# Thoughts On The 24 Hour Watch From A New Owner



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

Today I strapped on my first 24 hour watch and become a new member of the 24 hour club. Let me say that my new Glycine Airman Base 22 Purist with the 12 on top that arrived today is truly awesome. If I could do cartwheels, I would. :-!

Here are some of my initial impressions and thoughts in no particular order of importance. The 24 hour dial is going to take some adjusting to to put to practical use. Nothing to do with the conversion from 12 to 24 hour time; I've been doing that for 34 years in the fire service.

Intuitive reading and telling time at a glance is not possible for me with this dial, yet. It may come with time, but right now it takes a little work. What do I mean by that? Well, like most anyone, I can tell the time at a glance on a lumed 12 hour watch dial that has no numbers, in the dark, without my glasses. Not so with my new 24; I need to see the dial. I have not really needed my glasses to tell the time until now, but I'm OK with it. Life changes.

Squeezing 24 hour indexes/numbers into a watch dial neccessitates them being much closer together than their 12 hour counterparts. The "coarse" readings on a 12 hour dial are in memory and don't require any thinking on my part. The 24 dial does. Here's what I've learned so far. The 12 on top is good; I really like it. The top of the watch is daylight (0600-1800), and the bottom is night time(1800-0600). That is fairly intuitive, even without a multi colored bezel or dial to distinguish between day and night. Some Airman dials and other watches have darker shading for the 1800 to 0600 half of the dial to signify darkness. The Base 22 does not.

I've already learned that breaking my watch dial down into 4 quadrants simplifies things for me. Quadrant 1 starts at the lower left and goes from midnight to 0600. Quadrant 2 from 0600-1200, etc. At a glance of the loomed hands in the dark, I can get a pretty good guess at the actual time. Straight up/down or straight horizontal equals 0000, 0600, 1200, and 1800 for the hour hand. The in-between or 45 degree positions for the hour hand equal 0300, 0900, 1500, and 2100. I can get pretty close with a glance, but it is easy to be off by an hour or more without actually being able to see the numbers on the dial.

The minute hand is the one thing that is intuitive and is easy to use at a glance, even in the dark. Telling the actual minutes is not exacly easy for the middle minutes though, i.e. the ones that are not right next to an even hour index. The 5 minute marks are easy as they correspond to the even hour indexes which are heavy lines; 5 minutes = 1400 index, 10 minutes = 1600 index, 15 minutes = 1800 index, etc. Between the 1400 and 1600 hour indexes, for example, are minute marks 6, 7, 8, and 9. Six and nine minutes are clear, small lines and are easy to tell. Seven and eight are "in limbo" and are basically the left and right sides of the round 1500 hour index. They do have lines, but they are so close to the round hour indexes that I don't see them clearly like you can in the photo below. Luckily, my life is not so precise that I must be able to distinguish if it is actually 2207 or 2208 hours. The eagle eyed among us may be able to see them clearly.

It's not easy to put these random thoughts into words that others will understand, but I tried and I hope this helps new 24 hour owners or wannabes (not a bad thing). Here is a picture of the Base 22 Purist dial. These thoughts only apply to purist 24s, not 12/GMTs.

Although it takes adjusting too and a little work, telling time is actually fun again. I love the new Glycine and I'm having a blast just reading my watch. Not sure what I'm going to do when my in-bound Aviator 24 hour with the 24 on top arrives. My head may explode if I think too hard about it. :-s

PS I bought my Airman from Falcon Watch and it was a very positive experience. I spoke to Mr. Johnson after ordering the watch and a couple of extra bands from his eBay site. He includes a copy of the airman book with each purchase of an Airman. I had read that Falcon Watch is highly regarded and I can confirm that through my experience.


----------



## Dennis Smith (Feb 15, 2006)

Congrats! Thanks for the great write-up. Some thoughts...
1) I think you put it all really well...I couldn't have said any of it better myself and had the exact same experiences with my first 24.

2) I think you picked the perfect watch for your first 24. A real classic design and in a size that's a bit easier to read than many of the previous Airmans in 36 and 38mm.

3) Good luck getting on with the newer 24 on top . I've found that in my collection I can never have two 24 hour watches that are inverse to each other. It's too much for me . Although there are 12 on tops that I like a lot I'm committed to my Early Bird (24 on top) and can't have any of them. Maybe it's just a good excuse not to buy any more watches. Or maybe I should really be committed 

Anyway, glad you're having fun with it! It will get more intuitive, but the main thing is that you enjoy it.


