NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Fix Maximum Probability Positions
From: Hewitt Schlereth
Date: 2013 Mar 25, 18:05 -0700
From: Hewitt Schlereth
Date: 2013 Mar 25, 18:05 -0700
John, I am still puzzled by how you derive "Estimated track made good," if you don't base it on course steered - as Greg did in his example? Hewitt Sent from my iPad On Mar 25, 2013, at 3:59 PM, "Hewitt Schlereth"wrote: > John, in the top diagram of your latest PDF: > > 1) Is what you label "1st Estimated track made good," the course steered? > > 2) Am I correct in saying that what you call "Our tentative position," is what we TRF types would call our DR? > > Hewitt > > > Sent from my iPad > > On Mar 25, 2013, at 1:13 PM, "John Karl" wrote: > >> It seems that several of us (or just me) are mired in deep confusion over terminology. >> >> So I've attached yet another summary (a short one) of the comparison between the estimated-position running fix (EPRF) and the traditional running fix (TRF). >> >> To avoid confusion between the EP and the DR locations, I introduce a new name, called the tentative point (TP), the one TRF uses for the destination when advancing the first LOP. This TP is simply where we think we are when a new LOP is acquired. For our discussion it doesn't matter how the navigator determined that. But we do consider that it has an uncertainty surrounding it -- what doesn't. >> >> Please take a look, it's just one figure. >> 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 >> ---------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Attached File: http://fer3.com/arc/imgx/3-FIGS-in-ONE.pdf >> >> >> : http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=123074 >> >> > > > : http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=123079 > >