NavList:

Dear Dave and all,

Guyuou's method seems neat, almost ideal for a compact tabular method. It involves the use of only one, a few pages long, table, 7-9 additions and subtractions, 2 easy divisions by 2 and 7 table look-ups. If I get it right: it covers all angles of Lat, Dec and Ho, there are no angle-zones of reduced or questionable accuracy (e.x. in Ageton’s when K ≈ 90), it needs no whole-degree Lat or LHA, no interpolation is required, DR can be used as an Assumed Position is not necessary and there is no possibility of long intercept associated inaccuracies. The only drawback seems to be the multitude of rules, which, however, are comparable in number to that of other concise tubular methods (e.x. NASR).

But where is the catch? Why the “emergency cel nav” aficionados haven’t adopted it or commented on it?

Could you or someone else please explain the differences in the underlying concepts behind Guyou’s method and Marcq St. Hilaire’s? Are there any inherent limitations in the former that are remedied by the latter? If not, why isn’t Guyou’s method considered the queen of the (abundant) compact tabular methods?

Cheers,

Michalis Vaidanis

38°N 024°E

P.S.: I’m attaching a Meridional Parts Table along with an (intimidating) SR Form for the LOP solution (in A5 paper format). Chances are that I’m somewhere wrong, so please feel free to comment.