----------



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

In less than 24 hours with the 24, I have already improved with intuitive reading of time at a glance. Keeping in mind the quarters I spoke of in my first post, it's easy to see the "key markers"; 0600, 1200, 1800, and 0000. My eye is already discerning the *even* hour lines "in-between" the key markers. Right now, the hour hand is on the small round dot between key marker 0600 and the next even hour line, so I know it's 0700. The easy to read hour hand is on 12 minutes, so it's 0712 at the moment. I can read the watch without my glasses again. 

As Dennis stated, I think this Airman is a good size. First impression coming out of the box was that it's pretty small. I think all the close up photos I've seen on the Internet gave me the impression that the Airman is a very large watch, which it's not. I would'nt want the dial to be any smaller.

My initial foray into reading the time quickly in the dark was deceiving. It didn't seem like it would be possible, but it wasn't really dark enough yet to let all the lume details stand out. I took the new puppy out around 0000 last night and, low and behold, I could see all the indexes; the key markers, the even hour lines, and the odd hour dots.

The real key to this dial is understanding the 4 key markers of 0600, 1200, 1800, and 0000, and the in-between even hour lines of 0800, 1000, 1400, 1600, 2000, and 2200. There are only two in-between hours between each pair of key markers and it's really falling into place by keeping that in mind.

The shape of the hour hand, with the stubby, bold arrow, really helps too. The "tail" on the hour hand that some say is cheating (allows you to look opposite when the hand is on 2000 to see that it = 8:00 pm) isn't really even noticeable unless I look for it. It is just a neat design feature to me.

And as Dennis stated, I'm sure the 24 on top watch will cause mayhem with my new found ability to read this 24 hour purist dial.


----------



## SiebSp (Nov 1, 2006)

Interesting topic!

I have followed a similar process as you described in learning to read, first my Poljot Aviator, and later my Early Bird. It took me some time to realise that for reading the minutes, the position of the hand does not differ from that on a 12 hour watch, only the extra markers are a bit confusing. A matter of ignoring the odd-hour markings when reading the minutes, or realising they stand for 2,5 minutes.

To me, the minute markings of your watch would be more readable if the odd-hour markers would be a little more to te centre of the dial. Let's say flush with the inside of the even-hour markers, as they are on my Early Bird.


----------



## whifferdill (Jan 11, 2007)

Nice post and i enjoyed your essay - like Dennis says - a great first choice for a 24 hour watch and to be honest, with perhaps the exception of the Fortis 24 hour flieger or the Guinand Flying Officer, I don't think there are any 24 hour watches out there that can match the Airman and the 22 with its size, 12 on top and classic styling is one of the best, yet imo.

Once you get used to 24 hour, as you say in your essay, it's hard to go back, at least, on a full time basis, anyway

Enjoy.


----------



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

Thanks for the input and positive feedback. After wearing my new Airman for 5 days, I finally wore another watch yesterday. My blue Mako got to spend the day with me. Today, though, I'm taking the Airman around with me again.

I've also enjoyed the WUS forum and all the energy and knowledge here. Until just a few weeks back I never really spent much time on a watch forum or knew about 24 hour watches.


----------



## sheepshearer (Apr 29, 2010)

i have to say i can chop and change between 24 and 12 hour watches quite happily these days. probably the same bit of brain that allows people to learn more than one language - or something...

24 on top makes more sense to me and i don't think i could handle a 12 on top (the sun rising on the left hitting noon and setting on the right mnemonic would only work for me if i was in the southern hemisphere)

having said that, people do learn more than 2 languages, so i'm not saying never for a 12 on top


----------



## Dennis Smith (Feb 15, 2006)

sheepshearer said:


> 24 on top makes more sense to me and i don't think i could handle a 12 on top (the sun rising on the left hitting noon and setting on the right mnemonic would only work for me if i was in the southern hemisphere)


That's funny. I've heard that argument before, but I see it the opposite way (and why 12 on top feels better to me). If you're facing the sun, looking south, then the sun rises on the left and tracks the watch face to the right, setting in the west.


----------



## sheepshearer (Apr 29, 2010)

you're absolutely right you know - guess it depends when facing south whether you're looking at the sun itself or a sundial 

so as is usual in life, there is no right or wrong - just a particular view from where you're stood


----------



## Xaque (Aug 19, 2010)

sheepshearer said:


> 24 on top makes more sense to me and i don't think i could handle a 12 on top (the sun rising on the left hitting noon and setting on the right mnemonic would only work for me if i was in the southern hemisphere)


For me it doesn't even have anything to do with the sun as to why I prefer 24 on top.

I see it like this: A 24h watch is just *logical*.

The Second hand goes around once every minute, Minute hand once an hour, and Hour hand once a day.

Following this, a new minute starts when the second hand is at the top, new hour when the minute hand is at the top, and new day when the hour hand is at the top.

Having noon at the top seems just as illogical as having the hour hand go around twice.

But that's just my humble opinion.


----------



## Dennis Smith (Feb 15, 2006)

I like that argument!


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

Xaque is right that it makes more sense to have the hour minute and second hand all start at the same place.

Those who like 12 on top are right that it makes sense to have the hour hand pointing towards the position of the sun. 


:think:


There is a solution which reconciles both these views: have the hour, minute and second hand all start their journeys from the bottom of the dial! 

This can be achieved simply by turning a standard 24 at the top watch through 180 degrees, and ignoring the numbers (made easier by the fact that on most 24 hour watches they are now all upside down!). So then when all the hands are pointing downwards you read the dial as saying that it is exactly midnight. When the minute hand then travels through 90 degrees (so is pointing to the left of the dial), it is quarter past midnight. When it travels through 180 degrees (so points to the top of the dial) it is half past midnight. And when it has travelled through 360 degrees (so points to the bottom of the dial again) it is 1am. 


Well the 24 hour dial requires some relearning anyway, so why not go the whole hog? I have not tried this yet myself, by the way. Anyone care to give it a go?


----------



## Xaque (Aug 19, 2010)

Eh, you now what, while we're screwing everything up regarding Noon at the bottom or top... perhaps we should just compromise!










AMAZING 24 HOUR WALL CLOCK+ A HANDY GUIDE TO YOUR DAY - eBay (item 260538229615 end time Oct-12-10 03:55:00 PDT)


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

Not only do I own one of those clocks, I actually talked the seller into making them in the first place!  I can't quite remember what possessed me to email someone on ebay and ask him to make a 24 hour clock, but he did! 

I understand he designs and prints the faces himself, buying in the movement etc (of course). 

It is actually very high quality - I was really pleased with it.  

The only (minor) negative is that for a wall clock it gets throught the AA batteries relatively quickly. But that might just be mine, and you can use rechargeables easily enough.

Mine though has morning/afternoon (ie 12) on top. I remember I asked him to make it with for evening/night (ie 24) on top, but he said that when he tried laying it out, 'It didn't look right' and so he made me one with the morning/afternoon on top !  

Going to his ebay website now, I see that actually he has two different varients on there - and I guess he would make you whichever one you prefer...


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

PS I should mention that I have had it for 18 months or so, and when I last checked his website a few months ago, they were not advertised any more. So if you want one it might be an idea to get in now whilst he is still making them...


----------



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

It is not logical to keep track of time on a round dial, but it is practical. Tracking time, which I believe really is linear, in a straight line would require a very long watch. 

We use clocks and watches as a reference. Digital really makes the most "sense"; having multiple analog watches doesn't make sense. We do it because we like to, though.

After starting this thread, I have come to understand my 24 hour watch much better. I like the daylight hours at the top, but that isn't necessarily "right". The minutes, hours, and days all starting at the top can be argued as a good method, but it's still just arbitrary. I think it would be more "logical" to have the hour that starts the day placed at the crown. But that is my logic. Of course, a crown at 4 o'clock may skew that idea.

Once I stopped trying to fit my watch, in this case a 12 at top, into some logical rationalization, I realized I just need to know how to tell time on MY watch. I could delete all the numbers on the dial and tell time with my minutes starting at the bottom if I want to. Heck, take a watch, 12 or 24 hour, with just indexes for minutes and hours, without any numbers, and you could track time on YOUR watch with 12 being anywhere you want. 

I've become very comfortable, in a short while, telling the time with my 12 on top. Remember, that's all it's really about, being able to tell the time with your watch/clock, however you choose to read it. there isn't right or wrong.


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

Red Rover said:


> It is not logical to keep track of time on a round dial, but it is practical. Tracking time, which I believe really is linear, in a straight line would require a very long watch.


Well, whilst time is linear the earth rotates once a day so it makes sense to have an hour hand rotating once per day, to model that.



Red Rover said:


> We use clocks and watches as a reference. Digital really makes the most "sense"; having multiple analog watches doesn't make sense. We do it because we like to, though.


Digital offers less graphical information than an analogue 24 hour watch, which displays how much of the day has elapsed and how much is to come. Thus digital is inferior. This explains why so many prefer analogue.

Analogue watches are more aesthetically pleasing, too.

Thus there are good reasons for using an analogue 24 hour watch.

