NavList:

   

Reply

Mr. Hebard,thanks for your help and confidence in this matter.My experiance
of 04-26 was a great learning tool for me even though I failed to grasp the
essance of what the exercise of "distances" was meant to be at the time.I
believe I have it now.As for my success with the averaged Ho's of the
reflected images it most definetly a function of the sextant I use.Yes,I
have a good technique honed over many years of use.I look at it in the
following way:I'm a good mechanic.I approach intercepts and such in a
mechanical way.I know how to use the tools to get what I need.Where I'm
lacking is understanding some of the concepts behind the mechanical steps
needed to get the results.
As for future officers I believe they will.As long as the U.S.C.G. requires
celestial be taught and mastered to hold certain lisences.It is an officer's
responsibility to meet certain criteria to hold a lisence not some company's
responsibility.Most officers have to pay for it out of pocket.There are now
and will be in the future those who are intregued by and trying to master
observations useing fine equipment.Even with all the neat equipment on board
it is still satisfying to do.

-----Original Message-----
From: Fred Hebard [mailto:Fred@ACF.ORG]
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2003 15:59
To: NAVIGATION-L@LISTSERV.WEBKAHUNA.COM
Subject: Re: Lunar mechanics and Double Alts.


Dear Mr. Royer,

Thank you for sharing your experiences with us.  It was certainly
enlightening to read that your observed altitudes were within 0.1' of
arc of your calculated altitudes.  It gives me something to aim for, as
I still have standard errors of around 0.2' of arc, and the means only
rarely get within 0.1' (although they are getting there more
frequently!).  Part of it may be due to you superior sextant, but I am
sure much of it is due to your superior technique, from years of
experience.  I wonder whether sea officers just coming on board now
will ever again achieve your level of expertise.

Yours Sincerely,

Fred Hebard

   

Reply