NavList:

Mr. Franklin,

Thank you so much for posting this. It explains a lot. I was just working an example from "100 Problems in CN" which featured a three-body fix with an azimuth spread of less than 180°. I plotted the LOPs as usual, bisected the angles and got my answer. But when I checked it against the book and also the "CN in a Teacup" software, I was surprised to find they both put the fix outside the 'cocked hat'.

When I read your post I remembered this and went back to check it. Sure enough, the book's solution was right where it should have been. Where I should have plotted it had I known about this at the time. It's funny, I don't recall ever reading anything about this anywhere else. Although, I must confess, most of what I have learned has come from skimming publications and the internet in a kind of off-the-cuff lesson plan. Searching out only that which I thought I needed to know at the time in order to progress and grasp the concepts involved.

I must also admit that at first, I was baffled as to how this situation could occur. I'm a very visual learner and I just couldn't 'see' it in my head. But once I drew it out for myself it became crystal clear and your comment, "If the bodies are within 180 degrees and each falls short than, how could the observer ever be in the triangle?" actually made me laugh to myself at how obvious it now became.

I believe I am well on my way to beginning to understand this magnificent art/science. And I owe a BIG thanks to Mr. Reed for pointing me in the direction of this board, where I can glean insights from such masters as yourself, et al.

Sincerely,
Sean C.
----------------------------------------------------------------
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
----------------------------------------------------------------