NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Celestial Navigation without a sextant.
From: Greg Rudzinski
Date: 2008 Mar 11, 15:38 -0700
From: Greg Rudzinski
Date: 2008 Mar 11, 15:38 -0700
George, I base my 6 minutes of arc figure on the refration variables as seen in the A4 table of the Nautical Almanac. The temperature and pressure extremes are -7.3' to +6.9' from the mean. In reality on the ocean and from the beach I get better than + or - 4' from a GPS position. Extreme refraction can occure after the passage of a cold front. In this case opposing LOP's or a back sight will be needed to cancel out the refraction variable. On Mar 10, 12:32�pm, "George Huxtable"wrote: > Greg Rudzinski wrote- > > | � � �In a lifeboat with a chronometer,tables, and compass (no > | sextant), a navigator would be able to mark the GMT time of the sun's > | limb on the horizon. The elevation is zero. Correct for refraction, > | semi-diameter, and height of eye (dip). Perform normal sight reduction > | and expect 6 minutes of arc accuracy under normal weather conditions. > > What does Greg base his "6 minutes of arc" figure on, when it must include > the uncertainties in refraction for the Sun, as seen on the horizon? How > well does he know what that refraction will be, and how much it might vary > from the "book" value of 34 arc-minutes? > > I quote from Meeus, "Astronomical Algorithms", chapter 16 on Atmospheric > refraction (page 107 in my 1998 ed.). > > " ... According to Schaefer and Liller, the refraction at the horizon > fluctuates by 0.3 degrees around a mean value normally, and in some cases > apparently much more" The reference is to "Refraction near the horizon", > Publ. astron. society of the Pacific, vol 102, pages 796 - 805 (July 1990). > It would be nice to see more detail, but I don't have access to that > original paper. Brad Schaefer is a recognised authority on optics in the > atmosphere, and more recently has produced an authoritative series of papers > titled "Sunset Science". > > However, there are very divergent views on this matter. My 1977 edition of > Bowditch states, in vol 1 page 422 (para. 1606)- "Generally, the error in > tabulated refraction should not exceed two or three minutes, even at the > horizon". I regard that statement as absurd, but you can take your pick > between those views. > > George. > > contact George Huxtable at geo...@huxtable.u-net.com > or at +44 1865 820222 (from UK, 01865 820222) > or at 1 Sandy Lane, Southmoor, Abingdon, Oxon OX13 5HX, UK. > > George. > > contact George Huxtable at geo...@huxtable.u-net.com > or at +44 1865 820222 (from UK, 01865 820222) > or at 1 Sandy Lane, Southmoor, Abingdon, Oxon OX13 5HX, UK. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---