Most people aged below 40 have no idea how many inches there are in a foot though.
Personally I think of small distances in metric but longer distances in miles...
"Most people aged below 40 have no idea how many inches there are in a foot though."
Bollocks. Very few British people measure their heights in metric, even the under 25s (never mind the under 40s!).
A law known as the "Composition of Yards and Perches" (Latin: Compositio ulnarum et perticarum) was enacted some time between 1266 and 1303.
It redefined the yard, foot, inch, and barleycorn to 10⁄11 of their previous value. Thus, the rod went from 5 old yards to 5 1⁄2 new yards, or 15 old feet to 16 1⁄2 new feet. The furlong went from 600 old feet (200 old yards) to 660 new feet (220 new yards). The acre went from 36,000 old square feet to 43,560 new square feet.
Gives us back our lost 1/11 of a rod, furlong and acre is what I say.
Without Googling or using a calculator, due to my childhood interest in WW1 and WW2 battleships, and their main gun armament, I can tell you:
3 inches = 76 mm (eg. WW2 US destroyer escorts) 4 inches = 102 mm (eg. most WW1 RN destroyers) 4.7 inches = 120 mm (eg. most WW2 RN destroyers) 5 inches = 127 mm (eg. WW2 US and German destroyers) 5.5 inches = 140 mm (eg. WW2 French large destroyers) 6 inches = 152 mm (eg. almost all light cruisers worldwide) 8 inches = 203 mm (eg. almost all heavy cruisers worldwide) 9.2 inches = 234 mm (eg. WW1 RN armoured cruisers) 11 inches = 279 mm (eg. most WW1 and some WW2 German battleships 12 inches = 305 mm (eg. most early dreadnoughts (WW1 era)) 13 inches = 330 mm (eg. WW2 French battleships Strasbourg and Dunkerque) 14 inches = 356 mm (eg. WW2 RN battleships of the Duke of York class) 15 inches = 381 mm (eg. RN Warspite class, Vanguard and Hood) 16 inches = 406 mm (eg. RN Nelson class battleships) 18 inches = 457 mm (eg. Japanese Yamato class)
Decimalisation was first proposed in the 1830s. That's why Britain ended up with two coins of such similar value: the florin and half-crown.
It eventually took place two years before Britain joined the EEC.
The florin and the half-crown came out of 19th century plan for decimalisation? Is that really true? Could you perhaps provide a source?
One of the advantages of the old currency is that one could do most common fractions of a pound quickly in your head and their were the coins available to turn that into a reality. One third of a pound 6s 8d; two thirds was 13s 6d, a quarter 5s, and eighth 2s 6d (a half crown) and so on. I never quite understood the guinea though (£1 1s for our younger readers who may be unfamiliar with the term) .
From a mathematical perspective, every child from about the age of five or six was taught to do calculations in base 12 (pennies per shilling), base 20 (shillings per pound) and decimal (pounds) in their head and we were all very proficient at it. Marvellous mental mathematical agility training. I do wonder if the UK's decline down the mathematical proficiency tables didn't start with the decimalisation of our currency.
Actually the florin was the equal of a two shilling piece.
Amusing, but all this talk is of the Tory Party still being in power. As things stand, there are at least 30 constituencies where the police are investigating election expenses, which if found to be true will cause new elections to be called, and the imprisonment of the ex-mp's. There are several other investigations under way which also have the potential to cause Tory MP's to be disqualified.
Interesting, the tories have a majority of 18 just now, which if they lose 35 means they need a coalition partner. The SNP may be tempted, but officially getting into bed with the tories, even on a c&s would be electoral disaster at the locals next year also causing mass disengagement within the membership. Anyone else who would want to commit electoral suicide?
Think you will find all parties including the SNP's helicopter will be drawn into this. Also recent legal opinion is that if proven there would be a big fine but no action on MP's. Sorry to disappoint you
The Tories are clearly seriously worried that the election inThanet South may be declared void. I would expect Farage to easily win any by-election that is caused - cutting the Tory majority to 10.
Decimalisation was first proposed in the 1830s. That's why Britain ended up with two coins of such similar value: the florin and half-crown.
It eventually took place two years before Britain joined the EEC.
The florin and the half-crown came out of 19th century plan for decimalisation? Is that really true? Could you perhaps provide a source?
One of the advantages of the old currency is that one could do most common fractions of a pound quickly in your head and their were the coins available to turn that into a reality. One third of a pound 6s 8d; two thirds was 13s 6d, a quarter 5s, and eighth 2s 6d (a half crown) and so on. I never quite understood the guinea though (£1 1s for our younger readers who may be unfamiliar with the term) .
From a mathematical perspective, every child from about the age of five or six was taught to do calculations in base 12 (pennies per shilling), base 20 (shillings per pound) and decimal (pounds) in their head and we were all very proficient at it. Marvellous mental mathematical agility training. I do wonder if the UK's decline down the mathematical proficiency tables didn't start with the decimalisation of our currency.
Leave supporters will no doubt be claiming that the EU funds the magazine in some way or other.
No - but you look at the assumptions.
"We assume that the UK would gain restrictions on free movement of labour and smaller contributions to the EU budget while retaining access to the EU's market for goods, but face new and prohibitive barriers to trade in services. "
And why should we still be contributing to the EU budget - does America?
Norway, Switzerland, and Iceland (the EFTA countries) do contribute, albeit to a much smaller extent than we do. Canada, the US and Mexico pay fees for the upkeep of NAFTA.
But the question is - how much do they pay, relative to the UK's contribution to Brussels?
They pay far, far less of course. The point I was making is that those who say we should pay absolutely nothing are being excessively optimistic.
Leave supporters will no doubt be claiming that the EU funds the magazine in some way or other.
No - but you look at the assumptions.
"We assume that the UK would gain restrictions on free movement of labour and smaller contributions to the EU budget while retaining access to the EU's market for goods, but face new and prohibitive barriers to trade in services. "
And why should we still be contributing to the EU budget - does America?
Norway, Switzerland, and Iceland (the EFTA countries) do contribute, albeit to a much smaller extent than we do. Canada, the US and Mexico pay fees for the upkeep of NAFTA.
But the question is - how much do they pay, relative to the UK's contribution to Brussels?
AFAIK (and approximately) about 0.16% of GDP compared to 0.47% for the UK
@Casino_Royale Do you think it would reasonable and generous to impose a points system for migration and then be outraged when countries affected suggest that they might do the same in return?
Candidly, I believe that Leavers are being utterly delusional about how the renegotiation would be carried out. They seem to believe that they can get everything they want pain-free without making any concessions on points of concern on the other side and that it will all be tickety boo in a week or two once it's blown over because that would be "better". To me that sounds barking mad.
They have a delusional idea of the esteem the UK is held in by the rest of Europe. It is respected as are many of the countries in the EU but not more than.
I'm starting to get the very uneasy feeling that this referendum is being decided by the old the very old and the Colonel Blimps and few of them will be around to face the lasting consequences.
I suppose most Leavers don't expect the calamities of Brexit to penetrate their nursing homes. I'm all right Jack seems to be the attitude. However, a lot of carers in these places are from Spain or Portugal. They'd better hope such people get past the point-system firewall. Otherwise the fees are going to sky rocket.
It is extraordinary that we're allowing our freedoms to trade to be summarily taken from us by people who are completely unaffected. It's like giving the public a vote on an oil tanker driver's strike at BP.
Well this is the core – and critical – problem with referendums, is it not? Another reason why this blasted Euro poll shouldn't ever have been allowed to happen. People with little information, and no skin in the game, are allowed to decide the futures and livelihoods of those of us who work in a globalised city with European customers, and whose businesses would be sorely, possibly critically, damaged by a result of their self-serving isolationism.
What a pompous ass you are. I live and work in London for a company that trades globally and speak 2 European languages.
@Casino_Royale Do you think it would reasonable and generous to impose a points system for migration and then be outraged when countries affected suggest that they might do the same in return?
Candidly, I believe that Leavers are being utterly delusional about how the renegotiation would be carried out. They seem to believe that they can get everything they want pain-free without making any concessions on points of concern on the other side and that it will all be tickety boo in a week or two once it's blown over because that would be "better". To me that sounds barking mad.
I'd have no problem with countries doing the same in return.
I think it's entirely reasonable.
