RE: completely off-topic question...

From: Jacques Kilchoer <Jacques.Kilchoer_at_quest.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 18:40:18 -0700
Message-ID: <F001.00360761.20010803165023@fatcity.com>

Whoops! I'm tempted to say "damn you, US measurement system" (when is the USA going to switch to metric anyway?), but the fact of the matter is my brain was on the fritz. Thank you for correcting my mistake Mr. Norrell.

All right then, perhaps the 9-yard ammunition belt for a WWI Maxim machine-gun is possible. As I said before, I don't know anything on guns, but after looking at this picture

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/FWWmachinegun.htm it does seem like the cartridge plus the gap between cartridges could change the measurement from .311 inches to (9 * 3 * 12) / 250 = 1.296 inches.

I tried to estimate from the picture, figuring a hand is about 8 or 9 inches (20 to 22 centimetres) but my brain started hurting so I gave up.

I believe however that my second objection still stands, to wit: If the expression dates from World War I, why would the first mention in print date from 1966?

Jacques R. Kilchoër
x8816

-----Original Message-----
From: Norrell, Brian [mailto:BNorrell_at_QuadraMed.com]

Check your math:
.311 * 250 inches = 77.75 INCHES, = 2.15 yards. That is for the projectile alone. The cartridge is larger than that, plus a sizable gap between them could conceivably get you to 9. Received on Fri Aug 03 2001 - 20:40:18 CDT