Quote:
|
Originally Posted by seafarer
As a researcher, we tended to prefer to use UTM (Universal Transverse Mercator) instead, since it was more precise and easier to work with, and it meshed better with the short baseline acoustic navigation we used to have to use with our submersibles and robotic vehicles (we'd place a transponder grid on the sea floor, align it to a UTM chart, and then just work in decimal coordinates and distnaces, based on acuostic interrogations of the grid from the surface and/or the subs).
|
That's a bit like apples and oranges. "Navigating" relative to a transponder (or any fixed point) is like drawing a treasure map ... ten paces west, thirty-seven paces east, twelve paces past the two palm trees, etc. Navigating across the globe and fixing your position via celestial navigation is a whole different kettle of fish.
Admittedly, I can certainly understand the use of your standardized nautical mile with electronic systems such as an INS or GPS. But there is really very little difference between a GPS plot and the PPOS in SH4. They both use computers to maintain an accurate update. Same as with modern ships. Same as with an F-16. In the old days (compared to civilian counterparts, the military was much slower installing electronic navigation systems), preplanning and DR navigation required the use of ONC, JNC and TPC charts ... all of which used the old "1 minute latitude = 1 nautical mile" definition.
Nowadays, the equipment does the tracking. But navigators were still doing it, via the basics, long past 1950.