• Not a lawyer (unregistered) in reply to bstorer
    bstorer:
    The AU is commonly used within astronomy, and the litre is a common holdover from older metric systems.

    I don't have the time to check the facts, but a litre measures volume and is defined as 1dm^3 (one cubic decimeter).

    1kg = 1 litre of water = 1dm^3

    Elegant?

  • anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Not a lawyer
    Not a lawyer:
    So if you measure the distance between cities, you say 20 miles and not 200km. If you're American you are stuck with using miles for most large distances.

    I have no idea why we are discusing this AGAIN. The meter system is rational, and soo much better than anything else looks medieval. Totally pre-S.XX.

    But.. I dont care. If some people use these old system, resulting on uneficient work. More work for me! So, I am happy the way is. Except when a spaceship crash or something.

  • Maxime (unregistered) in reply to TheRealBill

    Quote: And metric proponents want to call Imperial or US Units arbitrary. Eghads, at least "a foot" makes sense, and is estimable by anyone who has seen feet. Even if they don't know the exact distance, they can get a feel for the distance.

    Actually the strength and the un-arbitrariness of the metric system is that it is decimal based (factor 10). From kilometer to meter to micron there are only factor of 10. Same for volume or surface. What make the imperial unit system so arbitrary is that it is not decimal based in conversion.

    From what the meter comes from as measurement does not matter at all, as long as other unit can consistently be derived from a single unit (meter) through a few zero appended or taken off. Same for surface and volume.

    No so much with gallon, inches, yard, and whatever else.

  • Alan (unregistered) in reply to TheRealBill
    TheRealBill:
    Capttcha: Alarm:
    bstorer:
    For all my fellow Americans

    8 meters = 0.00143988481 leagues

    The US system is probably the largest WTF mentioned. The real WTF is that people still use it...

    I'd wager that 99% of the people in the US don't know what a furlough is, nor a league (though they may know something could be 20,000 leagues under the sea)

    They might think something could be 20,000 leagues under the sea, but if you look at what a league is, they are wrong. What is possible is to travel for 20,000 leagues under the sea.

  • robert (unregistered)

    8 Meters of documentation... Lest see how many pages this is. So i measured a 500page pack of paper to be 5cm thick, for the mentioned thick paper, lets say 6cm.

    So there would be 8333 pages in one meter, or 66666 pages in 8 meters. Well, minus binding and packing, lets say 50k pages.

  • Tah taa! (unregistered) in reply to EvanED
    EvanED:
    freelancer (paraphrased):
    I live in Sweden and I am NOT a commie!

    Does... not... compute...

    (Sorry, I kid. Sweden's very nice. I had an unexpected afternoon in Stockholm last summer when my flight back to the US was canceled.)

    Oh, summer. Yeah, thats a nice time. All the nice boobies are out at that time. ;) And the weather is almost trustworthy enught to not bring an umbrella. ;)

  • (cs) in reply to Tim
    Tim:
    8 meters is, what, a couple thousand bucks' worth of paper? Still probably hundreds of thousands cheaper than a no-bid contract with an established defense contractor.

    actually it's $72 worth of paper. you can buy a three-inch packet of cheap laser paper for $2, and that's not even at bulk prices.

  • LB (unregistered) in reply to BitTwiddler
    BitTwiddler:
    I didn't know there was a difference [between socialists and liberals] ;-)

    Liberals in Europe (the UK isn't Europe) tend to be right-wingers. American, meet the world.

  • Tah taa! (unregistered) in reply to TheRealBill
    TheRealBill:
    Critter:
    THE REAL WTF here is.. they used meters. We all know ONLY COMMUNISTS USE THE METRIC SYSTEM BY CHOICE!! And communists == enemy to america.

    You're an idiot.

    The US Military uses the metric system. I have a feeling that they would take exception to being tagged communist.

    The CIA? Yep, metric.

    NASA? Metric. In fact, they lost at least one craft in the past as a result of an error that wouldn't have happened if they had been metric at that time.

    Are Canadians communists? Nope.

    Mexicans? Nope.

    Drug dealers? Hell, no. They are capitalists to the point of absurdity.

    As I said, you're an idiot.

    re: NASA. Not accurate. They use both metric and SAE, still do. The incident you referred could also be stated that had they used SAE thought there would not have been an incident. The problem was not the use or non-use of metric for measurement, it was the improper input of data values. Yeah, human error. An error that a program could have checked but did not.

