Turner has chosen in a recent paper to criticize Moss for inaccurate methods and observes that the inherent inconsistencies are ‘educationally objectionable’. However, he who criticizes must be prepared to be criticized in turn, and when a computer program of the standard evidenced in the printout of PROGRAM 2 is put forward as a general solution to the rhumb-line problem, and one which will enable the navigator to compute his tracks rapidly and accurately, we must needs examine it closely. Such an examination shows that, at the very least, the programmed solution offered is ‘computerizationally objectionable’.