Joat42 wrote:So it was unrelated to what measurement-system being used then. But you think the Russians failed being the first to land on the moon because they used metric? It couldn't be something like, I don't know - the rivalry between the engineers, insufficient budget and a lack of technical expertise?
No, it's called sarcasm.
One of the arguments presented was that the metric system is superior because it's used in engineering and science.
I sarcastically pointed out that one of the (if not the single) greatest scientific and engineering feats of modern times- putting man on the moon- was done using equipment made using Imperial measurements and that sort of flies in the face of their assertion.
Come to think of it, so would Chuck Yeager's breaking the sound barrier in level flight.
And Wilbur and Orville's flights at Kittyhawk.
The Soviets didn't make it to the moon for a plethora of reasons completely unrelated to something as silly as what unit of measure they used when building their equipment.
Again-
I don't buy into the claim that Imperial is inadequate. I also think that the claims of metric's superiority are vastly overstated.