PVBoom Wrote:Klem used MILs because he grew up using metric and thinks in metric. And because its a better system.
[/URL]
I grew up with Imperial in the UK and when the family emigrated, still Imperial until Australia went metric in 74. I was at school so easier to transition than later in life. For us, there are still some things in shooting that will always be Imperial I think. MOA for group sizes. Muzzle velocities in fps, and some of the older ranges have mounds in yards. We need to know Imperial when buying guns and parts from the US. The rest is metric now - you get used to it.
Getting back to mils. I found out the hard way that the first March scopes were graduated in 'US-mils', not mathematically-correct mils. If you work out how many milliradians fit into the circumference of a circle it's 6,283 (or 2xPi = 6.283 radians). For military use you guys rounded it up to 6,400 ('US/NATO-mils') so it becomes a decimal system and therefore easier use. The Swedes decided to round it up to 6,300 so it's closer to what it should be but again, now a decimal system. The Russians have made an even easier decimal system by rounding it way down to 6,000 mils in a circle. Great for artillery or navigating using a compass, but not so much for shooting when trying to use it with metric to judge and dial for distances.
All the Mils scopes we talk about will be graduated in mathematically-correct mils (6,283).