Tag

weight st lb to kg Related Articles

Ratings Comparison: Proton X70 vs Honda CR-V vs Mazda CX-5 - Driving performance

CVT 6-speed AT Power 184 PS 193 PS 230 PS Torque 285 Nm 243 Nm 420 Nm Weight

Ferrari F8 Spider launched in Malaysia – 720 PS/770 Nm, infinite headroom, from RM 1.1m before tax

The open-top supercar from Maranello is the successor to the 488 Spider, with more power and less weight

5 drivers' cars you can buy for under RM 80k

The figures don’t sound much, but a kerb weight of 996 kg, the MR-S has a very good power-to-weight

The Perodua Ativa's (D55L) 0-100 km/h time is almost as fast as the Proton X50 Flagship...how?

Total output is 177 PS and 255 Nm.Power-to-weight magicCould it look like this?

This 1,200 PS Lexus RC F is the world's most advanced drift car

While most purpose-built drift cars will definitely be stripped out to minimise weight, this RC Fs exterior

Watch this Mitsubishi Triton pull a load of over 19,000 kg!

Mitsubishi Motors Thailand decided to make a record-breaking run with the Mitsubishi Triton by showing

Video: Suzuki Swift Sport (ZC32S) Owner’s Review in Malaysia, leave it stock or mod it?

We used to see a variety of brand-new hot/warm hatches being offered such as the Ford Fiesta ST or even

Engine mounting: 3 symptoms of bad engine mounts

Even a small Perodua Axia’s 1KR-VE weighs about 70 kg.

Which B-segment hatchback has the best power-to-weight ratio?

, 34 kg less than the Jazz.As such, the Mazda 2 is able to boast a power-to-weight ratio of 108 PS-per-tonne

Watch out Golf R, the Toyota GR Corolla Sport could be coming soon!

If you were too late to buy the now-sold-out Toyota GR Yaris, you’re in for a surprise, as Toyota

View More

Choosing the right engine for your needs - Ford Ranger, Mitsubishi Triton, Isuzu D-Max, Toyota Hilux

of 1,910 kg, the D-Max 1.9’s power-to-weight ratio is 78.5 PS per tonne.

Volvo XC90 Armoured - Genuine Armoured Warrior With 50 mm-thick Glass, Weighs 4.5 Tonnes!

The steel armour is measured to be 10 millimetres thick and the glass can be up to alarming 50 millimetres

Ratings Comparison: Proton X70 vs Honda CR-V vs Mazda CX-5 - Fuel consumption

CVT 6-speed AT Power 184 PS 193 PS 230 PS Torque 285 Nm 243 Nm 420 Nm Weight

All-new 2021 Mazda 2 says yes to mini-Mazda 3 looks, no to TNGA Yaris platform for Japan

The Mazda 2 may be an ageing car but it’s definitely one that is catered to enthusiasts.

The electric MINI SE is coming to Malaysia, over 8,000 orders received worldwide

release a few days prior.The all-electric MINI SE falls in line with BMW’s plan of electrification to

Toyota Gazoo Racing to kick off Season 3 in September

Teams/drivers are only allowed to alter the car’s tyres and suspension.Street circuits will continue

No more recond Subaru BRZ from Japan soon, 2021 Toyota 86 to debut in May as GR86

rsquo;ve already seen the 2021 Subaru BRZ making its global debut in the US, so it’s only natural to

Perodua Bezza 1.0L GXtra Is Lighter Than A Lotus Elise

The Bezza 1.0 GXtra (AT) has a kerb weight of 880 kg A Lotus Elise Sport 220 weights 924 kg Most fuel-efficient

Think the 98 PS Toyota Raize/Perodua D55L is slow? Watch it smoke bigger engine cars

has the smallest power output out of the 5 cars, the tiny SUV also has a relatively good power to weight

All-new 2021 Subaru BRZ unveiled - 2.4L NA, 231 PS/249 Nm, 6-speed manual

carries on the traditional sports car formula with a front-engine, rear-wheel drive layout with low weight

Watch the Toyota Hilux tow a train of 64,000 kg coal transport trucks

Looks like Mitsubishi Motors is not the only brand resorting to special stunts to show off their pick-up

Geely-based Proton models most likely to launch in 2021 – Proton S50, V70, X90, or Perdana

Width (mm) 1,785 1,799 Height (mm) 1,460 1,416 Wheelbase (mm) 2,670 2,700 Weight

2021 Perodua Ativa 1.0 AV vs Proton X50 1.5T Standard – Do you need a bigger car?

1,035 kg 1,325 kg As for the exterior dimensions, the Proton X50 is the larger car overall.

