# NavList:

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

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
 Add Images & Files Posting Code: Name: Email:
Re: What time is it, really?
From: Gary LaPook
Date: 2008 Jul 17, 23:36 -0700
Gary writes:

It's actually 15.041º per hour (15º 2.5') approximately 361º per solar day.

gl

Bill wrote:

```As understand it, with an earth rotation of 15d per hour, 1 second time
equals 0.25 arc minute.  It follows that 4 seconds time would equate to 1
arc minute.```

```Bill asked

```
```What time is it, really?
```
```I believe the musical group Chicago answered that question back in the
late '60s... ;-)
```
```
And does anyone really care?  I do.
```
```A while ago there was a thread on time and the affect of dropping
leap seconds on cel nav.
```
```Don't think I was on the list for that thread, but as I understand it
leap seconds are added to UTC as needed to keep it within 0.9 seconds
of astronomical time.

The rule that I remember from back when I was first learning celnav was
otherwise your LOP could be off by up to 1 NM just from that error
alone (I interpret that to mean +/- 2 seconds). So I would say that
unless you need exceptional accuracy with your celnav sights you're
probably OK just ignoring the leap seconds.
```
```
As understand it, with an earth rotation of 15d per hour, 1 second time
equals 0.25 arc minute.  It follows that 4 seconds time would equate to 1
arc minute.  An arc minute of longitude would be nominally 1 nm at the
equator, but less if the vessel's AP is north or south of the equator.
Roughly 1' longitude * cos latitude = fraction of a nautical mile (ignoring
oblateness).  For example, near an elevated pole 360d longitude could be
under 1 nautical mile.

And why--despite the "former" CTA's cavalier attitude towards
chronometers--would I care?  With an artificial horizon, my Astra, and a 3.5
scope, I consider an intercept of 0!0 from an average of 5 or more
observations from a known GPS position lucky. 0!1 very good.  0!2 average.
0!3 fair, and > 0!3 has me checking IC and sextant calibration.

I figure an artificial horizon cuts IE and observation errors in half, so it
gives me 0!0 to 0!6 (averaged-observations intercept) as goal to shoot for
under ideal conditions.

I have never experienced my ideal conditions.  They would include a crisp
horizon, clear sky, and a relatively stable (or predictable) platform. And
of course accurate UT1 time. <g> But if I ever do...

Bill B

```

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To unsubscribe, email NavList-unsubscribe@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Browse Files

Drop Files

### 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)