Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

The "Queen of the Skies"
Stearmandriver
Senior Airman
Posts: 175
Joined: 12 Mar 2017, 22:33

Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Stearmandriver »

Hello all,

Since you seem to like classic airplanes here, I thought you might enjoy hearing about a recent flight I completed in the Connie. I did it the really old fashioned way: dead reckoning and sextant shots, using the sextant guage originally developed by Dave Bitzer and Mark Beaumont, and ported to FSX by Kris Ogonowski (Kronzky). I've enjoyed the discussions on the board about traditional navigation methods, they inspired me to come back and do a little more of this stuff. So who knows, maybe I can inspire someone else to try it out . :wink:

So I departed Johnston Atoll in the Pacific at 1251z, (0151 local) on June 01, 2016 (date chosen for relatively quiet weather enroute, just a few areas of storms).

Flight Plan said:
1147 nm
05:03 enroute
Cruising at FL200 at 245 KTAS
3500 gallons fuel on board
(I originally planned this flight to fly in the outstanding Jahn/Visser C-47 v3.14, but then decided to fly it in the Connie instead. That's why the checkpoints are labeled out through "6 Hour fix"; the C-47 is slower. I just re-planned it at Connie speeds and that made every hourly fix happen once every 40 minutes instead lol).

Image


Departure time was chosen using a common technique of the era: plan to fly the majority of the flight at night, so you have multiple celestial bodies to take shots from (resulting in multiple lines of position and therefor a fix); but plan to reach your destination an hour or two after sunrise, so you can intercept and follow a line of position off the sun all the way to your destination. So the plan was to fly a landfall procedure (a turn off course to know for certain which side of destination you're on) to intercept the 158 degree LOP from the sun and follow that into PLCH. Dead reckoning headings / groundspeeds calculated using ASN's wind forecasts, which are pretty true to real life in that they give you an estimate, but what you actually encounter is still a little different so you have to adjust.


Departure was uneventful; smooth climb out of Johnston Atoll, attempting to track 140 true.

Image



Taking the first sextant shot off of Nunki, for a speed line, at the 1st checkpoint:

Image



And the results: planned groundspeed is right on. Continue. (Green lines on the maps are Lines of Position calculated from sextant shots)

Image

Image



Took 2 shots at the next checkpoint: off Fomalhau for a speed LOP, off Antares for a course LOP. You can see the results above, plotted after the "2 hr fix". Groundspeed faster than planned, drifting left of course. But not by much, and a bubble sextant isn't that precise, so I'm not going to make any corrections yet. We'll grab a 3 star fix at the next checkpoint and have a better idea then.
Taking the Antares shot:

Image



Heading for the 3rd checkpoint, treated to a nice moonrise:

Image

Image



3rd Fix, shots off Fomalhau, Antares, Enif. Remember, bubble sextants - not the most precise navigation device (and this guage simulates that perfectly). And yet, we can reasonable conclude we're somewhere within the triangle formed by the 3 crossing lines of position. Yup, fast and left of course. Off-course correction calculated and applied at this point; turned three degrees right. Groundspeed averages out to 254kts, faster than our planned 242kts.

Image



Now the shots for the fourth fix were a challenge as I ran into an area of weather. This guage is smart; it won't let you take a shot in the clouds. When you try, you see this:

Image


So just like in reality, weather makes celestial nav a challenge. But we're at FL200; we aren't going to be in the clouds forever, and we have math on our side. We can make this work. So I just keep taking shots until I get some clear ones. Our checkpoint was planned for an arrival time of 1541z; I ended up with successful shots off Fomalhau at 1544z, Enif at 1546z, and Antares at 1551z (with periods of clouds in between). Now, deriving lines of position that create a fix from this data means we have to mathematically "advance" the LOPs based on the time elapsed between each one. I actually moved them "backwards" in time in this case, moving them all back to 1541z. Based on our last estimate of 254kts groundspeed, a quick time/speed/distance calculation tells us we're doing 4nm per minute. So, each line adjusted backwards the appropriate amount. Result (with a little more slop which is to be expected considering we had to interpolate, but we should still be within that triangle): still fast and left of course. A couple more degrees right applied for correction.

Image



Approaching the 5th checkpoint, weather has improved, and... dawn!

Image



5th checkpoint (the last we'll get star shots for) indicates still fast by the same amount, and trending back on course. After passing the 5th checkpoint, we get sunrise in earnest (several shots, just 'cause she's pretty in the morning!)

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image



Checkpoint 6, no stars were available and the sun was a bit low, but I grabbed a shot off of it for a course line, and it showed we were just about back on course. That was validated just after passing checkpoint 6 in the best way possible - visually. After over 4 hours in flight, and over 900nm traveled, our course line passes a piece of land near enough to maybe see it. That would be Fanning Island, a small atoll off to the right a little ways past checkpoint 6:

Image


And... eureka!

