NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Out of Date Almanac
From: Hewitt Schlereth
Date: 2009 Dec 8, 13:23 -0400
From: Hewitt Schlereth
Date: 2009 Dec 8, 13:23 -0400
Is the +2.1' 4-year correction to GHA Aries mentioned by Gary based on new astronomical work? I've always used +1.84'. Kolbe's long-term almanac does also. -Hewitt On 12/8/09, Greg Rudzinskiwrote: > Thanks Gary and Frank, > > I will be using my 2006 Nautical Almanac for 2010 Sun observations > with no corrections and be within .5 MOA (good enough). For stars the > plan is to photo copy the online Nautical Almanac for > 1/1/10,3/1/10,6/1/10,9/1/10 and use the star SHA and declinations plus > a 2.1 minute GHA aries correction which should get me within .5 MOA > (good enough). Looks like I'm out of luck for the Moon and Planets > though. Any ideas on how to compensate the Nautical Almanac Polaris > table ? > > > Greg > > > On Dec 7, 5:10 pm, Greg Rudzinski wrote: > > Any opinions on using a Nautical Almanac that is four years out of > > date? I bring this up because there are old almanacs available on > > Amazon.com from $2 to $10. New Nautical Almanacs have gotten > > expensive so my plan is to use a 2006 for the upcoming year 2010. > > -- > NavList message boards: www.fer3.com/arc > Or post by email to: NavList@fer3.com > To , email NavList+@fer3.com -- NavList message boards: www.fer3.com/arc Or post by email to: NavList@fer3.com To , email NavList+@fer3.com