Having a subdial to represent how much of the year has passed would equally make sense - it would model the rotation of the earth round the sun. And would display the amount of year elapsed and the time remaining. As far as I know no manufacturer makes one of these (I may be wrong) the nearest you can get being a one click at a time month display subdial, which is a poor substitute.


----------



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

Hi Dan, every thing you said makes sense to you. But they are subjective thoughts, just like mine are. Who's to say where the "day" actually starts on a 24 hour watch? Not the day itself, but the way we track it on the watch and apply the hours to our lives. 

My shift at the fire department goes from 0700 to 0700; 24 hours, just like my watch. I could work with a watch that had 0700 or 1900 at the top too. For me, THAT would make a lot of sense :-d.

Good dialogue here. :-!


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

Hi 

Thanks for your thoughts.

Thinking about it, a watch serves two related functions. 

1) It represents the passage of the day. This helps one coordinate one’s actions with the light and dark, warmth and cold etc as the day elapses. 

2) And it provides a numerical representation of the time of day, which is useful for coordination with other human beings. 

Being in the UK, my watch is now telling me its time for bed!! So I better not start on the nature of subjectivity now!  More another day. Goodnight! 

Best wishes

Dan


----------



## Xaque (Aug 19, 2010)

Red Rover said:


> My shift at the fire department goes from 0700 to 0700; 24 hours, just like my watch. I could work with a watch that had 0700 or 1900 at the top too. For me, THAT would make a lot of sense :-d.
> 
> Good dialogue here. :-!


This is why I sometimes wish my watch denoted the odd hours. Would make the 0700-1500, 1500-2300, 2300-0700 shifts prettier on the watch face.

Of course, when I started out in the business I worked for a company that decided days start and end at 0200 (not midnight).

That was a nightmare to conform too.... and I was 24 hrs early for a few of my shifts. (If the shift started at 0030 Monday, what it meant for the rest of the world was that it started 0030 Tuesday.)

The idea of a separate hand for the time of year would be really awesome. Much the same way a GMT hand operates, have the months noted around the face of the watch. One full revolution per year.

Man... That'd be really classy.

Although it would probably have to be done with an electronic system... with the different days in the month and leap years and all.


----------



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

PHILOSOPHERDAN said:


> Being in the UK, my watch is now telling me its time for bed!! .......Dan


C'mon, you didn't really need a watch to know that..............................

RR


----------



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

Here's some interesting info cut from an article I found in a link at russian24hour.info

History « 24hourtime.info

*Non-standard time*
Timekeeping methods varied from country to country. In Italy, they counted their hours from sunset, so by sunrise in the morning the hour was already about 12 or 13. The 1 to 24 numbering system used in Italy was known in France, Germany, and England as Italian Hours. The northern Europeans often divided the 24 hours up into two sets of 1 to 12, probably arranged so that 12 noon is at the top of the dial, and 12 midnight at the bottom. Notice how the Wells dial, above, doesn't actually use the Roman numeral XII for either.
The famous clock of the Beata Vergine (later San Gottardo) in Milan, built around 1330, was one of the earliest to strike a bell a number of times to tell the time (not just striking once on the hour). In 1335, Galvano Fiamma writes:
There is there a wonderful clock, because there is a very large clapper which strikes a bell 24 times according to the 24 hours of the day and night, and thus at the first hour of the night gives one sound, at the second two strokes, and so distinguishes one hour from another, which is of greatest use to men of every degree.​By contrast, the French and Northern Europeans were using the 24 hour double-XII dial, and were also introducing the single 12 hour dial. The 12 hour system was known as German hours in Bohemia, and French hours in Italy. Clocks imported into Italy were often converted from French-style numbering to use the 24 hour Italian system. In Southern Germany (Augsburg), which became one of the main centres of clockmaking by the 15th century, clockmakers were making clocks with both 12 hour and 24 hour dials, sometimes with both on the same clock. They used the terms 'great' and 'small' time systems to refer to the 24 and 12 hour time systems. This German alarm clock from the 1500s has three rings, each showing Arabic rather than Roman numerals:
 
*When did the roman-style counting (starting from dawn with 1) give way to our modern style counting, starting at midnight (or midday) with 0? Perhaps when clocks were regularly synchronized with the sun. Noon/midday is the easiest and most accurate way of synchronizing clocks with solar time, the basis for time until clocks were accurate enough to track the Earth's irregularities. *
*Why the move to 12 hour time?*
Both the 24 hour time system (1 to 24, as used in Italy) and the double-XII system (1 to 12 then 1 to 12 again, as used in England and Northern Europe) can be displayed on a 24 hour dial. So why did the 12 hour dial, with the added ambiguity of AM and PM, become popular and eventually dominate, for general-purpose public clocks, at least, between 1400 and 1600?
Here are some suggestions:
reasonargumentsobjectionspower needed to ring bellRinging a bell up to 24 times uses up a lot of power (up to twice as much as ringing the bell 12 times!), and reduces the period between windings. The 12 hour dial reduced the amount of power required to ring the bell on the hour. Also, portable spring-driven clocks - and later watches - were the latest thing, and the power savings gained by the 12 hour dial were eagerly seized by the clockmakers. Italy eventually followed other European countries, which had started switching to the 12 hour clock by 1550.A double-XII dial could have had matching bell ringing sequences (1 to 12, then 1 to 12) but still displayed on a 24 hour dial. Why change a familiar dial?lose count of 24 strokesIt's been suggested is that people lost count while listening to a long run of up to 24 bells. So the switch to 12 made it easier to tell the timeClock makers would have introduced some form of code (one bell rings before 12, another bell rings from 12 to 24, for example) if they had had the power to spare. Besides, counting bells isn't that difficult, really. 4 year old children can do it. Although it's easy to lose count if you're in a noisy environment.too difficult to readA 24 hour dial squeezes in 6 hours between what the 12 hour dial shows as 0900 and 1200 - so it's difficult to tell the difference between, say, 10 and 11, because they're closer together. This is particularly true before minute hands were widely used (before about 1650?) People are looking at a tower clock from some distance too, and upwards - it would be much easier for a 12 hour dial (or even a 6 hour dial).It would depend on the design, partly, and the way the dial was numbered. And 'difficult' is very subjective: we now learn the 12 hour dial intensively when young, so how do we know whether 24 hour dials are really harder to read? Do we find minutes hard to read - they've got 60 divisions?shows up inaccurate clocks too quicklyA 24 hour dial increases the required precision for the hour hand, because the hour hand moves less during an hour: if it's not accurate, it will soon start to be slower or faster. On a 12 hour dial with the same works, it takes twice as long to look like it's an hour adrift.An ingenious but not entirely convincing argument!not enough resolution for accurate time keepingWith more hours squeezed into a smaller arc, it was harder to read the exact time from a single hand on the 24 hour dial than on the 12 hour dial. This was before the widespread introduction of the minute hand, of course, so the difference between half past 10 and a quarter past ten would be harder to discern on a 24 hour dial, unless the radius of the dial was very big.This is a more convincing version of the above argument. But I'm not sure if the dates for the introduction of the minute hand and the growing popularity of the 12 hour dial coincide, though. Anyway, no clocks were really accurate (to a minute or so) before the introduction of the pendulum in about 1650.dominance of one country forced others to adaptThe clockmakers of France and, to some extent, Germany tended to use the 12 hour dial more than the 24 hour dial, and the technical superiority of their clocks forced out the less efficient makers of clocks with 24 hour dials, such as Italy. The gradual drift northward of the power centres of Europe during the renaissance is well documented.This is plausible. But is it true? And what about English clockmakers?avoids duplication so quicker to makeThe urge to simplify complexity and thereby reduce work and hopefully improve accuracy led clockmakers to eliminate the duplicate dial numbers and rely on context to resolve the ambiguity. There are other examples of similar attempts: the six hour dial, Benjamin Franklin's 8 hour dial, and so on.This theory suggests that clockmakers are the type of people who would just hate to have unnecessary duplication, even if it was merely the numbering on the dial. Making life easier for developers and harder for users has a very modern ring to it.24 hour time became Italian-onlyItalians were counting from sunset with their 1-24 system, and the Northern Europeans were counting from midnight with their double-XII systems. Perhaps the 24 hour dial became associated with sunset-starting clocks, so the 12 hour dial became the standard for midnight-starting clocks (which eventually became the standard).This links in with the Northern-drift theory of the renaissance above, which may be true.
I don't suppose we'll ever know for sure!


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

Thanks for the link Red Rover - looks fascinating, I will try to find time to read it all...



Xaque said:


> This is why I sometimes wish my watch denoted the odd hours. Would make the 0700-1500, 1500-2300, 2300-0700 shifts prettier on the watch face.


 Well it also is more rational to number the odd hours rather than the even hours (if you are going to number alternate hours). There are two reasons.

1) Because the even hours have dual denotation: thus the first one denotes denote 5 minutes and (on a 24 on top dial) 2am, the second denotes 4am and 10 minutes etc.. Thus rather than plump for one or other of these it makes more sense to write down the odd hours, for at the point where they fall they denote only the odd hours 1am, 3am etc. And we do not really need to have the minutes written down as they are largely instinctual anyway.

2) There is also more space to put the numbers at the odd positions.

I should add that I think it makes more sense to write down on the face alternate odd hours rather than write on the face *every* hour in order to keep the numbers a large easily readable size and to prevent the dial becoming cluttered.

Thus this Raketa almost gets it right: 
Raketa 24 Stunden mechanische Uhr SCHWARZ - Russische Uhren - Raketa

It is neat, elegant and easy to read. However for some strange reason it puts the lines for the minutes inside the numbers, rather than putting them round the outside circumference of the dial as is traditional. If it reversed those, and perhaps added a dot or dash to denote the transition point for the odd hours (not sure this is necessary though, and would not look so neat) then it would be the most logical, easily readable dial.

My conclusion is that there is not a single watch in current manufacture which has the most logical dial layout - as far as combining easy readability and elegance goes, at least. And possibly no watch ever manufactured.

Of course if you put a higher priority on elegance, then something like the forthcoming Airnautics Classic-24, may fit the bill. This watch has fewer numbers which makes it more elegant to look at, and very clear for those who are familiar with reading a 24 hour watch. However it makes it a little less easy to read for some, and especially those who are unfamiliar with 24 hour watches (I remember someone replying to an earlier post of mine about this watch that he thought he would find it less easy to read than one with more numbers).

Best wishes

Dan


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

Xaque said:


> The idea of a separate hand for the time of year would be really awesome. Much the same way a GMT hand operates, have the months noted around the face of the watch. One full revolution per year.
> 
> Man... That'd be really classy.
> 
> Although it would probably have to be done with an electronic system... with the different days in the month and leap years and all.


 Glad you like the idea. 

The uneven number of days in a month would not be a problem. The 'time of year hand' would just progress at an even rate throughout the year. It would move at just under 1 degree per day (because there are 360 degrees in a circle and 365 days in the year). Then the segments of the circular dial that it moves round would be painted slightly different lengths for the slightly different length of month. Thus January (31 days) would occupy a sector of just under 31 degrees of the dial. February (usually 28 days) would occupy a sector of just under 28 degrees of the dial and so on.

As for leap years, you could either have a mechanism which would regress the 'time of year hand' once per four years at the end of February (to keep it on the February sector on the 29th day rather than moving on to March). Or you could simply rely on the user to do it. Those who have a standard date dial have to do this whenever the month has less than 31 days. So asking them to change their watch once ever 4 years is not unusual or unreasonable! J

Not sure whether it would be best as a GMT type hand on the main central spindle or as a sub-dial. I would be inclined to have it as a large sub-dial. But there is no substitute for seeing it - and I would buy whichever one was produced (if I could afford it!) 

Best wishes

Dan


----------



## Xaque (Aug 19, 2010)

PHILOSOPHERDAN said:


> Glad you like the idea.
> 
> The uneven number of days in a month would not be a problem. The 'time of year hand' would just progress at an even rate throughout the year. It would move at just under 1 degree per day (because there are 360 degrees in a circle and 365 days in the year). Then the segments of the circular dial that it moves round would be painted slightly different lengths for the slightly different length of month. Thus January (31 days) would occupy a sector of just under 31 degrees of the dial. February (usually 28 days) would occupy a sector of just under 28 degrees of the dial and so on.
> 
> ...


Great ideas!

And for some reason when I was thinking about this last night, it didn't occur to me that I already have to advance my date every time the month has fewer than 31 days.

It would probably be very easy to have the Month hand rotate at a rate of 0.98 degrees a day. (12 months at 31 days)

Then at the months which have fewer than 31 days, when the day is manually advanced, the month hand would follow.

This wouldn't be as accurate as the method you describe, but it seems much more simple. (and frankly, I wouldn't be that concerned about super accuracy in the month dial...)

Of course, I'm sure why I'm reinventing the wheel... there are already watches/clocks out there with Month dials (sub dials).

But I want it as a GMT hand... Jan 1, 0001 would have all hands straight up.... mmmmmm.... Yes....


----------



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

Before I acquired my first 24, I studied the designs of different dials to see what seemed to be "the best" dial, at least the one for me. Now that I've been "using" my Glycine Airman Base 22 for two weeks, I have reallized it is less about what is logical, and more about what is usable. I say "using" rather than "wearing", because with a 24 there is much to learn, and I learn best by "doing" or using. I've used the Glycine for the entire two weeks, except two days, and practice with it all the time. I glance at it frequently and tell the time trying not to use the numbers. The system I use works for me.

A 12 hour dial is not necessarily logical, and certainly not intuitive, as some describe. But, it is "easy to use", mainly because it is fairly simple, and, as children, we commit every index to memory when we learn to tell time. With only 12 houre indexes, and with only minute indexes in between them, a 12 hour dial is not only easy to understand, but easy to visualize. We recognize the hour instantly, without any numbering, and the same with the minutes. This can be accomplished with a 24, but it takes some work to learn it.

First, the minutes on a 24 are not necessarily easy to read. We are used to a dial with main hour indexes, and only finer minute marks in between them; 4 marks to be exact. They are the 1,2,3,and 4 or 6,7,8,and 9 marks. 1 and 0 are the even hour indexes. With many 24s, there are odd hour indexes in the middle of the 4 minute marks we are used to visualizing without great effort.

My Airman has bold lines for the even hour indexes, and dots for the odd hours. It may sound odd, but I have learned to read the minutes quickly, by looking at the dial partly out of focus. I don't focus on a specific point, and the even hour indexes "appear" to stand out, like a regular 12 hour dial, which I can read without thinking.

The hours are a different matter. The same design features allow me to read the hour on my Airman without seeing a number. Breaking the dial into quarters; 1200-1800, 1800-2400, 2400-0600, and 0600 to 1200 makes it easy to narrow the time to morning, afternoon, evening or night. As Dennis uses, breakfast, lunch, dinner, etc...... or some other activity associated with a general time of day. In-between the start and end number of each quadrant are only two even hour indexes. It is easy to train yourself to know what they are, without thinking too hard. That is why I base my system on the even hours, because there are only two in between, rather than the three odd hour indexes. For example, 08, and 10 are between 06 and 12, and they are all even. If I focused on the odds, there are three, 07, 09, and 11, and they are mixed odds and evens with 06 and 12.

Now, with practice, you can tell theevens in any quadrant by knowing what the starting number is, and whether the hand is on the first or second even hour index. It is easy to visulaize the hour, similar to the ease of recognizing the hour on a 12 hour dial. If it's in-between the even hour marks, it's pretty easy to tell which odd hour mark it's on.

Look at a mock up of my Airman without numbers. If you have a system that you can recognize without numbers, you can tell the time on your 24 in the dark if your watch has good lume. I have learned that good lume is very important to me on my 24.

When you are comfortable with this, you could use this 24 dial to tell time accurately and quickly without any numbers at all. And, you can put the 12 anywhere you want, because you are just visualizing the dial and the hands.










If my Airman had no numbers, I could still tell the time using my system. The key is to have a watch that you can develop a sytsem to read without relying on the numbers. Lose the need for numbers and set yourself free. :-!

I emphasize the long indexes of the even hours and find that I don't really need the numbers. The minutes are pretty easy in the dark also; the left side of the round dots are 2 or 7, and the right side is 3 or 8. 1, 4, 6, and 9 are all next to the longer even indexes. Must have good lume though.


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

:-! I agree with what you write – that for many people, including myself, once you get used to a 24 hour dial you do not need the numbers provided the dial is well marked. As you say, it is important to have clear and different marks for the odd and even numbers. 

A related & similar, but slightly different way of doing this from that of the Glycine, is the new Airnautics Classic24. This has long lines for the even hours and a short line for the odd hours. Also, the odd hours are placed separately from the minutes (unlike the Glycine) which keeps the two indices more clear & distinct.

I was just suggesting putting in all the odd numbers rather than the even numbers, on those dials which are targeted at those who do need the numbers. 


Best wishes

Dan


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

PS I am surprised no company has ever (as far as I know) produced a 24 hour dial without numbers. As well as looking really cool, it would sell to both those who prefer 12 on top, and those who prefer 24 on top…


----------



## Dennis Smith (Feb 15, 2006)

Some of you have discussed wanting a hand that goes around once per year.
Although I haven't seen this in a 24 hour watch, I have seen it in others...Yes, it does already exist :-d. Notice in this Temption CM-06 the upper subdial has a hand telling the number of weeks in the year. The number of weeks is an especially nice way to do it because it's not affected by leap year.
I think weekly indicators like this are popular with people in business or economics who are dealing with fiscal quarters, etc...


----------



## peagreen (May 11, 2006)

If you find yourself wanting to cobble a clock together yourself, the people at www. klockit.com sell 24 hour movements and hands and even 24 hour dials but I created my own dial on the computer, printed it and pasted it on the the back plate of an existing clock that I had taken the works out of.
12 at the top. That's my personal preference although i was very favourably impressed by the square one with noon and midnight at either side.
When are Citizen going to produce an eco-drive watch with a 24 hour dial?