    By your argument here we could say the Soviets were failing to make successful moon landing attempts due to using metric, because clearly the US using SAE made it just fine. It would be equal WTFery.

    Furthermore, the Canadians, Europeans, Russians, British, etc. also use SAE. It's called Minutes, Seconds, Hours, Days, months, Years. Yup, time is not metricated. How about degrees of an angle? Yup, more non-Metric.

    Switching back and forth isn't that bad, I do it daily. No more than using more than a single programming language as best fits the situation.

    And actually, drug dealers are not capitalist. They are fascists. If you ever were to examine how they run things you would find that out real quick. Further, word has it many have been supporting politicians that want to keep their product illegal. Just because someone sells a service or product at large margins does not make them capitalist or "capitalists to the point of absurdity". Opportunists, perhaps. But not necessarily capitalists.

    The OP was being sarcastic, and you missed it. Then in reply you made some idiotic comments, whist calling the OP an idiot.

    It seems the real WTFs have moved from the stories to the comments

    Soviet made it into space before US: ;)

  • Tah taa! (unregistered) in reply to majiknet
    majiknet:
    UK Pints < US Pints UK Gallons < US Gallons

    Note: That's because the US takes everything and tries to make it bigger!!!

    And another interresting thing is, the swedish pint is also larger than the imperial, the swedish horsepower is larger than the american, and our foot is larger than your stoo, but, we havent used those at all since the introduction of the metric system to the world.

    The largest reason there ever were to not use the imperial measurements is that they were not the same, and they had pretty much as many versions as countries that were players on the political table.

  • GreyWolf (unregistered)

    1 milliHelen = amount of beauty required to launch one ship.

  • Will G (unregistered)

    There might have been a mistranslation because the sheer mechanics of a cotinues 8 meter shelf are mind boggling. It was probably a unit that had 4 shevles 2 meters long.

  • Canuck (unregistered) in reply to BitTwiddler
    freelancer:

    Second, last year our socialist government was replaced by a liberal government, so no, we don't have a socialist government.

    BitTwiddler: I didn't know there was a difference ;-)

    There is a big one, because "liberal" has meant lately "gung-ho corporatist" in many parts of the world :-P

  • Will G (unregistered) in reply to Will G
    Will G:
    There might have been a mistranslation because the sheer mechanics of a cotinues 8 meter shelf are mind boggling. It was probably a unit that had 4 shelves 2 meters long.

    I meant continuous

    Curse You Google Spell Check!

  • Communist (unregistered) in reply to ZergMortron
    ZergMortron:
    THE REAL WTF here is.. they used meters. We all know ONLY COMMUNISTS USE THE METRIC SYSTEM BY CHOICE!! And communists == enemy to america.

    Only morons does not know that in Europe everybody are using metric system.

  • Rich (unregistered) in reply to Tah taa!
    Tah taa!:
    And another interresting thing is, the swedish pint is also larger than the imperial, the swedish horsepower is larger than the american, and our foot is larger than your stoo,

    How long is a stoo?

    Rich

  • (cs)

    Okay, I have to give credit to the "metric == communism" poster. I never thought in a million years that anybody would fall for that sort of obvious trollbait, but man, you just showed us all how it's done. Bravo.

    The rest of you, you're too gullible. :P

  • (cs) in reply to Thief^
    Thief^:
    webhamster:
    Maybe someone can answer this for me...why isn't a "double quarter-pounder" called a "half-pounder"? I once confused the hell out of a poor countergirl at McDonald's with that question.

    "Because it's a double quarter pound of meat, not a half pound." I kid you not. That was her reply.

    I've worked there, but that's irrelevant as the answer is obvious. Yes she was stupid, but in a round-about way she was also right. It's because it is made from two 1/4lb patties and not one 1/2lb patty. The fact that two 1/4lbs is 1/2lb is irrelevant. In fact I bet you anything that they are measuring the uncooked weight, and that a single 1/2lb piece of meat actually weighs a different amount after being cooked than two 1/4lb pieces.

    Or at least that's the only answer I can think of.

    I thank god I no longer work there, I could honestly feel my intelligence draining out while I did...

    I know. I was in a pissy mood that day and needed to screw with someone without seeming to be mean. It was good for a few free minutes of entertainment.

  • captcha: ewww ??? (unregistered) in reply to akatherder
    akatherder:
    The metric system won't catch on in the US because it's either too specific or too "big" for how we use measurements verbally.

    Hey, where do you want this? a. Oh, set it 1/3m to 2/3m away from the wall. b. About 33-66 cm from the wall. c. Just put it a foot or two from the wall.

