Historically they issued leap seconds as early as practical. For example, see
“leap second scheduling” discussion at:
http://iraf.noao.edu/~seaman/leap/
More recently that statisitical bias hasn’t been as obvious, but then there
have been fewer samples.
One can hypothesize the factors that go into this decision or the stakeholders
with a say, I’d prefer to hear from the decision-makers themselves if any are
reading this :-)
Rob
--
> On Jan 8, 2015, at 6:06 AM, Peter Vince <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> While allowed to be up to 0.9 of a second out, presumably they are choosing
> to keep it closer, and within ± 0.5 if possible. The current prediction
> shows it is likely to be 660ms out on the 30th of June, while by December it
> would be 824!
>
> On 8 January 2015 at 08:53, <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> As we know, a leap second insertion has been scheduled for the end of june
> this year. My personal bet ws on that date, but judging by the IERS
> predictions of the UT1-UTC delta it could have been put off till december, or
> even june/dec 2016 and still remained within the .9 sec limits defined by
> ITU-R TF.460-6. Was this date chosen as a wakeup call to WP7A? (rhetorical).
>
> _______________________________________________
> LEAPSECS mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
> <https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LEAPSECS mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
_______________________________________________
LEAPSECS mailing list
[email protected]
https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/leapsecs
