Next message: Peter MacNeil: "Re: New life for Nav-l."
George wrote:
3. List policy has always been to discourage reference to
radio-navigation techniques, except where this was trivial in extent,
or had relevance to some discussion of traditional navigation. As I
understand it, there isn't any outright ban.
However, recent postings relating to intimate details of GPS have
greatly exceeded any such tolerant guidelines. With a new skipper, it
may be time to discuss whether that policy should be eased, but until
that happens, it seems to me that existing policy should be respected.
If there should be any collecting of opinions on that question, my
personal preference would be to keep Nav-l the way it is. Others may
differ.
My reply:
I would really like to see more discussions taking place outside of the
realm of just "traditional" nav techniques. I would like to see more
discussions on this list using any of the nav techniques. RDF nav, GPS
nav and RADAR nav included. RDF and RADAR navigation can now be
considered "traditional" as these techniques have been used for 60 +
yrs. And a cheap radar setup costs the same as a premium sextant does
now days. Radar navigation plays a much more important roll in today's
marine navigation than does RDF or celestial. Gone are the days when
only larger vessels could afford to have or needed radar for collision
avoidance or position finding.
We are training more and more private boaters in the use of smaller
unit, more powerful radar in range and abilities.
General seamanship topics are also great to discuss.
Sometimes the discussions concerning celnav on this and the other list
become moribund.
