|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
Subject: FW: [Nml] 249 v 229 , Starpath, time tick
From: Craig (craig@XXX.XXX)
Date: Sun Mar 14 1999 - 18:25:55 EST
Actually, the GPS (satellite) time is off by about 12 seconds. Each
manufacturer corrects for this inside the unit. Accuracy may be affected by
internal errors, but I'm sure it's accurate enough for celestial navigation.
Craig Scott
Columbia, South Carolina
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-navigation@XXX.XXX
[mailto:owner-navigation@XXX.XXX] On Behalf Of Ferrantelli
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 1999 13:04
To: navigation@XXX.XXX
Subject: [Nml] 249 v 229 , Starpath, time tick
Hello. I have a few basic questions. First, any strong feelings out there
about the Starpath workforms? I like them a lot, I use them with pub229,
and they seem quite a bit more efficient than Navy-type strip forms. I
haven't tried then with NAO method yet.
Second, is volume 1 of 249 only used for star identificaton, or can it
be used for reductions as well? All we tend to use it for in the Coast
Guard is as a star finder. I reduced a star sight using only pub249 and it
seemed to work, although I'm confused by the fact that it doen't include any
declination values?
Third, I've been using DGPS as my time tick for all my sights, (we don't
have a chronometer). Is this as accurate as I think it is?
Lastly, I'm intrigued by what I've heard about 211/Ageton sight
reduction. Where can I find out more and/or get a copy of the requisite
tables/forms/instructions.
Thanks,
QM2 Brent Ferrantelli, USCG
CGC SUNDEW (WLB-404)
Duluth, MN
"The Superior One"
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=
=-= TO UNSUBSCRIBE, send this message to majordomo@XXX.XXX: =-=
=-= unsubscribe navigation =-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=
=-= TO UNSUBSCRIBE, send this message to majordomo@XXX.XXX: =-=
=-= unsubscribe navigation =-=
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=
|