|
|
From: Peter Fogg (no email)
Date: Sun Sep 07 2003 - 21:26:01 EDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Trevor J. Kenchington"
> Still, I'd rather not have the potential for a 15 degree error in
> azimuth in my sight-reduction method
We still don't know about this 15 degree claim. In the event that a
navigator was relying on the Azimuth Tables, had (for the sake of argument)
never found his way as far as the Weir Diagrams, then a 15 degree difference
from his (corrected) compass reading would have the alarm bells ringing.
They should be ringing anyway, as soon as she realized he was on or near the
east/west line, if we can assume this navigator was at least familiar with
the method it was relying on.
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.
|