NavList:

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

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
 Add Images & Files Posting Code: Name: Email:
Re: George's test
From: Fred Hebard
Date: 2004 Nov 13, 11:24 -0500

```On Nov 12, 2004, at 6:06 PM, Alexandre Eremenko wrote:

> George Huxtable proposed the following test
> for the sextant rigidity.
> Measure some vertical angle which does not change
> much with time. Then take your sextant upside down and
> measure the same angle. (With a good sextant the result
> should be the same).
> I did this test today with my usual test for the index error.
> Here are the results.
>
> Sextant: SNO-T, made 1990, scope "inverting".
> Time: about noon, Lat approx 40, AltSun approx 32d,
> SD=16.2, (sun semidiameter), 4SD=64.8'
>
> Sextant upright position:
> Up     Low     Sum    IndEr
>
> 32.5   32.5    65      0.0
> 32.5   32.4    64.9    -0.05
> 32.4   32.4    64.8    0.0
>
> Sextant upside down:
> Up     Low     Sum    IndEr
>
> 32.4   32.4    64.8    0.0
> 32.5   32.6    65.1    +0.05
> 32.7   32.3    65      -0.2
>
> Now, if we average all 6 observations (Low and UP) we
> get 64.9 for upright position and 65.0 for upside down.
> Which gives 0.025' for the "non-rigidity error".
>
> Conclusions.
> 1. My SNO-T is pretty rigid.
> 2. Index error is probably 0.
> 3. My random human error is about 0.3 for the Sun.
>
> In fact, this 0.3 (human?) error causes a lot of trouble for me.
> a) I almost always tend to overshoot. So the correction
> (when it is substantial) is always negative.
> b) The error varies from 0 to -0.6' in my observations, and
> it is most frequently about -0.3' (if exists), but
> c) for very long distances (more than 120 d) it is sometimes -0.6'
>
> What is the resaon I cannot understand. Either it is
> a sextant instrumental error, or really some human error.
> All collimation tests I could do show 0.
>
> Alex.
>

Alex,

I don't understand from where you are drawing the conclusion that you
have a random human error of 0.3' for the sun.  Are you talking about
the range of the measurements in your test or about the mean index
error indicated by the test?

Your numbers look very good, especially those with the sextant right
side up; the range of measurements there is 0.1' of arc.  The upside
down numbers are fairly rough, with a range of 0.3' of arc.  The
semidiameter of the sun also is the correct value for the right side up
measurements, but not upside down.  It would appear you are not very
good at operating the sextant upside down, but quite proficient right
side up.

Measuring the sun's semidiameter with the sextant in various
orientations does seem to be good practice for taking lunars.  In
general, I think the exercise would be very helpful for  developing
proficiency with the sextant.   From you numbers, it would appear you
need more practice with the sextant upside down.  How about sideways or
at a 45 degree angle?

By the way, I get numbers similar to your right side up measurements on
dry land, but, thus far, they are much worse on the water.

Fred

```
Browse Files

Drop Files

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)