Which is the proper formatting, "the six-o'clock news" or "the six o'clock news". The former seems appropriate, since "six o'clock modifies the noun "news", but it just seems odd.
All the Google search results (which strangely only reference a single BBC news program) consistently refer to "the six o'clock news". :(
six o'clock news
A fun way to visualize it: the contraction, o'clock, literally can be viewed as "of the clock," hence "six of the clock."
A fun way to visualize it: the contraction, o'clock, literally can be viewed as "of the clock," hence "six of the clock."
Of course around here we'd be likely to typot that as "sex of the cock". :)
Of course around here we'd be likely to typot that as "sex of the cock". :)
I didn't know you were a Kiwi.
I didn't know you were a Kiwi.
I"m not.
Yet you speak it so well.
For a Kiwi speaking, "six" usually comes out as "sex" or "sux", and "chips" as "chups".
According to That-Which-Cannot-Be-Named-Lest-A-Fight-Will-Erupt:
[Times are] usually open; forms such as "three thirty," "four twenty," etc., are hyphenated before the noun.
For example, a four o'clock train, the 5:00 p.m. news.
Also, if you can treat it as a proper noun, you'd definitely be safe with Six O'clock News.
Also, if you can treat it as a proper noun, you'd definitely be safe with Six O'clock News.
Ah, so it's not a multi-word adjective, instead it's a multi-word noun. That resolves the entire issue. Thanks for the clarification.
You aren't fooling anyone. :)
Still, he deftly avoided one. I think he deserves kudos for that. Now, I'll shut the hell up, just so I don't provoke a reaction.
All the Google search results (which strangely only reference a single BBC news program) consistently refer to "the six o'clock news". :(
Not the Nine O'clock News.
Nine O'clock News
Should that be - Nine O'Clock News? Referring to rules for capitalizing key words. But that does look weird.
there's an actual television show called Not the Nine O'Clock News
That's simple. While "nine o'clock news" is generic and not copyrightable, "Not the Nine O'Clock News" is copyrightable, as no one else can claim it as their own. That means it's a 'distinctive' and unique name and it becomes 'first one to file for it gets it'.
That means it's a 'distinctive' and unique name and it becomes 'first one to file for it gets it'.
Not necessarily. I once had an accountant who wanted to make his firm his name. Unfortunately, his name was Dick Lewis. The government said it was too common, so first-come-first-serve doesn't work.
Should that be - Nine O'Clock News?
I was the first one to write "O'clock" in this thread, but I agree with you that "O'Clock" is the correct/usual style when it is capitalised.
I can't explain it, but it's good enough for me if the BBC have been doing it that way for decades.
Should that be - Nine O'Clock News? Referring to rules for capitalizing key words. But that does look weird.
If it's actually a multi-word proper name, as Ross and I surmised, then yes. However, if it's not copyrighted, then it may not qualify for a 'proper name' designation, meaning it would be all lower-case letters (likely since there are thousands of six o'clock news programs).
since there are thousands of six o'clock news programs
That is true. Although if the phrase is being used as a name for the program, then things are different.
If it's actually a multi-word proper name, as Ross and I surmised, then yes. However, if it's not copyrighted, then it may not qualify for a 'proper name' designation, meaning it would be all lower-case letters
I don't think that copyright has anything to do with a proper name. Proper names exist once a name has been given someone or something - it doesn't matter if others use the same name too. How many people are named John?
I think its valid to say either 'I will watch the Six O'Clock News' or 'I will watch the six o'clock news'.
The first suggests I will watch a program that is called the Six O'Clock News, and the second I will watch some news program that starts at six o'clock.
However, if it's not copyrighted, then it may not qualify for a 'proper name' designation, meaning it would be all lower-case letters
It doesn't have to be copyrighted (trademarked?) to be a proper noun. I didn't copyright Switch Blayde yet it's a proper noun.
All the Google search results (which strangely only reference a single BBC news program) consistently refer to "the six o'clock news"
My guess is that they have copyrighted (or similar) the name
My guess is that they have copyrighted (or similar) the name
My guess is a copyright for the phrase "six o'clock news" or any of the many variations would not hold up. Almost every local TV channel uses that label for one or more of their daily news programs. That suggests the phrase or label is a common one. I don't think common phrases or labels would really hold up under copyright.
My guess is that they have copyrighted (or similar) the name
Almost every single radio and TV station in America (not counting anywhere else) has their own "six o'clock news" program, as the name is (I assume) considered generic and thus isn't copyrightable. Thus the fact they'd post dozens of reference to a single BBC station, while ignoring the thousands of other entities, seems a bit of a stretch—even for Google. The best I can guess, is that the station pays Google, but generally, you can't pay Google to delete alternate search results, only to ensure your sites are always the first to appear every time. :(
Using military time avoids a lot of these problems, "the news at eighteen hundred hours."
Using military time avoids a lot of these problems,
I missed the last train out of a town in Italy because I converted the military time to my watch and did it wrong.
I missed the last train out of a town in Italy because I converted the military time to my watch and did it wrong.
Was it military time or the 24 hour clock time - there is a minor, but very important difference. Military time is 4 digits with an alpha, while the 24 hour clock is 2 digits a colon and 2 digits. If I remember my zone codes right, and I may have the wrong code, a time in my location could be listed as:
Military of 1200Z hours or 2200J hours - - twelve hundred hours Zulu or twenty-two hundred hours Juliet
24 hour of 22:00 hours - - twenty-two hundred hours
10.00 p.m. - - ten p.m. or ten at night.
Military time must always have a zone code with it so everyone knows what the time reference being used is. Most military organisation use Zulu (also known as UTC or Greenwich Meantime) for cross zone communications.
Was it military time or the 24 hour clock time
Must have been 24-hour clock.
But when I was in the army they used to say, "Sixteen hundred hours" meaning 4pm.
Must have been 24-hour clock.
But when I was in the army they used to say, "Sixteen hundred hours" meaning 4pm.
It would've been. I spent a lot of years working on Australian military bases and we used the system they learned off the US services. Communications, especially formal ones, that went to people in another time zone, or was thought they may go to someone in another time zone had military time with the format 2200Z (Zulu was the most common zone used for International communications), however the communications that stayed totally local we were instructed to use the 24 hour clock of 22:00 hours. Now, the way you said the numbers was exactly the same, but you could always tell if it was a 24 hr reference or a military reference by the inclusion or exclusion of a time zone and the way it was written down with or without the time zone or the colon.
22:00 hours in Canberra was the same as 1200Zulu so we had to have a quick and easy way to designate which was which. Over 90% of face to face communications, especially verbal ones, were done using the 24 hr clock using local time, while about 90% of written communications used military time using Zulu time as the reference. This why most comms centres had 2 clock one on Zulu and one on local.
Military time must always have a zone code with it so everyone knows what the time reference being used is.
Most of the time I've overheard military people mentioning the time there's been no mention of the time zone.
I suspect unless otherwise specifically stated (17:40 Zulu) it's taken as the local time zone.
Military time must always have a zone code with it so everyone knows what the time reference being used is.
Not the military I spent 20 years in (US). I've never heard of the method you mention. I've only seen times expressed two ways. Local time (without any suffix) and Zulu (GMT or UTC). Local was assumed if there was no suffix.
Not the military I spent 20 years in (US).
Which friggin' American military did you serve in? Midnight has always been references as "Oh-zero hundred". You'll never hear anyone in any military service state "It happened at five minutes after midnight". Nor will they state something as insipid as "It happened at 24:05", since the clock only has twenty four hours in it. If civilians say it "3:09", military personal will say "03:09", pronounced "O'three hundred hours" or "O'three-o'nine".
I grew up in the military, my father and brother were in the Navy (which includes the Marines), my sister serves in the Army and my brother-in-law in the Coast Guard, and each one uses military time which follows those guidelines.
If someone in the military uses "local time" (i.e. "3:30 p.m.", then they must be serving in an incredibly lackadaisical branch, since they don't even bother to follow military protocol.
When on duty, you use 'military time', when at home, you use 'civilian' (NOT 'local') time.
As far as your reference to 'local time', that refers to anyone residing in their particular time zone, not how it's specified. You need to go back and check your terminology.
Which friggin' American military did you serve in?
You missed the point. First, no one mentioned midnight. And by local time he didn't mean 3:09. He meant when some said three hundred hours it meant 3:00am where he was (i.e., his local time).
Not the military I spent 20 years in (US). I've never heard of the method you mention.
Check out the comment I was responding to:
Not the military I spent 20 years in (US). I've never heard of the method (a 'zero-based time system) you mention.
Midnight, in military time, is "O'zero hundred hours". How is that not a 'zero-based system'?
I also understood what he meant by 'local time', but by contrasting the military system for reporting time (on a non-stop twenty-four hour clock) against 'local time' (a time-zone issue) he was conflating apples and oranges. He meant military time vs. 'civilian time', as those are two separate time reporting functions (i.e. "midnight" vs "o'zero-hundred hours").
Midnight, in military time, is "O'zero hundred hours". How is that not a 'zero-based system'?
Going back a long time we avoided precisely midnight; it was always 2359 or 0001hours.
Intended to avoid confusion when a date was also specified - is it midnight of the day before or after?
is it midnight of the day before or after?
ISO8901 says midnight is at the start of the day (00:00) unless it's explicitly stated to be the end (24:00), and allows both the 2359 format and the 23:59.
- and the last second of last year was 2016-12-31T23:59:60
ISO8901 says midnight is at the start of the day
When the UK government was selling off the silverware to a generation of Sids, share applications typically had to arrive by mail by the deadline date. However, sometimes there was a nominated postal address at which applications could be hand-delivered up until midnight. I guess the UK government wasn't familiar with ISO8901 ;)
AJ
and the last second of last year was 2016-12-31T23:59:60
In both my military experience (Navy) and Ham radio (which uses UTC/24 hour time) midnight ending the current day would be expressed as 24:00:00 followed by 00:00:01 of the new day.
That "dividing line" between 24:00:00 and 00:00:01 is "instant;" zero time between the last second of the old day, 24:00:00, and the first second of the new day, 00:00:01.
All told, pretty simple. HR:MIN:SEC 24:60:60. No biggie.
That "dividing line" between 24:00:00 and 00:00:01 is "instant;" zero time between the last second of the old day, 24:00:00, and the first second of the new day, 00:00:01.
I'm sure it was intended for clarity only, as giving a deadline of midnight is confusing, while giving one for "24:00:00" isn't.
zero time between the last second of the old day, 24:00:00, and the first second of the new day, 00:00:01.
I know what you mean, but it is not instantaneous. A tenth of a second after the last second of the day would be 00:00:00.1
I know what you mean, but it is not instantaneous. A tenth of a second after the last second of the day would be 00:00:00.1
And .2 seconds before that would be 23:59:59.9
Or should we go for millisecond? Or microseconds, perhaps? Or, more precisely, even less than a nanosecond after midnight, it's already the next day!
Perhaps the atomic clock at WWV could be a tad more precise... but it's still the next day. ;-}
instantaneously => occurring in an instant.
instant => happening or coming immediately;
immediate => .000000001 sec; the accuracy of WWV.
Hardly enough time to blow my nose, scratch my butt, and light my pipe. Pretty durn 'instant'. But you'll note that as we get older, time seems to slip by pretty durn quick.
That "dividing line" between 24:00:00 and 00:00:01 is "instant;" zero time between the last second of the old day, 24:00:00, and the first second of the new day, 00:00:01.
Thank you for clarifying my point, namely: your dividing line between 24:00:00 and 00:00:01 is 1 second wide not the zero time you indicated.
Thank you for clarifying my point, namely: your dividing line between 24:00:00 and 00:00:01 is 1 second wide not the zero time you indicated.
Preceded, of course, by 00:00:000000001Z
Thank you for clarifying my point, namely: your dividing line between 24:00:00 and 00:00:01 is 1 second wide not the zero time you indicated.
In the past I worked for various government organisations that used either Military Time or the 24 hour clock. On instruction they all had was you were to never schedule anything for, or report anything as happening at 00.00 hours - everything scheduled to happen around that time was to be either 23.55 or 00:05, and if you reported an event it either happened at 23.59:55 or 00:00:05 - this was to ensure everyone was clear on which day things happened. I can't think of anything which you can't safely fudge one way or the other by anywhere between five seconds to 1 one thousandth of a second. By the time you actually observe something and glance at a timepiece the event or the timer has to have been before or after the split second where 00:00:00.000 applies.
In the past I worked for various government organisations that used either Military Time or the 24 hour clock. On instruction they all had was you were to never schedule anything for, or report anything as happening at 00.00 hours
Thanks, Ernest. You used a five minute differential, we used one minute for the same purpose.
As for those going to one millionth or even one tenth of a second, what is the use of that in a practical warfare situation?
Even if orders state that the start signal will be given at midnight you and I both know that the word "go" takes at least a half second and by the time it is heard by radio five miles away ...
Most things taken out of context appear ludicrous, and if placed in a different context, they appear ridiculous.
In both my military experience (Navy) and Ham radio (which uses UTC/24 hour time) midnight ending the current day would be expressed as 24:00:00 followed by 00:00:01 of the new day.
Forgetting ISOs (which are not well publicised in the UK save where business is bound by them) I think that this is how the general populace considers midnight.
Also the 24 hour clock is not in general use - private PCs allow the choice of 12 or 24 hour clock and I have no idea what proportions of users choose which.
I, for one, never used the 24 hour clock until I moved onto** continental Europe where, in conversation, it tends to be 50:50.
** to digress, should that be into or onto?
I, for one, never used the 24 hour clock until I moved onto** continental Europe where, in conversation, it tends to be 50:50.
** to digress, should that be into or onto?
Interesting question ... I would choose either "moved to ..." or "moved on to ..."
If the sense you want is simply that you shifted to a new residence there's no reason to add anything other than "to ..."
If the sense you want is that of a life-changing decision, the end of one phase as you 'move on' to another, you need the 'phrasal verb', "to move on". For that sense, "on" is part of the verb and if the next word is "to" that will be a preposition. IMO, you should not concatenate those two distinct words together, willy-nilly, because doing so changes the meaning of your sentence.
If the sense you want is simply that you shifted to a new residence there's no reason to add anything other than "to ..."
If the sense you want is that of a life-changing decision, the end of one phase as you 'move on' to another, you need the 'phrasal verb', "to move on".
It was the latest in a series of such moves, that time intended to be +/- 10 years but ended up as 18 years!
Life changing - definitely; any change in language, food, culture, away from all acquaintances etc. has to be life-changing
As for the choice of two longer words, why use two letters when four will do just as well? It's a parallel to using five adjectives instead of one - floury :-)
It's a parallel to using five adjectives instead of one - floury
Are you implying that the author is a pastry chef, or did you mean flowery?
As for the choice of two longer words, why use two letters when four will do just as well?
I'm not sure what you mean, but I think you're suggesting "move onto" and "move on to" mean the same thing.
If so, I disagree. I think those two use different verbs with different meanings.
** to digress, should that be into or onto?
Onto: "I digress onto the lawn of my neighbor as payback for his letting his dog 'digress' on my lawn."
Onto: "I digress onto the lawn of my neighbor as payback for his letting his dog 'digress' on my lawn."
I know a fellow who had a nice fence around his front yard to keep people etc' off it. The drive was to the side of the block and also had a nice walk so people could get to the front door. Anyway, the bulk of the yard has a nice metal railing fence four feet high that was good to keep most people and animals out of the yard. The neighbour across the road had a a bunch of small dogs, I forget the breed, but they could get between the rails and the neighbour never stopped them from racing onto other people's yards. Well, after numerous complaints were ignored my friend mowed the grass short, then laid down some DC wire like you use for electric fences, but had an insulating strip under them, and another wire close by. he covered most of his yard with it. Then he let the grass grow to about an inch long before he plug the charger into the mains to power up his yard. The next time the neighbour let their dogs loose they went through the rail and started to have a piss. Followed very quickly by loud yelping when the current flowed back to them. After several such incidents the dogs kept away from his yard. The neighbour couldn't work out what hurt their dogs in his yard.
edit to add: since you were digressing about dogs, I thought I'd give you a humourous digression.
I thought I'd give you a humourous digression.
One good digression spawns another.
A mentor from my teenage days told this story from his teenage days. He and his cousin were victims of an aggressive gander on their uncle's farm. When two teen boys get their heads together, bizarre events follow. One procured a hand-crank telephone ring generator, the type with multiple horseshoe magnets and a geared rotor. The other found a Ford Model A spark coil to multiply the voltage output of the hand generator.
They found a spool of bare wire that would span the small pond where the gander ruled, tied a succulent spray of lettuce leaves at mid-point, and stretched the wire across the pond a couple of feet above the water.
The gander came paddling over, investigated the lettuce, and stretched his neck for a bite. My friend said he cranked the telephone generator as fast and hard as he could; he said that when the gander bit down and tugged on the lettuce, a stream of gander shit shot three feet across the water.
Afterward, it took only a handful of lettuce waved at the gander to send it waddling away in fear.
Afterward, it took only a handful of lettuce waved at the gander to send it waddling away in fear.
Damn, that story is so good, it needs to be included in story somewhere.
I thought I'd give you a humourous digression.
