NavList:

   

Reply

In the beginning was chaos, the little boat was bobbing about upon the briny
deep, no land in sight, no idea where he might be.

Then came systems of navigation, imperfect certainly, that said - Well, the
indications are that we are "here".

Well goodo. Everybody on board was thinking (but were too polite to say) -
But if we're not "here" then where are we?

What was lacking was a method that could say - If we're not "here" the
further indications are that we are "there".

My problem with the Great LOP Controversy was that all it proposed was a
giant step backwards to chaos, all it could suggest was that the little boat
was still lost.

The technique George Bennett proposes is a step in the other direction, a
practical method to graphically examine the data and establish "there". This
is the end game, to take a fix position in terms of latitiude and longitude
and propose another, hopefully more accurate, inside or outside the LOPs.

While I was tapping away at this a call came from George Bennett on his
mobile (cell-phone) on their way to the airport, but still thinking about
this. He asks me to add that the bisectors can be and should be signed, as
in plus or minus, towards or away from the direction of azimuth. More order
to the chaos.

There was a slogan promoting tourism in the Northern Territory, which is a
little like Australia's 'Wild West', known locally as 'the Never-Never',
that went 'You'll never-never know if you never-never go ...'

This technique is a bit like that. You'll never-never know if its a dud or
not unless you get into it. Theorizing about it in front of the computer
will be of  limited assistance. And be encouraged, if I can start to
understand it then you probably can too. I already know there are far finer
minds than mine out there on the Nav. List.

   

Reply