NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: NA sight reduction tables - a considered response from NavList to the NA office?
From: Robert Eno
Date: 2012 Apr 9, 11:13 -0400
From: Robert Eno
Date: 2012 Apr 9, 11:13 -0400
A formal poll would be a very interesting exercise
Geoffrey. I agree with you and Frank that the NavList community probably
does constitute a legitimate body that represents the last vestiges of
those who actively practice astro-navigation. As I said in an earlier post,
there are, in addition to the amateurs like me, a lot of intellectual
heavyweights on this list; probably the top experts on the
planet.
The problem with conveying our wisdom and
suggestions to the NA Office may be, for the most part, a paucity of
"credentials". I can only speak for myself but notwithstanding that I have been
an amateur navigator since 1983 and in fact have used astro-navigation in the
practical sense before the days of the GPS whiz-box, I have zero credentials. I
never navigated professionally; I do not have "papers" attesting to my
proficiency (or non-proficiency) in the art and science of astro-navigation. Nor
do I have any formal courses under my belt. The whole shootin' match was
self-taught and involved hundreds, maybe thousands of hours of practical
experience. So my word on this subject, in the eyes of bureaucrats, for whom
paperwork and credentials mean everything, is worthless.
If we are to take a poll and make an entreaty to
the NA office, then I suggest that the credentialed members of this list -- the
intellectual heavyweights of whom I spoke earlier -- act as the front men to
represent our views on this topic. Only then, would the NA Office be receptive
to any change.
Robert
----- Original Message -----From: Geoffrey KolbeTo: NavList@fer3.comSent: Monday, April 09, 2012 3:18 AMSubject: [NavList] NA sight reduction tables - a considered response from NavList to the NA office?The straw pole that has effectively been taken on this list would appear to universally condemn the NA tables as being too complicated and confusing to be used in the circumstances for which they were intended, which is an emergency backup in the event that other electronic means of navigation have failed and the navigator is reduced to pencil and paper.
My own view, for what it is worth, is that the rules for the tables are too complicated and are not well expressed in the NA. I think that a well thought out workform - such as that devised by the people at Starpath - is essential if these tables are to be used successfully on a regular basis.
Back in January, Frank Reed was suggesting that the NavList community could be considered as a legitimate body to represent those who still practice celestial navigation today. Is this not a good case where representation could be made to the NA office that the NASR tables are not practical as currently laid out?
To this end, should a more formal pole be run to gauge the opinion of the NavList?
What mechanism should be adopted to convert this pole into a document for consideration by the NA office?
Geoffrey
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 7038 (20120408) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
