Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

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

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    Name or NavList Code:
    Email:
       
    Reply
    Re: Bowditch Table 15
    From: Bill B
    Date: 2005 Jan 24, 17:56 -0500

    Jim wrote:
    
    > When I do drawings, the vertical angle that an observer would shoot between
    > the top of an object over the horizon and the horizon has to increase for
    > decreasing height of eye as the observer climbs down a 100' mast, but the
    > table suggests that vertical angle increases (keep "Distance by Vertical
    > Angle" constant, and change [H-h] appropriately as you look at Table 15).
    
    Do not think you can keep anything but H constant.  This is more like
    Rubik's cube, you can't change one thing without changing another ;-)
    
    If I do keep "Distance by Vertical Angle" constant, tabular H-h increases,
    as does the tabular corrected angle.  That we would expect, no surprises
    there. Note however that the corrected angle includes a dip correction.  To
    decrease H-h by say 5 ft (tabular angle 0.07, dif 45 to 0.08, dif 50)  I
    must increase dip by 5 feet.  As the table includes negative corrected
    angles, obviously dip exceeds the measure angle corrected for IC in a least
    some cases.
    
    As h is decreased, the angle would indeed increase.
    As h is increased, the angle would indeed decrease.
    
    As h is decreased, the absolute value of the dip correction would decrease.
    As h is increased, the absolute value of the dip correction would increase.
    
    As h is decreased, the difference between H and h would increase.
    As h is increased, the difference between H and h would decrease.
    
    i.e.  h has an inverse relationship to the angle measured, dip correction,
    and H-h.
    
    Imagine the situation where you can see the base/waterline.  The closer you
    get to the object, the bigger the angle from waterline to top. An inverse
    relationship.
    
    Same here.  The closer you get to the object, the more of it you can see
    above the horizon, so the bigger the angle.  Again an inverse relationship
    but with a different equation where dip may be a big factor.
    
    Any help there?
    
    Bill
    
    
    

       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Get a NavList ID Code

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

    A NavList ID Code guarantees your identity in NavList posts and allows faster posting of messages.

    Retrieve a NavList ID Code

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

    Email Settings

    NavList ID Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    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