    Do people really use decimeter that frequently?

    They taught us the metric system in elementary school, but the only conversion we ever cared about was how to get to feet or inches.

    In europe we'd say... "Oh, put it about half a meter from the wall"

    of course in germany it would be put exactly 500mm from the wall, In Italy it could be anywhere from right next to the wall too the other side of the room, and in france, well their not going to let some foreigner tell them where to put it so it wont be there at all.... :)

    of course

  • (cs)

    Id like to point out that one thing this 8 meters of documentation rule seemed to achieve was forcing them to print everything including the source code, etc.

    What it forced to happen may have been what the rule was supposed to achieve - everything is archived

  • (cs) in reply to chrismcb
    chrismcb:
    akatherder:
    Teh dayli WFT:
    Hey, where do you want this? a. Oh, set it 1/3 foot to 2/3 foot away from the wall. b. About 10-20 cm from the wall. c. Just put it a decimeter or two from the wall.

    Rarely have I seen such a retarded argument.

    I was wondering how detailed I needed to be. I guess I can just dumb it down a bit. It is quite common to say half a foot or 6 inches. I guess the fact that it seems a lot easier to break something down into inches because it is broad enough that you don't sound like an anal retentive loon.

    If you're speaking in unspecific terms, you can describe where to put something within 6 inches without it sounding awkward. With the metric system you would need to say a fraction of a meter or very specific measurement in cm or make very liberal use of the decimeter.

    As I said, it's the verbal conversion that Americans just can't stomach. If you don't live here, you might not get it.

    You know I "live here" and I don't get it. How is 6 inches any more/less precises than 10 centimeters?

    So your whole argument is the English System is better because feet is smaller than a meter? And yet a mile is much bigger than a kilometer...

    I specifically didn't say that the English system is better. I actually prefer metric because it's a easier to convert in a tens-based system. Once we get that bias out of the way, maybe you will read what I am writing instead of making a judgment based on spite, mmm k?

    When you are speaking in cm, the measurement is more precise by design because a cm is smaller than an inch. Right? When you are speaking (VERBAL communication), it sounds anal retentive to specify something to a centimeter. So you are left splitting a a meter up into thirds, quarters, etc. I am talking about the normal every day layman who just wants to give you a very simple rough idea of a distance. I'm not talking about a laboratory where accuracy matters. It's very hard for Americans to get used to saying 3 decimeters, 1/3 of a meter, or 30 cm instead of one foot. Half a foot, a foot, a foot and a half, two feet... these are all very common, easy, and well understood descriptions that cover anything in every day life. You rarely need to be more specific than that.

  • Diego (unregistered) in reply to ZergMortron

    wrong.

  • Jag (unregistered)

    It's a paper trail ... wtf do you want?

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to akatherder
    akatherder:
    chrismcb:
    akatherder:
    Teh dayli WFT:
    Hey, where do you want this? a. Oh, set it 1/3 foot to 2/3 foot away from the wall. b. About 10-20 cm from the wall. c. Just put it a decimeter or two from the wall.

    Rarely have I seen such a retarded argument.

    I was wondering how detailed I needed to be. I guess I can just dumb it down a bit. It is quite common to say half a foot or 6 inches. I guess the fact that it seems a lot easier to break something down into inches because it is broad enough that you don't sound like an anal retentive loon.

    If you're speaking in unspecific terms, you can describe where to put something within 6 inches without it sounding awkward. With the metric system you would need to say a fraction of a meter or very specific measurement in cm or make very liberal use of the decimeter.

    As I said, it's the verbal conversion that Americans just can't stomach. If you don't live here, you might not get it.

    You know I "live here" and I don't get it. How is 6 inches any more/less precises than 10 centimeters?

    So your whole argument is the English System is better because feet is smaller than a meter? And yet a mile is much bigger than a kilometer...

    I specifically didn't say that the English system is better. I actually prefer metric because it's a easier to convert in a tens-based system. Once we get that bias out of the way, maybe you will read what I am writing instead of making a judgment based on spite, mmm k?

    When you are speaking in cm, the measurement is more precise by design because a cm is smaller than an inch. Right? When you are speaking (VERBAL communication), it sounds anal retentive to specify something to a centimeter. So you are left splitting a a meter up into thirds, quarters, etc. I am talking about the normal every day layman who just wants to give you a very simple rough idea of a distance. I'm not talking about a laboratory where accuracy matters. It's very hard for Americans to get used to saying 3 decimeters, 1/3 of a meter, or 30 cm instead of one foot. Half a foot, a foot, a foot and a half, two feet... these are all very common, easy, and well understood descriptions that cover anything in every day life. You rarely need to be more specific than that.

