NavList:

A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

HOME

Re: Why do we ocean navigators defer to 249 when 229 is better?
From: Stan K
Date: 2014 Sep 1, 21:38 -0400

For those of you brushing up on some of the more popular tabular sight reduction methods, you can use Celestial Tools to check your work. It includes (in addition to the Law of Cosines) the Nautical Almanac Concise method, HO 249 (Vol. 2 & 3), HO 229, HO 214, HO 211 (including the Sadler Technique), Modified HO 211 Compact (Ageton-Bayless), HO 208, and the S-Table (Pepperday and Farley versions).

It is available at

www.celestialtools.webs.com

Stan

-----Original Message-----
From: Sean C <NoReply_SeanC@fer3.com>
To: slk1000 <slk1000@aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Sep 1, 2014 2:42 am
Subject: [NavList] Re: Why do we ocean navigators defer to 249 when 229 is better?

There's also the fact that one doesn't need an alamanac to use HO 249 for several years. Having said that, I usually use HO 229 myself (which, of course, never 'expires'...but you need a current almanac). Coincidentally, I started brushing up on HO 249 just recently.

-Sean C.

Subject:
Author:
Start date:	(yyyymm dd)
End date:	(yyyymm dd)

NavList:

A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

NavList

What is NavList?

Get a NavList ID Code

Retrieve a NavList ID Code

Email Settings

Custom Index

Add Images & Files
Name or NavList Code:	Email:

Name:
	(please, no nicknames or handles)
Email:

NavList ID Code: