otnmbrd wrote:
[snip]
No, it only tells you the cumulative. Once again, YOU need to figure out
the "why" to know how the "cumulative" came about.
For instance, you are on a displacement type boat with 20k of wind on
the port beam. Your GPS tells you, you are making your course good (no
set or drift). What does that tell you?

hi otn,

what you are saying is the same as what the fat navigation book i've
been studying is saying, that the navigator navigates and the GPS just
gives a fix, which is one of the many interesting things a navigator
needs to know to do his/her job. it's brilliant at giving fixes,
fortunately. like you are saying, navigation is more than getting from
A to B, which is what GPS is great at ... but about getting from A to B
safely, in good time, with good weather, with a smooth ride, following
advantageous winds and currents, arriving at tricky harbor entrances in
daylight, etc, etc, things that GPS doesn't know anything about. even
the navigator doesn't know them all, s/he can only use his/her best
judgement and experience when combining the information gained by the
navigational aids at hand such as GPS fixes, wind direction
measurements, wind speed, calculations of currents, route books showing
statistical "best times" for advantageous conditions, and on and on.
it's all important in creating "situational awareness", and the more
accurate information upon which to make a judgement, the better.

which is the most important navigational tool in the middle of the
ocean ? like otn said, himself (i'm assuming you are male otn,
apologies if i'm wrong!). and other really important tools are .. if
using paper charts (doesn't everyone do their real work on paper charts
?) ... good updated charts, pencils and scrap paper, a straight edge,
GPS receivers, wind vane, a calculator, good reference information,
depth finder, radios, etc, etc .. and the most important information
are GPS fixes, current heading, heading made true, magnetic direction
(which is only on occasion coincidentally the same as your GPS
direction), weather reports, etc, etc. but in the end, it is the
totality of all of this information combined in the navigator's own
squishy brain that is the most important thing, and the experience and
knowledge of the navigator to make good judgements that keeps a boat
off of a reef.

in that context, i still think RDF would be interesting to use. if
you're just sitting there in the ocean moving along at a nice pace
without a speck of land in sight, i, personally, would gain an added
measure of comfort in my own decisions by knowing that WABC's
transmitter at location lat/long is located 10 degrees off of
starboard. yes, i want a GPS fix too (goes without saying), and i want
to know a lot more than that, but i'd like to know that RDF information
too if i had the choice between having it and not having it. and as
far as that goes, i'd be happy with celestial fixes along the way too,
even relatively inaccurate ones that put me in the same neighborhood.
and i'd be happy seeing stationary clouds on the horizon forming over
and island, sea birds, knowing what location nearby vessels think they
are at, etc, too, i want as much information as i can get. all of
these perceptions form a picture in the navigator's mind that you hope
is the same as what reality is.

and i'm not saying that anyone here doesn't think the same kind of
thing, i would assume that everyone posting on this thread has some
similar kind of idea in mind even if there is debate over whether RDF
or celestial sights are worth including for the amount of trouble
and/or equipment weight, etc, that's involved. but i personally don't
see RDF, celestial sights, or sea birds as "un-necessary" or "something
to do when bored", i see them as interesting information that i would
rather have than not. i don't see how excluding any of that
information is smart as a goal unto itself .. and for those involved in
a ****ing contest in this thread, i'm not trying to infer that you
think it's a bright idea either. so don't **** on me! lol.