Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.


A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Add Images & Files
    Re: Nories tables vs H.O. table's
    From: Chuck Griffiths
    Date: 2002 Jan 28, 11:49 AM

    ...I like Norie's compact size (Burton's is even smaller but its tables carry
    less precision, giving answers more like those of Pub 249) and if room
    allows, I will carry Pub 249 vol 1, 2, and 3 for plannig sights and quick
    work and also carry Norie's for sight reduction or sailings problems not
    covered by the declination range or stars listed in 249. Plus it's just fun
    to do a sight reduction using the cosine-haversine method!
    Norie's gives the observation "How far a Navigator is justified in working
    to tenths of a minute is a matter that can be argued about indefinitely, but
    since the nautical almanac gives hour angles and declinations to tenths of a
    minute and modern sextant with a decimal vernier enables readings to be
    taken to tenths of a minute as well, it would seem only logical to use
    navigation tables which, with the minimum of effort, provide for the same
    order of precision" (Norie's Nautical Tables, Capn. A. G.Blance (ed),
    Revised Edition 1991, pp 13-14).
    Rod Deyo
    As I've mentioned previously, I'm a big fan of Ageton's tables because I'm
    enough of a pragmatist to accept that .5' solutions fit well with the accuracy
    of my sights. But, I really enjoy the elegance of the cosine-haversine method
    enough to wonder why it hasn't found more modern followers.
    I see any sight reduction method that works from one's DR position as a big
    advantage over AP methods. While I accept that both approaches offer
    theoretically equivalent accuracy, I prefer working directly from my DR for the
    following reasons:
    1. I have a pretty good idea how good my sights and solutions are as soon as I
    calculate my intercepts. (Rather than having to complete plotting the LOP's to
    know if I'm way off.)
    2. I can use high angle sights without having to correct for the curvature of
    LOP's. (Something that I see a lot of people neglect, in fact, the table for
    this correction isn't even in the 1995 Bowditch.)
    3. Any of the sight reductions methods that work from a DR are, I think, easier
    to use for Great Circle solutions.
    I think the reason HO 229 is so popular is that all those big volumes look so
    pretty on one's bookshelf. :-)
    This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may
    be legally privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure under
    applicable law. This e-mail and its files are intended solely for
    the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and their content
    is the property of Smiths Aerospace.  If you are not the intended
    recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication.
    If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the e-mail
    administrator at postmaster@si.com and then delete this e-mail, its
    files and any copies.
    This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been scanned
    for the presence of known computer viruses.

    Browse Files

    Drop Files


    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    You can also join by posting. Your first on-topic post automatically makes you a member.

    Posting Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your posting code will be emailed to you immediately.

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site