Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.


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

Compose Your Message

Add Images & Files
    Re: 1797 logbook notation
    From: George Huxtable
    Date: 2010 May 27, 01:22 +0100

    George B asked-
    "I was browsing through the 1797 logbook of a local ship in our library
    today. This was my first attempt at doing this, and although I understood
    much of what I found I have a couple of questions.
    On the left side of the page are three columns with hourly entries for
    H(our), K(nots), and F(???). Is the last entry fathoms? The numbers in this
    column ranged from 2 to 7, or were blank. "
    Yes, these were fractions of the distance between the knots, and
    traditionally labelled F for "fathoms", a fathom being six feet. In which
    case these should have been eighths of a knot, which would have been 48
    feet. However, it was often considered more convenient, for working with a
    traverse table, if knots were actually subdivided into tenths, rather than
    eighths, although these would still labelled with "F". The spacing between
    knots settled down, over time, at around 50 feet, though would vary, as did
    the timing of the glass, some being 28 seconds, some 30 seconds, and these
    were not always consistently matched. If knots were being split into
    tenths, the number in that "F" column would then run from 0 to 9 rather
    than 0 to 7, and the estimated subdivisions would have been 5 feet rather
    than 6 feet. You just have to look at the way the numbers ran: in the case
    that George B refers to these would have been in eighths of a knot of about
    6 feet. Things were not always consistent, even on the same ship.
    Parts of a knot, noted as fathoms, should just be thought of as "armfuls"
    of line, very roughly estimated. Often, if it wasn't much over a whole
    number of knots, it was taken to be that whole number, in which case an
    entry of 1 in the F column would be rare. Similarly, if the reading was
    estimated as just short of the next whole knot, entries of 7 (if in
    eighths) or 9 (if in tenths) would be omitted, and the next-higher whole
    knot would be noted instead. It was by no means an exact science, this
    interpolation between whole knots.
     "On the right side of the page is a column for what I think is magnetic
    variation, determined either by "Azimuth at 6 AM (or PM)", or by "Amplitude
    at Sun (circle with dot in center) Set". If there are three entries for a
    day they are in the order Azim at 6 PM, Amp at Sun Set, Azim at 6 AM. I can
    see how you could measure compass deviation by sighting along the compass
    and measuring the azimuthal angle to the setting sun, but I don't see how
    that matches up with these entries."
    The bearing compass would have a pair of vanes with slots in to allow the
    magnetic bearing of the Sun to be established, if it wasn't too high in the
    sky. In the days when ships carried a timekeeper of some sort, the true
    bearing of a low Sun could be calculated at a moment in local time, such as
    (in Summer) at 6 am or 6 pm, knowing the latitude.
    But this could also be done with no knowledge of the time,  by measuring
    the azimuth of Sunrise or Sunset, whenever that happened to be, and
    comparing it with an amplitude, taken from a table in an almanac. The
    amplitude was the difference between that azimuth and due East or West, and
    the moment of measurement was not taken at actual sunrise / sunset, but
    when the whole Sun was clear of  the horizon be a few arcminutes, which
    allowed appropriately for dip (depending on height-of-eye at the poop) and
    refraction, at the moment when the centre of the true Sun would be truly
    horizontal. That offset was usually just estimated by eye in terms of an
    appropriate fraction of the Sun's disc, floating clear above the horizon, a
    fraction with which any navigator would become familiar. The difficulty
    with measurement by amplitude was the great uncertainty in refraction, when
    near the horizon, depending on atmospheric conditions.
    contact George Huxtable, at  george@hux.me.uk
    or at +44 1865 820222 (from UK, 01865 820222)
    or at 1 Sandy Lane, Southmoor, Abingdon, Oxon OX13 5HX, UK.

    Browse Files

    Drop Files


    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    You can also join by posting. Your first on-topic post automatically makes you a member.

    Posting Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your posting code will be emailed to you immediately.

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

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

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site