----------



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

Peagreen can you post a photo of your homemade 24 clock?

*QUOTE:*
If you find yourself wanting to cobble a clock together yourself, the people at www. klockit.com sell 24 hour movements and hands and even 24 hour dials but I created my own dial on the computer, printed it and pasted it on the the back plate of an existing clock that I had taken the works out of.
12 at the top. That's my personal preference although i was very favourably impressed by the square one with noon and midnight at either side.
When are Citizen going to produce an eco-drive watch with a 24 hour dial?


----------



## Red Rover (Aug 12, 2010)

Peagreen can you post a photo of your homemade 24 clock?

*QUOTE:*
If you find yourself wanting to cobble a clock together yourself, the people at www. klockit.com sell 24 hour movements and hands and even 24 hour dials but I created my own dial on the computer, printed it and pasted it on the the back plate of an existing clock that I had taken the works out of.
12 at the top. That's my personal preference although i was very favourably impressed by the square one with noon and midnight at either side.
When are Citizen going to produce an eco-drive watch with a 24 hour dial?


----------



## PHILOSOPHERDAN (Aug 25, 2010)

Hi Dennis

Thanks for the link, that’s interesting.  It’s pretty close to what I had in mind. I guess it will click round once per week, just under 7 degrees, as opposed to advancing daily (just under 1 degree per day) or continuously. And it won’t be exactly synchronised to the beginning of the year – so if it clicks round on Sunday midnight then if the New Year begins on a Thursday (for example) then it will either be behind or ahead of where it should be. But I guess these things would not make much difference in practice. 



Shame this feature does not come with a 24 hour watch....


Just out of curiosity, do you happen to know some other watches that sport this feature?

Best wishes

Dan


----------



## kerangaro (Nov 6, 2009)

PHILOSOPHERDAN said:


> Xaque is right that it makes more sense to have the hour minute and second hand all start at the same place.
> 
> Those who like 12 on top are right that it makes sense to have the hour hand pointing towards the position of the sun.
> 
> ...


Very good idea, but the date mechanism should be adjusted to fit such a change. Is it possible to change the 2893 like this ?


----------



## ncmoto (Jan 2, 2008)

That will help me adjust to my new EarlyBird


----------



## peagreen (May 11, 2006)

Red Rover said:


> Peagreen can you post a photo of your homemade 24 clock?
> 
> *QUOTE:*
> I created my own dial on the computer, printed it and pasted it on the the back plate of an existing clock that I had taken the works out of.
> ...


Sorry to have kept you waiting, Red Rover. I don't follow this forum daily.
My creation is far from fancy - a very cheap kitchen clock that I converted to simple straightforward 24 hours with stuff from Klockit - The World's Leading Clock Parts and Clock Movements Supplier for Over 35 Years.

Dropbox - Photos - Online backup, file sync and sharing made easy.


----------



## peagreen (May 11, 2006)

I've been having a good look at this watch and I do like it a lot, except for the numbering of the hours turning upside down and back as it goes round the dial.
On the bezel the numbers all have their base towards the axis of the watch but if you read the numbers on the dial the same way it goes 15, 16, 17, 18, 61 !?!
I know they can't do that with the bezel because that can be turned and they never know which numbers will be left/right/top/bottom but it bothers me all the same.


----------



## segibbons03 (Oct 9, 2021)

The airman is probably the only 24-hour watch I would buy. Looks good!


----------



## jkpa (Feb 8, 2014)

segibbons03 said:


> The airman is probably the only 24-hour watch I would buy. Looks good!


digging up one old thread after another won’t let you sell any faster FYI


----------



## segibbons03 (Oct 9, 2021)

Caught me red handed. What does a member have to do to qualify to sell something?


----------



## ned-ludd (Apr 8, 2017)

segibbons03 said:


> Caught me red handed. What does a member have to do to qualify to sell something?


Perhaps _read _the forum rules?








Oops! We ran into some problems.







www.watchuseek.com





Also, as has been said many times: _"this is a watch discussion forum first and foremost, with a sales forum bolted onto the side."_
So if you've joined the forum with the express purpose of selling watches, you're probably in the wrong place.


----------



## CMSgt Bo (Feb 12, 2006)

segibbons03 said:


> Caught me red handed. What does a member have to do to qualify to sell something?


I guess reviewing the Sales Corner Rules and Guidelines is a bit much to ask: Sales Corner Rules and Guidelines


----------



## segibbons03 (Oct 9, 2021)

Are you suggesting I was speed posting? I have been a member of this site since last year. I made a point of coming on to the site and posting more, that does not mean I was speed posting.


----------

