Jump to content

Cable size


Sanddancer

Featured Posts

3 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

and arn't "mils" something to do with parts of a radian?

6400 NATO mils in 360 degrees. " one banana subtends one mil at 1000 bananas", as my gunnery instructor put it .

Edited by Iain_S
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 15/06/2019 at 14:02, Murflynn said:

on the subject of confusing arithmetic, it really bugs me when advertisers claim something is '2 times more' when they mean 'twice as much'.........    2 times more means 3 times as much;   if they want to claim it is twice as much they should say '1 time more', or more easily understood 100% more.

 

 

Doesn;t bug you as much as when BBC presenters say something is "2 times less" I bet!

 

In fact they tend to do it with the bigger numbers e.g. "LED bulbs use 10 times less electricity than incandescent". No, they use one tenth of the electricity....

 

 

Rant over.

 

 

 

 

  • Greenie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

 

Doesn;t bug you as much as when BBC presenters say something is "2 times less" I bet!

 

In fact they tend to do it with the bigger numbers e.g. "LED bulbs use 10 times less electricity than incandescent". No, they use one tenth of the electricity....

 

 

Rant over.

 

 

 

 

 

One of the things that really irks me as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Mine is "you have two choices" when they actually mean a choice of A or B

 

But A is a potential choice, and B is a potential choice. Two choices!

 

I agree with your basic point though.

 

Another that grates is 'less than <a plural>' e.g. "less sparrows in our gardens these days".

 

FEWER sparrows, FFS!!!

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

But A is a potential choice, and B is a potential choice. Two choices!

 

I agree with your basic point though.

 

Another that grates is 'less than <a plural>' e.g. "less sparrows in our gardens these days".

 

FEWER sparrows, FFS!!!

 

 

 

 

 

You have a single choice - A or B

You can CHOOSE A or Choose B

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Because it’s a proper imperial fighter, not one of those metric jobbies. 

Non of that foreign rubbish - it used .303" (not 7.7mm) machine guns and 0.79" (not 20mm) cannon.

With a fuel tank of 122 gallon (not 554.6 litres) it was British 'Thru and Thru' !!

 

Edit from 303" to .303"

Edited by Alan de Enfield
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

Non of that foreign rubbish - it used 303" (not 7.7mm) machine guns and 0.79" (not 20mm) cannon.

With a fuel tank of 122 gallon (not 554.6 litres) it was British 'Thru and Thru' !!

That's a big machine gun ...  wasn't  .303 a more common size?

  • Greenie 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AFAIK cannon in a fighter plane have always been referred to as 20mm, because these guns were developed in Germany, Switzerland and Spain (Becker, Oerlikon and Hispano).

Later marks of the Spitfire carried 20mm cannon.

Edited by Murflynn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.