Thanks to dick for the thorough historical perspective. Very interesting, entertaining, and enlightening.

That answered a question I had occasionally wondered about, as I couldn't remember how it was before the advent of DST: whether they initially added or took away an hour. Since it begins in April, they must've initially took away an hour.

I used to live in Indianapolis, Indiana. Back then they didn't do the DST thing (I don't know what they do now). It was nice not having to fool with the clocks (biological et al), but sort of a bummer in January when it got dark at 4pm.

Now that I'm older, springing forward wreaks havoc. It's not worth what my body goes through now for the extra hour I get to stay up or sleep away in October.

That's why I always liked GMT. Standardized. I guess that's why the military liked it, too. You'd think, though, that the members of an organization that relies so heavily on coordinated effort would not have such a difficult time understanding a concept like standardized time. A typical exchange trying to coordinate radio communications, for example.

"Okay, call me back at 0100, GMT."
"What time is that where I'm at?"
"0100, GMT."
"No! I want to know what time locally I have to call you back."
Then if I screwed up and miscalculated his local time from GMT, it was my fault, not his. A convenient way for him to cover his butt and not have to learn anything at the same time. The advertisements were right - it wasn't just a job, it was an adventure...in self-control.

End of mundane military memory.

Neil