RivetBangers.com

I am thinking MPH. I know that with all digital solutions it is a simple toggle to swith from one to the other, but right now MPH seems logical. Van uses it when he refers to the aircraft and the Cherokee Six uses it as well. Also when discussing airspeed with neophytes, they understand it too.

What are you planning on or using in your plane? Knots or MPH?

Take the poll too!

CJ

Knots. All the charts in nautical miles, other aircraft are in nautical mile, etc. It makes it easier to not have to convert when flight planning, etc.

Voted. Definately knots. I had a Cherokee that was in MPH, and I didn't like it for the same reason spike stated-charts and approach plates. Van's uses MPH 'cuz the numbers look better. I am going to have to use what I'm used to, Knots.

Yes, ATC uses knots on their radar. Some avionics use only knots for some functions. MPH are for cars. Knots are for airplanes and boats. All airliners are set for knots, and so should your airplane.
Cheers, Pete

god, I can't even tie my own shoes.


I am going for knots. Thats what I have used my whole career. I ain't change'n for nut'n.

Why would Van want to try and make his numbers look good by putting it in MPH? They are good no matter how you look at them.

Good question snap. I read it somewhere...I think on the Van's website on the story page.

You're right though, the numbers are great either way!

Have to go with knots. It is how I was raised in the Navy (surface and air side). The only civil aircraft I have flown is a Cherokee and the MPH really screwed me up. Like posted earlier, everything in aviation is done in knots, and will use knots for consistancy.

Jim

The only way MPH got introduced into aviation is that 115 MPH sounds faster than 100 knots.

I realize that actual navigation is something of a dying art (I have to admit that I depend on GPS and FMS much more than I really feel I should), but no navigator would ever waste time using MPH. Since the definition of a nautical mile is one minute of arc at the Earth's surface, you don't even need to have a mile scale to navigate using a decent chart (one minute of latitude is one nautical mile to more accuracy than can be used in nearly any real life situation).

210 MPH sounds much faster to my non-flying freinds than 180 knots, however, so I do understand the temptation for MPH.

Pat

OK, so it is jut me anna nuther guy!

Time for me to jump ship. I am switching to KNOTS!

Whew! That was hard!



Glad I did it BEFORE my panel was constructed!

CJ

Good choice CJ!

Glad we could sway ya!!

I'm not the only one who voted for statute MPH but I gues I'm the only one speaking up. I like statute mph. I can't give you a good reason other than I'm just used to it. I don't read approach plates. ATC never tells me how many knots to fly. They have assigned me altitudes and courses but that's about it. However, I freely admit I live in a sheltered world.

My airspeed is marked with MPH on the outer and knots in the inner ring. My GPS output is in knots and I do all my flight planning in knots. I true out at 165 kts or 190 MPH. I know they are the same but 190 sure sounds better.

Dale