A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
From: Hanno Ix
Date: 2015 May 17, 20:51 -0700
Step 4 of the procedure I described in my prior email was:
4. calculate n + ( 1 - q ) * hav ( LHA ); this yields hav ( ZD )
4. calculate n + ( 1 - q ) * vers( LHA )/2 ; this yields hav ( ZD )
Your list of virtues of the haversine are IDENTICAL to those of the versine, so why do we need to divide by 2?
For example the formula: vers ZD = vers LHA. cos lat. cos dec + vers (lat +/~ dec) works just as well as the traditional formula, substituting versines for the haversines and using both natural and log functions.
Could a mathematician or a navigation historian on this list please explain why the versine is the poor relation of its half-size parent??