Image

Image



Home stretch, now. Using time calculated from my most recently calculated groundspeed (which the appearance of Fanning has roughly confirmed), I calculate that I should make the turn onto my landfall procedure - a 090 true course - at 1721z. I do so, and set my sextant up for the most important shot of all - the one that tells me I'm on the 158 degree LOP that passes through our destination of Christmas Island at 1730z (give or take a few). You can see on the map above what we're doing - at "Turn for Landfall", we turn left onto a 090 true track and start taking sextant shots on the sun to intercept the red line on the map. That's our LOP into Christmas Island.

Image
(One thing I like about this one - with a real sextant, when taking a sun shot you put a green filter on for safety. This guage shows that by turning the sun into a little green ball.)



All right... at 1729z, within ONE MINUTE of my original planning, I get a sextant shot that shows we're dead on the 158 degree line of position off the sun. We know that at this time, that LOP passes through our destination, which should only be about 50nm away. Since we're on our line we want to follow to destination, we turn right to pick up the 158 true track (my dead reckoning, corrected for variation and winds, put this at a magnetic heading of 147 degrees). Annnnnd:

LAND HO!

Image

Image


Nice gentle approach and a smooth landing. My only regret is that I forgot to activate the nice freeware scenery I found for Christmas Island, so the final shots are default FSX. Oh well... there's always the departure ;-).


Image

Image

Image


So this was a great time. I sometimes feel silly for putting in the time I do with flight sim, probably especially because I fly for a living... but you know, it's stuff like this that makes me feel foolish for that. I don't think there's any reason to feel silly for gaining a greater respect for and understanding of our history by attempting to experience it to the best of our abilities. And I'm continually blown away by just how GOOD all this is! The whole FSX world, the physics that mean dead reckoning actually WORKS, and of course the extras like the sextant guage and the beautiful Connie. This... is pretty good stuff!

If anyone made it all the way through that novel, thanks for reading ;-).

Artur
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 306
Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 08:37

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Artur »

Really impressive :shock:

User avatar
Piper_EEWL
Chief Master Sergeant
Posts: 4544
Joined: 26 Nov 2014, 14:14
Location: Germany

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Piper_EEWL »

Impressive job indeed! I'm sure that i would get very lost :lol:


Thanks for sharing
B377&COTS, J3 Cub, B-17G, Spitfire, P-40, P-51D, C172, C182, Pa28, Pa24, T-6 Texan, L-049&COTS, Bonanza V35B

User avatar
Paughco
Senior Master Sergeant
Posts: 2104
Joined: 30 Nov 2014, 12:27

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Paughco »

VERY cool! Thank you!

Seeya
ATB
Image

flapman
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 457
Joined: 10 Oct 2013, 21:35

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by flapman »

Excellent job stearmandriver,

I've managed to read the flight navigator handbook, but haven't taken the time to install this gauge, or to practice celestial nav. How did you plot your LOP's, and make measurements for route corrections?

Some day I'm going to have to give this a go.. probably at some point after I learn how to use Doppler navigation in Russian airliners. 8)

Stearmandriver
Senior Airman
Posts: 175
Joined: 12 Mar 2017, 22:33

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Stearmandriver »

flapman wrote:Excellent job stearmandriver,

I've managed to read the flight navigator handbook, but haven't taken the time to install this gauge, or to practice celestial nav. How did you plot your LOP's, and make measurements for route corrections?

Some day I'm going to have to give this a go.. probably at some point after I learn how to use Doppler navigation in Russian airliners. 8)
I never even heard of doppler navigation, though I can guess at the concept. Interesting, I'll have to look into THAT!

It's funny, plotting the LOPs is more involved than using the darn sextant. I use Google Earth because it's free and paperless, but I think it would actually be quicker and more intuitive to use a paper chart, plotter and a pencil in this case.

I cross posted this same story over at Sim Outhouse; figured I could give the Connie a little more exposure. I mentioned there that I'd thought about making a video tutorial on how I do this... but I'm not sure if there'd be much interest, or if I quite have the time and motivation to do that. My videography skills are... poor lol. But I like rambling on about this stuff, so maybe ;-).

The sextant gauge is here, and there's a tutorial on plotting in Google Earth as well:
http://www.kronzky.info/fs/sextant/

The basic gist is, you start with your assumed position, and the sextant tells you how much closer to, or farther away from, the star you actually are, along the azimuth of whatever star you measure. (In real life, you calculate this distance through the sight reduction process, but thankfully this gauge does that work for you, just a bunch of grunt math).

So then you go to Google Earth, drop a pin on your assumed position, and then use Earth's ruler tool to measure the distance the sextant gave you, toward or away from the star (depending on whether you got a negative or positive distance). Drop a pin there, and then use the ruler tool to draw a line through that spot at 90 degrees to the star.

