NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Latitude by Lunar Distance
From: George Huxtable
Date: 2006 Oct 13, 10:42 +0100
From: George Huxtable
Date: 2006 Oct 13, 10:42 +0100
Peter Fogg wrote- | | The correction for parallax is positive and that for refraction is | negative. There will be an infinite number of positions where the two | corrections can cancel one another, ie; the distances will be the | same. I think Peter has misunderstood here. Yes, it's true that parallax and refraction work opposite ways. But parallax will always be the greater of the two, so they never actally cancel out. But, for the purpose of Frank Reed's rather unrealistic exercise, it wouldn't matter if they did. As long as the discrepancy between calculated altitude and measured altitude varies in some way with altitude, that discrepancy can, at least in theory, be used to determine the Moon's altitude. But I suggest that Frank Reed is guilty of rather over-egging his pudding here, in writing- "The results are accurate to +/-6 miles in the positional fix (less accurate in one dimension as the Moon falls lower in the sky)." Come off it, Frank! That method would, at the very best, be half as accurate (or twice as inaccurate) as longitude-by-lunar. So if he could achieve an accuracy of 6 miles either way, a devout lunarian could correspondingly claim 3 minutes for a longitude. Both would be related to the unrealistic claim of angular-distance measurement to 0.1 arc-minutes. Just because some observations on one occasion, from on land, fell within that bracket does not imply any such accuracy; as Frank, with a scientific background, should be well aware. And three of us have asked Frank to show how a position is to be deduced from a pair of such observations, showing the working. I have presumed that any delay in responding was because Frank was working on the details of how to formalise it. We were offered a nice graphical picture of intersecting cones, but that was not what had been asked for. Is that all we're going to get? George. contact George Huxtable at george@huxtable.u-net.com or at +44 1865 820222 (from UK, 01865 820222) or at 1 Sandy Lane, Southmoor, Abingdon, Oxon OX13 5HX, UK. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---