Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9   Go Down

Author Topic: Noonan Navigation Error  (Read 159105 times)

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #90 on: August 17, 2011, 10:55:05 PM »

I was poking around the Waitt site today and found a new photo they didn't have before.  If you feel Earhart and Noonan may have gone down further north, this one interestingly enough shows their 2006 zone searched with Nauticos as well as the 2009 search region.  How much farther north could they have possibly gotten?  I just wish their maps included some kind of scale...



Their site also makes the statement the "team left the area with an extremely high degree of confidence that the area explored can be eliminated from future searches."  I wonder how they can be so bold when the maps seem to suggest regions of rough topography where something could conceivably hide.

--------------------------------

Using the 36.5 NM distance between the near shores of Baker and Howland for scale, the search area extended to 68 NM north of Howland, 36 NM west and encompassed a swath a minimum of 18 NM to the west and 10 NM to the east of the 157 LOP. This also covers the 4 NM to the west offset LOP if Noonan was using the Williams coordinates but there is a gap in a high probability (least unlikely) area.

gl
« Last Edit: August 17, 2011, 11:00:33 PM by Gary LaPook »
Logged

h.a.c. van asten

  • T4
  • ****
  • Posts: 322
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #91 on: August 18, 2011, 01:08:23 AM »

Every circle of uncertainty has its own circle of uncertainty around it .
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #92 on: September 07, 2011, 01:27:42 AM »

Since Itasca was between A/c and horizon 38 mls , 61 km  away most probably , sea was black and smoke was black ; if smoke field was as large as Howland itself , optical angle from 1,000 ft did not trespass  1´ arc  which is the resolution limit for the eye in clear air . In case of some horizon haze ship and smoke obscured .

Don't know if I'm smart enough to sort all that out, but it seems to support that there are so many possible variables that could have been in play that day that we will never know for certain what combination of things may have conspired to keep AE and FN from spotting Howland.

Now Gardner, stripe it any way you wish - there was a target if ever there was one...

LTM -
-----------------------------------------

I have attached a photo of some clouds shadows and a ship. Did you have any problem separating the ship from the cloud shadows?

gl
Logged

Martin X. Moleski, SJ

  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 2951
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #93 on: September 07, 2011, 08:44:27 AM »

However, is is clear that if the clouds were more plentiful it could be a much different matter.  But even the light clouds present do illustrate how dense the shadows can be.  Think of this picture with something approaching 40 or 50% cloud coverage with even puffier clouds - got any pix like that?  Might be closer to conditions present that day.  Maybe with an island or two thrown in - say, one like Howland, another like Gardner?

Ric Gillespie noted in another thread that we know what the conditions were close to Howland that morning: "According to Itasca's deck log, visibility that whole morning was '9' - the maximum on the scale, defined as 'Prominent objects visible above 20 miles.'"

The Itasca took off to search northwest of Howland because that was the only part of the sky that was cloudy. Thompson reasoned that they must have come down there because if they had approached from the west or southwest, they would have seen the smoke signal and the island.

We do not have any weather reports from Niku that morning.

If the plane landed at Niku, then the weather was good enough to see the island and make a landing.

If the plane didn't land at Niku, the weather may or may not have played a part in its loss.
LTM,

           Marty
           TIGHAR #2359A
 
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #94 on: September 07, 2011, 09:55:51 AM »

Since Itasca was between A/c and horizon 38 mls , 61 km  away most probably , sea was black and smoke was black ; if smoke field was as large as Howland itself , optical angle from 1,000 ft did not trespass  1´ arc  which is the resolution limit for the eye in clear air . In case of some horizon haze ship and smoke obscured .

Don't know if I'm smart enough to sort all that out, but it seems to support that there are so many possible variables that could have been in play that day that we will never know for certain what combination of things may have conspired to keep AE and FN from spotting Howland.

Now Gardner, stripe it any way you wish - there was a target if ever there was one...

LTM -
-----------------------------------------

I have attached a photo of some clouds shadows and a ship. Did you have any problem separating the ship from the cloud shadows?

gl

Nice photo.  No, scattered clouds leave much open ocean for excellent contrast where the ship is concerned. 

