NavList:

   

Reply

On Feb 22, 2005, at 4:04 PM, Royer, Doug wrote:

> Doug,
>
> Just as a matter of note, assuming that the terrain was not flat, would
> you not agree that following your position on 7.5'-series topographic
> maps, with terrestrial cross bearings as needed would have been
> sufficient to locate you within 0.1' of your position?  I.E., that the
> celestial nav was more for the exercise than for finding out where you
> were.
>
> Fred
>
>
> Yes sir that is the case.Topograghical maps and mil-grid projections
> are
> what we had covering the terrain we followed from beginning to end. We
> went
> 3 days straight without being able to take any celestial sights.
> Relying on
> map positions etc. Took sights when I could for something to do.
> The terrain was not flat in the least. Even while traversing the desert
> pans/arroyos it is anything but flat. Crossed 3 mountain ranges.
> Chocolates,
> Cargo Muchachas and the White Ranges.
> Anything but flat. Major variations in elevations from day to day or
> even hr
> to hr.
>
> I just don't have the info Alex requested on accuracy and used this as
> an
> example that with all the accumulated errors in equipement/procedures
> made
> we still would have been close to the pick up point at the end.
>
>

Yes, it is reassuring that it still works!  And I commend you for
following your position with a sextant.  And one doesn't always have
those high resolution maps.

Fred

   

Reply