Owner Review: Eat, Sleep, Touge, Repeat - Living with a Ford Fiesta ST for 6 years

the views of WapCar.Facebook: Daniel TanFord Fiesta ST, reportedly 1 of 35 in Malaysia.

Which B-segment sedan offers the best power-to-weight ratio?

1.5-litre engine.The City’s 1.5-litre engine is good for 120 PS and 145 Nm, allowing the 1,112 kg

The Toyota GR Yaris is a reborn Lancer Evolution, WRC car by Tommi Makinen for the streets

ongoing 2020 Tokyo Auto Salon, Toyota has just unveiled the brand-new GR Yaris, its latest addition to

Owner Review: Living With My 2014 Ford Fiesta ST Named Bloop

I couldn’t wait to pick it up.Prior to owning the Ford Fiesta ST180, I had a Subaru which relieved

The new 2020 Lexus LC 500 sheds 10 kg, priced from RM 1.25 mil

grand tourer is rather quick with a 4.4 seconds 0-100km/h time.The 2020 LC 500 has shed 10 kilograms of weight

550 PS and 700 Nm Aston Martin DBX production starts, coming to Malaysia soon?

over four years since Aston Martin announced its investment in a brand-new manufacturing facility at St

Malaysia mulls CO2 emission as requirement for EEV, more hybrids to come?

, to 225 g/km for cars weighing 2,270 kg.

weight st lb to kg Q&A Review

What is the best weighing scale to buy in India?

If you are trying to loose or gain weight then a weighing machine is mandate at your place. To keep yourself fit then workout is not just the solution to get rid of your extra weight or to gain extra weight. It also requires to keep a track of your body weight regularly. And going to hospitals and gyms every now and then just to check your body weight is not possible. So bring one weighing machine at you own place then. Now, the question arises, ,“Is buying any random weighing machine is okay or not?” ,then answer is a ,“A big No”., As if your machine weighs your weight higher or lower than the correct, then you may do wrong exercises resulting in serious health issues. Every weighing machine is not trustworthy and hence it is necessary to choose the best among various options. So below are some of the ,best weighing machines available in India: 1.Hoffen HO-18 Digital Electronic LCD Personal Body Fitness Weighing Scale Pros Made from tempered glass weight capacity is 2.3 to 180kg Digital display Low battery indicator Auto-off feature Cons Users Experienced warranty issues 2.Omron HN 289 (Black) Automatic Personal Digital Weight Machine Pros High grade tempered glass panel Equipped with 4 sensors LCD panel for easy reading Auto on/off Stylish design Weight capacity up to 150kg Cons Lack of indicators 3.Dr Trust (USA) Electronic Supernova Digital Personal Weighing Scale Pros It is rechargeable It has a LCD display The tempered glasses are really strong It has Ultra modern look The look itself appeals to measure your weight Cons The warranty covers only in USA. It’s not practical to procure warranty. 4.Nova BGS – 1260 Ultra Lite Electronic Pros Four precision sensor for accurate measurement Lightweight “Step-On” technology-infused The grip on the scale ensures that feet do not trip. One year warranty Capable to measure in KG, ST and LB units. Cons Some customers have reviewed that it provides a different reading at different ends of the product. 5.HealthSense Dura-Glass PS 115 Digital Personal Body Weighing Pros Premium sleek design. Temperature sensor. Lightweight, Easy to handle. Precision G-sensors. Clear bright blue LCD screen display. Battery indicator. Tempered glass platform. Cons Some customer complaints about its accuracy. Please ,UPVOTE, my answer if found useful.

What is the heaviest a human can possibly weigh?

