Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.


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

Compose Your Message

Add Images & Files
    Re: Fix by Lunar Distances... for missiles in 1950
    From: Richard M Pisko
    Date: 2006 Dec 05, 12:46 -0700

    On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 01:10:27 -0700, Bill  wrote:
    > If I recall--a long shot--the 45 is very old technology.  The predicted
    > movement of magnetic north on some of my older charts has not lived up to
    > expectation according to current US Gov sites. Therefore any dated
    > algorithms would suffer the same fate as the chart mag vs. true
    > predictions.
    Correct.  I had neglected to read the whole article before posting the
    location, and the author did "tests" and posted results (as described
    later) to determine that the algorithm cut off in 1995.
    > If I understand, an old algorithm again.  I have noted on the true to mag
    > options on my Garmin 12 I have a choice of auto or user defined
    > variation.
    > I will have to try plugging in current up-to-date user defined values
    > from
    > the US gov site.  I doubt given that given the  resolution (1 d) and
    > previous comparisons that as few seconds or a minute will get it spot on,
    > but an interesting exercise.
    I think the old Garmin algorithm was to the nearest degree . . . and given
    the various magnetic anomalies (up to 90 degrees!!) and local attraction,
    you would be better off with a good map, a sextant, and a good variable
    angle protractor to determine accurate bearings or angles between
    objects.  Although I do like my various bearing compasses which read to
    the degree or half degree (and can be estimated somewhat more finely than
    that) I find even the screws in my eyeglasses, the pens and pencils in my
    shirt pockets (and everything else that I have forgotten to remove) will
    distort the magnetic field around me.  The difference in the angle
    differences as taken from a theodolite (between distant landmarks)
    compared to those derived from subtracting magnetic azimuths from the
    bearing compasses are great enough to be cautious about accepting even
    that half degree reading.
    The sextant is much better, but since I did my testing a long time ago
    with a plastic Davis vernier example, the results may not be meaningful.
    Besides, the theodolite measures angles using a vertical hair through each
    object, and the sextant had to be tipped upward to superpose the objects
    while attempting to maintain their relative elevation.  (I'm probably
    confusing the issue here by going off on side tracks not really applicable
    to Navigation.)
    Richard . . .
    Using Opera's e-mail client since Dialog, "the Dog", died.
    To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com
    To unsubscribe, send email to NavList-unsubscribe@fer3.com

    Browse Files

    Drop Files


    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

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

    You can also join by posting. Your first on-topic post automatically makes you a member.

    Posting Code

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

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    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