I remember seeing some clocks like that when I was in the Army. As I recall, the hour hand makes one complete revolution in one day, while the minute hand makes one complete revolution in one hour. Now we have digital clocks that can show 24 or 12 hour cycles.
You're right but that's true of all 24 hour clocks. This one breaks all the conventions about clocks, 12 or 24 hour. For example, the 24 is normally at the top of the dial, not the bottom. The hour hand is usually the shortest hand, not the longest. The second hand is supposed to be equal to or longer than the minute hand and the minute hand is supposed to be longer than the hour hand. Because we all "know" these rules, whether we realize it or not, we can intuitively look at an analog clockand know instantly what time it is without thinking about it. This clock requires you to read/think about it.
This thread is taking an ususual turn from expensive letters to odd clocks!
At my age, I cannot remember what I had for breakfast, so, when I saw what I recognized as a 24-hour clock, I just made a comment about seeing them in the Army. I have not seen one since.
I did not analize the position of the numbers or the length of the hands. Now I realize the difference when it is mentioned. Do you know the answer to the riddle, or are you looking for the answer?
At the risk of looking stupid again (a common situation for me), I never felt I could glance at a 24-hour clock and know the time without thinking about it and reading the numbers. (In two years, I never thought about 24-hour time without "translating" into civilian AM and PM time.) If others have that same limitation, it would not make any difference where the numbers are.
Still, if someone offered a 12-hour clock with numbers located out of the traditional positions, I can understand the problem that would create in using it in the normal "glance" fashion. I prefer a watch with traditional hands over a digital for the reason that I do not have to "read" the numbers to get a feel for the time.
Knowing the nature of kwill1911's interests, I suspect there is more to this story. kwill1911, please tell us more.
Nope, that's all I know about it. I have several other clocks by the same maker (Hammond, the people that also made the organs.). Most of the clocks are standard 12 hour dials made for the Postal Telegraph service. An interesting side note: since this was the early days of electricity they didn't know how to design an electric motor to start itself. So these clocks have a "spin to start" knob on the back.
I also have some other 24 hour clocks but they have conventional dials.
Sorry for high-jacking the thread.
[This message has been edited by kwill1911 (edited 08-09-2004).]
Bummer! If the clock is so early, perhaps the 24-hour convention had not been established, or the maker did not know about the convention.
I just realized that the lower half of the face has a dark portion, which often corresponds with the hours of darkness from 1800 to 0600 hours. Maybe that is part of the "glance" factor before the convention was established.
Your 100 % correct, that's exactly what the dark half moon was meant to be. Some Swiss Military wrist watches had the same dark half moon but most have the standard 24 hour dial so the dark half moon would be at the top of the watch rather than the bottom. I guess it's interesting info for some, but what does this have to do with Colt.
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JudgeColt: Bummer! If the clock is so early, perhaps the 24-hour convention had not been established, or the maker did not know about the convention.
I just realized that the lower half of the face has a dark portion, which often corresponds with the hours of darkness from 1800 to 0600 hours. Maybe that is part of the "glance" factor before the convention was established. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
21 - 27 of 27 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.