Paul Gates, KD3JF wrote:
> What amuses me is when some hams use 2400 hrs... No such thing IMO. There is
> 2359 and then 0000 hrs. At least that is what I learned in the Army.
>
2400 is a legitimate synonym for 0000 in the 24 hour time system. It can
be used as the specification of an ending time, but is not used as a
starting time. I write firmware for security systems and some other
dedicated systems that perform actions based, at least in part, on date
and time data. 2400 is typically used to indicate the end of time period
for the current day, such as 2100-2400 UTC. If it were specified as
2100-0000 there is an ambiguity (today or tomorrow?) that has to be
resolved by software. Using 2100-2359 produces a one-second shorter than
desired period. Maybe not a big deal, but it could be in some circumstances.
There is also another allowed value that might seem strange: a time such
as 23:59:60 can occur when a positive leap second is inserted by a
leap-second event. Software needs to be aware of such situations and
deal with them intelligently.
> It is truly bizarre that ARRL refuses to use the time
> honored standard.
>
Agreed.
Gus Hansen
KB0YH
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|