NavList:

   

Reply

Paul,
Maybe the method is so loose that it doesn?t matter. After all, a plane 
traveling at hundreds of miles an hour and thousands of feet high has a 
different requirement for precision then a boat that need to find a point 
they can only see from a few miles away.
Robert Gainer

>
> From: Paul Hirose 
> Date: 2006/04/13 Thu PM 05:38:26 EDT
> To: NAVIGATION-L@LISTSERV.WEBKAHUNA.COM
> Subject: jet fighter celestial nav
>
> U.S. Air Force Manual 51-40, "Air Navigation" (1955 edition), which I
> got on eBay, has a chapter on fighter plane celestial navigation.
>
> "The space limitations of fighter cockpits preclude the making of the
> detailed computations required for conventional celestial nevigation.
> With this technique, there is no plotting and very little computation
> required in the air. All that need be done is to make an observation and
> compare the sextant readings with precomputed values for the time of the
> observation..."
>
> The celestial body must be either within 15� of the course line or
> within 5� of a perpendicular to the course line. At pre-planned times
> you shoot one body and compare observed vs. predicted altitude. There is
> no attempt to take fixes; you check the progress of the flight with
> speed lines and course lines.
>
> "During the celestial observation the aircraft must be stable. In a
> single place aircraft a dependable auto-pilot is an absolute necessity."
>
> I wonder how they corrected for refraction through the canopy. The
> manual doesn't say.
>

   

Reply