I didn't know about why that orbiter failed though, pretty funny!
The orbiter failed because while NASA used metric, the contractor (Lockheed Martin, I believe?) used imperial for one system and no one caught their mistake.
It is worth pointing out though that NASA employees use imperial units in their everyday lives. Using both systems may have given US scientists and engineers a competitive advantage over European scientists and engineers.
That burn was out of this world
When I'm reading through dates, January gives me a hell of a lot more information than "the fifteenth"
Then use ISO and start with the year, which gives you even more information.
Not necessarily. I work outdoors, the month gives extremely important seasonal context. "A July" tells more than "1985"... although realistically I need both for any conceivable purpose.
Also, to be honest, reading dates is not a difficult process. It takes less than a second regardless of whether it starts with a month, a day, or a year. It's not worth to use that as the basis of discussion. Imo, having the numbers be logically sorted from biggest to smallest unit (or reverse) is worth it just to avoid the confusion.
Maybe someday a metric country will take 13th place for walking on the moon
Guess which system NASA uses
I refuse
Chuckled at this. Well done
Pre- or post- Mars orbiter?
Well they did for the moon landing, and have as a policy since 1979.
I didn't know about why that orbiter failed though, pretty funny!
The orbiter failed because while NASA used metric, the contractor (Lockheed Martin, I believe?) used imperial for one system and no one caught their mistake.
It is worth pointing out though that NASA employees use imperial units in their everyday lives. Using both systems may have given US scientists and engineers a competitive advantage over European scientists and engineers.
That burn was out of this world
When I'm reading through dates, January gives me a hell of a lot more information than "the fifteenth"
Then use ISO and start with the year, which gives you even more information.
Not necessarily. I work outdoors, the month gives extremely important seasonal context. "A July" tells more than "1985"... although realistically I need both for any conceivable purpose.
Also, to be honest, reading dates is not a difficult process. It takes less than a second regardless of whether it starts with a month, a day, or a year. It's not worth to use that as the basis of discussion. Imo, having the numbers be logically sorted from biggest to smallest unit (or reverse) is worth it just to avoid the confusion.