[ARDF] Re: Protractors, 80m accuracy

[Matthew Robbins]

Just a clarification.  I wrote:

<<One thing I am certain about is the need to more-or-less continuously
check that the "other" Ts are where they should be based on your
earlier bearings.  Say I'm going to 1 for my first T, and it's a 2km
leg.  For a few seconds each minute, I verify that 2, 3, 4, and 5 are
where they ought to be.  I have found this to be essential to ARDF.
Sometimes I just check that it's, say, northwest of me, but I check
it.  If I notice anything weird, I take a bearing and plot it.>>

On 2m, if I am in a valley or some other RF hole, I'll still check
each minute, but I don't consider it weird if there are obvious
reflections. If I have a bearing from high up, then I get something
different in a valley, I try to ignore the latter.  When I'm in a hole
on 2m, usually the thing on my mind is to get somewhere useful.

I too, take a lot more than I plot.  Say I've got my initial bearings
down, and now I'm in a position to get some cross bearings.  I'll plot
the first cross bearing as a tick, and then I'll just see where the
later cross bearings fall with respect to that one.  If it's different
significantly, I put a new tick in.

One thing I think I need to do is to lengthen the cross ticks so it is
a line extending maybe 500m on either side of the initial bearing.  I
think that will help me to balance the visual sense of the two
bearings, rather than overemphasizing the initial (meaning more
distant and probably less accurate) bearing.  Right now, when I see
the little X on the map, it's hard not to just go there.  I'm hoping
the longer lines will help me see the data rather than the "X".

Matthew
Cincinnati, Ohio USA