NavList:

Did I really make the right assumption when stating "Lunars report 3 angles : Lunar distance, and "corrected" heights of 2 Bodies corrected for only dip and refraction"  ?

If so, then earlier published results are correct. Hint: former typo for the Aug 25th Sun-Moon Distance which is actually 80°42.55' (vs. previously indicated 80°42.45') while everything else remains unchanged since I performed actual computations with 80°42.55' .

*******

But should I have stated instead, which seems to better fit to the Lunar traditional Methods : "Lunars report 3 angles : Lunar distance, and "corrected" heights of 2 Bodies corrected for only dip and refraction and SEMI-DIAMETER", then reverse-engineering gives:

1st Example , On Aug 25th, 1830 (TT-UT = +7.4s), Lunar distance 80°42.55' with SUNL = 35°59.5' and MOONL =  44°35.3' . Own results then give :

Lunar taken at 17h58m43.7s UT1 from Position N25°00.4' W034°18.8' with a cleared distance 80°48.4'

If so, the Navigators' Longitude at W034°11'15" then becomes only 9' off (vs. 15') which is really good !

2nd Example : On Aug 28th, 1830 (TT-UT = +7.4s) ,  Lunar distance 114°42.9'  with SUNL = 27°11.1' and MOONL = 28°38.7' . Own results then give :

Lunar taken at 18h20m41.8s UT1 from Position N18°20.8' W030°43.1' with a cleared distance 114°35.7'

If so, the Navigators' Longitude at W030°39'30" then becomes only 4.6' off (vs. 9') which is truly REMARKABLE !

*******

Request for information to you Frank :

Are the "corrected Sun and Moon heights published here" corrected for "only dip and refraction", or rather - which actually seems [much] more logical - corrected for "dip, refraction and SD" ?

Thanks for your Kind Attention and reply,

Kermit

antoine.m.couette[at]club-internet.fr