Example: you measure a star due north of you and receive a distance of +10. You plot your assumed position, then use the ruler tool to measure 10nm due north. Drop a pin, then draw an East- west line through there. That is your LOP.

If you want to fix your position, shoot another star and get another LOP and you're roughly where they cross. Three LOPs is even more precise, it'll give you a (hopefully small) triangle that you're theoretically within ;-).

Hobart Escin

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Hobart Escin »

My understanding of celestial navigation was always the concept of the sextant essentially being a precision protractor that measured a star's declination (angle) above the actual horizon. This declination figure is achieved by 'shooting' the sextant at a known star or other heavenly body (Victoria's Secret Model?). With a precise time hack (hello quality Omega watch), and the current date, the navigator referenced this declination figure with a current US Naval Hydrographic Table, and this process, along with assumed position, could subsequently be used to derive Earth coordinates (lat, long) for a single line of position based on the declination reading from the sextant cross-referenced in the aforementioned Navy Tables. So basically, the US Navy Tables publication provides referenced Earth coordinates for any heavenly body declination reading taken at any time of day from a known assumed position, and these publication-derived coordinates were used to plot a single line of position.

As the OP of this thread mentioned, the more LOPs the navigator plotted from multiple star declination readings, the more precise the 'fix' or actual position on a map would be achieved. Three sextant shots on three different stars would provide three LOPs which would triangulate a fixed position in the middle of the LOP intersection. Also, the moon is visible about half the time in daylight conditions during any typical month, and a "Sun/Moon" sextant fix could also be used during the day for a precise position fix without the need for triangulation.

I'm not sure how this sextant gauge simulation works in comparison to the actual real-life celestial navigation process, but it looks like a heck of a lot of fun. I
wonder if this gauge can be ported to P3D?

Brief description of sextant usage from a Harvard science professor (apparently he couldn't get a real job at Princeton):

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3jypIZMmeo[/youtube]

flapman
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 457
Joined: 10 Oct 2013, 21:35

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by flapman »

My understanding is that FSX/P3D accurately models the celestial sphere and heavenly bodies, and the gauge actually functions as a sextant in the sim. Your description of the process is essentially correct from my understanding. Instead of using Hydrographic tables, the FAA Flight Navigator Handbook recommended using the US Navy Air Almanac as a source, but that's just another way of getting the information.

Thanks for the explanation of google maps. You're right about the paper charts idea. I still have a navigation plotter and E6B (metal) and it would be some good practice to use them all in unison. As I said, this gauge and tutorial will have to go on the "to do" list!

Tobus75
Senior Airman
Posts: 226
Joined: 10 Aug 2014, 06:17
Contact:

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Tobus75 »

While I absolutely admire your flight and this tutorial, I've come to the conclusion I'm more a "shift-5" type of guy :mrgreen:
Image

Stearmandriver
Senior Airman
Posts: 175
Joined: 12 Mar 2017, 22:33

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Stearmandriver »

Hobart Escin wrote:My understanding of celestial navigation was always the concept of the sextant essentially being a precision protractor that measured a star's declination (angle) above the actual horizon. This declination figure is achieved by 'shooting' the sextant at a known star or other heavenly body (Victoria's Secret Model?). With a precise time hack (hello quality Omega watch), and the current date, the navigator referenced this declination figure with a current US Naval Hydrographic Table, and this process, along with assumed position, could subsequently be used to derive Earth coordinates (lat, long) for a single line of position based on the declination reading from the sextant cross-referenced in the aforementioned Navy Tables. So basically, the US Navy Tables publication provides referenced Earth coordinates for any heavenly body declination reading taken at any time of day from a known assumed position, and these publication-derived coordinates were used to plot a single line of position.

As the OP of this thread mentioned, the more LOPs the navigator plotted from multiple star declination readings, the more precise the 'fix' or actual position on a map would be achieved. Three sextant shots on three different stars would provide three LOPs which would triangulate a fixed position in the middle of the LOP intersection. Also, the moon is visible about half the time in daylight conditions during any typical month, and a "Sun/Moon" sextant fix could also be used during the day for a precise position fix without the need for triangulation.

I'm not sure how this sextant gauge simulation works in comparison to the actual real-life celestial navigation process, but it looks like a heck of a lot of fun. I
wonder if this gauge can be ported to P3D?
Yup, that's pretty well accurate. A sextant is just a device to measure a precise angle above the horizon. Nautical sextants are more accurate but unsuitable for aerial applications, so aviators used bubble sextants - a device that negates the affect of altitude on the measurement (I don't know how). The angle obtained is compared to the angular distance that heavenly body WOULD be above the horizon for the given time at your assumed position. The difference between your measured angular distance and what an almanac tells you it would be at your assumed position can, through either raw trigonometry or a series of tables, yeild the distance offset in miles. This is the only piece of information a sextant yeilds that you didn't have when you started - how much closer or farther from the heavenly body your actual line of position is than the one passing through your assumed position. A sextant shot doesn't really deliver coordinates, just a distance.

