NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
From: John Karl
Date: 2013 Mar 26, 13:44 -0700
Hewitt,
Yes in the estimation approach, one uses all the info available PRIOR to acquiring the new, and more accurate, LOP. There's nothing wrong with ignoring currents and drift if there's no info on them, or if you simply chose to. Then the location of the EPRF along the new LOP has that uncertainty built in, as well as the normal uncertainty. But that EPRF is still the best Rfix with the data used.
And yes, the distance between the EPRF and the TP (DR, etc.) is a measure of the component of error in the direction perpendicular to the LOP. And there's no info on error along the LOP.
But the traditional running fix gives no error information.
(The error is all in its assumptions.)
JK
----------------------------------------------------------------
NavList message boards and member settings: www.fer3.com/NavList
Members may optionally receive posts by email.
To cancel email delivery, send a message to NoMail[at]fer3.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
