Hi,
Unfortunately I have thought of a plausible reason for using the
range [-90,270) for the azimuthal angle which Chris suggested today.
Something that we might do rather naively for a given track is
determine its azimuthal angle by taking the average of the azimuthal angles
for the track segments which make up the track. So if the track segments
have azimuthal angles 1, 359, 0 for example, then the average (180) clearly
isn't what we want.
Hopefully people are clever enough to avoid this sort of error but
I can imagine it slipping through on occasion.
Not saying I'm convinced we should start changing code yet but
maybe....
Cheers,
Douglas
26-415 M.I.T. Tel: +1 617 258 7199
77 Massachusetts Avenue Fax: +1 617 258 5440
Cambridge, MA 02139, USA E-mail: hasell@mit.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Feb 24 2014 - 14:07:29 EST