02-29-2016, 03:01 PM
(This post was last modified: 02-29-2016, 03:05 PM by c_davidson.)
Celestial navigation is difficult for a multitude of reasons but I wish to focus upon one particular- the math portion.
Learning celnav was very difficult for me because my skill at math was and isn't very good and I'm not trying to improve it. I don't drool over formulas or abstract ideas and principles.
The endless quantity of books and web sites that supposedly explain how to perform celnav were written by people* who don't appear to be able to explain it except to other mathematicians. That's a pity as celnav really is a dying art for ocean navigation and it certainly should be encouraged as backup.
It seems to me that since those that are promoting astronav in print are either retired physicists, engineers or math teachers there is a loftiness and arrogance conveyed that is similar to the saying over Plato's Academy door- “Let no one ignorant of geometry enter here". There is some doubt as to whether this was really there- my guess is it was- heck- the guy wrote "Republic"!
So it comes across as, "well, little man, unless you know the law of cosines we can't help you. Black art, I think Francis Chichester called.
But, then there's job security- keep things vague and not really understandable and you'll have job security.
By the way- the Naval academy IS NOT going to teach celnav processes- just that the method exists and no more- no sight reduction or using a sextant.
No wonder everyone has a hard time with math! It's the teachers!
Keep in mind that the navigators in the past 150 years were mostly grade school to high school educated at best. If they could do it- so can we!
* Do you really think I'm going to buy a book on celestial navigation written by someone named "Mary Blewitt"?! Blew it? are you kidding me?!
Learning celnav was very difficult for me because my skill at math was and isn't very good and I'm not trying to improve it. I don't drool over formulas or abstract ideas and principles.
The endless quantity of books and web sites that supposedly explain how to perform celnav were written by people* who don't appear to be able to explain it except to other mathematicians. That's a pity as celnav really is a dying art for ocean navigation and it certainly should be encouraged as backup.
It seems to me that since those that are promoting astronav in print are either retired physicists, engineers or math teachers there is a loftiness and arrogance conveyed that is similar to the saying over Plato's Academy door- “Let no one ignorant of geometry enter here". There is some doubt as to whether this was really there- my guess is it was- heck- the guy wrote "Republic"!
So it comes across as, "well, little man, unless you know the law of cosines we can't help you. Black art, I think Francis Chichester called.
But, then there's job security- keep things vague and not really understandable and you'll have job security.
By the way- the Naval academy IS NOT going to teach celnav processes- just that the method exists and no more- no sight reduction or using a sextant.
No wonder everyone has a hard time with math! It's the teachers!
Keep in mind that the navigators in the past 150 years were mostly grade school to high school educated at best. If they could do it- so can we!
* Do you really think I'm going to buy a book on celestial navigation written by someone named "Mary Blewitt"?! Blew it? are you kidding me?!