Hi ,Dayitva Goel,, Interesting, Well this could be any number depending on the human, some people can weigh 120kg and be perfectly fit and healthy, others would be unable to function at this weight and would be more susceptible to heart attacks and strokes due to the overload of weight-bearing and strain on the muscles, tissues and organs.. It really depends, on height, age, genetics, bone density and formation. Many factors will dictate a person’s weight. The heaviest person in medical history was Jon Brower Minnoch (USA)(1941–83), who had suffered from obesity since childhood. He was 185 cm (6 ft 1 in) tall and weighed 178 kg (392 lb or 28 st) in 1963, 317 kg (700 lb or 50 st) in 1966 and 442 kg (975 lb or 69 st 9 lb) in September 1976. In March 1978, Minnoch was admitted to University Hospital, Seattle, where consultant endocrinologist Dr Robert Schwartz calculated that Minnoch must have weighed more than 635 kg (1,400 lb or 100 st), a great deal of which was water accumulation due to his congestive heart failure. The body can’t handle so much weight,trying to maintain homoeostatic mechanisms and the endocrine system would be exhausting.. Hope that helps, R.

Under what circumstances do Brits use "stone" instead of "pounds" when discussing weight?

People of all ages use st/lb. It’s even mentioned in the curriculum because its so popular. We use stones to make referencing to weight as easy as referring to height. We don’t refer to ourselves in inches as it becomes cumbersome. Over the years the use of feet and inches became popular as it avoids long numbers. The same is true of weight (mass). Rather than hundreds of pounds it is simple small figure usage such as 13st 5lb. In the same way you might be 5 ft 10 in. The use of stone is always singular - we don’t say ‘stones’. If you check any weight loss program / advert they always use st/lb. If someone is discussing human weight on TV or the radio then it will ALWAYS be in st/lb If you check TV programmes discussing weight or weight loss then you’ll always see st/lb The idea that younger people use kilograms is nonsense Weighing scales from shops show imperial figures with a handy smaller metricic scale. Electric scales default to st/lb but can be changed to kg. I find the use of kg or pounds a bit overwhelming. I find it unusual that the US use pounds but then have a divisor when it comes to height There are many people that - for some reason - HATE imperial and try to paint it as something for the older people or they simply just insult it. (Can you understand why someone would insult measuring words? - Very bizarre) There is simply nothing wrong with Brits using our own way of weighing ourselves. It’s tradition, its popular, it harms no-one and it obviously works

Why didn't the UK fully change to metric system? Why did they keep miles? Why are even young people not familiar with kg and cm and they say how many stones they weigh despite GPs measure their weight in kg and their heights in cm?

I left school in 1998 (university in 2001). All my schooling was at state schools following the National Curriculum. So, your standard education available to all. I was never taught feet and inches, except in passing. All measurements were in metric - scalar dimensions, areas, energy, etc - all cm/m/km, joules, newtons, newton-metres, Celsius. I’m 39 and no-one I know uses Imperial for the majority of uses. However, our road distances are in miles - so I have a good grasp of how long a mile feels for car/train travel. But for walking/cycling I’ll use m/km. We also tend to measure a person’s height in feet and inches. Not entirely sure why - but it’s not like that invalidates our understanding of metric. It also feels like st/lbs for human weight appears to be gradually reducing. A few of my younger cousins default to kg for that although many of my same-age friends are st/lb. My mum was a nurse, so she’d used metric for body measurements her whole career, which might explain why we’d have our bathroom scales in kg!

What do British people mean when they talk about weight in terms of "stone"?

In traditional English weight measurement, one stone is ,14 pounds, (or 6.35 kg). The ,stone, (full: ,stone weight,) is invariably used for ,human weight, rather than anything else insofar as the last 150 years is concerned. For instance, I am 8 stone 11 pounds — or 123 lbs or 55.79 kg. In usage, the word ,stone, is not pluralised (because it’s a contraction of ,stone weight,). The current 14 lb standard for the stone was regularised by the Weights and Measures Act ,1350, (25 Edw 3 st. 5 c. 9) and upheld by section 2 of the Weights and Measures Act ,1495, (11 Hen 7 c. 4).

Does India have answers to defend against Pakistan's F-16?

Pakistan has about 70 - 80 of these. About a dozen new built F 16 Block 50/52. The rest are Mid Life Upgraded (MLU) air frames. It’s Performance specs are something like these : Performance Maximum speed,: At sea level: ,Mach, 1.2 (915 mph, 1,470 km/h)At altitude: Mach 2(1,320 mph, 2,120 km/h) clean configuration Combat radius,: 340 mi (295 nmi, 550 km) on a hi-lo-hi mission with four 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs Ferry range,: 2,280 nmi (2,620 mi, 4,220 km) with drop tanks Service ceiling,: 50,000+ (15,240+ m) Rate of climb,: 50,000 ft/min (254 m/s) Wing loading,: 88.3 lb/ft² (431 kg/m²) Thrust/weight,: 1.095 (1.24 with loaded weight & 50% internal fuel) Maximum ,g,-load: +9.0 g To defend against these, India has these : About 50 ,Dassault Mirage 2000 Performance Specs : Maximum speed,: ,Mach, 2.2 (2,336 km/h, 1,451 mph) at high altitude/ 1,110 km/h (690 mph) at low altitude Range,: 1,550 km (837 ,nmi,, 963 mi) with drop tanks Ferry range,: 3,335 km (1,800 ,nmi,, 2,073 mi) with auxiliary fuel Service ceiling,: 17,060 m (59,000 ft) Rate of climb,: 285 m/s (56,000 ft/min) Wing loading,: 337 kg/m² (69 lb/ft²) Thrust/weight,: 0.7 at loaded weight 2. About 60 - 70 of ,Mikoyan MiG-29, UPG Performance Maximum speed,: ,Mach, 2.25 (2,400 km/h, 1,490 mph) At low altitude: Mach 1.25 (1,500 km/h, 930 mph) Range,: 1,430 km (772 nmi, 888 mi) with maximum internal fuel Ferry range,: 2,100 km (1,300 mi) with external drop tanks Service ceiling,: 18,013 m (59,100 ft) Rate of climb,: initial 330 m/s average 109 m/s 0–6000 m(65,000 ft/min) Wing loading,: 403 kg/m² (82 lb/ft²) Thrust/weight,: 1.09 Maximum design ,g,-load: +9 ,g 3 Low altitude Surface to Air Missiles SPYDER (Surface-to-air PYthon and DERby) The SPYDER systems were delivered starting in 2012. Six SPYDER-MRs along with 300 Python-5 surface to air missiles (SAMs) and 300 Derby SAMs were delivered by 2013. 4. Medium Altitude SAM ,Akash (missile) 5: Long Range SAM ,S-125 Neva/Pechora, guided by Radars and other subsystems from the ,S-300 (missile), like the PSM-33 Mk.2 Radar and the ST-68 ‘Tin Shield’ Radar 6: AA Guns 7: An assortment of MANPADS. We do not even have to use the Su 30 MKI. So, gentleman, your F 16 is as dead as a Roast Turkey on Thanks Giving. Edit 2016/10/09 at 1600 IST approx I did not know that this answer was going to be read by so many people. Amazed and humbled. Some people seem to think I am saying 1 aircraft is better than the other. Or one Air Force is better. I do not like that kind of reductionist comparisons. The parameters are so many that it is possible to give answers for very specific situations only. These other answers will make the point clear : Nadia Nongzai's answer to Is Pakistani Air Force capable of handling Indian Air Force? Nadia Nongzai's answer to Which Indian fighter jet is better than Pakistani F-16 fighter jet? I am not in favor of using unnecessary violence. We have better, classier weapons. Nadia Nongzai's answer to What is best solution to prevent Pakistan striking India? Nadia Nongzai's answer to What is the way to neutralise Pakistan-China relationship? And for the girls and boys who think they have it in them to defend the country, Nadia Nongzai's answer to How are women selected in Indian Air Force?

What is the greatest supersonic jet fighter ever made?

Hello there, This is a ,very, tough question to answer, so I am going to first give the criteria on which I have rated the design. I will also give, in conclusion, the design which is the next best, and could share the podium with this design, apart from a single criterion. First, the criteria of evaluation : Performance - Absolute and relative Warload capability Combat record Longevity / Userbase Extensibility in terms of being upgraded / other versions For which, there is ,one, fighter which definitely, in my view (for which the other answers given have validity, ,nolo contendre,) gives this fighter a very high ranking. This is of course - ,The McDonnell-Douglas F-15 Eagle,. [The greatest ever ? let’s read on….] McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle - Wikipedia Okay, once the howls from gallery have subsided, lets evaluate it on the five criteria above one by one. [1] Performance - absolute and relative Maximum speed,:, **,High altitude:, Mach 2.5+ (1,650+ mph, 2,665+ km/h),Low altitude:, Mach 1.2 (900 mph, 1,450 km/h) Combat radius,:, 1,061 nmi (1,222 mi, 1,967 km) for interdiction mission Ferry range,:, 3,450 mi (3,000 ,nmi,, 5,550 km) with conformal fuel tanks and three external fuel tanks Service ceiling,:, 65,000 ft (20,000 m) Rate of climb,:, >50,000 ft/min (254 m/s) Wing loading,:, 73.1 lb/ft² (358 kg/m²) Thrust/weight,:, 1.07 (−220) (1.26 with loaded weight at 50% internal fuel),[133] Maximum design ,g,-load:, 9 g To put that in perspective, let us look at the performance of its predecessor, the ,F-4 Phantom II, : Maximum speed:, 1,280 kn; 1,473 mph (2,370 km/h) at 40,000 ft (12,000 m) Maximum speed:, Mach 2.23 Cruise speed:, 508 kn; 584 mph (940 km/h) Combat range:, 367 nmi; 423 mi (680 km) Ferry range:, 1,457 nmi; 1,677 mi (2,699 km) Service ceiling:, 60,000 ft (18,000 m) Rate of climb:, 41,300 ft/min (210 m/s) Lift-to-drag:, 8.58 Wing loading:, 78 lb/sq ft (380 kg/m2) Thrust/weight,:, 0.86 lbf/lb (0.0084 kN/kg) at loaded weight, 0.58 lbf/lb (0.0057 kN/kg) at ,MTOW Takeoff roll:, 4,490 ft (1,370 m) at 53,814 lb (24,410 kg) Landing roll:, 3,680 ft (1,120 m) at 36,831 lb (16,706 kg) The Phantom, while no slouch, is considerably outclassed when it comes to out and out performance. The F-15, for instance, is ,ballistic, - meaning that thrust (just) exceeds it’s own weight/mass. That’s quite a prospect - it means you could put an F-15 in a vertical position, light the afterburners, and then shoot to its maximum ceiling riding on its thrust alone - and would definitely leave a Phantom rocking in the wake of its turbulence as its shoots straight up ! Now, it also true that the F-22 outclasses the F-15 in terms of performance for speed - it can supercruise, which the F-15 cannot. But lets look at that again - Performance (F-22) Maximum speed,:, ,At altitude:, ,Mach, 2.25 (1,500 mph, 2,410 km/h) [estimated],[104],Supercruise,:, Mach 1.82 (1,220 mph, 1,960 km/h) Range,:, >1,600 nmi (1,840 mi, 2,960 km) with 2 external fuel tanks Combat radius,:, 460 nmi (with 100 nmi in supercruise) clean (529 mi, 852 km) Ferry range,:, 1,740 ,nmi, (2,000 mi, 3,220 km) Service ceiling,:, >65,000 ft (20,000 m) Wing loading,:, 77.2 lb/ft² (377 kg/m²) Thrust/weight,:, 1.08 Maximum design ,g,-load:, +9.0/−3.0 ,g In terms of ,speed, altitude and g-load,, there is almost nothing to choose from between F-22 and F-15. Supercruise is nice, but overall performance is a near dead-heat. And, the F-15 ,beats the pants off ,the F-22 in terms of ,range, ,when using FAST packs … Then, the F-15 is not a stealth type at all - but it ,could be, as we will see - this is an important consideration. A way of understanding just how ,good, the F-15 is in terms of performance comes from a tried-and-tested trick performed by F-15 drivers from the early days. An F-15 leaving McDonnell’s St. Louis factory can start at one end of the runway, take off, ,go supersonic on burners immediately after takeoff,, and then get to cruise altitude in under just over a minute - ,an all before its moved beyond the end of the runway fence horizontally !!!!,. That is eye-popping performance ! Even today, the F-22 can do no better … apart and from post stall maneuvers - and yet, even here, the F-15 can match that if it ever becomes critical. More to come below …. [2] Warload