NavList:

   

Reply

So,
1. The frame from an old Soviet SN sextant,
2. The arm from some other sextant,
Something is missing on this arm: either an illumination
device or a "microscope" usually fitted to Soviet sextants.
I just see a hole for it.
3. Forged inscriptions "C. Plath, Hamburg" on the arc.
4. Lousy painting job,
5. A scope from nobody knows where, probably
not a sextant scope at all,
4. The box (and especially the locks) are definitely not
"original", whatever this word cold mean in this case:-)

Already a lot.
So, what is "a lot more", I am curious:-)

(It's pity: I know the guy, bought a 3-armed protractor
last summer from him, negotiated a "Hughes Gothic" (with silver arc!)
looking
so nice in his pictures... I was alarmed when he said
that he intends to "polish" this Hughes Gothic. I tried to
explain him why this should not be done. He replied that
polished old sextants are sold better and at higher price:-)
I still think he could be honest, but just deceived by
some of his "suppliers").

I suspect that people who pay this sort of money for a sextant
"not in perfect condition" use them for decoration.
But to use for decoration a sextant with a swastica??!

A.

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Yourname Here wrote:

> Alex gets my applause for identifying the frame as that of a SNO-M sextant.
>
> But, there is more, lots more.
>
> Joel Jacobs
>
> --
> Visit our website
> http://www.landandseacollection.com
>
>
>
>  -------------- Original message ----------------------
> From: Alexandre Eremenko 
> > The frame looks exactly like a frame
> > of an old Soviet SN or SNO-M sextant.
> > (These old Soviet sextants were probably
> > modeled on C Plath, but I've never seen
> > a C. Plath with exactly this shape of frame).
> > Where does the arm come from I could not
> > determine.
> > The scope is obviously not from this sextant
> > (as many people noticed).
> > And they seem to have painted the teeth of the arc(!)
> >
> > Alex
> >
> > > Check this eBay listing and let's see who can say
> > > what's wrong with this
> > > sextant.
> > >
> > > Joel Jacobs
>

   

Reply