The distance to "A" is as important and will be the dependent variable on how many sets should be turned to get the error ellipse to a real and workable number. 50', maybe two doubles. 2000' feet, maybe several sets of doubles. Add some elevation and pressure differences in and I may turn as many as 30 sets.
Once it's intersected, then you can evaluate the differences in the math vs. what was calculated and maybe you have an answer.
If the angle of "A" is very small, like less than say 10å¡, then maybe you need another point somewhere else do work another triangle.
Triangulation can be a pain. If done correctly though, very powerful.
rfc, post: 365362, member: 8882 wrote: How many observations of B and C would you have to make to attain the same statistical reliability compared to just occupying A? 2n for each?
I think I saw someone else reply before, but as I figure it, the answer you your question is 2 times. For example if you would have done 2 arcs had you occupied A, you would do 4 from B and C.