NavList:

Re: S-table and long term almanacs
From: Geoffrey Kolbe
Date: 2014 Oct 4, 08:40 +0100

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Carl Roberts <NoReply_Roberts@fer3.com> wrote:

 

maybe dr Kolb could boot the NA reduction and include Alan Bayless or S-Table.

​There is a perception that "nobody uses the NA tables" and so they should be replaced by something else. However, my feeling is that outside the rarefied ​halls of this list's discussions, the NA tables are widely accepted - and used!

 

Geoffrey Kolbe

Dear Geoffrey,

I'm not sure what you base that feeling upon. I have never used the NA tables, nor met any other navigator who does. As has been been pointed out by several other members, they are finicky to use, which is the last thing you want at sea. 

It is certainly true that many people are exposed to the NA tables through the USPS. However, that is a long way from saying that those students actually put such classroom knowledge into regular practical use. As Stan K has acknowledged, USPS celestial instruction is typically about acquiring theoretical knowledge. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that ... but it should not be confused with actual ocean navigation.

Respectfully, Roger 

Re: Which Method do you prefer using and why.
From: Stan K
Date: 2013 Apr 4, 16:39 -0400

Geoffrey,

 

The NAO tables are one of the only two methods currently taught by the United States Power Squadrons (USPS), the other being the Law of Cosines "calculator" method.

 

...

 

This makes some sense, until you consider why people take the two courses that still included celestial navigation, Junior Navigator and Navigator.  Informal surveys have shown that only 10% of those taking the courses ever expect to use what they learned offshore (and only a small percentage of those actually do).  People take thes courses because they are interested in the material.  They want to understand what was done in the historical novel they just read....