No Jeff... I doubt I could explain that adequately expect I would think
horizontal beam width would affect resolution, range and maybe weather
penetration abilities.

CM

"Jeff Morris" jeffmo@NoSpam-sv-lokiDOTcom wrote in message
...
| So perhaps you or Neal can explain to everyone how the horizontal beam
width affect the
| image.
|
| -jeff
|
|
| Capt. Mooron wrote:
| Most people I've seen either find a radar image intuitively correct
| to what they see around them ... or they don't. I knew immediately
| what I was looking at on the first radar image I saw. I can
| interpolate between radar, air photo and chart in an instant. I
| mentally compensate for differences in scale and orientation. Maybe
| I'm one of the lucky few... but I assumed everyone had this ability
| to some extent.
|
| CM
|
| "Simple Simon" wrote in message
| ...
|
| But radar is different from a paper chart because
| a paper chart does not foreshorten the view while
| radar does. Radar is really no different than a
| looking at something with eyes that use radio
| waves instead of light waves
|
| Our eyes use light and when we see a hundred
| yards of water at a distance of a quarter mile this
| hundred yards of water looks a helluva lot shorter
| than the same hundred yards right off our bow.
|
| Radar 'sees' thing the same way so one must
| extrapolate this information mentally in order
| to match it with a chart of the same area.
|
| It would be much the same as equating a gnomic
| projection with a Mercator projection but backwards
| if looking north on a Mercator.
|
| See what I mean? But the point is the majority
| of people can't even imagine such differences
| let alone work with them.
|
| This is what I mean by spatial comprehension.
|
| S.Simon - a sailboat Captain who's superior to any and all motorboat
| Captains
|
| "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
| ...
| Generally I find that women are at a loss when it comes to spatial
| comprehension. A man will usually automatically know the extended
| limits of an automobile when he sits in one. Women depend on
| mirrors and the visual depth of field at a specific spot to
| determine this. This is one of the reasons why women generally do
| not back into a parking space... while men prefer to. I say this is
| a general trait.... I know of women who are very good with spatial
| interpretation.
|
| If you look at the radar screen as a chart... it is easier to
| resolve the image and blend it to the area around you. Just keep in
| mind that often you only view the proximal reflected surface of any
| object. The "chart" on a radar screen is always oriented to the
| line of the vessel and bearing is always relative unless a fluxgate
| compass or GPS input is available. In a day or two I could easily
| have you running with a full comprehension of radar... at least as
| well as anyone else. Tuning radar is no problem....
|
| CM
|
| "Simple Simon" wrote in message
| ...
|
|
| I've met many people who cannot extrapolate a land map
| of an area they are familiar with much less be able to relate
| to a nautical chart. If tests were given for this type of relating
| a graphical representation to geography I bet you'd be
| apalled at the numbers of folks who simply can't relate.
|
| Bobsprit is probably one of these chart challenged people.
|
| Simple things like basic orientation of the map while they
| look at it leaves them at a loss. A radar display is even
| more of an alien representation that a paper chart. Is the
| display 'heads up' or "oriented north" for instance is more
| than many people can cope with. Spatial relationships
| and representative distances with respect to scale are
| concepts many simply cannot fathom. I've only used
| radar a couple of times and found it did not convey
| much information at all other than skewed and foreshortened
| spatial relationships that were difficult to stretch out into
| geographical reality in my mind - a mind which excels
| at spatiality.
|
| I can see where practice, practice, practice and a mind
| that can understand is vital for a radar operator. This is
| yet another reason I think there should be a navigator at
| the helm of large ships. Let the navigator navigator - let
| the Captain steer according to input from the navigator.
|
| S.Simon - a Captain who knows how things work
|
|
|
|
| "Capt. Mooron" wrote in message
| ...
|
| "Shen44" wrote in message
|
| Radar is an aid to navigation, that is well learned if one has
| one,
| but
| not as
| important to learn for beginners, as some of the other basics,
| such as compass, chart work, etc..
| Contrary to what some may think, radar is not something you can
| just
| turn
| on,
| for the first time, and be instantly familiar and competent with
| it's usage. I have seen any number of people using it on a
| fairly regular
| basis,
| who
| have
| problems tuning (and sometimes detuning) for best picture, then
| equating that picture to their charts or vessel traffic around
| them.
| Without knowing the basics of relative motion and how to plot
| targets,
| you
| can
| easily get yourself into as much trouble as you can avoid.
|
| Maybe these people are the same ones with spatial difficulties. I
| haven't seen anyone that has had a problem understanding a radar
| image... tuning radar is a little more complicated ... but not
| out of the realm of the newbie.
|
| While I concur that Basic Navigation is primary obstacle to
| overcome... a radar in use to confirm your plots and verify
| relative bearings is perfectly fine.
|
| The days of high tech being utilized only on large ships is over.
| Navigational instrumentation is now available to the layman and
| the general population's ability to embrace technology has
| increased dramatically.
|
| CM
|
|