NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Can I Navigate Without an Assumed Position?
From: Bill Lionheart
Date: 2017 Aug 26, 14:24 +0100
From: Bill Lionheart
Date: 2017 Aug 26, 14:24 +0100
Probably this is well known to navigators, it is just something I know from geometry. If you know the GP of a heavenly body and its altitude that means you are on a known "small" circle centred on the GP. On a map projection that is conformal circles are taken to circles, so you have a position circle on such a chart. If you have two such position circles you know you are at one of the (typically two) places that they intersect. If you have three and they more or less agree at one point of intersection you have your position. This does not use an assumed position (other than you are on the surface of the earth). The reason we need an assumed position is that we usually work on a chart on the scale where we can approximate the small circles by straight lines. This is easier and if you had a big enough chart to draw the circles it would not be so accurate. You would probably then zoom in and do it with the conventional method using the circle method as your GP. You can do it all computationally rather than graphically of course. [The more knowledgeable NavList members will no doubt reply with the history and terminology of such methods in navigation] Bill -- Professor of Applied Mathematics University of Manchester http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/bl