NavList:

   

Reply

Hi Peter, pretty close I got 14d 15.4N, 142d 53.3E.
Mike Burkes

On Nov 16, 1:19�am, "Peter Fogg"  wrote:
> Federico you asked, on 8 Aug last: "Any comments?"
>
> Basically agree. �Using all of the sights I derive, at the time of the
> first, a probable position of:
> N14d 15.3' �E142d 53.2'. �Have allowed for the ship's movement while the
> upper limb of the moon is being observed. � As Greg Rudzinski points out,
> the ship is steaming at 080d, while the position line extends towards 069d;
> fairly similar.
>
> Have plotted these sights and compared them with the calculated slope. �They
> are evidently very consistently good observations, showing little spread.
> Since the apparent movement of the moon (or any celestial body) as it
> rises/falls is an arc, extending the time-spread of the multiple sights
> beyond about 5 minutes, as here, could lead to those at either end being
> less reliable.
>
> Adopting 19h 08m 00s and 65d 54' leads to an azimuth of 159.1d and an
> intercept of T0.6, which may be a slight improvement on the sight taken at
> close to that time, #4: 19h 08m 06s, Hs 65d 55.0' ? �At any rate, plotting
> them reveals that there are none (excepting perhaps those at either end, for
> the reason above) which need be discarded. �In this case an average should
> give a good result.
>
> Jeremy posted the problem in NavList 5416 on 13 Jun 08; mind his corrections
> which followed soon after.
>
> On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Federico Rossi wrote:
>
>
>
> > �Hello everybody,
>
> > I was browsing through the exercises that Jeremy kindly posted on the list
> > back in June. Today I was working out exercise 14 Multi-moon LOP's and I've
> > seen there was no solution posted (if I'm not wrong), so here's mine.
>
> > I've averaged the sights and obtained a Hs of 65 deg 59,8' at 09 09 14 UTC
> > (or 19 09 14 ZT). This yields to a calculated altitude of 65 deg 55,5' (I
> > use the haversine method and Norie's tables 'cause I like working the old
> > way) and to an intercept of 1.3 NM forward. The azimut is 160 deg. Moving
> > back the LOP to 19 00 00 ZT and assuming the intersection between this LOP
> > and the course made good as the most probable position I got a fix at 14 deg
> > 17,0' N 142 deg 58,5' E.
>
> > Any comments?
>
> > Federico
>
>
>
> �Slope.pdf
> 785KViewDownload- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply