Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.


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

Compose Your Message

Add Images & Files
    Re: The "big" sextant manufactures
    From: Robert Eno
    Date: 2007 Oct 28, 10:25 -0400

    Free Plath sextants?
    Gee Frank, where was I when they were handing them out?
    Seriously, as a Plath enthusiast, I believe that Plath's reputation is
    well-deserved. I cannot say I have used every brand of sextant but I have
    used a lot and in my humble opinion, Plath is the best of the lot. When I
    say "Plath" I am referring to both Cassens and Plath and C.Plath. The only
    edge I give to C.Plath is the bronze (as opposed to brass) frame. My own
    C.Plath has been modified to include the best of both Plaths. For example,
    the Cassens and Plath handle can be completely disassembled for repair and
    inspection, whereas the C.Plath handle cannot. Additionally, the upper
    pillar on the C.Plath handle is glued into place (puzzling). Cassens and
    Plath is firmly bolted. Anyhow, I replaced the C.Plath handle with a Cassens
    and Plath handle to make the sextant as a whole, easier to repair. I've
    replaced a few other C.Plath components with Cassens and Plath components
    for the same reason. I like to think I have the best of both worlds.
    And for anyone who has doubts about the superb engineering that went behind
    C.Plath sextants, I invite people to examine one of their older model bubble
    attachments (the version where the size of the bubble can be increased or
    I cannot, however, say the same for the post 1993 C.Plaths; ditto for their
    later model of bubble attachment. I don't know what came over them when they
    decided to deviate from the original designs. I understand that the
    rationale was to cut down on the number of component parts, which from the
    point of view of the repair man was a step backwards.
    I rather admire John Karl for daring to say that he felt that the C.Plath he
    examined was junk. I like a man who isn't afraid to take a shot at a sacred
    cow. Nevertheless, I disagree with his assertion. I wonder if was John
    examining one of the older Plath models with a much older telescope? I
    believe that the design of the scope improved considerably in the 1960s.
    I still want to take up John's advice and have a look at the Navy Mk II.
    P.S. Frank, do give me advance notice when one of the big guns has a sextant
    give away promotion drive?  I'll be happy to write up a review.
    ----- Original Message -----
    Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2007 10:33 PM
    Subject: [NavList 3660] Re: The "big" sextant manufactures
    > Alex, you wrote:
    > "I want to understand just HOW this reputation of "Rolls-Royce of
    > sextants"
    > was made."
    > Advertising? :-) Free sextants for reviewers?? :->
    > -FER
    > >
    To post to this group, send email to NavList@googlegroups.com
    To unsubscribe, send email to NavList-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

    Browse Files

    Drop Files


    What is NavList?

    Join NavList

    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    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 Settings

    Posting Code:

    Custom Index

    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site