 Check out the bookstore at IRBS.com |
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
From: Bill (no email)
Date: Wed Apr 20 2005 - 16:38:19 EDT
> Alex you wrote:
> "25 38 51 65 68 71 82 90 127
> -0.5 -0.4 -0.4 -0.6 -0.2 -0.1 -0.2 -0.2 -0.8
>
> Frank responded
> Should I attach this table to my sextant box lid as a
> certificate, and use it?"
>
> I would. How do you feel about the large jumps in the table from 65 to 68 and,
> less so, from 90 to 127?
Alex
I would not attach this table to my sextant box lid as a
certificate. I concede your hand is more steady than mine, your experience
(and logs) with your sextant far greater than mine, and your observation
methods and statistics are close to flawless as is humanly possible.
And as you pointed out (paraphrase), the tougher the shot, the higher the
standard deviation. I find my usual standard deviation with the sextant in
a comforatable position to be < 0.2'. In extremely awkward positions it may
rise to 0.6'. Pretty bad.
I have two observations:
1. It seems the SNO-T is a high-quality instrument. If I recall, the specs
are plus/minus 10 seconds error along the arc (0.17'). Unless you got a
dud, any value higher than 0.2' is highly suspect.
2. Are you using the same star pairs when you get the 0.5', 0.6', and 0.8'
values? If so, could the results indicate some type of personal error in in
that position.
Think we need to get together in a more controlled setting with fresh eyes
and do some comparisons, using the same scope on both instruments.
Bill
|