NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: AP terminology, WAS: 2-Body Fix -- take three
From: Frank Reed
Date: 2009 Nov 13, 14:49 -0800
From: Frank Reed
Date: 2009 Nov 13, 14:49 -0800
Jeremy, you wrote: "So we need to get at least 2 Sumner points, and preferably three to expose plotting and/or math errors. Sounds like at least as much work, if not more, than St. Hilaire. I don't know, since I've never plotted Sumner lines. As an aside, we use the same equations with different names in our Great Circle sailings." Yes. That's the big thing: calculational cost. Your comment about great circle sailing is true, of course, and it reminds me of a brief era, so long ago, when I had access to a software tool that would calculate great circle distances (from a terminal on a main-frame computer). That's what it was designed to do, and it requested its inputs for that problem. I used it to solve other spherical trig problems when necessary, and in those days I could actually still impress people by saying "when it asks for the 'latitude of the first city', just enter the declination of the star." Ha! Times change. You also wrote: "Why is Blu-Ray better than HD-DVD, or VHS better than Betamax? It was adopted over time and tradition truly does rule the seas." The supremacy of tradition in celestial navigation is very real (and I'm not saying it's a bad thing), but it sometimes creates the impression of perfection where it shouldn't. The inertia of navigational tradition does indeed share some aspects of consumer inertia (like the examples you've given), and this fact is not generally recognized by navigators. Modern, late 20th century celestial navigation reached a plateau of efficiency just about the time it was being replaced. From about 1960 to 1990, celestial navigation was largely a fixed, unchanging set of procedures. In some ways, this is comforting for users and enthusiasts, too, but it's a mistake that some people make (not you) to think that earlier methods of navigation were "not really proper" celestial navigation, and it's a mistake that some other people make (not you, not anyone specific here) to think that there can be no modern variations that would be more useful under some circumstances, more teachable under other circumstances, or even more accurate under still other circumstances. -FER --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ NavList message boards: www.fer3.com/arc Or post by email to: NavList@fer3.com To , email NavList+@fer3.com -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---