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
    Optimum number of LOPs
    From: Bob Goethe
    Date: 2018 Nov 24, 07:33 -0800

    I have read with interest the discussion on the ever-troublesome cocked hat, and the difficulties associated with assigning a most probable point (or even a least improbable point).

    If one takes sights on two celestial objects - where he feels equally confident in the quality of the sights - and uses Frank's equation for determining the error elipse (http://fer3.com/arc/imgx/error-ellipse-ratio.jpg.thumb.jpg), to what extent can one say that he has pretty much what he needs to come up with as good a fix as can be had?

    That is to say, if one takes a sight on a third object, reduces and plots it, could he say that he has done more work with no significant probability that he knows more about his actual position than he had after plotting his initial two LOPs?

    And if a 3rd LOP represents a poor navigational return on time-invested, presumably a 4th LOP is even less worthwhile?


    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