NavList:

   

Reply

Alex,

You misconstrue my meaning  :-)

I'm not suggesting anyone buy anything,.. rather merely pointing out
that if someone wanted a sextant with an adjustable lunar scope the
SNO-M is cheaper than the SNO-T.

Further, the SNO-M lunar scope is not exactly the same as the SNO-T
lunar scope, at least as far as the two I have.

As to whether optically they are equivalent, I don't know, but
mechanically they are dissimilar. Moreover, whether their physical
differences matter to a user, I also don't know.

I understand they were both used by the Soviet Navy so I assume they are
both of adequate capability for a yachtsman  :-)

Cordially,

Courtney


Alexandre Eremenko wrote:

> Courtney,
> As I can judge from the pictures,
> and from SNO-M manual, it is just the SAME scope.
> So you are proposing buying an SNO-M just for its
> scope? Well, the current advertised price
> in maurnavy.com/ is $145, plus $80 (at least)
> for shipping and money transfer... A bit too expensive
> for an old used scope in unknown condition.
>
> Alex.
>
>
>
> On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Courtney Thomas wrote:
>
>
>>For those that might prefer a less expensive alternative to the SNO-T
>>inverting scope,... my SNO-M inverting scope has all the same
>>adjustments as my SNO-T inverting scope.
>>
>>HTH,
>>
>>Courtney
>>
>>
>>
>>Alexandre Eremenko wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Frank,
>>>We already discussed these SNO inverting scopes
>>>a lot on this list, so let me try to summarize:
>>>
>>>On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Frank Reed wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>If I have it right then, the feature that you
>>>>like about the inverting
>>>>scopes is not that they're inverting
>>>>but he fact that they have adjustable
>>>>alignment (which would make good sense). Yes?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>That it is inverting is not a "feature":-)
>>>It is just an accidental property, irrelevant
>>>for astronomical observations. But relevant in binoculars,
>>>designed for looking at objects on the earth,
>>>that's why they never make inverting binoculars.
>>>But from the pure optical point of view, Kepler scopes are
>>>superior to everything else.
>>>
>>>The features are:
>>>1. They let maximal amount of light through.
>>>Because they have the
>>>minimal possible number of lenses (2) and no prisms or mirrors.
>>>Probably this is the main advantage. This is also the
>>>reason astonomers prefer them.
>>>2. They have no prisms and thus are much smaller and
>>>lighter than comparable prismatic scopes.
>>>3. At the same time they have larger field of view
>>>in comparison with Galileo scopes of equal diameter
>>>and magnification.
>>>4. They have wires (you cannot mount wires in a Galileo scope).
>>>The usefulness of wires was discussed a lot on the list,
>>>so I do not repeat the arguments. I remember that Frank
>>>was not convinced in their usefulness.
>>>5. They have collimation adjustment.
>>>I don't know why most modern sextants do not have it,
>>>maybe because for this adjustment you need wires, and it is
>>>impossible to put wires in a Galileo scope:-)
>>>
>>>Alex.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>--
>>s/v Mutiny
>>Rhodes Bounty II
>>lying Oriental, NC
>>WDB5619
>>
>>
>


--
s/v Mutiny
Rhodes Bounty II
lying Oriental, NC
WDB5619

   

Reply