A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
From: Frank Reed
Date: 2015 May 14, 18:29 -0700
Well, it's interesting, yes, but I don't think this is really "resolved" (and in the interest of continuity, I've dropped that word from the subject). The explanation describes a factor of k·cos(theta), but the angle theta depends on the observing circumstances so how could they include it in a generic altitude correction table? Something's fishy. This offset for phase really belongs in the celestial coordinates themselves, which I believe is what they do today, or it could be put in a separate calculation or a small table entered with theta, if it's going to be used at all. At least the values of k seem to be in agreement with the model I described earlier today, so that's encouraging.