NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Longhand Sight Reduction
From: Hanno Ix
Date: 2014 Nov 13, 17:25 -0800
From: Hanno Ix
Date: 2014 Nov 13, 17:25 -0800
Greg
highlighting every other line might make the table visually too busy. Is there a problem with the present striping, the highlighting of only every fifth line?
Personally, I can identify a desired line just by looking at its relative position in
relation to the prior and the next multiple of five without counting. That is why I chose
this pattern in the 2' tables.
H
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Greg Rudzinski <NoReply_Rudzinski@fer3.com> wrote:
Hanno,
Highlighting every other line horizontally might be worth a look.
G
From: Hanno Ix
Date: 2014 Nov 12, 19:09 -0800Francis,thank you for your comparisons.I think longhand sight reductions will probably never pass the Chichester test but would love to be proved wrong. As I see it, the real advantage of a minimized longhand sight reduction method is that it does not depend on a mechanical device that can, and probably will, fail. Even a ripped and wrinkled haversine table however will do the job and do so in short order.It seems you like the 2 arcmin format. You realize of course the same trick works for all trig functions. In the attachment there is such a table for sin() and cos(). It is actually older than the haversine table and was certainly not optimized for size of fonts. If you like I will implement the changes to the typography as suggested by Greg for the haversine table. But before I embark on this let me know if you - and Greg, you, too! - if there are other suggestions you might have.
