NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Latitude by Lunar Distance
From: Wolfgang Köberer
Date: 2006 Nov 11, 08:49 +0100
From: Wolfgang Köberer
Date: 2006 Nov 11, 08:49 +0100
Frank,
I never thought that re-inventing the wheel
in celestial navigation was one of the goals of this group. But if - as you (no
capitals) say - the criterion is that a concept is novel "to this group", well,
the concept of finding one's position by astronomical observations certainly is
a new concept for a group of 2nd graders; your grade of novelty is
obviously dependent on the group of reference you choose. What I want to say by
that is this: in a group like NavList, where in my opinion a couple of
discussions were way above the level of professional discussion in the heyday of
celestial navigation (maybe owing to advanced tools of computation) , I would
not expect that someone tosses in an idea as "new" without at least a small
reservation that it might not be so new after all - which you now admit
("probably ten times, too"). Therefore I am completely at a loss for what reason
you (again: no capitals) feel "attacked". I had only intended to say that there
is a historical predecessor to this discussion. And the "sorry" pertained to the
fact that it may be a bit disappointing to find out that an idea is not that
original as one thought in the first place, after all. An experience I've had
many times myself.
Finally about my proficency at taking
and working out lunars that you made a subject of: I own a few sextants -
starting with plastic and ending with Plath - but I admit that on an Atlantic
crossing a couple of years ago I only
took one sun and one star shot. Which basically shows that I am not that much
interested in being perfect in taking celestial shots and working out a
solution/position line as fast and accurate as possible. I am not interested in
balancing 2 spinning plates on 2 sticks simultaneously either. I admire people
that can do it, but it' s just nothing that I aspire to do myself. Which is to
say: I am interested in the history of navigation for the cultural and
scientific aspects of this subject. If I have to occupy myself with the
technical details, I do, but not for the sake of them. This seems to be
different with you (still: no capitals),
which is fine with me. Different people
have different tastes. As long as this list tolerates such people as me I will
throw in whatever I think might be of interest, even if you might feel
attacked.
May I sit down now?
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: NavList@fer3.com [mailto:NavList@fer3.com]Im Auftrag von FrankReedCT@aol.com
Gesendet: Samstag, 11. November 2006 00:16
An: NavList@fer3.com
Betreff: [NavList 1661] Re: Latitude by Lunar DistanceWolfgang you wrote:"So the idea is not exactly original or new (94 years) and has been
published in a peer-reviewed journal before, I am sorry to say."Call me confused, but why are you "sorry" to say that? It goes without saying that everything in celestial navigation has been thought of before. Probably ten times, too. But did YOU ever realize that you could determine a true position fix using lunar distances without any horizon at all? I think it's quite a novel concept for this group of people. I suppose that's why a couple of people were determined to attack it instead of trying it out.Out of curiosity, has anyone besides me tried it yet? Have you measured some lunar distances assuming that GMT is known (as it is today, of course)? Have you plotted out the resulting lines of position and experienced the satisfaction of finding your position by celestial navigation in an entirely new way? I dropped the topic in October, but I would be happy to discuss it again.I feel I should say this every time, just so there's no confusion: this use of lunar distances to get a fix in latitude and longitude is entirely different from the historical method of lunar distances which used the measured distance to determine GMT. The measuring process, the required fine adjustment of the sextant, and most aspects of the clearing process are the same or very similar, but the final result is completely different.-FER
42.0N 87.7W, or 41.4N 72.1W.
www.HistoricalAtlas.com/lunars
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com
To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
