NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Advancing LOP's in surface Celnav.
From: Peter Hakel
Date: 2013 Mar 13, 18:21 -0700
From: Gary LaPook <garylapook@pacbell.net>
To: pmh099@yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 10:23 PM
Subject: [NavList] Re: Advancing LOP's in surface Celnav.
From: Peter Hakel
Date: 2013 Mar 13, 18:21 -0700
Since the intercept is:
a = Ho - Hc
and the Hc is fixed by the choice of AP, then our two methods are equivalent. Changing Ho automatically changes the intercept by the same amount. Either way, you plot only one LOP relative to the original (unshifted) AP.
For completeness I should add that the usual disclaimers about avoiding altitudes that are too close to 90 degrees apply in this case.
Peter Hakel
a = Ho - Hc
and the Hc is fixed by the choice of AP, then our two methods are equivalent. Changing Ho automatically changes the intercept by the same amount. Either way, you plot only one LOP relative to the original (unshifted) AP.
For completeness I should add that the usual disclaimers about avoiding altitudes that are too close to 90 degrees apply in this case.
Peter Hakel
From: Gary LaPook <garylapook@pacbell.net>
To: pmh099@yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2013 10:23 PM
Subject: [NavList] Re: Advancing LOP's in surface Celnav.
The traditional method of advancing an LOP requires plotting two azimuths and two distances. Method one has you plotting the intercept, one azimuth and one distance, followed by plotting the movement of the vessel, a second azimuth and distance. The second method has you advancing the AP, one azimuth and one distance, and then plotting the intercept from the advanced AP, a second azimuth and distance. The flight navigator's way that I posted has you plotting only one azimuth and distance, the adjusted intercept. gl --- On Sun, 3/10/13, Peter Hakel <pmh099---com> wrote:
|
: http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx?i=122822