Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Cavalry Corp
Posts: 4070
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 5:28 pm
Location: Sampford Spiney Devon UK

Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by Cavalry Corp »

It would have been nice if weapons were listed in imperial or metric but not both ??

For me ( 46yrs ) imperial means more I suppose ...
sfbaytf
Posts: 1374
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 9:54 pm

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by sfbaytf »

I never got use to the metric system and still prefer inches, feet and Fahrenheit. I don't know what the crazy rest of the world is thinking. Then again they call soccer football.
mariandavid
Posts: 300
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 5:05 pm

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by mariandavid »

Alas I am the opposite - I much prefer it when the historical designations are used - even as far as using 8.8cm rather than 88mm, let alone 3.45 inches (???) or whatever!!
sfbaytf
Posts: 1374
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 9:54 pm

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by sfbaytf »

It can get confusing. The Navy usually uses inches while the Army uses mm for it's guns/cannons.
User avatar
Terminus
Posts: 39781
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Denmark

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by Terminus »

We did what we did for the sake of historical accuracy.
We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.
User avatar
Grfin Zeppelin
Posts: 1514
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:22 pm
Location: Germany

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by Grfin Zeppelin »

If a ship of mine gets hit by a uh 5 whatever inch gun I always ponder if thats bad or not o.O

Image
SpankyMcFlych
Posts: 10
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 3:25 am

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by SpankyMcFlych »

haha, I'm in the enviable position I suppose of knowing both. Born in Canada after the switch, but with parents who still used imperial. I'm 6' tall (well... 5'11" really, it just sounds better rounded off), zomg! I'm also 180cm tall heh.

I much prefer having the weapons listed in their historical measurement. Hearing the main guns on some battleship called 16 inchers is a lot more meaningful to me then hearing them called 406mm. and hearing the 40mm Bofors aa guns, or the 20mm Oerlikon aa listed in millimeters just means I recognize they're non US designs. 5inch guns are generic 5inch guns. Small caliber ship guns, only capable of damaging light targets generally. If they were listed as 127mm guns I'd have to scratch my head to figure out what they are.

It's like an additional layer of info. Some guns are just normally imperial measurements, and others are normally metric, and you can get a better idea of the guns use and history by which is used.

This confusion wouldn't exist if ya'll in the USA would make the switch like most of the rest of the world has lol :p
User avatar
PresterJohn001
Posts: 382
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 6:45 pm

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by PresterJohn001 »

and don't forget the british army designations 18 pounders etc

Personally i prefer the historical designations, i have a fair idea what the guns do. Having to convert from metric to to Imperial inches for the main gun sizes on my ships is unwanted work, and i don't even bother with the smaller stuff. Still Yamato 18 inches, feel em AFB!


I demand change and i demand it now ;p
(joke btw)

memento mori
User avatar
Nomad
Posts: 7273
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2001 8:00 am
Location: West Yellowstone, Montana

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by Nomad »

Are you trying to tell me that 36 is smaller than 16?? [X(]
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by witpqs »

ORIGINAL: Nomad

Are you trying to tell me that 36 is smaller than 16?? [X(]

So you sound like you just might not know how they get the measurements for shotguns like 12 gauge and 10 gauge? [:D]
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: SpankyMcFlych


This confusion wouldn't exist if ya'll in the USA would make the switch like most of the rest of the world has lol :p

We already did. Nobody here calls them "Imperial" measurements. Just, normal, everyday inches, feet and pounds. [:)]
The Moose
usersatch
Posts: 400
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 6:39 pm

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by usersatch »

English or metric--the bigger the number, the worse it is to be on the receiving end.
User avatar
Blackhorse
Posts: 1415
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Eastern US

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by Blackhorse »

ORIGINAL: SpankyMcFlych
I much prefer having the weapons listed in their historical measurement. Hearing the main guns on some battleship called 16 inchers is a lot more meaningful to me then hearing them called 406mm. and hearing the 40mm Bofors aa guns, or the 20mm Oerlikon aa listed in millimeters just means I recognize they're non US designs. . . This confusion wouldn't exist if ya'll in the USA would make the switch like most of the rest of the world has lol :p

Hey, we (U.S. of) Americans are multi-metric! . . . 81mm mortars; 105mm and 155mm Artillery; and 90mm tank / anti-tank and/or anti-aircraft guns, &tc, were all U.S. designs in WW II.

WitP-AE -- US LCU & AI Stuff

Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
Moriarty: Crap!
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: SpankyMcFlych
This confusion wouldn't exist if ya'll in the USA would make the switch like most of the rest of the world has lol :p

Nah...we're waiting for the rest of you to realize your mistake and come back to inches, feet and pounds. [:D][:D][:D]
User avatar
witpqs
Posts: 26376
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 7:48 pm
Location: Argleton

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by witpqs »

Well, Mike - maybe they should study first:

[:D]



Image
Attachments
TableofL..Measures.jpg
TableofL..Measures.jpg (173.21 KiB) Viewed 157 times
User avatar
freeboy
Posts: 8969
Joined: Sun May 16, 2004 9:33 am
Location: Colorado

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by freeboy »

36 is smaller than the lower numbers in some things, sum things? lol
take cables for instance.. doh, was that a sucker?
I am with mr T on this one, the world used both mm and inches in the discription, so I would feel it odd if you translated the 16 inch guns on some BB to a MM rating, or a 88 75 or other art peice into inches..its just the way we are used to them from the historical record..
 
"Tanks forward"
User avatar
gladiatt
Posts: 2578
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 5:19 pm

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by gladiatt »

ORIGINAL: sfbaytf

. I don't know what the crazy rest of the world is thinking. Then again they call soccer football.

Just think of it: foot - ball : play the ball with the feets !! easy to understand, no ??
When i hear of "American football", that mean the ball is not played with the feets but with the hand, so why not call it "handball" ?? (maybe because "handball" already exist )

[;)][:D]
User avatar
Barb
Posts: 2503
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:17 am
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by Barb »

It is easy to calculate: One inch = 25,4mm..
therefore basic weapons:
0.303 inch = 7.7 mm
0.5 inch = 12.7 mm
20mm = 0.787 inch
28mm = 1.1 inch
40mm = 1.57 inch
76mm = 3 inch
18pdr = 84 mm
25pdr = 87 mm
4 inch = 102 mm
4.5 inch = 114 mm
4.7 inch = 120 mm
5 inch = 127 mm
5.5 inch = 139/140 mm
6 inch = 152 mm
8 inch = 203 mm
12 inch = 305 mm
14 inch = 356 mm
15 inch = 381 mm
16 inch = 406 mm
18 inch = 456 mm
Image
User avatar
Dixie
Posts: 10303
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:14 pm
Location: UK

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by Dixie »

ORIGINAL: gladiatt

ORIGINAL: sfbaytf

. I don't know what the crazy rest of the world is thinking. Then again they call soccer football.

Just think of it: foot - ball : play the ball with the feets !! easy to understand, no ??
When i hear of "American football", that mean the ball is not played with the feets but with the hand, so why not call it "handball" ?? (maybe because "handball" already exist )

[;)][:D]

American rugby...[:D]
[center]Image

Bigger boys stole my sig
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: Inches or mm - size matters, but one or the other please

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

ORIGINAL: gladiatt

ORIGINAL: sfbaytf

. I don't know what the crazy rest of the world is thinking. Then again they call soccer football.

Just think of it: foot - ball : play the ball with the feets !! easy to understand, no ??
When i hear of "American football", that mean the ball is not played with the feets but with the hand, so why not call it "handball" ?? (maybe because "handball" already exist )

[;)][:D]

When the game was invented there was no forward passing, and drop-kicking was a common means of scoring. They wore leather helmets, there were no cheerleaders, and instant replay was what happenned inside your head after the old Statue of Liberty play. Good times . . .
The Moose
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”