NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
From: Brad Morris
Date: 2014 Aug 31, 18:50 -0400
Here's my 2 cents: 249 predates 229 in time. Celestial navigation is slow to adopt anything "new", even in its heyday. 229 appeared just at the twilight of celestial and the dawn of GPS navigation. It never had the duration of opportunity to become adopted that 249 had. GPS overwhelmed celestial and the decision over which to choose (249 or 229) became obvious, to wit: neither.
B
Hi there, it has been awhile and I have been out of touch. But my question is this: Why are Nautical and Marine Navigators opting to use HO 249 and shunning HO 229? I like 229 and the idea of using a sight reduction table designed for someone up there in the aether while we in sailboats suffer at sealevel, is a bit perplexing to me. Is easy always better? Okham thought the simplest solution was usually the most correct answer, but where has precious and being exact and lauded for it gone?
