NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: DR plotting techniques
From: George Huxtable
Date: 2003 Oct 18, 21:24 +0100
From: George Huxtable
Date: 2003 Oct 18, 21:24 +0100
>On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 00:13:24 +0100, George Huxtable wrote: > >>Rodney Myrvaagnes wrote- >> >> >>>I can't see how an uptide or downtide arc could be more efficient than >>>a continuously-corrected rhumbline. Could you explain which is more >>>efficient, and why? >> >>Rodney, I'm glad someone asked that question. I can explain it best by an >>example, which not by chance happens to correspond rather closely with the >>passage between my own home port of Poole and its opposite number on the >>French coast, Cherbourg. >> >>Consider a passage from port A to port B, which is due South of A, across a >>channel which runs East-West, and is subject to a strong tide, running 6 >>hours each way. Say the distance A to B is such that in smooth water and at >>the vessel's cruising speed, the passage would take just 12 hours. And say >>the vessel departs from A, just when the East-going tide commences. > >Come on, George. That is an extremely special case. > >I am leaving to catch a tide in the East River, but I will try to >pursue this further next week. > > > >> >>If the vessel just steers a Southerly course throughout, the tide will take >>her, say 15 miles to the East of the direct straight A to B track, over the >>first 6 hours. Then, the tide will turn Westerly, and over the next 6 hours >>it will bring her back West by that same 15 miles, to deposit her right at >>the doorstep of port B. >> >>If the vessel was following a ground-track using GPS, waypoints would be >>set at A and B, and a straight-line ground track drawn between them. The >>helmsman would be commanded to steer West of South during the first 6 hours >>to keep to that track and counteract the tide, and then, later, East of >>South, to do the same. In the case of a slow vessel, and a hot tide, the >>attempt to keep to the straight track may even become impossible. But in >>any case, those Eastings and Westings are quite counterproductive, >>cancelling each other out, and are made at the expense of the Southing, >>which in this case is all that matters. Sceptics may find that a simple >>vector diagram will convince them, but are welcome to argue back if it >>doesn't. >> >>George. =============== George counters- No, it isn't a "special case", at all, as Rodney claims. Certainly, I chose the simplest, and most obvious example, to show it up. It's true that over ANY cross-current passage, when that cross-current varies significantly with time, then trying to counter that cross-current at every moment, by varying the heading to hold to a short and straight ground-track, will not be the best way to go. It will always be more efficient to stick to a constant heading, which is calculated to compensate for the total net tidal displacement over the duration of the passage, whatever that happens to be. Following a straight ground-track will turn out to be the same as the procedure above if, and only if, the cross-current stays constant with time. This may be the case when crossing an ocean current, or a river flow, or making a short cross-tide passage which only takes an hour or so, a small fraction of a tidal cycle (such as when crossing the Solent). In those cases, following a straight ground-track will be just as good. That's the special case. But in general, the tidal cross-currents will vary appreciably with time over the duration of a passage, and then it will always be advantageous to adopt a constant-heading strategy, and ignore any specified straight-line track. That's the general case. Things get rather more complex when a cross-current varies with POSITION across the passage, and I haven't attempted to tackle that problem! Please argue back, anyone, if you're unconvinced. And Rodney, enjoy your trip, and take care when crossing a tideway. Yours, George. ================================================================ contact George Huxtable by email at george@huxtable.u-net.com, by phone at 01865 820222 (from outside UK, +44 1865 820222), or by mail at 1 Sandy Lane, Southmoor, Abingdon, Oxon OX13 5HX, UK. ================================================================