
NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Low Alt Refraction
From: Marcel Tschudin
Date: 2013 Apr 29, 15:03 +0300
From: Marcel Tschudin
Date: 2013 Apr 29, 15:03 +0300
Re: http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx/Low-Alt-Refraction-USCG-Student-Example-for-Low-Altitude-Cou%C3%ABtte-apr-2013-g23718 and http://fer3.com/arc/m2.aspx/Low-Alt-Refraction-Hirose-apr-2013-g23719 Thank you, Kermit, for providing all these different text book values and thank you Paul for your explanation and for the refraction formula from the Explanatory Supplement. Kermit, you wrote: "When appropriate I leave upon you the task of reworking these different results into the very same environmental reference (e.g. 1010 mb and +10°C) so that you can get a good feeling of the Refraction Values dispersion at 0° apparent altitude. My guess is that they all should match the US NA -34.5' value to within +/- 1'. Let me know your results." Yes, for what it is worth I did compile these values and converted them to the same condition. I added also a few more to your list. You find the results in the attached screen shot. The extreme values scatter slightly more than you were expecting. One must however be aware that the "real" values, those resulting from daily and even hourly variations may possibly lead to even larger differences. Just a few comments: The French references differ by almost 3 arcmin. The value from reference #2 agrees close with reference #14, which was obtained by ray tracing using the US Standard Atmosphere (1976) Reference #3: The air pressure is given. I do not know what the water pressure relates to. Reference #6: Could this have been a typo and the value been in degrees, still requiring to add the sun diameter? References #7 and #8: Bennett derived his formula from previous (analytical) work done by Garfinkel. Reference #9: This relates to Paul's comments. Because it refers to the Explanatory Supplement it is assumed that the value relates to the nautical standard conditions (1010 hPa, 10 C). References #10 and #11: It looks like being the same formula. There seems however to be a slight difference. Was #11 not copied correctly? (I do not have the original reference.) Reference #12 and #13: Relate to http://astro.ukho.gov.uk/data/tn/naotn63.pdf Reference#13 uses a simplified standard atmosphere consisting of 2 layers, the troposphere and the stratosphere. Best regards, Marcel