NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Hughes explanation of Chichester's navigation.
From: Gary LaPook
Date: 2014 Dec 5, 02:33 -0800
From: Gary LaPook <NoReply_LaPook@fer3.com>
To: garylapook@pacbell.net
Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 11:56 PM
Subject: [NavList] Re: Hughes explanation of Chichester's navigation.
From: Francis Upchurch <NoReply_Upchurch@fer3.com>
To: garylapook---.net
Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 10:31 AM
Subject: [NavList] Re: Hughes explanation of Chichester's navigation.
From: Gary LaPook
Date: 2014 Dec 5, 02:33 -0800
The pages didn't come through so here is another shot at it.
gl
From: Gary LaPook <NoReply_LaPook@fer3.com>
To: garylapook@pacbell.net
Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 11:56 PM
Subject: [NavList] Re: Hughes explanation of Chichester's navigation.
I'll let Chester tell you about it, see attached.
gl
From: Francis Upchurch <NoReply_Upchurch@fer3.com>
To: garylapook---.net
Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 10:31 AM
Subject: [NavList] Re: Hughes explanation of Chichester's navigation.
Hanno and Gary,
This is really very interesting. Chichester tried the Booth bubble (no sophisticated averaging mechanism) and failed, so reverted to standard marine sextant and low altitude, natural horizon sights.(with some difficulty as described). If you really want to do the Chichester test, perhaps you should have a go with marine sextant at low altitude, using natural horizons, or is this too dangerous? Fun though? Bet your modern altimeters are a lot better than Chichester’s broken relics?
Still think the Bygrave and possibly (to be proven) Brown-Nassau will turn out to be the best systems but the Doniol Hv quick method looks very
good to me.
Let the contest begin!
Still like the idea of an annual LaPook prize for this (the most slick method, goose-shit or otherwise, more politely expressed.)
Await deep thoughts/ comments from the Sages.
Francis
File:
File:
File:
File:
File:
