Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/12/10

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: Way OT: State Leicas
From: Rob Heyman <rheyman@bigpond.net.au>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:10:56 +1000
References: <7EFC5B41-0C67-11D7-8E91-000393802534@mac.com> <20021210185144.GJ14399@latency.net>

And in Australia, Texas would fit three and a half times into Western
Australia at 976,784sq.m
Queensland is 668,203.19 sq.m
Northern Territory is 520,898 sq.m ( a bit smaller than Alaska)
South Aust is 379,722 sq.m  and
New South Wales is 309,127 sq m.
All of which are more than twice the size of California
Then we have the smaller states of Victoria, Tasmania and the ACT.

I don't think most people realise how big this place is!

Rob

Jeff Moore wrote:

> 2002-12-10-12:47:48 Martin Howard:
> > Any large rangefinder gets called a "Texas Leica" -- in some way odd,
> > since I thought Texas was only the second largest state in the US,
> > after California.
>
> Second largest, yes;  after CA, I don't think so.
>
> Reminds me of the old joke: after listening to the Texan brag over and
> over how everything about his state is the biggest, the Alaskan suggests
> that if he and his kind don't shut up, Alaska will split itself in
> half... and then there there will be *two* states bigger than Texas.
>
> California: 155,973 square miles;
>      Texas: 261,914 square miles;
>     Alaska: 570,374 square miles.
> --
> To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
__________________________________
Rob Heyman M.Photog
32 Binyara Street
CHAPEL HILL   Qld   4069
Ph   07 3878 3884  fax 07 3378 6639
__________________________________


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from Martin Howard <mvhoward@mac.com> ([Leica] Way OT: State Leicas)
Message from Jeff Moore <jbm@jbm.org> ([Leica] Re: Way OT: State Leicas)