Next message: Frank Reed: "Chronometers overboard! (an 1890s excuse for lunars)"
Alex E wrote:
"The table of correction is
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
0 -4 -4 10 6 -1 4 5 -5 4 4 3 14
The first line in degrees, the second one in seconds."
That's fascinating! Do you have any idea how this calibration machine worked
(or anyone else, for that matter)? Did you watch the testing in progress?
And:
"The errors I had in star distances are usually larger, and always positive.
In principle they can be attributed to backlash, but I never measured
anything after the sextant test."
Would backlash produce errors like this (a consistent pattern varying with
location on the arc that would 'mimic' arc error)? I don't see how, but I
wouldn't be surprised to learn that there is some sort of explanation.
-FER
42.0N 87.7W, or 41.4N 72.1W.
www.HistoricalAtlas.com/lunars
