Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

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

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    or...
       
    Reply
    Re: Significance of azimuth errors, was : Principles and Being Practical
    From: Trevor Kenchington
    Date: 2003 Sep 7, 23:01 -0300

    Peter,
    
    I really should leave this alone, since I am confident that it is clear
    to just about everyone on the list bar (apparently) yourself, but the
    issue being bounced around is _not_ an ambiguity. It is an estimation
    error.
    
    While I intend to buy a copy, I do not have the book in question. Hence,
    I cannot be sure of just what it says. However, the instructions for
    resolving the ambiguity which you keep on referring to would seem to be
    just that: instructions for resolving an ambiguity (presumably between
    quadrants). They are not, by the author's own admission, instructions
    for avoiding the estimation error which George has identified.
    
    As you note, this has become a huge kerfuffle over not very much at all.
    The not very much is a warning to users that one particular method has
    the potential to introduce significant errors under certain well-defined
    conditions. That should be straightforward. The kerfuffle comes from
    your insistence, and nobody else's, on making a big issue over this one,
    straightforward point. Indeed, you have now made such an issue of it
    that you have insisted on inserting your same message into a distinct
    thread, which I had given a new subject line precisely because I wanted
    to be able to deal with the implications of an erroneous azimuth
    estimate (regardless of the origin of that error) without being drawn
    into your persistent insistence on ambiguities where there are errors.
    
    Unfortunately, I failed.
    
    
    
    Trevor Kenchington
    
    
    
    
    Peter Fogg wrote:
    
    > What seems so unfair about this huge kerfuffle (about not very much at all)
    > is that if only the Weir Diagrams were on offer then that would presumably
    > have been just fine with the critics - haven't heard about their
    > shortcomings. But since another, simpler method is also provided that works,
    > once again, just fine in the vast majority of cases and has instructions
    > provided for resolving ambiguity near the prime vertical then the whole
    > method is denounced as 'VERY bad'. Which is nonsense.
    
    
    --
    Trevor J. Kenchington PhD                         Gadus{at}iStar.ca
    Gadus Associates,                                 Office(902) 889-9250
    R.R.#1, Musquodoboit Harbour,                     Fax   (902) 889-9251
    Nova Scotia  B0J 2L0, CANADA                      Home  (902) 889-3555
    
                         Science Serving the Fisheries
                          http://home.istar.ca/~gadus
    
    
    

       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    Name:
    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Email:
    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:

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    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