NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: The mil as a unit of angle.
From: Richard M Pisko
Date: 2003 Mar 13, 12:07 -0700
From: Richard M Pisko
Date: 2003 Mar 13, 12:07 -0700
Back before the dawn of time (on Wed, 12 Mar 2003 09:25:00 +0000, to be exact), Robert Enowrote: >I still have an old "mil" compass from my very short-lived career in the >army. Never could wrap my head around those units of measure. > One "advantage" is that the old points on a compass rose can be matched to even numbers on the US mil system. For example: 0 is North and 1600 is East. 800 is NE. 400 is NNE. 200 is N by E. 300 would be NE by N, I think. I have no idea what would correspond to 100mils. >I've read >about all kinds of efforts to replace the sexigesimal system for reckoning >angles (as well as the quirky system that we use for reckoning the passage >of time) and it appears, much to my delight, that these efforts have >failed miserably. The sexigesimal system is here to stay. > Maybe as long as the earth still has (roughly) 360 days in a year? But the Guinea, Shilling, Farthing, Sixpence and half-penny have not thrived. The pound, ounce and grain are mostly limited to the USA, I believe, and to historians. Measurements such as the chain, furlong and acre are simply related, were quite useful, but are fading left-overs from very old English usage. Those failed French "decimalized" pocket watches from just after their Revolution are quite valuable, I have been told. I wouldn't mind having a working replica, and making some appointments according to that system. :-) -- Richard ...