[LEAPSECS] Schedule for success

[Rob Seaman]

On Dec 20, 2008, at 3:32 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:


> In message <B00E39AF-B2CE-4828-9DFF-E6EDE16DD6B4 at noao.edu>, Rob  

> Seaman writes:

>

>> Nobody has spent a dime on investigating possible risks involved in

>> aircraft navigation.

>

> That shows, if nothing else, the depth of your research.


I was obviously speaking (as I have for nine years) of the context of  
the limp yet relentless proposal to eviscerate UTC.  If somebody has  
references to risk analyses (for ATC or any other industry) of  
relayering UTC on something other than mean solar time, please share  
them with the list.  I'd be happy to delve deeper.

Turning the issue around, is there even a coherent such study of the  
effects of leap seconds on ATC (or any other industry)?  (Completely  
ignoring the question, if you will, of whether or not aircraft  
navigation might actually care about mean solar time.)

We're to understand that leap seconds "suck".  Wouldn't the obvious  
first step to motivating the need for a change be to demonstrate that  
such a problem actually exists?  And then to explore the scope of the  
issue and any external scheduling constraints?

Rob