I asked "What kind of margin of error can I expect in figuring distance?" My issue and concern is that I've seen a lot of discussions about which method is best for measuring distance, but I found it quite difficult to find out how accurate each method is.
That's the focus of the question: How accurate are different methods. I even ask if it's possible to know what causes issues of accuracy in the different methods.
I even state, in my question, that I've seen many discussions on which is better, but they do NOT say what kind of accuracy the different methods have. For instance, is the Law of Cosines accurate to within .34%? Or less? Or more? What about Haversine? What kind of accuracy does that have? Or Vincenty?
I'm not asking which is best. I'm asking for rates of accuracy on the different methods and if it's possible to know what factors impact that accuracy. That's not at all what the other question asks.
While the question it's marked a duplicate of ("Why is law of cosines more preferable than haversine when calculating distance between two latitude-longitude points?") does have an answer that discusses the accuracy of the Law of Cosines, it never gives a clear number to say just what the margin of error is. It does, at least, say, that small distances might be an issue, but this answers only part of my question.
I had read that answer on that question while doing research, but it did not give me a full answer and the focus is on comparing two methods.
I'm not a math major. In fact, honestly, I haven't used trig in many years. All I'm trying to find out is what margin of error the different formulas have and what impacts that margin of error so, if possible, I can allow for it. Maybe the problem is, since I haven't used trig since high school, I just don't have the trig and advanced background to understand everything that one answer says about accuracy.
Which is one reason I tried to ask, "What is the accuracy of these methods?"
I feel like I'm in school and I have asked the teacher, "How big is an elephant?" and rather than getting an answer, I'm referred to someone using logs and advanced biology to compare the size of a baby elephant to the size of an adult elephant without ever saying, "Oh, and a big elephant is about 11 feet high."
I'm sorry I'm not as advanced as everyone on this Q&A site, but I'm just trying to get an idea of what kind of accuracy I can expect I know if I'm going to be off by inches, feet, yards, or miles.
The other question (and the answers) either do not provide that information or provide it in an advanced format that not all of us can follow. I'm a beginner at this and I'd like to learn more, but if I have to start by knowing it all on this Q&A site so I can get answers and start learning, then that's quite a frustrating situation.