Two short ones from me. (There may be a pun involved in that sentence.)
My dad was deer hunting with a couple of my uncles, and they ran across an electic fence. My uncles had been giving my dad some grief (due to their age difference, they were WWII vets while Dad hadn't been old enough), and they dared him to grab the electric fence. Keep in mind you can touch one of those things with the BACK of your hand, and all it'll do is knock your hand away. But if you grab it, it'll lock your hand closed around it and you're in trouble then. But what Dad did was sneaky - he said, okay. Then just as he touched the fence, he grabbed one of my uncles. So while my dad got a little of it, as he was the conduit, my uncle got the main zap. They quit giving my dad grief after that.
Second one involved me and my cousins. Again, a bit of an age difference. We were out mushroom hunting and ran across an electric fence. We'd all heard about the electric fence story from our dads, so they dared me to pee on it. I said, sure, if you do it first. One of them did. I didn't have to, the rest of us almost peed ourselves laughing at his getting zapped.
I think the moral is - never underestimate the cruelty of cousins and in-laws. Shocking, eh?
Second one involved me and my cousins. Again, a bit of an age difference. We were out mushroom hunting and ran across an electric fence. We'd all heard about the electric fence story from our dads, so they dared me to pee on it. I said, sure, if you do it first. One of them did. I didn't have to, the rest of us almost peed ourselves laughing at his getting zapped.
Not funny. One of my mother's brothers had to adopt because he peed on an electric fence.
Not funny. One of my mother's brothers had to adopt because he peed on an electric fence.
Actually, it is. He should win his own Darwin Award, as he voluntarily elected to remove his genes from the future human evolution.
He should win his own Darwin Award, as he voluntarily elected to remove his genes from the future human evolution.
which ranks right up there with drunken frat boys in a fart-igniting contest.
which ranks right up there with drunken frat boys in a fart-igniting contest.
Which, unlike D.S.'s assertion, is what makes it so funny. It's hard to feel sorry for someone who's own stupidity and hubris injures them. Those are called 'just deserts'. You can feel pity, as all right thinking people would, but that doesn't make it any less humorous.
It's hard to feel sorry for someone who's own stupidity and hubris injures them.
It's not so hard when it's a relative.
It's not so hard when it's a relative.
This was the same cousin that took me out to see the litter of baby pigs ... then pushed me off the fence into the pigpen when I was younger. You ever fallen face first into a pigpen? Not something I care to repeat - especially since momma pig was pissed and nearly got me.
especially since momma pig was pissed and nearly got me.
Seriously, that was a cousin long overdue for an appointment with an axe handle out behind the barn. Adult pigs are nothing to fool with, especially a sow thinking you're a threat to her young.
Adult pigs are nothing to fool with, especially a sow thinking you're a threat to her young.
Even worse, domesticated pigs can go wild in one generation; the boars grow tusks and have a foul temper at the best of times. You keep close to a tree when they are around.
We should be profoundly grateful that pigs and bears cannot cross-breed: just imagine a tusked critter with claws that could outrun a saddle horse and climb trees!
Odd twist: female bears and pigs are both called sows.
And the males are both called boars.
There are only two? I guess there aren't many combination pig/bears left!
There are only two? I guess there aren't many combination pig/bears left!
Nope, they nearly all got morphed into a human form and elected to the US Congress.
Nope, they nearly all got morphed into a human form and elected to the US Congress.
For the moment, they're mostly harmless. They're too preoccupied kneeling, swearing loyalty, and ignoring the venality of the Orange One. When they're forced to confront the impending consequence of the mid-term elections, they'll snap out of it with ravening ferocity.
Will that be ravening or raving or both?
Ravening while they attempt to save their seat;
Raving when they lose it.
Raving when they lose it.
If they win and are like their leader, they will be raving about not winning by a greater margin. OOps! I almost forgot, he lost the popular vote.
Those are called 'just deserts'.
Like moving to Arizona, you get just deserts. If you go to a restaurant or Baskin & Robins you can get just desserts. The extra s makes a difference you can taste.
since you were digressing about dogs, I thought I'd give you a humourous digression.
Those are the best kind. 'D
That "dividing line" between 24:00:00 and 00:00:01 is "instant;
Except for the hour up to thirteen o'clock ;)
AJ
military personal will say "03:09", pronounced "O'three hundred hours" or "O'three-o'nine".
Members of the military do not use a colon between hours and minutes when write a time, so it is 0309. I was in the USAF for 7 years. A common day-time reference use for a given year was 187:0309, where 187 referred to the day of the year (i.e. January 1 was 001 and February 28 was 059).
Members of the military do not use a colon between hours and minutes when write a time, so it is 0309. I was in the USAF for 7 years. A common day-time reference use for a given year was 187:0309, where 187 referred to the day of the year (i.e. January 1 was 001 and February 28 was 059).
Alas, when I was young I heard military time all the time, since I lived on (or near) base as a dependent. However, I didn't read military times, so I'm not familiar with the proper formatting.
I had several family members in the military, and planned to attend Annapolis myself, but Type I, Juvenile Diabetes intervened and I never had the opportunity (which was probably for the best, since I don't take orders particular well. :(
Military time must always have a zone code with it so everyone knows what the time reference being used is. Most military organisation use Zulu (also known as UTC or Greenwich Meantime) for cross zone communications.
Must always? No, not for local operations.
Our short frag orders would just be something like, okay, guys, we're going to move to point alpha at eleven hundred, we'll cross phase line beta at twelve hundred, and we should be at objective charile by fourteen hundred.
At the division level, there might be a comment line on the top of the whole operations order that time referenced were Zulu or local, and if it was Zulu, there'd typically also be a reference that we were operating at Zulu minus five. I think the only time I ever saw full Zulu time used was when we deployed some guys to Europe for training - and then they wore two watches. (Back in the 80's, when I was in.)
Military time must always have a zone code with it so everyone knows what the time reference being used is
Not always. On a military facility, people use military time inferring local time, not Zulu time, without a reference to a time zone. Usually something like - Be here at 0600 tomorrow. Zulu is typically used when the events need to be correlated to events occurring in multiple time zones.
What does 2200J reference? I thought it a reference to UTC or Julian date-time, but the number format is wrong for both.
What does 2200J reference? I thought it a reference to UTC or Julian date-time, but the number format is wrong for both.
The J is the Time Zone Designation, as I said, the Juliet of J time zone - not sure since it's been a while, but I think it's UTC +10.
As i said, a lot of people mix up the 24 hour time with military time, which is why they use the two formats and the designator to make sure it's clear which it is. Most of the time the military will be using the 24 hour time system and not the full military time in their verbal communications because they're using the local time zone.
Time Zone Designation
J was probably just a poor choice for your example of a time zone designation for J is not used for that purpose. J is used to designate the local time zone.
https://www.timeanddate.com/time/zones/military
Secondly, if 13:42 May 7, 2017 (UTC) is converted to a Julian date you would get 2457881.0708333333.
Finally, the term Military Time is a commonly used term for the 24-hour clock. It is not a separate timing system. The Military Time heading of the following link defines the written and spoken formats used by the United States and allied English-speaking military forces, which differ in some respects from other twenty-four-hour time systems:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/24-hour_clock
J was probably just a poor choice for your example of a time zone designation for J is not used for that purpose.
I did say it's been a over 20 years since I used it, and I only every saw Juliet or Zulu time or it was 24 hour format.
Thanks for the links, although the first one shows the time 22:43:45 the seconds makes what I was saying clear by saying:
In the 24-hour time notation, the day begins at midnight, 00:00, and the last minute of the day begins at 23:59. Where convenient, the notation 24:00 may also be used to refer to midnight at the end of a given date – that is, 24:00 of one day is the same time as 00:00 of the following day.
and
Military usage, as agreed between the United States and allied English-speaking military forces,[10] differs in some respects from other twenty-four-hour time systems:
No hours/minutes separator is used when writing the time, and a letter designating the time zone is appended (for example "0340Z").
Leading zeros are always written out and are required to be spoken, so 5:43 a.m. is spoken "zero five forty-three" (casually) or "zero five four three" (military radio), as opposed to "five forty-three" or "five four three".
Military time zones are lettered and thus given word designations via the NATO phonetic alphabet. For example, 6:00 a.m. US Eastern Standard Time (UTC−5) would be written "0600R" and spoken "zero six hundred Romeo".
Local time is designated as zone J or "Juliett". "1200J" ("twelve hundred Juliett") is noon local time.
Greenwich Mean Time (or Coordinated Universal Time) is designated time zone Z, and thus called "Zulu time".
Hours are always "hundred", never "thousand"; 1000 is "ten hundred" not "one thousand"; 2000 is "twenty hundred".
That makes it clear a Military time notation is - 0340Z - while a 24 hours time notation is - 23:59 - so they have a slightly different presentation (which is what I've been saying all along).
Leading zeros are always written out and are required to be spoken, so 5:43 a.m. is spoken "zero five forty-three" (casually) or "zero five four three" (military radio), as opposed to "five forty-three" or "five four three".
I don't recall hearing "zero five forty three" spoken format very often, generally they used "O'five forty three (supposedly, times don't use dashes, though I'm not sure whether the military does or not). I'm sure for significant times, where orders were given and no one wanted to risk confusion, they'd probably spell it out as you suggest, though. It just wasn't a common usage around most military establishments.
I can't recall how the exchanges (shops) and commissaries (grocery stores) listed times, since that was used by both military personal and civilians (either dependents or civil service personnel), though I suspect they added the colons.
Typically, most bases just use the local time, but anyone referencing oversea schedules (like the time of an offensive strike) would typically default to Zulu time, so everyone would be using the same time (the reason many overseas personnel wear two watches). They typically wouldn't EST (I'm not sure what the letter designation for that would be) or any other specific local time. Again, if European forces used Washington, England, German and Zurich time, all hell would break out as the likelihood of someone mistaking one for another increases dramatically.
That makes it clear a Military time notation is - 0340Z - while a 24 hours time notation is - 23:59 - so they have a slightly different presentation (which is what I've been saying all along).
I was confused by the earlier note that "I've never heard any military operation use zeros for time", which didn't seem to make sense since most clocks start at zero hundred time.
It just wasn't a common usage around most military establishments.
The 12-hour clock is the most common format in the civilian community. So military personnel generally use the 12-hour clock when talking with non-military people and with their family; especially when they think use of the 24-hour clock would be confusing.
My dad was military during my early childhood; he retired when I was 16. Around the house, we always used the 12-hour clock. If your family was similar in that regard, then your dad probably used the 24-hour clock when around other members of the military - but you weren't aware of it.
As far as pronunciation of the leading 0, I have heard it said both ways: zero and oh. My impression was zero was used for emphasis and oh for casual conversation.
My dad was military during my early childhood; he retired when I was 16. Around the house, we always used the 12-hour clock. If your family was similar in that regard, then your dad probably used the 24-hour clock when around other members of the military - but you weren't aware of it.
Don't forget, I was the one who said "Hell, yeah the military uses 24-hour time" based on the comment about "after 20 years in the military I never heard any one use zeroes in time keeping.
What does 2200J reference?
That's the time on Jupiter, though I'm not sure which of the 38-hour Jupiter time zones it would properly be. 'D
Using military time avoids a lot of these problems, "the news at eighteen hundred hours."
Unless of course it was in the morning when it would be called something like "the news at oh six hundred hours."
In actual usage, tv stations want to emphasize who they are, above when it is, so they start off with the station's name/network and number and put the time at the end.
So it would be stuff like "KWTF5 News at 6", or "Action 13 news at 6:00" or "Fox 10 News at 6PM".
Even when they want to emphasize the time by bragging they have it very, they still will say something like "KWTF First News."
Of course if you are in a certain ethnic enclave in South Africa (think of Shaka), Zulu time could be local time.
There is also a town in Indiana (USA) named Zulu. Local time there might be Zulu time.
It seems to me someone either isn't reading the post properly or they don't understand them. There are 2 ways time can be given- written or oral - and three ways of presenting it - military, 24 hour civilian, general civilian (which is the a.m. & p.m. and not covered further in this post).
They way I was taught was formal military communications used the military format and always included the time zone designation. However, if everything was happening in the same time zone, then you dropped out of the military time zone to using the 24 hour civilian method.
Thus a textual message would normal have a time like 2200Z and be read out as twenty-two hundred Zulu. Full military time was normally reserved for official communications, especially those across multiple time zones - say one from LA to NY.
While a verbal communication to someone in the same local area would be stated without the time zone and thus use the normal 24 hour system of twenty-two hundred hours.
Most verbal communications are within the local time zone and thus don't require the time zone designator, and thus it's dropped and the communication becomes the basic 24 hour time format. The same is often true of local written communications. Both military time and 24 hour time use the same basic system and words, with the only differences being the use of the colon in the 24 hour time and the drop of the colon with the addition of the time zone designator for full military time. Most of the time there won't be a difference between the two in daily usage that isn't in formal textual communications.