    You see, that's another American oddity. Nowhere in the world have I seen fractions used so often. IIRC, even stock quotes used to be in fractions of a dollar instead of cents. In the rest of the world people are used to speak in 1/10ths exclusively - i.e. 30 cm instead of 1/3 of a meter and 500 m instead of half a kilometer.

  • JohnB (unregistered) in reply to bstorer
    bstorer:
    For all my fellow Americans

    8 meters = 314.96063 inches, or 26.2467192 feet, or 8.74890639 yards, or 0.0397677563 furlongs, or 0.00497096954 miles, or 1.59071025 rods, or 4.37445319 fathoms, or 0.00143988481 leagues, or 78.7401575 hands

    Hope that clears things up.

    You missed: 0.397677563 chains

    For those few who didn't know this, in the Google search box you can type "how many inches in 3 meters" and get the answer from Google's calculator. In fact, it handles all sorts of conversions.

    But it didn't handle chains (had to do the math myself).

    Captcha: Howdy (I had to Doody it myself!)

  • This is nothing... really... (unregistered) in reply to Diamonds
    Diamonds:
    George Jansen:
    A couple of the details seem odd. Your basic retired general mid 1990s would have had his prime flying years in during the Cold War. The Russians shot down the odd US reconaissance plane and may have for all I recall mixed it up with US planes in Korea, but "vast experience in aerial warfare"? Aerial warfare training, perhaps. And the rest of the Warsaw Pact got out and about even less.

    Also the notion of illustrating 8 meters of documentation by spreading his arms. I can manage something under a two-meter stretch. I don't say he didn't offer 2 for 8, but it sounds odd.

    The Real WTF (TM) is this thought process:

    • A retired General in 1990 would have flown during the cold war. (good so far)
    • The Soviet Union had only a few air engagements with the US during the cold war. (starts to fall apart)
    • Therefore, because the Soviet Union only had battles with the USA... he must have either been in Korea or training his whole carrier. (worse than failure)

    A good starting for a Ex-Soviet retired general's combat experience is not going to be the USA...

    Some folks don't know about the Soviet/Afganistan business.

  • Ben Baril (unregistered) in reply to Ken
    Ken:
    In Soviet Russia, flight simulator software documents YOU.

    I was just WAITING for someone to write this. You, my friend, have won the internet for today.

    (Captcha: Bathe...hmmm, is WTF trying to tell me something?)

  • Jno (unregistered) in reply to freelancer
    freelancer:
    Seraph:
    Will:
    Gedoon:
    FYI the rest of the fucking world uses metric system! It's just the stupid rednecks called the US of A who refuse to convert.
    Doesn't the UK measure highway distances in miles? And beer in pints?
    This brings up another measurement WTF: UK (Imperial) pints are not the same as US pints.
    Interesting point there. NASA actually lost a Mars orbiter back in '99 because the UK team working on it used English miles, while NASA used US miles. More about it here: http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/
    From the Mars Climate Orbiter Mishap Investigation Report:
    "Specifically, thruster performance data in English units instead of metric units was used in the software application code titled SM_FORCES (small forces). The output from the SM_FORCES application code as required by a MSOP Project Software Interface Specification (SIS) was to be in metric units of Newton-seconds (N-s). Instead, the data was reported in English units of pound-seconds (lbf-s)."
    AFAIK, both the USA and the UK use statute miles (when appropriate) of 1760 feet (1609 metres).
  • (cs) in reply to webhamster
    webhamster:
    Curtis:
    Canada uses the Metric system exclusively.

    Well, not really. I'm five-nine and a-hundred-and-ninety pounds. I eat quarter-pounders and foot-long subs. (Although a "30.5 cm sub" would be awesome.

    Maybe someone can answer this for me...why isn't a "double quarter-pounder" called a "half-pounder"? I once confused the hell out of a poor countergirl at McDonald's with that question.

    "Because it's a double quarter pound of meat, not a half pound." I kid you not. That was her reply.

    Well, technically, it's not a half-pound patty. It's two quarter-pound patties.

  • Sam (unregistered)

    Why aren’t these cockpits being sold commercially? I want one ... now!

    Sam.