Me too. I don't particularly want British citizens to be a drain on the welfare systems of other nations. That said, I don't think that's really the situation. The Costas expat situation is always raised - so far as we can discern the financial arrangements there are satisfactory for Spain, or we'd hear a lot more about it very quickly.
I have been wondering about the possibilities of England strongly Leave whilst Wales, Scotland, NI, Gibraltar all strongly Remain.
If, as has been suggested, the Scots wish to hold another Independence referendum as a result, would it not be much simpler if England simply seceded from the UK, leaving rUK in situ as a member of the EU?
Would Wales, Scotland, NI and Gibraltar join NATO and build their own armed forces?
The Royal Gibraltar Regiment already serves alongside the UK army in conflict zones. www.royalgibraltarregiment.gi/
Without Googling or using a calculator, due to my childhood interest in WW1 and WW2 battleships, and their main gun armament, I can tell you:
3 inches = 76 mm (eg. WW2 US destroyer escorts) 4 inches = 102 mm (eg. most WW1 RN destroyers) 4.7 inches = 120 mm (eg. most WW2 RN destroyers) 5 inches = 127 mm (eg. WW2 US and German destroyers) 5.5 inches = 140 mm (eg. WW2 French large destroyers) 6 inches = 152 mm (eg. almost all light cruisers worldwide) 8 inches = 203 mm (eg. almost all heavy cruisers worldwide) 9.2 inches = 234 mm (eg. WW1 RN armoured cruisers) 11 inches = 279 mm (eg. most WW1 and some WW2 German battleships 12 inches = 305 mm (eg. most early dreadnoughts (WW1 era)) 13 inches = 330 mm (eg. WW2 French battleships Strasbourg and Dunkerque) 14 inches = 356 mm (eg. WW2 RN battleships of the Duke of York class) 15 inches = 381 mm (eg. RN Warspite class, Vanguard and Hood) 16 inches = 406 mm (eg. RN Nelson class battleships) 18 inches = 457 mm (eg. Japanese Yamato class)
I thought Yamato Class were 18.1 inches, as they were slightly larger than the 18 inch guns - then the largest to date - which were built for the late WW1 RN battleships, but actually used in the end on monitor bombardment vessels.
Comments
Personally I think of small distances in metric but longer distances in miles...
"Most people aged below 40 have no idea how many inches there are in a foot though."
Bollocks. Very few British people measure their heights in metric, even the under 25s (never mind the under 40s!).
A law known as the "Composition of Yards and Perches" (Latin: Compositio ulnarum et perticarum) was enacted some time between 1266 and 1303.
It redefined the yard, foot, inch, and barleycorn to 10⁄11 of their previous value. Thus, the rod went from 5 old yards to 5 1⁄2 new yards, or 15 old feet to 16 1⁄2 new feet. The furlong went from 600 old feet (200 old yards) to 660 new feet (220 new yards). The acre went from 36,000 old square feet to 43,560 new square feet.
Gives us back our lost 1/11 of a rod, furlong and acre is what I say.
3 inches = 76 mm (eg. WW2 US destroyer escorts)
4 inches = 102 mm (eg. most WW1 RN destroyers)
4.7 inches = 120 mm (eg. most WW2 RN destroyers)
5 inches = 127 mm (eg. WW2 US and German destroyers)
5.5 inches = 140 mm (eg. WW2 French large destroyers)
6 inches = 152 mm (eg. almost all light cruisers worldwide)
8 inches = 203 mm (eg. almost all heavy cruisers worldwide)
9.2 inches = 234 mm (eg. WW1 RN armoured cruisers)
11 inches = 279 mm (eg. most WW1 and some WW2 German battleships
12 inches = 305 mm (eg. most early dreadnoughts (WW1 era))
13 inches = 330 mm (eg. WW2 French battleships Strasbourg and Dunkerque)
14 inches = 356 mm (eg. WW2 RN battleships of the Duke of York class)
15 inches = 381 mm (eg. RN Warspite class, Vanguard and Hood)
16 inches = 406 mm (eg. RN Nelson class battleships)
18 inches = 457 mm (eg. Japanese Yamato class)
I'm voting Leave.
www.royalgibraltarregiment.gi/
:-D