NavList:

   

Reply

Frank wrote

> In my own experience, star-to-star angles remain somewhat less accurate than
> good lunar distance observations, but they have the singular advantage of
> convenience being available at any moment on any clear night --and with a
> multitude of choices in angle at any time.

In my case, I believe the reverse to be true. I've spent way too much time
determining my astigmatisms distort a sphere, which cause exercises like
measuring the Sun's semidiamter to be a wee bit off--but predictable .
There is a repeatable difference between high-elevation Sun limb-to-limb IE
checks and Sun/horizon IE checks (except for those &%$*!! days).

I can adjust for the vertical measurements, but when I get into sun-, star-
or planet-to moon measurements for lunars it gets strange as the angle is
not always vertical or horizontal, so a guessing game. Alex, for example,
"learned" to see what alignment (although not text-book perfect) caused his
lunar observations to coincide with Frank's lunars pages.

So much for attempting to quantify maddening personal errors.

Bill B.






--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Navigation List archive: www.fer3.com/arc
To post, email NavList@fer3.com
To , email NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply