@EasyPrompt
I think that the interpretation of "time, times, and half a time" to be a 3 ½ year stretch (according to the parallel texts in Revelation) says nothing about why the writer of Revelation used the term in the first place and whether the unit of time "time" (καιρος) means "year".
All that is certain is that the term "time and times and half a time" does not exceed 3.5 years. Whether "times and times and half a time" is also exactly 3.5 years or a shorter period is not yet refuted/confirmed.
If he wanted to write of the woman in Rev 12:14 as being in an eschatological "wilderness" somewhere for 3.5 years, then he would have directly used that time span - cf. Rev. 11:9 where it says that the dead bodies of the two prophets lay literally "three and a half days", so he could just as easily have written "three and a half years" - or he could have chosen a unit of time, perhaps 1260 days or 42 months. But he deliberately and relatively lengthily writes out a "banal" time figure, and in a few words. He must have had some special reason for doing so. But the interpretation that it is 3.5 years does not explain that reason. From my point of view, he was referring to the same passages in Daniel - which is obvious - but as to the interpretation of what these complicated time figures mean, that interpretation, there in Daniel, is also not to be found. I am offered the hypothesis that "time and times and half a time", is a shortened expression of "a week and 62 weeks and half a week", but since the interpretation of Daniel is, in my opinion, extremely demanding, I evaluate it for myself only as a working hypothesis...
Another way of describing the 3.5 year problem is to convert "time, times and half a time" into 3.5 years, and to retroactively derive a length for "time" from this time "transaction". This is prone to error.
Granted that it may be a year, but it may just as well be a week or a month: if the interpretation of "times and times and half a time" works with the time period "year", then it is equally permissible to interpret that another unit of time can be used - derived from astrophysical phenomena (week, month) or even from other domains. If the NT writers applied the term (καιρος), for example, to the period of Elizabeth's pregnancy (Lk 1:20) or to the time period of the grain "harvest" (Mt 13:30), then the time unit "time" (καιρος) must be evaluated in this respect as well. And no one has done that yet and neither have I 😊 . Yet for centuries we have all, out of convenience, copied from one another. It will be necessary to step out of our comfort zone (yuck, what a disgusting expression) in order to move on (yuck, yuck, that's the other disgusting word cliché 😊 ). It's time for a change, EasyPrompt!