NavList:

   

Reply

--- George Huxtable  wrote:

> And I agree with him. It would be interesting to see a mix of
> results, obtained by various methods.

See, George and I CAN actually agree on something....  ;-)

Just kidding, and though we may cross swords (or keyboards)
occasionally, as I've said before I'm sure George is a very capable
navigator and I respect his skills (and often deep knowledge) of the
subject.

> Jeremy bases his problems on a real-life situation (and I REALLY
> appreciate that!)

Ditto that - it's great to be able to sink our collective teeth into
some "real world" problems, especially since there's no movement to
contend with when just shooting from a beach (though I do live in
California, so maybe that statement doesn't always hold true... ;-)).

I would also ask Jeremy if it would be possible to put something like
"[SOLUTION]" in the subject line so those of us who might not have had
a chance to work that particular problem yet can skip the "spoiler"
until we're ready to check out work.

> But what about dithering that GPS position, giving it only to the
> nearest degree or two, or more (and saying so), like a very bad case
> of "selective availability"? Then, it would become a more real test,
> in first having to choose an appropriate AP (assumed position), just
> as one might have to do at sea, from a DR position, if "all else
> failed".

I'm curious what George is driving at with that request (and I'm sure
he's got a good motivation, I'm just not seeing it right now).

Personally, I'd like to have an accurate GPS position available (as
part of the solution - not before, of course... ;-)) to check my
work... Unless you maybe mean using the degraded GPS position as a
starting point (or maybe just another data point) for a DR?

--
GregR



> GregR wrote-
>
> And..... not to nit-pick what seems to be our preferred methodology
> for
> solving these, but if we're all just going to use our favorite
> navigation computer programs (and I realize that computers are the
> norm
> for doing navigation these days, even I do that), what are we really
> exercising other than our data entry skills (and maybe a chance to
> see
> how the various celnav programs compare with each other)?
>
> I'd like to request that at least a few of these be solved by the
> "old
> school" method (i.e. only an almanac, sight reduction tables,
> plotting
> sheets (and the usual navigation drawing tools), but no
> computers/calculators other than maybe to check our work). I think
> that's more a measure of celnav skills than just plugging a bunch of
> numbers into a computer program and hitting "Calculate".
>
> ================
>
> And I agree with him. It would be interesting to see a mix of
> results,
> obtained by various methods.
>
> And I would suggest another way to add interest and test us a bit
> harder.
> Jeremy bases his problems on a real-life situation (and I REALLY
> appreciate
> that!) but that means that he can start off with a precise GPS
> position and
> then we check whether the celestial observations agree with it. But
> what
> about dithering that GPS position, giving it only to the nearest
> degree or
> two, or more (and saying so), like a very bad case of "selective
> availability"? Then, it would become a more real test, in first
> having to
> choose an appropriate AP (assumed position), just as one might have
> to do at
> sea, from a DR position, if "all else failed".
>
> George.
>
> contact George Huxtable at george@huxtable.u-net.com
> or at +44 1865 820222 (from UK, 01865 820222)
> or at 1 Sandy Lane, Southmoor, Abingdon, Oxon OX13 5HX, UK.
>
>
> >
>


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply