I didn't answer the reference time as it was irrelevant, as any time reference would have been sufficient.
I'm sorry to have to say this, but that is goobledegook.
Is there some way that we could possibly get on the same page which I've been trying to do all along? I suspect that other readers will know that I have, but you don't seem to know or don't want to do it.
You
are putting me to a lot of work!
And if you don't stop it then I might have no option but to stop it for some time because I am a long-term invalid and have limited physical and intellectual energy that I must apply to more essential tasks than fruitlessly trying to screw a very simple answer out of somebody who won't provide one.
Some of your answers are utterly weird to me. They don't make sense. They are contradictory. Like the quote above. "the reference time... was irrelevant, as any time reference would have been sufficient."
What sort of reference time or time reference would suffice? Choice 4 again if none of the others.
I would guess that the latter part of your sentence means that a GET (you say time reference) would be sufficient, but you seem to be implying that you don't want a GET and some other time instead, yet you posted GETs in your second quote.
If you answered the question that you didn't answer, I might actually know what you want and so will others and we can all stop facepalming, sighing and mopping our brows.
So puh-lease, type just two words and the one digit of the four that applies in the list I gave you. Such as "Your list: 3" if you do indeed want ground elapsed time.
Alternatively, if you want the time on the Spacecraft Films DVD that John Young starts struggling to swap film magazines, type 1. That time will, of course, have nothing to do with ground elapsed time -- it will be the time the particular piece of video appears on the DVD or in the appropriate file or menu item on the DVD. By studying the ALSJ I could probably relate that time to a GET if indeed that is what you want.
And if don't want either of 1 or 3, then tell us what you
do want because we can't possibly know until you tell us.
Are really saying that it is ground elapsed times that you
don't want? If so, silly me for guessing that you did when you didn't answer the question. I'm asking yet again, because a straight answer would be very useful.
Two requests to other readers:-1. Do you
know what bknight wants for his "any time reference"? I believe he wants GETs because he immediately followed his statement with GETs in his second quote. But he seems to be confused about it or unwilling to say.
2. If earlier posters in this thread are still with us, in future posts could you please change the original GETs (DD:HH:MM:SS) to the modern ones (HHH:MM:SS)?
I'm glad the new ones exist because they are much easier to follow and any figures you then give will match with the ALSJ and AFJ.
It's easy enough: 06:05:18:39 is 149:18:39 (6 x 24 + 5) plus the same MM:SS.
Sure, many of us can do that for ourselves, but it's far easier to follow if it's done in the post. Or if you want to be really pedantic, like me, show both!
