The Royal Institute of Navigation

First Letter

Prof.dr.PetarCumbelicZlatni potok 9
DUBROVNIK, Hrvatska (Croatia)

The Royal Institute of Navigation
1 Kensington Gore,
LONDONSW7 2AT, England

27 Feb 1996

Dear Sirs,

Please find enclose herewith a copy of my Nautical Tables that I published in 1969. Second edition was published by Hydrographical Office of the Navy. Please note that from page 23 till page 38 there is an English Language explanation for the use of the Tables. I noticed only recently that my Nautical Tables PRW had been published with minor and insignificant modifications in the Nautical Almanac from the year 1989 including this year 1996.

Now I come to the point: Could it be possible to print a review in The Journal of Navigation for the two Tables, may PRW sight reduction tables and so called NAO reduction tables?

I think it will be better to bring the dispute before the scientists for opinions at the first place and at present time.

Finally I wish to inform; you that I published an article in the Journal (Vo1.40 No l, Jan l987) titled “The Distribution of Navigational Errors". Also I am member of the Royal Institute of Navigation (membership number 9629.

Also I wish to inform you that my Tables have been cited in American Practical Navigator Bowditch first time in 1977 edition on page 575 (Volume 1).

Thank you,

Yours sincerely,

Second Letter

Prof.dr.PetarCumbelic
Zlatni potok 9
DUBROVNIK, Hrvatska (Croatia)

The Royal Institute of Navigation
1 Kensington Gore,
LONDONSW7 2AT, England

1 June 1996.

Dear Sirs,

I enclose herewith a photocopy of my letter dated 27 Feb.l986 which is self-explanatory. 

Since I have received no reply so far I wonder whether you received my mail or not. 

As the matter is rather important for me, may I ask you again the same question (of course if you did receive my previous letter with my Nautical Tables enclosed): "Could it be possible to print a review in the Journal of Navigation of my Nautical Tables PRW and of so called NAO Reduction Tables from the Nautical Almanac, comparing the two etc.?" 

I hope I shall receive your answer soon and I. remain, Dear Sirs,

Yours sincerely,

Third Letter

Prof.dr.PetarCUMBELIC
Zlatni potok 9
DUBROVNIK, Hrvatska (Croatia)

The Royal Institute of Navigation
1 Kensington Gore,
LONDONSW7 2AT, England

30 Aug 1996

Dear Sirs,

I am sorry but I have to say that I am greatly disappointed that after six months I have not received a reply to my registered letters dated 27 Feb and l June l996. 

It is hard to believe for me that my letters were ignored deliberately for some "higher" reasons. 

All I asked was a simple answer to a simple question. Is it possible that may register letters have gone astray? Please confirm that you received may letters and enclosed Nautical Tables PRW and please answer may question: "Will you publish a review of two Tables in the Journal?" In case that the answer be negative I shall try with other nautical publications, journals etc. Thank you, 

Yours sincerely,

Fourth Letter

Prof.dr.PetarCumbelic
Zlatni potok 9
DUBROVNIK, Hrvatska (Croatia)

The Royal Institute of Navigation
1 Kensington Gore,
LONDONSW7 2AT, England

8 November 1996

Dear Mr.Kemp,

I have written three registered letters to The Institute so far and received no reply. 

Something is definitely wrong; therefore I have taken the liberty to address this letter to you in person. 

As I said in may previous letters I ask only an answer whether it may be positive or negative. 

If necessary the next letter I will write to the Patron of The Royal Institute of Navigation to HRH The Prince Philip Duke of Edinburgh. 

Yours sincerely,

Encl. Photocopies of three previous letters.

Fifth Letter

Prof.dr.PetarCumbelic
Zlatni potok 9
20000 DUBROVIK
Hrvatska (Croatia)

ProfessorJ.F.Kemp
The Old Coach House
The Street Patching
West Sussex, BN13 3XF

6 December 1996

Dear ProfessorKemp,

Thank you for your letters of 17 and 29 November. To comply with your request I enclose herewith an unbound copy of Nautical Tables PRO. I apologize for not being able to send you a better copy as I ran out of them. Second edition of my Tables were incorporated in an unabridged Nautical Tables published by Hydrographic Office of Croatian Navy.  That is a large book without English translation. Thank you. 

Sincerely yours,

First Letter

ProfessorJ.F.Kemp 
The old coach house 
The street 
Patching 
West Sussex 
8n13 3xf 
Tel (01903) 871503 
Fax (01903) 871613 
17 November 1996

Prof. Dr. Petar Čumbelić
Zlatni potok 9
20000 Dubrovnik 
Hrvatska (Croatia)

Dear Dr.Čumbelić,

Thank you for your letter of 8 November. I am sorry that you have not received a reply to your previous letters to the Institute this year.
In June, I intended to ask a reviewer to comment on your tables but, for various reasons, no review has been forthcoming. Since all the referees and reviewers I use are unpaid volunteers, I have no means of putting pressure on them if they are slow in responding to my requests or even if they prefer not to respond at all.
In view of your latest letter, I will take the matter up again and try to find someone with the expertise and the time to examine your tables. However, I should say at once that it would not be proper for the Institute to become involved in any dispute which might have legal implications.
I will write to you again at a later date when I have taken the matter further. In the meantime, I apologise once again for the delay in responding to your letters. .
Yours sincerely

Editor, Journal of Navigation 

Second Letter

ProfessorJ.F.Kemp 
The old coach house 
The street 
Patching 
West Sussex 
8n13 3xf 
Tel (01903) 871503 
Fax (01903) 871613 
29 November 1996

Prof. Dr. Petar Čumbelić
Zlatni potok 9 20000 Dubrovnik 
Hrvatska (Croatia)

Dear Dr.Čumbelić,

Further to my letter of 17 November, I am sorry to have to say that we have not been able to retrieve your Nautical Tables to send them to another reviewer. As I said in my previous letter, my referees and reviewers are all unpaid volunteers, so I am not able to put pressure on them at all.
Rather than wait for what might be a long time before we can recover your tables, I would be grateful if you could let us have a second copy. I will then be pleased to send them to another reviewer for comment. Depending upon the comments I receive from him, I will then decide whether it would be appropriate to publish his comments in a future issue of the Journal of Navigation.
I am sorry for the delay which has occurred in dealing with your submission, and I hope it will not be too much trouble for you to let us have a second set of your PRO Tables.
Yours sincerely,

Third Letter

ProfessorJ.F.Kemp 
The old coach house 
The street 
Patching 
West Sussex 
8n13 3xf 
Tel (01903) 871503 
Fax (01903) 871613 
19 December 1996

Prof. Dr. Petar Čumbelić
Zlatni potok 9 20000 Dubrovnik 
Hrvatska (Croatia)

Dear Dr.Čumbelić,

Thank you for your letter of 6 December and for letting me have a second copy of your Nautical Tables. I shall be sending these to an expert for comment, and I will be in touch with you again when I have received his report. As I said in my previous letter, I frequently send papers to eminent referees for comment. However, the referees are all unpaid and they are all busy people, so it may be a few weeks before I can give you a response.
With best wishes,
Yours sincerely,

Fourth Letter

ProfessorJ.F.Kemp 
The old coach house 
The street 
Patching 
West Sussex 
8n13 3xf 
Tel (01903) 871503 
Fax (01903) 871613 
15 January 1997

Prof. Dr. Petar Čumbelić
Zlatni potok 9
20000 Dubrovnik 
Hrvatska (Croatia)

Dear Dr.Čumbelić,

Further to my letter of 19 December, I have now received a report from the expert to whom I sent your Nautical Tables. There are a number of points I would like to make.

1. It appears that short-method tables for astronomical navigation have used the method of dropping a perpendicular from the zenith of the PZX triangle from at least as far back as the French Hydrographer Souillagouet in 1891.
2. I enclose a review, by the late D.H.Sadler, of Concise Tables for Sight Reduction by ThomasD.Davies which, I understand, are the same tables that are now published in the Nautical Almanac. In the review, it is suggested that these tables are simply a new presentation of Bertini's tables of 1918 and Radlerde Aquino's tables of 1938, but using a lower order of precision. I imagine that many of the points made by the reviewer would also apply equally well to your tables. Clearly, when tables are based on a particular method of dividing the PZX triangle, corresponding tabulated figures must be identical although there might be differences in layout and explanation.
3. Dr.Sadler also reviewed sets of tables by two (then) Yugoslav authors in 1958, so we can assume he was familiar with work in your country (see attached copy of his review). His later (1985) suggestion that Admiral Davies's tables derive from Bertini s and Aquino's rather than from your own tables, must therefore be considered significant.
4. It seems to me that a comprehensive review is needed of all the short method tables so far published. A comparison of your tables with those included in the Nautical Almanac would not be useful without reference also to the other tables which have been published using the same principle of dropping a perpendicular from Z in the PZX triangle. At the present time, I do not know of anyone with both the expertise and the time to produce such a comprehensive review. With the introduction of calculators and computers, and the replacement of astronomical navigation methods by satellite systems, there is not a great deal of interest amongst my Journal readers in tabular methods for reducing astronomical observations. It is understandable that few people would be prepared to spend the time and effort required for a comprehensive survey of short method tables.

In summary, I feel that a comparative review of the tables produced by yourself and those included in the Nautical Almanac would need to take into account the many earlier tables based on similar principles. This would be a major task, and I know of nobody who would be prepared to take the work on. Also, I feel that few Journal readers are interested in short-method tables at the present time. In these circumstances, I believe it will not be possible to publish a review of the kind you are suggesting in the Journal of Navigation in the foreseeable future. Finally, I must apologise again for taking so long to respond to your request that we should publish a comparative review of your tables and those contained in the Nautical Almanac. I am sorry that my response is a negative one, and I enclose the copy of your tables which you kindly sent us. I shall be retiring as editor of the Journal as from July 1997, but I will leave our correspondence on file so that it is available to the new editor who will take over from me.

Yours sincerely,