NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
M.O.O. Alternative table 1
From: Eric Haberfellner
Date: 2001 Nov 27, 7:57 PM
From: Eric Haberfellner
Date: 2001 Nov 27, 7:57 PM
Hello, I am a new member to the list. and I have a couple of what are probably very elementary questions about H.O. 249. 1) For yacht navigation to bring all of the sight reductions for a fix to a common time, Is it valid to use "Alternative table 1- Altitude Correction for Change in the Position of the Observer" which provides corrections for 1 minute of time? This table deals in ground speeds of 50 to 900 knots (which is a bit fast for your average yacht I will admit). However if you divide the speeds at the head of the columns and the values extracted from the table by 100 and then muliply by the number of minutes you are that have elapsed since the sight time and the fix time it appears to give a correction to Ho which and the resulting intercept to bring the LOP to the desired fix time. Is this a valid technique? Can it be used with longer time intervals to do a running fix where hours may have elapsed between the sights? If this works, I would rather do this than the additional plotting to bring the sights to a common time. 2) Doing sight reductions with H.O. 249 Volume 1. Are intercepts calculated using only H.O. 249 Vol 1 as accurate as those calculated using Vols 1 and 2 (for those bodies which have declinations less than 30 degrees). Somehow it always feels like a cheat to not have to mess with the declinations of the bodies. It is however the only way with H.O. 249 to deal with the navigational stars with declinations of 30 degrees or more (so it must some validity). Should volume 1 sight reductions be treated with more suspicion than Vol 2 & 3 sight reductions. Thanks in advance for those to reply or even think about these questions. Eric Haberfellner