NavList:

   

Reply

Peter: Point taken, but I'd still try to keep that extra decimal point of data 
since it really shouldn't add any significant time in standard reduction 
methods (like HO 229).  What do the power squadron people teach in this 
regard, since they are generally teaching the small boat crowd?

Lu Wrote:

On May 17, 8:28 pm, Lu Abel  wrote:
> In most engineering schools students are taught to carry out
> calculations to at least one more digit of accuracy that is desired in
> the final answer and only round at the very end.

I have met very few mates who are engineers.  In fact I am one of the few.  
Most hate math in general.  It is a great rule however.  I like using all the 
precision I have availabe with my sources which typically is 0.1 (sextant, 
Nautical Almanac, and books)
> 
> I also have to wonder about "0.1' of arc and 0.1 deg of azimuth"   0.1
> degree of azimuth is exceedingly hard to measure either with a compass
> or to plot on a chart, whereas 0.1' of arc is 0.1 nm, easily discernible
> on most mid- to large-scale charts or on a plotting sheet used to reduce
> two LOPs to a L/Lo of position.
> 

I think we need to clarify what we are using.  For plotting sheets I am using 
either a universal plotting sheet which is covering several degrees of 
latitude and longitude in a fairly small piece of paper.  I can't plot to 0.1 
for lat or long on this with any confidence at all.  0.3-0.5' is a good 
guess.  On the ship I am using PS92x series ploting sheets for specific 
latitudes which are much larger and are a bit better scale.  I would be 
confident at 0.2 for lat and long on this sheet.  I certainly can't 
accurately draw 10 lines between each minute of lat or long on either of 
these charts so will not claim 0.1 accuracy.

I use navigation triangles for my azimuth mesurements on the charts and can 
draw much less than 1 deg with regularity.  For measuring azimuths with my 
Alidade (magnified) I can observe bearings with an accuracy of 0.2 deg (esp 
stars), but with the azimuth circle its 0.5 deg at best.  When making compass 
correction via triple interpolation of HO 229 I look for 0.1 deg in my 
reduction with my biggest error being found in the references of variation 
when out on the open ocean.  In reality I am usually getting 0.3-0.4 degrees 
of accuracy in plotting but will certainly go to 0.1 with the math.

If you are using charts with 0.2' hash marks I can see the precision that you 
speak of, but I can't think of any time that I've plotted Celnav LOP's on 
such a large scale chart.  I am using piloting techniques at that point.

I guess my question is what plotting sheets are you using that you can 
deterimine Lat/Long to 0.1'?  I find that my 0.5mm pencil lead is at least 
0.2' wide on thse sheets, and on the universal plotting sheets is closing in 
on 0.5' wide.

I am attaching a pdf reference that shows a plot on one of the big Plotting 
sheets I use as well as my triangles.

Jeremy
File: 

   





--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply