PS Re: looking for pics\SPOILER B5

> On Fri, 10 Jan 1997, Mike Miserendino wrote:

metric tons should be either "t" or "tonnes"

Maybe the M stands for x1000, like in Roman numerals, so the tonnage is
600,000 which would be more in line with expectations. Besides, maybe the need
for engines and shielding
bumps the mass-ratio up compared to the station itself?

> On Fri, 10 Jan 1997, Mike Miserendino wrote:

metric tons should be either "t" or "tonnes"

> Rob Paul wrote:

> metric tons should be either "t" or "tonnes"

Both "MT" and "t" are the correct abbreviations for representing a metric ton.

Date sent:  13-JAN-1997 13:39:46

> Rob Paul wrote:

> metric tons should be either "t" or "tonnes"

> Both "MT" and "t" are the correct abbreviations for representing a

Yes but ton is not metric. A metric ton does not exist. A metric tonne on the
other hand is 1,000 Kg.

So 'M ton' can't be metric.

> Adam Delafield wrote:

A ton can be expressed in either metric or imperial measure. A tonne is
1,000kg as you stated, while a ton US (short ton) is about 1016kg and a ton UK
(long ton) is about 907kg. Kilograms is the international standard
(SI)
measure for mass.

> So 'M ton' can't be metric.

Sure it could. The "M" might also represent "Mega" or "Millions of" as someone
pointed out earlier, but this would make for one very heavy ship for its size.
It might even represent some new unit. It appears to be artistic freedom.