However, is is clear that if the clouds were more plentiful it could be a much different matter.  But even the light clouds present do illustrate how dense the shadows can be.  Think of this picture with something approaching 40 or 50% cloud coverage with even puffier clouds - got any pix like that?  Might be closer to conditions present that day.  Maybe with an island or two thrown in - say, one like Howland, another like Gardner?

I'm curious though, Mr. LaPook - with your advocacy of "other than" TIGHAR's path in this quest, do you have your own site where all your research is documented? Nothing you've put up sways me away from the Niku hypothesis, but much of it is interesting and obviously you are putting a great deal of effort into some alternate approach.  Most interesting.

LTM -

-----------------------------------------------yes
See: 

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/

gl
Logged

Dan Swift

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 347
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #95 on: September 08, 2011, 10:57:31 AM »

As an instrument pilot myself, the problem I have with the analogy of driving down 1st Ave or Street to Cochran (your LOP) and knowing the Starbucks is in a particular direction down Cochran, reinforces to me the possibility of a Niku landing.  There were no VORTAC's or DME arc approaches available...so that is a moot point. 

But there also were no street signs over the Pacific that night and early morning.  So if you were say on 2nd or 3rd Ave. instead of your intended 1st Ave., when you hit you LOP (Cochran)....you can't find Starbucks where you think it is....so you drive up and down it until you find it....or not.  If you get too low on gas, you look for a gas station first....so you drive in the direction where you know (think) there may be some gas stations.   Remember, there are no street signs....no DF equipment functioning, no receiving radio.  Seems very possible to me.   
TIGHAR Member #4154
 
« Last Edit: September 08, 2011, 01:59:06 PM by Martin X. Moleski, SJ »
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #96 on: September 08, 2011, 11:40:11 AM »

As an instrument pilot myself, the problem I have with the analogy of driving down 1st Ave or Street to Cochran (your LOP) and knowing the Starbucks is in a particular direction down Cochran, reinforces to me the possibility of a Niku landing.  There were no VORTAC's or DME arc approaches available...so that is a moot point. 

But there also were no street signs over the Pacific that night and early morning.  So if you were say on 2nd or 3rd Ave. instead of your intended 1st Ave., when you hit you LOP (Cochran)....you can't find Starbucks where you think it is....so you drive up and down it until you find it....or not.  If you get too low on gas, you look for a gas station first....so you drive in the direction where you know (think) there may be some gas stations.   Remember, there are no street signs....no DF equipment functioning, no receiving radio.  Seems very possible to me.   
---------------------------

There are standard search patterns to fly, starting at the most likely location for the destination and remaining in that area. Using my prior analogy, when you didn't immediately see the Starbucks, you would start again at the location that you had expected to find it and instead of just looking right and left from Cochran street to find the Starbucks you would use  a normal search methodology of driving into the shopping center parking lots on each side of the street so as to do a more complete search of the places where that Starbucks (and your friend) could be hiding. I'll bet that you have done this same thing yourself.

See: https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/topics/standard-search-pattern


gl
« Last Edit: September 08, 2011, 01:59:18 PM by Martin X. Moleski, SJ »
Logged

Irvine John Donald

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #97 on: September 08, 2011, 02:29:56 PM »

Too bad you guys aren't flying over Canada. We have a Tim Horton's on every corner.
Respectfully Submitted;

Irv
 
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #98 on: September 08, 2011, 02:52:24 PM »

Dan makes good sense to me. 

With no signs, you couldn't know if you were on 1st or 10th street out there, only that you'd hit "Cochran" (the LOP) somewhere along its length. 

With growing jitters and in need of a caffeine fix, you look left and right, up and down Cochran: you realize there is a more limited chance of finding "Starbucks" (land) to your left than to right because you see fewer store signs to left than to right, i.e. only one or two possibilities for landfall to NNW (Howland or maybe Baker) than to SSE (Gardner and others in group). 

Belly now rumbling and blood sugar dropping, you glance to left, then right... I'd only go so far to the left - to the end of the 'signs' (LOP out to NNW to end of time willing to risk) before turning back toward the other direction where more signs lay in the distance (LOP SSE - use remaining fuel to get to known land ("Starbucks")).

As to any help from any sort of radio device, given AE's particular predicament one may as well be surfing the FM dial and trying to discern distance from stations by clarity of signal in a big city with the signals bouncing off the buildings along the street, etc.  That's about as close to any real radio help as I can imagine: a lot of noise and no help as to direction and little as to distance.

I'd trust FN's caffeine addiction on this one.

LTM -
--------------------------

Except their DR restricted the range of locations where they could have intercepted the LOP. There were only two exits off the expressway, 1st street and 10th street, so when you hit Cochran you couldn't be any farther west than 1st street of further east than 10th street. You therefore know that you can't be more than 10 blocks away from the Starbucks so you only have to search thoroughly that ten block stretch, driving up or down Cochran and driving through the adjoining shopping center parking lots looking for the Starbucks that may be towards the back of the parking lot. No reason to drive 350 NM east to start looking for a different Starbucks, one where you know your fiend is not waiting for you.

And the Moon was available for Noonan to determine an LOP that crossed th sun line LOP giving them a fix so they could determine that they were near Howland. It would be like looking up an seeing the sign saying "7th street."

gl
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #99 on: September 08, 2011, 09:36:42 PM »

Dan makes good sense to me. 

With no signs...

I'd trust FN's caffeine addiction on this one.

LTM -
--------------------------

Except their DR restricted the range of locations where they could have intercepted the LOP. There were only two exits off the expressway, 1st street and 10th street, so when you hit Cochran you couldn't be any farther west than 1st street of further east than 10th street. You therefore know that you can't be more than 10 blocks away from the Starbucks so you only have to search thoroughly that ten block stretch, driving up or down Cochran and driving through the adjoining shopping center parking lots looking for the Starbucks that may be towards the back of the parking lot. No reason to drive 350 NM east to start looking for a different Starbucks, one where you know your fiend is not waiting for you.

And the Moon was available for Noonan to determine an LOP that crossed th sun line LOP giving them a fix so they could determine that they were near Howland. It would be like looking up an seeing the sign saying "7th street."

gl

I thought 1st / 10th etc. were more east-west, and Cochran north-south(?) - who's on first / what's on second?   :o  Must be my bad...

What DR?  AE never got a steer, so no way to know how close or far she was from.  Moon shot - that's an interesting grab.

I added a bit more to my post while you were writing, Gary - see above, or more to the point from your own site - follow the sun (line)  ;D -

"Most interesting however seems to be:[/b]"American Air Navigator, Mattingly (1944)", Page 157 - "Running down a sun line".  This seems to touch precisely on what we have been discussing regarding the LOP and is immediately and concisely relevant to the AE-FN need as we can understand it.  I would love to read the remaining text on the "running down a sun line" subject - Page 158, etc. - do you have that, Gary? 

I recommend the reading - go to https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/topics/standard-search-pattern, thence the link for "Page 157" under "American Air Navigator, Mattingly (1944)"."


I think the sun line approach does much to answer these things.  Do you have page 158, etc.?  LOP still grabs me as the most plausible, reliable and easy to reach solution for FN.

-----------------------------------

I don't know why you didn't find it, it's been on my website all along.

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/topics/landfall-procedure

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/resources/american-air-navigator-mattingly-1944

You should also read Weems since that was written by Noonan's friend P.V.H. Weems. Noonan visited and corresponded with Weems on a regular basis so it almost certain that Noonan was familiar with (and probably contributed to the writing of) everything it that book. Look at pages 422 though 425.

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/resources/weems

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/resources

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/topics


gl
« Last Edit: September 08, 2011, 10:26:22 PM by Gary LaPook »
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #100 on: September 08, 2011, 10:00:32 PM »

Dan makes good sense to me. 

With no signs...

I'd trust FN's caffeine addiction on this one.

LTM -
--------------------------

Except their DR restricted the range of locations where they could have intercepted the LOP. There were only two exits off the expressway, 1st street and 10th street, so when you hit Cochran you couldn't be any farther west than 1st street of further east than 10th street. You therefore know that you can't be more than 10 blocks away from the Starbucks so you only have to search thoroughly that ten block stretch, driving up or down Cochran and driving through the adjoining shopping center parking lots looking for the Starbucks that may be towards the back of the parking lot. No reason to drive 350 NM east to start looking for a different Starbucks, one where you know your fiend is not waiting for you.

And the Moon was available for Noonan to determine an LOP that crossed th sun line LOP giving them a fix so they could determine that they were near Howland. It would be like looking up an seeing the sign saying "7th street."

gl

I thought 1st / 10th etc. were more east-west, and Cochran north-south(?) - who's on first / what's on second?   :o  Must be my bad...

What DR?  AE never got a steer, so no way to know how close or far she was from.  Moon shot - that's an interesting grab.

I added a bit more to my post while you were writing, Gary - see above, or more to the point from your own site - follow the sun (line)  ;D -

"Most interesting however seems to be:"American Air Navigator, Mattingly (1944)", Page 157 - "Running down a sun line".  This seems to touch precisely on what we have been discussing regarding the LOP and is immediately and concisely relevant to the AE-FN need as we can understand it.  I would love to read the remaining text on the "running down a sun line" subject - Page 158, etc. - do you have that, Gary? 

I recommend the reading - go to https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/topics/standard-search-pattern, thence the link for "Page 157" under "American Air Navigator, Mattingly (1944)"."


I think the sun line approach does much to answer these things.  Do you have page 158, etc.?  LOP still grabs me as the most plausible, reliable and easy to reach solution for FN.

-----------------------

See diagram one,

and diagram two.
gl

« Last Edit: December 25, 2011, 02:36:07 AM by Gary LaPook »
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #101 on: September 08, 2011, 10:25:19 PM »

Dan makes good sense to me. 

With no signs...

I'd trust FN's caffeine addiction on this one.

LTM -
--------------------------

Except their DR restricted the range of locations where they could have intercepted the LOP. There were only two exits off the expressway, 1st street and 10th street, so when you hit Cochran you couldn't be any farther west than 1st street of further east than 10th street. You therefore know that you can't be more than 10 blocks away from the Starbucks so you only have to search thoroughly that ten block stretch, driving up or down Cochran and driving through the adjoining shopping center parking lots looking for the Starbucks that may be towards the back of the parking lot. No reason to drive 350 NM east to start looking for a different Starbucks, one where you know your fiend is not waiting for you.

And the Moon was available for Noonan to determine an LOP that crossed th sun line LOP giving them a fix so they could determine that they were near Howland. It would be like looking up an seeing the sign saying "7th street."

gl

I thought 1st / 10th etc. were more east-west, and Cochran north-south(?) - who's on first / what's on second?   :o  Must be my bad...

What DR?  AE never got a steer, so no way to know how close or far she was from.


I added a bit more to my post while you were writing, Gary - see above, or more to the point from your own site - follow the sun (line)  ;D -

"Most interesting however seems to be:[/b]"American Air Navigator, Mattingly (1944)", Page 157 - "Running down a sun line".  This seems to touch precisely on what we have been discussing regarding the LOP and is immediately and concisely relevant to the AE-FN need as we can understand it.  I would love to read the remaining text on the "running down a sun line" subject - Page 158, etc. - do you have that, Gary? 

I recommend the reading - go to https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/topics/standard-search-pattern, thence the link for "Page 157" under "American Air Navigator, Mattingly (1944)"."


I think the sun line approach does much to answer these things.  Do you have page 158, etc.?  LOP still grabs me as the most plausible, reliable and easy to reach solution for FN.
----------------------------------------------------------

Not a "grab" at all. I posted the following on the TIGHAR Forum back in 2002:


"Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 14:17:10 EST
From: Gary LaPook
Subject: Re: Plan "B"
The "cut" of the LOPs derived at Howland Island on July 2, 1937 for the sun and
moon lines varied between 59 degrees at 1830 Z to 125 degrees at 2100 Z and
back down to 69 degrees at 2400 Z which would provide acceptable "cuts" for
accurate celestial fixes at anytime during that period. These cuts were not all
the prefect 90 degrees but all are well above the minimum 15 degree cut stated
in "Weems" 1938 edition on page 281.
There has previously been a concern stated that the moon was too high in the
sky to be measured with the sextant as it was above 75 degrees when they
arrived in the vicinity of Howland. However, by 1945 Z its altitude was below
70 degrees and got progressively lower as the day progressed while the altitude
of the sun got higher. Both of their altitudes stayed below 70 degrees between
1945 Z and 2400 Z (presumably the tanks dry point); both were below 65 degrees
2015 Z through 2300 Z; below 60 Degrees 2030-2230 Z; and below 55 degrees
2100-2200 Z. Wouldn't these altitudes allow Noonan to get a shot of the moon?
Gary LaPook"

=====================================================================

("Cut" is the angle of the intersection between two LOPs. A perfect cut would be 90 degrees but anything over 30 degrees provides very good accuracy in the resulting fix and anything over 15 degrees is usable but not desirable because the accuracy of the fix is degraded.)
-----------------------------------------------------

Since posting that I analyzed Noonan's navigation on the Dakar flight and on the flight to Hawaii. On the Dakar flight, at 1341 Z Noonan took another observation of the sun, this time from the left side cabin
window. He measured 74̊ 48' with his octant.

On the flight to Hawaii Noonan took 14 celestial observations, the highest of which was 75 degrees.
So we know from Noonan's navigation in the same airplane using the same sextant that he could take observations 75 degrees high so could have taken observations of the moon while searching for Howland.
See: attached and

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/discussions/navigation-to-dakar
gl
« Last Edit: September 08, 2011, 10:29:21 PM by Gary LaPook »
Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #102 on: September 08, 2011, 11:48:01 PM »

Noonan had to know, even if just by DR, that he was in the vicinity of Howland and any Sun or Moon sights would have narrowed the uncertainty down to about plus and minus 7 NM from the derived LOPs so no reason to fly off to the Phoenix, Marshall, or Gilbert islands or to fly to New Britain or Hawaii or Chicago.
This makes some sense, and you very well may be correct in your analysis.  But let's imagine they do actually find the Electra just off the reef of Nikumaroro.  Can you think of any rational reason that had happened, or did Noonan forget how to navigate?


-------------------------------

Noonan didn't forget how to navigate so I am the first one to admit that I have no explanation for why they didn't find Howland.  I'm not real concerned that they will find the plane near Nikumororo nor Mili, nor New Britain, nor Saipan.

You should also read:

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/discussions/why-it-was-not-possible-to-follow-lop-to-nikumaroro

gl

Oh, you apparently DO have your own site - I see now by the link above.

What I don't get, after reading your site, is why anything TIGHAR has put up about the LOP and possible landfall at Gardner would be in question: TIGHAR never said Gardner was ON the LOP that I recall, but NEAR it - reasonably so, it seems. 

For me, it's back to Niku being a big, reef-ringed island with a bright, blue lagoon in the middle of it - unlike the miserably small and lumpish Howland; a celestial (sunrise fixed) LOP passing directly through Howland on the day in question passes just east of Niku - and closely enough to put Niku well within reasonable spotting range - especially given its characteristics.  Regardless too of all the stuff I've seen put-up to try to debunk the idea of Howland possibly being obscured by cloud shadows, I still don't buy that angle either.  Howland could easily have been obscured among shadows - it strikes me as a little like chasing a bunch of dirty sheep across a meadow to find the one small black one among them...

So, for me anyway, given the choice of casting money onto the oceans under which AE and FN may lie, and sending the same money down a "LOP" for "landfall" at a real chance of an answer - I feel even more compelled than before to send TIGHAR some more money...  ;D  But, to each his own - and TIGHAR is to be commended for allowing so many points of view to be openly discussed here.

By the way, cool illustrations via your globe pictures.  After working through them, they actually reinforced what I already understand about LOP and all that is reasonable about TIGHAR's own "position" - "THE LOP" indeed passes very near Niku.  I think ol' FreddieNoonan coulda used that to good advantage, given the lost cause of finding Howland.

Now gotta dash and take care of raising my TIGHAR membership level...

LTM -
--------------------------
The LOP passed near Gardner only near the time of sunrise and moved quite far away by the time the plane could have been approaching that island. You seem to have missed the whole point of that web page.

gl

Logged

Gary LaPook

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 1624
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #103 on: September 09, 2011, 04:50:21 AM »

1. Impossible , @ 1815 GMT sun´s elevation was far below 6 deg , nevertheless distance off was recorded . 2. About 0720 navigator had the sun only for observation , seeing the west shores of Nukumanu from 27 mls , 43 km is doubtful , separately from the specific coordinates communicated , these are by exactness for sunset , not discovered by van Asten , but by mathematics . 3 . No story changed , @ sunset the bubble sextant was used , see EJN-2011. H.

--------------------

This is so funny, so now it's "about" 0720! LOL!

Van Asten still has not explained how Earhart's radio waves managed to travel faster than the speed of light and go back in time so as to be received at Lae at 0718, a minute and a half before the 0719:30 time that van Asten claims that Noonan observed sunset. The time of this observation is critical to van Asten's theory since his whole theory is based on his mathematical (ten decimal places again) computation of this time. If Noonan had actually made an observation at 0719:30 then the position could not have been transmitted at 0720. Taking an observation with a bubble sextant in flight, as van Asten says Noonan was doing for this observation, takes about three minutes as you must take at least ten observations and average them to arrive at an accurate observation. The average time of all of these individual observations is the time used for the observation, again this is something van Asten doesn't understand. If Noonan actually did compute his position based on a sun observation that had an average time of 0719:30 then he was shooting the sun for about three minutes from about 0718:15 to about 0720:45. Then he had to figure out the average of the ten (or more, taking even more time) by hand which takes about an additional minute and a half (try it yourself using degrees and minutes of arc as read off a sextant) and about another minute to refer to his precalculated altitude data, so the claimed 0719:30 observation would not have been completed until about 0723:15 which is more than three minutes later than van Asten claims that the position report was transmitted. It is also more than five minutes after the report was actually received in Lae!

see flight navigation manuals:

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/resources/weems/weems-314-315.JPG?attredirects=0

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/resources/aircraft-navigation-manual-h-o-216-1941/ho216-1941-182.JPG?attredirects=0

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/resources/aircraft-navigation-manual-h-o-216-1941/ho216-1941-183.JPG?attredirects=0

https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/topics/accuracy-of-celestial-fixes

see also:
https://sites.google.com/site/fredienoonan/other-flight-navigation-information/recent-landfall-approach

LOL!

gl

------------------------------

I just had to upload this image of a radiogram for Mr. van Asten showing the time the message was received in lae was 5:18 P.M. (0718 Z)
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Noonan Navigation Error
« Reply #104 on: September 09, 2011, 12:50:17 PM »

--------------------------
The LOP passed near Gardner only near the time of sunrise and moved quite far away by the time the plane could have been approaching that island. You seem to have missed the whole point of that web page.

gl

I didn't miss the point, but I think you missed mine:

Your site includes authoritative information on the use of sun lines on the "page 157" link.  Despite the example used in that text being nearly verbatim the same case AE and FN would have faced, you continue to discount that approach for some reason beyond my understanding.

As to sun lines, LOPs and movement -

Once established and charted, the LOP does not "move" with the sun.  Think about it - the idea is to 'find' one's self and to chart that position, in this case 'along a LOP thus'...

If an established LOP, once so obtained, did move, it would be useless as a navigation tool - I agree with that.  And yes, of course the sun moves - and so does the sun line - not the same thing as a LOP once obtained and charted per above. 

A LOP could easily have been established by offset - FN would have known how far east or west he was at sunrise by the time.  From that shot he also would have had a good idea of speed.  Therefore it would have been a simple matter for him to project by offset a LOP for Howland: then it would be a matter of elapsed time by which to judge arrival at the LOP.

Once at the LOP it is a matter of track - simple enough and the obvious outcome would have been 157 - 337.

Simple and foundational.  Given the nature of able humans like FN when confronted with a need to solve a problem, I suspect FN would have done about what Occam says is rational - and LOP is about as foundational as it gets in the case he was facing.  I think that's where I'll keep my money...  ;)

Cool link between FN and the author of that material - thanks for sharing that.  Small world!

LTM -
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
« Last Edit: December 12, 2014, 12:11:30 PM by Jeffrey Neville »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9   Go Up
 

Copyright 2019 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Powered by PHP