NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Another "emergency navigation" sight reduction method
From: Stan K
Date: 2015 Jul 15, 03:20 -0400
From: Stan K
Date: 2015 Jul 15, 03:20 -0400
Gary,
Agreed - someone should have changed the subject of this thread soon after it started. When I started the thread, I was talking about Starpath's N(x) Table. In the book at which I was looking, the section is called "N(x) Table for Emergency Sight Reduction". Thus my bad choice of subject.
Stan
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary LaPook <NoReply_LaPook@fer3.com>
To: slk1000 <slk1000@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Jul 14, 2015 11:56 am
Subject: [NavList] Re: Another "emergency navigation" sight reductionmethod
From: Gary LaPook <NoReply_LaPook@fer3.com>
To: slk1000 <slk1000@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Jul 14, 2015 11:56 am
Subject: [NavList] Re: Another "emergency navigation" sight reductionmethod
BTW, I don't like calling these "emergency navigation" systems. That implies using a less accurate system for celestial navigation in emergencies whose only advantage is that they are compact so as to fit in a ditch bag. This seems to say that you use the most accurate standard system everyday, carrying the entire set of HO 229 in your small boat, and will use the bastardized system only in an emergency. What we are actually talking about are different methods of clestial navigation, that just happen to be compact, but that should be used every day for normal celestial navigation, leaving the entire set of HO 229 at the dock. Most navigators have apparently shifted to using HO 249 to save the considerable space (and weight) of the ultimate set of tables, HO 229, and find the level of accuracy in HO 249 accptable for practical navigation and the Bygrave and Hav-Doniol (and others) provide the same level of accuracy in very compact forms.
gl
