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: Lunar Distances with Alex's SNO-T
    From: Bill B
    Date: 2006 Nov 09, 02:08 -0500

    Left town unexpectedly for family matters.  I apologize for the delay in
    Frank wrote:
    > So there's no
    > problem calculating its exact angular size in the sky. BUT you can't use the
    > value in the Nautical Almanac. Is that sacrilege? Isn't the Nautical Almanac
    > nearly Holy Scripture for celestial navigation? Some people treat it that way
    > sometimes, but in fact, the modern Nautical Almanac is no more than a
    > well-honed tool for a particular class of celestial navigation observations,
    > namely, ordinary altitude observations. And here and there in the tables of
    > the Nautical Almanac, you will find that some quantities are inaccurate by as
    > much as three-tenths of a minute of arc, because that level of error is not
    > critical for ordinary altitude observations.
    > To get the correct semi-diameter of the Moon, just take out the Moon's HP from
    > the almanac for the correct hour of observation. Multiply that by 27.27%. Then
    > apply the augmentation. You can calculate this or just use a short lookup
    > table as follows: if the Moon's altitude is between 10 and 30 degrees, add 0.1
    > minutes of arc, between 30 and 60 add 0.2', above 60 add 0.3' (see "Easy
    > Lunars" on my web site). That's close enough in most cases. Note that if the
    > Moon is lower than 15 degrees or so, you have to take refractional flattening
    > into account, but you could just as well wait until the Moon's higher than
    > that.
    I'll take the word of a guy that knows the exact diameter of the moon and
    its distance from the observer at any given time.  And I would bet the farm
    you know how to determine that.
    For those of us OCD in other areas, if I recall you stated your formula was
    You said 27.27%, Alex posted 27.277. Is his added digit meaningful?
    How "approximate" is "approximate?" You wrote, "Actually, the correct
    horizon SD at the time of the observation was 15.9 (calculated from 27.27%
    of the HP --you should always use a calculated SD when doing lunars). Then
    you need to augment it for altitude which gives 16.0 minutes of arc. The
    result is then quite a bit closer, but yes, a little off --an error of 0.14
    minutes of arc in the Moon's diameter.
    "0.14 minutes of arc." Off what standard, please?
    Thanks again
    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