You can take that distance and, along with your assumed position and the azimuth to the heavenly body (things you already knew) , plot your actual LOP.

This is all based on the principle that, for any given heavenly body at any one instant, there is a line on the earth's surface where the heavenly body will be the same angular distance above the horizon, anywhere on that line. If you know the time, and angle above horizon, you can plot that line and you know you're on it. It is, obviously, a curving line - but the radius is so large that it's almost inconsequential, and you can plot it as a straight line. You'd have to be hundreds - maybe thousands - of miles off course before the curvature started to matter.

Now, how this actual gauge works? I'm speculating here, but this is my guess: after you enter your assumed position and azimuth (compass direction) of the shot, the gauge calculates the difference in miles between the LOP (at 90 degree to the azimuth) you're ACTUALLY on from the LOP your assumed position is on. It calculates the difference in miles, rounded to the nearest 5. It forces you to attempt to line up a dancing sun or star in a dancing bubble - just like in reality. The worse your shot is (averaged over 1 minute) the more it factors error into that distance, and it displays that distance as a result at the end.

In reality, error can enter this process in many stages, several of which you don't actually have to perform using the gauge (averaging and interpolation using tables, for instance). The gauge simulates that by forcing you to round your assumed position to the nearest 5 minutes of lat/lon. The final result achieves a real-world level of (in)accuracy. It's all pretty brilliant, I think!

BTW, the gauge doesn't actually know anything about the position of any heavenly body. You can take a shot at any azimuth, at any time of day, and it'll return a result. It also doesn't care what expected elevation you enter (but you're still smart to enter one because the comparison of expected to measured elevation helps you understand the results).

So for practice purposes, you don't need to worry about looking up the almanac. You can shoot any azimuth you wish. When trying to simulate a real flight, I personally look up the almanac and only use what would really be available in the sky.
http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/celnavtable.php

Just for fun, I use the free AutoStar X utility that gives you an accurate (and much prettier) night sky in the sim. It's fun when you can actually identify the star you're "shooting" ;-).

P3D - I don't know. I thought I saw somewhere that someone tried it and it worked. Worth a shot!

User avatar
trindade
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 400
Joined: 15 Apr 2011, 04:48
Location: LPPT

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by trindade »

Tobus75 wrote: I've come to the conclusion I'm more a "shift-5" type of guy :mrgreen:
make it two :mrgreen:

Congrats, simply amazing!
Image

AviatorMoser
Airman
Posts: 18
Joined: 26 Jun 2015, 12:46

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by AviatorMoser »

This is right up my alley. I'm training with the sextant right now so I can do the overnight North Atlantic flights.

I'm not sure how you determine the LOP exactly. It's based on the stars azimuth/elevation? I know with Polaris, your LOP is in an east/west direction. Does that mean your LOP is then perpendicular to the azimuth of the star?

Dooga
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 357
Joined: 23 Aug 2013, 17:23

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Dooga »

Great stuff, thank you!

Canders
Airman First Class
Posts: 81
Joined: 03 Sep 2013, 17:17
Location: Oklahoma City

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Canders »

That's quite a trip and a brain-bender, but I bet it was fun. And the bast part is to see the island in your windscreen approaching in the distance!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Stearmandriver
Senior Airman
Posts: 175
Joined: 12 Mar 2017, 22:33

Re: Dead reckoning / celestial nav - 1200nm of open Pacific

Post by Stearmandriver »

AviatorMoser wrote:This is right up my alley. I'm training with the sextant right now so I can do the overnight North Atlantic flights.

I'm not sure how you determine the LOP exactly. It's based on the stars azimuth/elevation? I know with Polaris, your LOP is in an east/west direction. Does that mean your LOP is then perpendicular to the azimuth of the star?
Yup, your LOP is always perpendicular to the star's azimuth. It IS based on the star's azimuth/elevation, but the sextant turns the elevation into a distance in nautical miles.

So, once you've got your shot:
1. Measure along the azimuth towards the star for a positive distance, or away from the star on the reciprocal of the azimuth for a negative distance.
2. Mark that spot, then draw a line through there perpendicular to the azimuth. That's your LOP.

Like you point out, the LOP is always perpendicular to the azimuth. Practically, this means you can choose stars to yeild the "type" of LOP you want. A star in front of you will yeild an LOP mostly perpendicular to your course line - most useful for a groundspeed check. A star off your wing will yeild an LOP mostly parallel to your course line - useful for a course check. So you don't have to make a 3-star shot for a fix every time.

new reply

Return to “Lockheed Model 049 Constellation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests