wes wall and
SaturnV (have you seen the Haynes Manual in the UK?),
Don't have to tell you that this topic has been discussed at length on this or the old thread. With that sense of
déjà-vu, I've been trawling through the pages from this time last year, so far without success. (No doubt the antipodal
mm43 will remind us later where to find it.)
SaturnV,
Regret I've no expertise in this area. Is "HYCOM" the same as the "NCOM" referred to in BEA Interim Report 2, page 79?
Looking at BEA Interims 1 & 2, I've noticed a discrepancy on the recovery position of the fin. This makes a complete nonsense of the 29-hour "voyage" (for want of a better expression) in my post above, in terms of both track and distance. Can you confirm the source of the recovery position you quoted:
"VS recovered June 7 @ 18h35 @ 3.47N 30.68W" ?
Unless I've missed it, neither report specifies the Lat/Long, but the map in Interim 1 (enlarged slightly in the Appendix, page 107) has the
June7-"recovery" diamond position-symbol at
about:
N03
° 36'/W030
° 37', i.e., in the language of your quote,
3.60N 30.62W.
That looks almost identical to the "sighted"
June 6 position you quoted. Can you shed any light?
[EDITED ADDITION]: See my subsequent
post (#3743 next page).
wes wall, (quote):
It assumes all have accepted the discovered site as close to the LKP, but what are we considering "close?" Given the BEA's close to the vest attitude, the "close" could mean about anything.
You say that if you like; I couldn't possibly comment...
Chris