Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

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

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    or...
       
    Reply
    Re: Lunar trouble, need help
    From: Paul Hirose
    Date: 2008 Jul 07, 15:45 -0700

    KENT AE NORDSTRÖM wrote:
    > I all cases there is an angle between the distance line and the vertical
    > used for measuring the altitude. Refraction compresses the body - more on
    > the LL than on the UL - which means that there is a need to correct also
    > the distance for refraction. The body is not circular but compressed in
    > directions apart from th the compression in the vertical. The arguments for
    > this correction is altitude and angle between the distance and the vertical.
    
    The last angle is the position angle. It's the "azimuth" from point A to 
    point B on the celestial sphere. If the coordinates of those points are 
    expressed in a horizontal reference system (any system could be used, 
    e.g., RA and dec.), the zenith is the "north pole". In that case, if B 
    is directly above A, the position angle from A to B is zero. The angle 
    increases counterclockwise. This is consistent with the way we measure 
    azimuth: 0 at "north", increasing "east".
    
    Here are the International Astronomical Union routines for position angle:
    http://www.iau-sofa.rl.ac.uk/2008_0301/SeparationPA.html
    
    > This correction should be done for the moon and the sun. As an example for
    > altitude 8d 30s and angle of 45d the correction is about 5 arcsec's, while
    > when the angle is 0d, as in altitude reduction, the correction is 10
    > arcsec's. If the other body is the sun then a similar correction should be 
    > used. So it is not negligible to avoid this
    > correction when reducing the distance.
    
    I agree with your numbers, but are those corrections significant for a 
    sextant shot at 8.5° altitude from the deck of a ship?
    
    My lunar distance program corrects the Moon and Sun semidiameters for 
    refraction, and even adjusts the Moon position for the difference 
    between its center of mass and center of figure. However, in the real 
    world I'm sure human error, sextant error, and non-standard refraction 
    have much greater effect than the little corrections I'm applying.
    
    -- 
    I block messages that contain attachments or HTML.
    
    --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
    Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
    To post, email NavList@fer3.com
    To unsubscribe, email NavList-unsubscribe@fer3.com
    -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
    

       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    Name:
    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Email:
    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:

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    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