is 'how does my
plane compare to Van's numbers'. So the dialog is set from the get go in
......... MPH.
Deems Davis # 406
Baffling / Plenum / Engine Stuff
http://deemsrv10.com/
>
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
On Jun 9, 2007, at 4:39 PM, linn Walters wrote:
> ...
>> and ATC uses knots.
>>
> This I didn't know.
>
...
I always wonder what those using MPH and miles say when they tell ATC
their position or when ATC asks their speed. Do they actually go
through the conversion or do they just give wrong information. It
sure seems easier to me to just nautical miles and knots.
Larry Pardue
Carlsbad, NM
RV-6 N441LP Flying
http://n5lp.net
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
I'm a fair-weather pilot and fly direct ..... and not that high either
..... and I hate to talk to anyone except the guys in my gaggle.
However, I did ask a tower controller how the difference (MPH/KTS)
affected their operation, since I flew in/out of some towered airports.
His reply: NADA! Now, this was before widespread use of GPS, so his
answer may be different now, but he explained the pilots have a real
problem with being '5 miles out' when they were anywhere from 3 to 7!!!
Admittedly, the difference becomes greater the farther out you are.
My most recent conversations with a tower guy concerned the difference
between 'track' and 'heading'. Same answer, though. If you get far
enough off heading .... he'll let you know!!!
Linn
do not archive
Larry Pardue wrote:
>
> On Jun 9, 2007, at 4:39 PM, linn Walters wrote:...
>
>>> and ATC uses knots.
>>>
>> This I didn't know.
>
> ...
>
> I always wonder what those using MPH and miles say when they tell ATC
> their position or when ATC asks their speed. Do they actually go
> through the conversion or do they just give wrong information. It
> sure seems easier to me to just nautical miles and knots.
>
> Larry Pardue
> Carlsbad, NM
>
> RV-6 N441LP Flying
> http://n5lp.net
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knots vs. MPH |
On 9 Jun 2007, at 18:39, linn Walters wrote:
> <pitts_pilot@bellsouth.net>
>
> Ron Schreck wrote:
>
>> All military services use knots, commercial airlines use knots,
>> aeronautical charts are scalled based on nautical miles
>>
> Actually aeronautical charts are based on a scale of 1:20 or
> something like that .... I don't have one handy ..... and has both
> a nautical and statute scale at the bottom.
It is a royal pain in the you know what to use the scale at the
bottom. But, there are all these longitude lines running N-S, with
marks for every minute of latitude on them. And, one nautical mile =
one minute of latitude, so those marks make a perfect scale, if you
are using nautical miles.
IFR charts have distances between waypoints, all in nautical miles.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|