NavList:

Thought I would chip in here regarding “Nautical Heretic”

Not that I am suggesting there is the slightest chance of Knots being unknotted!

But as I am a ground lubber with the fastest speed attained in my day being in a Jeep with the digital gauge set to kph – however, as an ex-military navigator my brain is set very firmly in knots for speed, secondly mph ( giving way to kph).

For the record – a very neat mental calculation for maritime tactical navigators prosecuting a submarine – resolving to a kill was that 1 NM = 2000 yds (2025 actually) and a submarine travelling at 12 knots covers 1200 yards in 3 minutes from the datum – eg a visual sighting or MAD contact.

This figure was hardwired to the TACCO brain – even now it just pops in.

When I left the military and went to Veterinary University – 1984 – the world of science was converting to metric – all science measurements – typically imperial – went metric.

Suddenly, lbs, ft, ozs, pints, gallon ( imperial) ,Fahrenheit, psi, etc was metric – we had to be able to jump back and forth as vets – in drugs calculations, physical measurements – it wasn’t a big deal as the brain gets use to it.  Luckily 1 cc = 1 ml

I still jump back and forth from kph to knots for weather – I have a tape measure that is both ft/inches – metres/cms/mms and ALWAYS need to mentally convert height in metres to Ft for it to register as a mental image meaning anything.

When I flew in the RNZAF – US military still used lbs for fuel – I think the Orion fuel gauges read lbs – not sure – perhaps kg or litres?  - have just asked my twin Bro – he was P3B Orion pilot at same time – however, he is now Air NZ Capt – ex Boeing 777 Capt – now back to Boeing 737 as age of 72 means USA will not permit you to be Capt anymore – rest of world does.

His reply re metric

Everywhere – knots, kg, ft , litres ( except China = metres but Boeing 777 had button to convert as ANZ 777 went to China).

Interestingly my 72 year old brain still jumps back and forth mentally to give me a perspective I can mentally form –

Metres – feet for altitude

Timber measurements – 100 x 50 = 4 x 2

Litres = litres

1 cc = 1cc

Mg/ml = mg/ml

Kph to knot

P3B Orion fuel gauge – US Gallons ( not sure – my twin can’t remember but says not lbs or not kgs)

However, I am speechless at the total ignorance of the general public at anything other than the basic of basic understanding – eg. The weather in kpa and kph (luckily 1 mb = 0.1 kpa)

Oh – whilst the subject is still warm on the forum

Shackleton’s Ship – I too watched the series and was bitterly disappointed in it. Never watched it to the end – boring. Read many books on the subject and many, many other explorer’s Arctic/Antarctic adventures – a particular interest of mine.

Whilst I cannot comment on the accuracy of the last position of the ship before it went down – I think Frank you said – this can be ignored as inaccurate! – I do not for one moment question your knowledge behind this statement and expertise on the subject – except for the following reason I disagree with that single statement for the following reason.

Now we delve into modern statistical methods for support on that front.

“Bayesian statistical methods”

Bayesian inference is a method of statistical inference in which Bayes' theorem is used to calculate a probability of a hypothesis, given prior evidence, and update it as more information becomes available. Fundamentally, Bayesian inference uses a prior distribution to estimate posterior probabilities.

– interestingly – the name of the yacht that met a sudden end in Sicily – 19 Aug 24 ( the name of that yacht was based on the statistical method that reaped the owner a lot of $$) – I digress.

Prior to Bayesian we used frequency statistical analysis – but its single biggest failing was that if something had never happened before – this method had no starting point to calculate.

On the other hand, Bayesian could, without any prior event, still come up with a probability – ( and this statistical method has been used very,  very successfully where frequency failed dismally – ( eg. Thresher, nuclear bombs lost out of a B52 over Spain (1966 Palomares)

Without a boring lecture on Bayesian – one of its most powerful strengths was that you could just pick a starting point – even if it was a guess – the method worked.

My point Frank – the last known position ( whether considered accurate, inaccurate, or a guesstimate) was still “a starting point” and it seems from your feed to this forum of the search method used to eventually find the target – THEY WERE NOT USING BAYESIAN – much to their loss!.

Merry Xmas ALL – great forum I read every day.