Good man. All trips are good trips.
Indeed, all trips are good. But I don't think that we've discussed the concept of "Sol's true north star" here and the claimed example is from elsewhere.
The idea of "true north" is very much dependant on what frame of reference you are considering. Earth's rotational axis and, indeed, the whole Solar System is not remotely aligned with the galactic plane - just consider the position of Polaris relative to Sol in the ED MW! So if you are considering north in either Sol's or Earth's terms then our terrestrial understanding of the term is a long way distant. Stating that Wregoe TV-L C24-0 is "north" of Sol doesn't make much sense to me. It simply doesn't apply in any Earth or Sol reference of the concept of "north".
I'm of the opinion that the relative flatness of the MW gives us a clear galactic plane and that therefore it makes more sense to say that you are either "above" or "below" it. Granted that those terms are entirely arbitrary in that they could be reversed, but the ED MW has positive and negative co-ordinates so it is reasonable to consider that positive is "above" and negative "below". That means that Wregoe TV-L C24-0 is more correctly "the furthest most direct star above Sol". Not as snappy perhaps but more accurate IMHO.
I much prefer using the concept of north / south / east / west to refer to the whole galaxy when viewed from the (obviously arbitrary, but the ED default) above position. So north is what you get if you head from Sol towards Sag A* and onwards to Beagle Point. South is the opposite direction, west is to the left of Sag A* and east to the right.
All in all, I would wish that FDev had chosen Sag A* to be the galactic co-ordinate centre rather than Sol. We long ago accepted that Sol doesn't revolve around the Earth and we should similarly accept that Sol isn't the centre of the galaxy!
