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 Sep 24, 18:34 +0100
From: Bill Lionheart
Date: 2017 Sep 24, 18:34 +0100
For the case of three circles of position (generally not great circles) I wonder if there is an equivalent geometric construction to the symmedian point giving the least squares solution. I would expect it to have the same tendency to be closer to the shorter side of the "triangle". Bill On 24 September 2017 at 17:38, Frank Reedwrote: > John Howard, you wrote: > "Just as an exercise, I used a globe and string to get an AP at 60° N and > 115° W." > > But that's way off! May I suggest that you try this again? With a common > globe, you should expect to get a position this way within one or two > degrees. Even if you mark up a common ball (like a 10-inch diameter ball > that you might find in the toy department of Walmart) with a bit of care, > you can get a position this way within 3-5°. > > And by the way, for others following along who may not realize this, this is > not technically an "AP". It's a fix. The globe is serving as an analog > computer, and the result, when done right, is your position. Given that the > accuracy is rather low, you could then feed that into a standard celestial > calculation and use this as a starting point or "assumed position". > > To reiterate, in the real world, you're never this lost. These are game > problems, not navigation. Also in the real world, a sight consists of the > altitude as well as an approximate azimuth, which really ought to be given > in the statement of the problem. You know what direction you were facing > within 10 or 20 degrees, and this significantly constrains the calculation, > whether you're working by direct computation or by analog on a globe. If you > know that Spica, e.g. was in the SSE at some altitude, h, then you measure > off a distance of 90°-h away from Spica's GHA and dec (its "GP") and draw an > arc of a circle. That much is obvious. But you don't need to draw the whole > circle; you just draw that portion that "sees" Spica in the south-southeast, > or equivalently, that portion of the circle which is perpendicular to SSE. > > Frank Reed > > -- Professor of Applied Mathematics University of Manchester http://www.maths.manchester.ac.uk/bl