  • (cs) in reply to Not a lawyer
    Not a lawyer:
    bstorer:
    The AU is commonly used within astronomy, and the litre is a common holdover from older metric systems.

    I don't have the time to check the facts, but a litre measures volume and is defined as 1dm^3 (one cubic decimeter).

    1kg = 1 litre of water = 1dm^3

    Elegant?

    Yes, but in SI, the approved unit for volume is cubic meters. Don't blame me, I'm just the messenger.

  • cancerous (unregistered) in reply to ZergMortron

    cue admiral ackbar

  • pointer (unregistered) in reply to Tah taa!
    Tah taa!:
    And another interresting thing is, the swedish pint is also larger than the imperial, the swedish horsepower is larger than the american, and our foot is larger than your stoo, but

    But our, ahem stuff ahem, is larger than yours. :P

  • slashbot (unregistered) in reply to Tah taa!
    Tah taa!:
    Soviet made it into space before US: ;)
    Yeah, but they missed the moon. :P
  • lusis (unregistered) in reply to BitTwiddler

    You'd be surprised but I think the US is the only country where we equate liberalism with socialism. Everywhere else in the world where I've read about a "liberal" government, they always refer to the "classic liberal". You know, my kind of people - Reason magazine reading, libertarians ;)

    captcha: digdug (ohhhh time for Mame!)

  • (cs) in reply to Not a lawyer
    bstorer:
    The AU is commonly used within astronomy...
    Not when you're talking interstellar. 1AU is piddly (only 93-and-a-bit million miles). What you need is either ly (light years) or the absolutely wonderful compound imperial measurement of pc (parsec); 1 parsec = parallax of 1 second of arc as determined by the average diameter of the Earth's orbit, around 3.26 light years (a year being normalised to 365 days of 24 hours).

    The length of a cricket pitch is coincidentally 1 chain (of which there are 10 in a furlong). Except that most don't know how long a chain is, but know that a cricket pitch is 22yds long.

    I find it aggravating when someone refers to a person's weight as a multiple of pounds as my 14 times table ain't too hot past 196 (14 stone). Stones and pounds are much easier, hell even cwt (hundredweight) I can deal with easily...

  • Anonymous Coward (unregistered)

    Can you guys read? It is clearly stated that the story took place in a "Post-Communist European country". Russia/CIS is not considered one of those because, first, it is not European, and second, it is not that post-Communist either. Also, Russians would not be converting to domestic jets because they have never used foreign-mades.

    To identify the country you have to think which ones of the former East bloc do have their own production of fighter jets - these include, but may not be limited to, the Czech Republic (part of former Czechoslovakia) and Serbia (part of former Yugoslavia). I'd vote for the Czechs, also because they indeed do have some good game developers, but it could be otherwise.

    About the general it is said that he has "a vast knowledge of aerial warfare and forty years experience in the service". Where do you see "combat experience" in this sentence? Duh!

  • jc (unregistered)

    Hope they used acid free paper....

  • Anymouse (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous Coward

    Obviously they are just hung up on measurements and continue to carry that over into areas that it shouldn't be relevant. The General was obviously used to giving it 'the whole 9 yards' while in combat, and just wanted to make sure that they got the same out of their documentation (8 meters is roughly 9 yards).

    For clarification purposes, the phrase 'the whole nine yards' referred to the length of the ammo belts on early warplanes (not sure which country), and so when a pilot had expended all his ammo on the target, he was said to have 'given it the whole nine yards'.

    What this has to do with software documentation or flight simulators is rather irrelevant, similar to most of the other comments on here.

    captch: bling - what the pilots wore to attract the ladies... gold wings.... bling

  • Stan (unregistered)

    At NASA they say the shuttle doesn't fly until the paperwork is taller than the vehicle.

    I interviewed with a former manager of software development for the Seawolf submarine. He proudly said they had 12 shelf feet of process documentation ... instructions for writing even more documentation. But a submarine probably has more moving parts than a flight simulator. :-)

  • Kev (unregistered) in reply to Will
    Will:
    Belcat:
    Only the US uses such a cumbersome labour-wasting system.

    Doesn't the UK measure highway distances in miles? And beer in pints?

    Nope, we measure roads in meters/km, but then sign them in yards/miles - although 300/200/100 yard countdown boards are often located 100 meters apart and we end up with signs containing values like "546 yds" - which just happens to be "500 mtrs" - that's the real wtf!

    The best is directions given in imperial metric - i.e. Drive down the road for 10 miles, turn left at the Red Lion then in about 400 meters the gate is on the right, heard that one too many times now,

    We buy petrol (gasoline) by the litre but measure it's consumption by the gallon.

