A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
From: Hanno Ix
Date: 2015 Jul 2, 11:03 -0700
If I may...
I did not take Frank's comments to be "inappropriate" by any means. IMHO, they seemed to be objective observations based on the facts of the matter. I, myself, upon reading the entry when Andrés first posted the link, thought that the article was a bit biased toward the Doniol method in general, if only for the amount of text devoted to it. And I agree with Frank's statements that, "...[the] article does not describe sight reduction, as it is done, and as it exists today." and "The article on the intercept method covers nearly everything in your sight reduction page..." Also, I think that Andrés, being a grown man, can decide for himself whether or not to take offense and therefore whether or not an apology is appropriate. Although (and again, this is just my own, humble opinion), I cannot see why one would be.
As I seem to be one of the few NavList members who is not particularly enamored with the Hav-Doniol method, I realize I may be in the minority here. But, quite frankly, I was surprised at the reaction to Frank's comments. After all, he did start the thread bearing the title "Making an impact..." with the suggestion to replace the NAO concise tables with the Hav-Doniol method. He even commented: "How awesome would that be?"
Please do take my comments for what they are - one amateur's opinion. But I just felt I needed to say it.