NavList:

Dear Andrés,

(1) - NIce to see that our both results are fully consistent even though they have quite different origins both in terms of Almanacs and in terms of Algorithms/Software.

(2) - In this same post you also indicated that : " Jim Wilson's method gives bad results when SOG is greater than say 10 kn.  " .

A few queries then :

(2.1) - From both Methods published by M. Jim Wilson and respectively described at §4.3.1 and §4.3.2 in this document please be so kind as to indicate which method you are referring to here :

- The "Wilson 1 method" ? Or rather :

- The "Wilson 2 method" ?

(2.2) - If you are referring to the "Wilson 1 method":

Would the use of the corrected - hence better - Formula (1.1) described here significantly change your conclusions about such "Wilson 1 method" overall performance ?

M. James N. Wilson certainly did not use this properly scaled 1st order Formula (1.1) since he even publishes a drawing to graphically determine the "48/π improperly scaled" value for "UT Mer. Tran. - UT Culm."  

(3.3) - If you are referring to the "Wilson 2 method" :

Since the "Wilson 2 method" uses only Formula (1.2) (which M. Jim Wilson seems to have actually pioneered), how did you manage to perform actual simulations on such "Wilson 2 method" since it consists of an [almost] exclusively "hand sketch" method ?

Thanks in advance, and

Best Friendly 2024 Regards,

Antoine