    Beer in a pub is by the pint (and illegal to sell in metric measures) but in the supermarket it's by the ml and illegal to sell in pints.

    My gas (the stuff used for heating, cooking etc, not the fuel for you car) meter reading is in cubic feet, but my gas bill is calculated in kWh.

    At school (mid 80s to late 90s) we only used imperial measures in history lessons, and in one maths lesson where we learnt to convert between the two (in basic terms, not exact ones - i.e. 30cm=1foot, 1yard=1meter, 1km=0.6miles, 1lb = 450g)

  • (cs) in reply to Loren Pechtel
    Loren Pechtel:
    Long ago I had a teacher that I drove nuts. He wanted to make sure we actually read over the stuff we were supposed to so we were to turn in our notes. He was expecting something like 10 pages. I turned in 2 or 3 and drove him up the wall because he couldn't find anything wrong with what I did but it was way too short.

    The difference between typed and handwritten didn't occur to him. (This was back before everyone had a computer to do such stuff on.)

    I had a teacher like that too. We would often need to turn in rough drafts of reports, etc. which she expected to be hand written, but I would type them up on my trusty Commodore 64. But in her mind, typing was only suitable for the final copy, probably because she had the typed = typewriter mentality. She couldn't wrap her head around the idea that I could type faster than I could write, or how easy it was to incrementally edit the rought draft into the final copy.

  • Kerin (unregistered) in reply to Communist
    Communist:
    Only morons does not know

    you moron.

  • Anonymous commie (unregistered)

    Well, now I know what I would do if someone asked me for 8 meters of documentation. I would toss out a comment about "US sucks because they don't use metrics" in a fairly popular forum and then print out the resulting discussion.

  • Skip (unregistered) in reply to Jno
    Jno:
    freelancer:
    Interesting point there. NASA actually lost a Mars orbiter back in '99 because the UK team working on it used English miles, while NASA used US miles. More about it here: http://www.cnn.com/TECH/space/9909/30/mars.metric.02/
    From the Mars Climate Orbiter Mishap Investigation Report:
    "Specifically, thruster performance data in English units instead of metric units was used in the software application code titled SM_FORCES (small forces). The output from the SM_FORCES application code as required by a MSOP Project Software Interface Specification (SIS) was to be in metric units of Newton-seconds (N-s). Instead, the data was reported in English units of pound-seconds (lbf-s)."
    AFAIK, both the USA and the UK use statute miles (when appropriate) of 1760 feet (1609 metres).

    You mean YARDS, not feet... but in the aerospace industry worldwide the standard is nautical, not statute miles. For space systems in the U.S. (at least satellite systems I worked on) it was all metric because the ECR coordinate system is used and that is in meters. I don't know outside earth's orbit if they still use ECR (I guess they could) but certainly they wouldn't use miles. English units of force may be one thing because engine and torque specs are often given in English units by the manufacturers, but speed and distance in space? Always metric.

  • gl (unregistered) in reply to EvanED
    EvanED:
    He wrote a page and a half of the essay, then wrote out the entire lyrics of the Star Spangled Banner, then completed the essay.

    No comments on the graded work.

    Sorry, but I have to call you on this. Nobody actually knows all four verses to the star-spangled bannner, only the first verse that they play at baseball games.

  • tyc (unregistered)

    I hope they, the games company, at least put in an easter egg that turns flight simulator from "serious flight training" mode into games mode!

  • vern (unregistered) in reply to gl
    gl:
    Sorry, but I have to call you on this. Nobody actually knows all four verses to the star-spangled bannner, only the first verse that they play at baseball games.
    I have to call you on this. While I don't know all 4 verses, I certainly know more than the first (3 actually: 1st, 2nd, and 4th).
  • (cs) in reply to cklam
    cklam:
    Who the wet flying fart cares ... and it's moron, not maroon.
    He's quoting Bugs Bunny, you maroon.

    If somebody's already pointed this out, I apologize. I'm reading through the posts and there are a lot to go... I didn't want to finish reading first and then come back to try to find this one to quote it.

  • (cs) in reply to Not a lawyer
    Not a lawyer:
    If you're American you are stuck with using miles for most large distances.
    In Texas, we don't measure distance in miles. It goes like this:

    Joe Schmoe: How far is your drive to work? Joe Bloe: About 35 minutes.

Leave a comment on “Very, Very Well Documented”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article