NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: No Lunars Era
From: Ken Muldrew
Date: 2004 Dec 7, 10:22 -0700
From: Ken Muldrew
Date: 2004 Dec 7, 10:22 -0700
On 6 Dec 2004 at 21:07, Alexandre Eremenko wrote: > On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Ken Muldrew wrote: > > > For land navigation there was a lunars era. > > is there a hard evidence of this? > (Lewis and Clark story is rather an evidence of the contrary). Scads of it! I guess my point really should have been that the lunars era was more one of mapping than navigating. De(a)d reckoning may be good enough for most of an ocean voyage, but only if you know where you want to go. Accurate positions of coastlines and inland places depended on lunars (moreso than jovian satellites or lunar eclipses). Once mapped, then the account was good enough for navigation with the occasional lunar to set the account back on track. > I know almost nothing on the land surveying and its history, > but I suppose that more precise instruments than sextants > could be used > on land, transit instruments, and such. > (Maybe not for lunars, I don't know). Theodolites were used later on, but this was in the era of chronometers. Sextants, pocket watches, and compasses were the dominant tools of mapmaking in the 18th century. > > accuracy was easily good enough > > because landmarks > > could be used, > > What do you mean by using landmarks? > How is this related to the lunar distances? If you measure a latitude and longitude of a place using celestial, and it is a few miles out, that is still good enough to get someone close enough so that they can recognize landmarks (or see the building they're trying to get to) to complete their journey. Ken Muldrew.