capability The F-15C can basically drop and fire every missile its likely to need to make use of - from the earliest AIM-9 sidewinder to the latest AMRAAM. But, as we should all know, that’s not the end of the story. Its remarkable that the F-15E Strike Eagle exists - its the bomber version of the F-15, and became quite famous at the outbreak of hostilities in the Gulf War of 1992 : McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle - Wikipedia The F-15 can lift a LOT of ordinance - both as an F-15C : Armament (F-15C) Guns:, 1× ,20 mm, (0.787 in) ,M61A1 Vulcan, ,6-barrel Rotary cannon,, 940 rounds Hardpoints,:, Total 11 (not including CFTs): two under-wing (each with additional two missile launch rails), four under-fuselage (for semi-recessed carriage of AIM-7 Sparrows) and a single centerline pylon station, optional fuselage pylons (which may include ,conformal fuel tanks,, known initially as ,Fuel And Sensor Tactical (FAST) pack, for use on the C model) with a capacity of 16,000 lb (7,300 kg) and provisions to carry combinations of: Missiles: ***4× ,AIM-7 Sparrow 4× ,AIM-9 Sidewinder 8× ,AIM-120 AMRAAM Other:, ***up to 3× 600 US gallons (2,300 L) external ,drop tanks,for ferry flight ,or, extended range/loitering time. MXU-648 Cargo/Travel Pod – to carry personal belongings, and small pieces of maintenance equipment. I ,like, the idea of the cargo-travel pod - that’s a classy thing for any fighter to have, these days. 11 hardpoints outclasses it competitors - except one. Armament (F-15E Strike Eagle) Guns:, 1× ,20 mm (0.787 in), ,M61A1 Vulcan, ,6-barreled Gatling cannon,, 500 rounds of either ,M-56, or ,PGU-28, ammunition Hardpoints,:, 2 wing pylons, fuselage pylons, bomb racks on CFTs with a capacity of 23,000 lb (10,400 kg) of external fuel and ordnance Missiles:, ,Air-to-air missiles,: 4× ,AIM-7 Sparrow 4× ,AIM-9 Sidewinder 8× ,AIM-120 AMRAAM,Air-to-surface missiles,: 6× ,AGM-65 Maverick 2× ,AGM-84 Harpoon 2× ,AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER,AGM-130 AGM-154 JSOW AGM-158 JASSM Bombs:, ,Mark 82 bomb Mark 84 bomb Mark 77 bomb incendiary,GBU-15 GBU-10 Paveway II GBU-12 Paveway II GBU-24 Paveway III GBU-27 Paveway III GBU-28, (Bunker buster) GBU-31 or GBU-38, {8 GBU-31s or 16 GBU-38s} (JDAM),GBU-54 Laser JDAM (LJDAM),GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb (SDB),B61, or ,B83, nuclear bomb CBU-87 or CBU-103, (CEM) CBU-89 or CBU-104, (GATOR) CBU-97 or CBU-105, (SFW) CBU-107 Passive Attack Weapon BLU-107 Durandal Others:,up to 3× 600 ,US gallons, (2,300 ,L,) external ,drop tanks, for ferry flight ,or, extended range/loitering time1x 1,800 ,litres, (480 ,US gal,) Super cruise drop tank. HOLY COW ! That is a LOT of ordinance ! It totally outclasses the F-22, which has no hardpoints for Stealth, and carries everything inside … great for ACM, but a bit disappointing for sheer weaponry imho. But to each its own. The F-15 wins for being able to carry ,everything, over intercontinental ranges. [3] Combat Record Here the Eagle ,really, shines, in terms of its combat record with all airforces used to date. Specifically - 106 victories with no, I repeat ,no, combat losses. In short, its unbeatable. All losses of F-15’s have to date been attritive losses from maintenance failures, themselves very rare. In this regard, only the McDonnell F-4 Phantom exceeds the F-15’s performance for a supersonic jet. Practically all other types (including the Russian MiG’s and Sukhois) gave as good as they got i.e. nearly as many shot down as victorious - and MiG-17’s and MiG-21’s have had the worst ratings in this regard, so far - and been the majority of the F-15’s victims around the world. The F-22 has not been used in combat so far, and neither has my No. 2 pick. [4] Longevity / Userbase The F-15 is older than me, but not by much. I’m 40 as I write this - it is 45 ! And it is ,still, a credible front line fighter. Its also widespread - unlike the F-22, the F-15 is in use by foreign airforces - the IAF, RSAF, RoKAF and JASDF - neatly around the world. It polices the skies over Western Europe from USAFE bases. That’s a pretty good spread of utility. The F-4 Phantom II, F-104 and F-16 are the only other fighters from the US to have had a wider spread of users. The Mirage III, Mirage F-1 and Mirage 2000 also make a very good showing around the world. Ditto the MiG-15, MiG-17 and MiG-21. Less so the MiG-23/27 series. However, so far, the F-15 does appear to have eclipsed these for longevity, and looks likely to fully eclipse all others, as we are about to see … [5] Extensibility in terms of being upgraded / other versions Here we get a blurring of fact and fiction. During the late 1970’s early 1980’s, the F-15 was used as the basis of some really interesting concepts to improve its performance even beyond that of its already potent form … First, the F-15 had canards added to it, as the F-15 STOL/MTD : In a very ‘Spirit of ’76′ patriotic paint scheme - looks good :-) The F-15 testbed later became the F-15 ACTIVE with some of the first 3D Nozzle fitted to a jet fighter, which also worked very well. Its post-stall maneuverability has only been exceeded by the X-31 and of course the F-22 which benefited from the former’s research work. The ACTIVE is matched by the later Su-37 and Su-57. However - and wonderfully - in fiction we get to see an imagined future F-15 Advanced in one of my favorite, very grown up Anime movies - ,Patlabor 2, which I recommend to everyone wanting to see one of the highpoints of animation for grownups. Here it is - the, F-15 ,Kai, Eagle Plus, : Isn’t that something else ? Wonderfully, reality has imitated art to a certain extent - and I wonder if the guys at the Boeing Phantomworks watch ,Patlabor, - maybe they do ! Because not so long ago we got the ,F-15SE Silent Eagle,, a proposed stealth upgrade : Boeing F-15SE Silent Eagle - Wikipedia Here, the F-15SE benefits from ,Patlabor,-like stealth features, and advanced FAST-packs with retractable weapons bays. If there was a need for 3D Nozzles, the SE could probably accept them. On these criteria, then, the F-15 does rank as a benchmark fighter on the basis of which other subsequent fighters can be judged. The F-22 doesn’t really beat the F-15 in a measurable way apart from supercruise and stealth, and this is about the only way the F-15 would give ground to the F-22. And not even there - the Mitsubishi F-15J ,Kai ,project has advanced to the MSIP stage, and is expected that the ,Kai, will sport F-22 equivalent electronics making this fighter a generation 4.5 fighter for the real world. Quite a thought ! So if the F-15 is my number 1, what is my number 2 ? Why, the Su-27 ,Flanker, of course ! The Su-27 series only give ground to the F-15 in terms of combat kills - the F-15 is blooded, and Flanker has so far not been (Syria does not count !) In simulated dogfights, the two are very evenly matched. I hope I’ve given a good account of why I believe the F-15 is the most successful Supersonic Fighter. Until its arrival, it was a dead heat between the Mirage III and F-4 Phantom II. The F-104, while widespread, was definitely not an unmitigated success - just ask the Bundesluftwaffe ! Very much my 2c worth.

How do Brits know their weight in stone? Are UK bathroom scales marked in stone along with kg and/or lbs?

This is my British bathroom scales with two 4kg weights on it. Either the weights or the scales (or both) are slightly off 7.9kgs for my 8k weights Here is the underside of the scales showing the switch to change units. There's lb, kg and st/lb Here are the same two 4kg weights with the switch flicked to st/lb It's 1st 3.6 lb Finally, here are the two 4kg weights with the switch changed to lbs 17.6 lbs We use our bathroom scales to know our weight in stone and pounds. The switch is very rarely moved to lbs as it's something we never use but it would probably be moved to kg a few times a year to weight suitcases to make sure you're under the 15kg weight that ScabbyAir is enforcing. There will then be lots of cursing the next time ŷou weight yourself and get a really weird figure and realise that you didn't switch it back to st/lbs when you got back from the airport

An intramuscular medication is given at 5.00 mg/kg of body weight. What is the dose for a 180-lb patient?

To figure this out you have to covert pounds to kilos, so there is 2.2 kilograms in 1 pound. So, 180 pounds would equal 81.6 kg. Now, we would take 5 x 81.6 equals to 408. Or, what is even better is…call downstairs to pharmacy they always have the answers and a lot quicker than it takes for us to figure it out.

HOME