JAXAshby wrote:
joe, you don't understand the definition of the term "DR".

jax, you don't know the definition of "DR", you only know A definition
of "DR", and the fact that *you* don't understand this is not surprising.

otn

over the knee, if you expand the definition to include gps charterplotters,
anything is possible.

same same if you expand the definition of breakfast eggs to include three
bricks of 24-k gold, you would be rich.

DR is speed vs time vs direction pointed, and your best guess as to where that
puts you. that's it, nothing more.

Some people believe that guessing as to current direction and strength and
guessing as to boat drift due to wind speed and direction improves their best
guess as to where they are, but it doesn't.

joe, you don't understand the definition of the term "DR".

jax, you don't know the definition of "DR", you only know A definition
of "DR", and the fact that *you* don't understand this is not surprising.

otn

JAXAshby wrote:
over the knee, if you expand the definition to include gps charterplotters,
anything is possible.

If I use a gps chart plotter (assuming gps working and connected) then I
have a fix not a "DR" position

same same if you expand the definition of breakfast eggs to include three
bricks of 24-k gold, you would be rich.

DR is speed vs time vs direction pointed, and your best guess as to where that
puts you. that's it, nothing more.

As stated before, you know "A" definition of DR, nothing more.
All this and your last post tell me is that you have extremely limited
experience and knowledge of the subject.

Some people believe that guessing as to current direction and strength and
guessing as to boat drift due to wind speed and direction improves their best
guess as to where they are, but it doesn't.

Statement shows limited experience.

DR has been used for centuries and is still used today. As such, it's
used to travel new routes as well as those that have been frequently
done in the past.
For this reason, many sailors have expanded on the term "DR" to include
past experience; their knowledge of how their vessel reacts to winds,
known currents; soundings, etc. .... i.e. they use these factors to
improve/fine tune their "DR" plots.
As Bowditch states, your definition is correct, but it's not universal.
For you, "DR" is speed/time/direction and that's OK since it's probably
all your experience can handle, but for many others, it includes a
number of other factors beyond your capabilities which don't give a
position and can be in error, but from experience, helps improve what
*THEY* call "DR".

otn



joe, you don't understand the definition of the term "DR".

jax, you don't know the definition of "DR", you only know A definition
of "DR", and the fact that *you* don't understand this is not surprising.

otn

no, over the knee, you DO have DR **if** you expand the definition of DR as you
did prior. I didn't expand it, you did.

over the knee, if you expand the definition to include gps charterplotters,
anything is possible.

If I use a gps chart plotter (assuming gps working and connected) then I
have a fix not a "DR" position

over the knee, give it up for the kriste sakes. once ah-fricken-ghen you are
arguing a physical impossibilty. most every scientist -- and certainly every
last physicist -- on the planet is laughing at you.

You, over the knee, have a better chance of arguing astrology is valid.


DR has been used for centuries and is still used today. As such, it's
used to travel new routes as well as those that have been frequently
done in the past.
For this reason, many sailors have expanded on the term "DR" to include
past experience; their knowledge of how their vessel reacts to winds,
known currents; soundings, etc. .... i.e. they use these factors to
improve/fine tune their "DR" plots.
As Bowditch states, your definition is correct, but it's not universal.
For you, "DR" is speed/time/direction and that's OK since it's probably
all your experience can handle, but for many others, it includes a
number of other factors beyond your capabilities which don't give a
position and can be in error, but from experience, helps improve what
*THEY* call "DR".

otn



joe, you don't understand the definition of the term "DR".

jax, you don't know the definition of "DR", you only know A definition
of "DR", and the fact that *you* don't understand this is not surprising.

otn

Statement shows limited experience.

over the knee, that is the very same arguement put forth by true believers as
to why they believe astrology is valid.

over the knee, you know more about astrology than physics. do you believe in
astrology??

JAXAshby wrote:
no, over the knee, you DO have DR **if** you expand the definition of DR as you
did prior. I didn't expand it, you did.


over the knee, if you expand the definition to include gps charterplotters,
anything is possible.

If I use a gps chart plotter (assuming gps working and connected) then I
have a fix not a "DR" position

ROFL Go back and read my previous post. "I" did not expand the
definition of "DR" up to this point, if anything, you did. My simple
statement was that your's was only one definition of "DR", not the absolute.
BTW, there are adult education courses you could take which might help
your reading comprehension.

otn

JAXAshby wrote:
over the knee, give it up for the kriste sakes. once ah-fricken-ghen you are
arguing a physical impossibilty. most every scientist -- and certainly every
last physicist -- on the planet is laughing at you.

You, over the knee, have a better chance of arguing astrology is valid.

Try to pay attention, difficult as that may be.
The subject is navigation ..... because someone is a scientist,
physicist, or astrologist, it doesn't necessarily hold that they are a
"navigator".
If you had any experience, you would know that navigation, especially in
the past, was as much an "art form" as it was a "science".
Especially, back then, your "basic" definition of "DR" was used and
held, *AS* the basic definition, but again as stated, it was not the
only definition, then as now.
The only problem I really see here, is that you have at best a highly
limited knowledge base of navigation, coupled with extremely little
experience, so, that, coupled with your consistently poor showing in
reading comprehension and lack of ability to grasp or expand on a
concept other than the one you may have been initially taught, you can't
possibly grasp how these other factors could possibly be applied to the
definition of "DR" ..... hey, no problem .... just stick with the basics
you know .... it's not like you're going to be senior navigator on some
offshore boat, at any time.

otn

JAXAshby wrote:
Statement shows limited experience.


over the knee, that is the very same arguement put forth by true believers as
to why they believe astrology is valid.

over the knee, you know more about astrology than physics. do you believe in
astrology??


ROFLMAO I'm still trying to figure out how you found the need to work
"Astrology" in to a discussion on DR .... it's a given you'll start
screaming "PHYSICS" when you don't have a clue as to what's being said,
in a vain attempt to sound intelligent when you try to give an answer.

BTW I should have said Astrologer, not astrologist.
Also, BTW .... which is it, you just like seeing your name show up with
as many separate replies to a single message as possible? Or are your
thought processes so fracture that you have to take a "brain freeze"
break between your pearls of knowledge, so you send a bunch of separate
junk rather than just one junk - post?

otn

Joe wrote:

Ah I see what your saying, sorry.

Let me rephrase the question

What about the other two questions - the ones where you ask for the course
*to steer* and the speed *made good*? Do you mean the course and speed made
good?


--
Wally
www.artbywally.com
www.wally.myby.co.uk