Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    or...
       
    Reply
    Re: Angular Distance Between Stars By Camera and Sextant
    From: Paul Hirose
    Date: 2012 Sep 20, 21:56 -0700

    Marcel Tschudin wrote:
    > Instead of using Ha I used his unrefracted Hc which I expect to be related
    > to the astronomical horizon (ZD=90°). Calculating first the unrefracted
    > distance with Hc and Z (yes, only the difference in Z is relevant) results
    > in an unrefracted distance of
    > Dtrue = 10.460896°
    > resulting in
    > Dref =  10.457595° (using Bill's Excel sheet with GHA, Dec and Hc from
    > Andrés)
    
    I agree with your unrefracted distance within .000001°.
    
    For refracted distance, I think a more direct solution is to use the 
    refraction and Hc from Andrés' program. That gives refracted az/alt. 
    Then calculate distance.
    
    Your guess is correct - I assumed Ha included refraction only. That is 
    the definition of Ha, but "Ha" from his program is something different. 
    If we add his values for Hc and refraction, and compare the sum to his 
    Ha, the latter is about 3" - 4" greater:
    
          Alioth       Alkaid
       28.317414    34.115333  Hc
    +   .028946  +   .023032  refraction
    -----------  -----------
       28.346360    34.138365  refracted alt
    - 28.347441  - 34.139225  "Ha"
    -----------  -----------
        -.001081     -.000860
    
    The refracted altitudes are very close to my values (.000009° and 
    .000017° different). The separation angle computed with the refracted 
    altitudes above (not "Ha") is 10.455629° vs. my 10.455680. The 
    difference is only .18". But the Excel solution is 6.9" different from 
    my angle.
    
    There is a mistake in the formula Andrés gave for Ha:
    
     >> Ha = Hs + IE - dip;
    
    Index error should be subtracted, not added. E.g., if the sextant says 
    +.1' when the direct and reflected images coincide, index error = +.1', 
    which should be subtracted from all altitudes. It is helpful if the 
    sextant is adjusted so index error is always zero or positive, never 
    negative. That makes the math easier: index error, dip, and refraction 
    are all subtracted from Hs to obtain Ho.
    
    -- 
    I filter out messages with attachments or HTML.
    
    
    
    

       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    Name:
    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Email:
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    You can also join by posting. Your first on-topic post automatically makes you a member.

    Posting Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your posting code will be emailed to you immediately.
    Email:

    Email Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site