Talk:Dead reckoning

message: I'm undertaking many edits to replace the rather stilted language with more modern terminology.  Please bear with me until I'm fished.  Shouldn't take more than two hours.  - Mugs 13:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stilted Language

message: Dead Reckoning is a mathematical process based upon scientifically measured inputs.  Animals don't do math!  "Path Integration" needs it's own topic space, not a disambiguation redirect to a process only humans perform.  - Mugs 14:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is more of a philosophical point than a problem in terminology. The net result of the animals actions is the implementation of a mathematical algorithm, whether or not the animals are consiously aware of it. AfD hero (talk) 01:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Diverge Path Integration

message: Perhaps this article needs to have aviation and marine sections. I am not familiar with a DR at every 300 miles and combined turns etc, it must refer to aviation? Also as far as I know the term velocity is not commonly used in marine navigation, in physics velocity refers to both speed and direction. Generally in marine navigation a DR does not include set and drift, I don't know what the practice is in aviation, in marine usage a DR corrected for set and drift is called an estimated position (EP), KAM 01:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Aviation usage vs marine

message: According to FAA, wind information contributes to calculation. 
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/pcg/D.HTM
"DEAD RECKONING- Dead reckoning, as applied to flying, is the navigation of an airplane solely by means of computations based on airspeed, course, heading, wind direction, and speed, groundspeed, and elapsed time. --Natasha2006 16:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Different ways in calculation? 

message: I notice that a large portion of the "Animal navigation" in this article was added by the anonymous IP User:81.178.46.51 in this change  This edits appear to copied from somewhere else, completed with square-bracketed numbers, likely from references. Could anyone deduce where the text came from? Flibirigit (talk) 06:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe its directly from the Homing pigeon article. I feel some of it should be trimmed drown, and or referred to that article. Flibirigit (talk) 06:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animal navigation 

message: I work with other historians on the origine of medieval portolan charts. The question how accurate dead reckoning (DR) navigation by sails could be is of overwhelming importance there. We could not find much historic date because most nautic historians supposed DR had the accuracy of the portolan charts from the same time. But that is in doubt.
I created a page with the DR data I found so far. If you have data or sources, please send it there or to its discussion page. Besides historians, it may be of interest to present sail navigators too. -- Portolanero (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help! In search for DR data. 

message: Some information on the history of dead reckoning usage would be really nice, and seems to be completely lacking at present.72.33.212.238 (talk) 13:35, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical information please 

message: === Images ===
The caption and content of first image (showing a triangle and two dots, filename Dead-reckining.svg[sic]) seems to contradict that of the second, which describes the triangle as indicating a Dead Reckoning position ("Wind drift.png") and not the origin and tack, as in the first image.
=== Photos ===
I mean...watch, pen and paper presented as dead reckoning tools (in two pictures) is serious?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramas rtl (talk • contribs) 08:56, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This is my first time to visit this page, but yea, those pretty much are the tools of dead reckoning (plus straight edge and perhaps a protractor). --Unicorn Tapestry {say} 12:45, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos and Images in Article 

message: I mean...watch, pen and paper presented as dead reckoning tools (in two pictures) is serious?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramas rtl (talk • contribs) 08:56, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This is my first time to visit this page, but yea, those pretty much are the tools of dead reckoning (plus straight edge and perhaps a protractor). --Unicorn Tapestry {say} 12:45, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photos 

message: The order of topics seem to be sprinkled in rather than planned. That is, the first section is 'Errors', which describes the down side of dead reckoning rather than what dead reckoning aims to accomplish. In a way, it tells what dead reckoning isn't rather than what it is.
At the same time, I recognize it shouldn't be dropped near the end of the article because its message is too important. I believe it needs a section prior to Errors, perhaps stolen from the introduction. A couple of the topics near the end should probably come under the heading Mechanical Devices.
Thoughts? --Unicorn Tapestry {say} 12:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead what? 

message: Also does not have any references.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.223.230.154 (talk) 22:52, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Additional notes, scientific information and curiosity" section is irrelevant, and should be removed. 

message: The theory that "dead reckoning" comes from "deduced reckoning" is wrong. It is not supported by professional etymological research, and it supposedly originated in a letter to the editor of the newspaper The Morning Post in the 1920s. Former versions of this page a few years ago stated this clearly enough. The current version of this page repeats the false etymology without comment or qualification in the opening line (using the strange structure of a parenthetical phrase within a parenthetical phrase (like this)). This should be repaired. 2600:1000:B02F:75EC:B127:6416:2794:E83F (talk) 17:06, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deduced reckoning is wrong 

message: This section is full of jargon and I'm not even sure what the context is after reading it a few times. Suggest a rewrite by someone familiar with the topic.Dlthewave (talk) 22:18, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: @Dlthewave i am also unsure if this is written by someone with english as a native language, which makes it hard to understand on top of the jargon. 46.15.58.191 (talk) 21:13, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Localization of mobile sensor nodes 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dead reckoning. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060313165051/http://www.irbs.com/bowditch/pdf/chapt07.pdf to http://www.irbs.com/bowditch/pdf/chapt07.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:43, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified