The Great Elliptic Sailing (GES), which can reduce sailing distance, is important to navigators. Whether a Great Ellipse (GE) is worth using depends on whether the distance saved is significant. Otherwise, the Rhumb Line (RL) is easier to steer. We propose a simple criterion to evaluate the difference in distance between the GE and the RL. The criterion is that the GE is worth using when the vertex lies between the departure and destination. In order to take the advantage of shorter distance, the GE is usually approximated as a series of waypoints. Unlike currently practised methods, we propose the Longitude Bisection Method (LBM) which determines waypoints with varying intervals. This approach can establish the appropriate number of waypoints to approximate the GE effectively. The proposed criterion and the LBM are demonstrated in practical examples.

The running fix or sight-run-sight fix is a classic problem in celestial navigation. Methods employed to obtain the fix traditionally involve advancing a Line of Position (LoP) taken at an earlier time and crossing it with one obtained later. Attempts to generalise the operation of advancing an LoP when the Earth's surface is represented by a plane to the case of the sphere have resulted in proposals that contain poorly constrained approximations or are otherwise fundamentally flawed. A simple rapidly-convergent iterative procedure to obtain a running fix is described that avoids the notion of advanced LoPs and is readily applicable to both the sphere and ellipsoid.

I am grateful to both Dr Ponsonby and Sqn Ldr Hoare for their responses to my original article and would like to thank them for replying. It is interesting that they have come up with such different approaches, one based on solid geometry (but not spherical trigonometry) and the other based on a map projection, which both give exact or near-exact answers.