NavList:

   

Reply

Well, whattayaknow, finally some posts on this list actually related to
navigation...  ;-)

> I use the inverse of your method, I start counting seconds from the
> time of the sight until I can look at my watch, never more than 3
> seconds so less opportunity for the count to get off by any
> significant amount.

Ditto that, with the added step that I've timed how long it takes me to
move the sextant away from my eye and read the watch (seems to be
pretty consistent at 2 seconds), though I do count time the same way
that you do.

> I use a digital watch that has a push button for illumination at
> night. I check its error after the round of sights using a more
> accurate watch or radio time signal.

Same for that as well, and if you get one of the digital ones that
automatically synchronizes with WWVB (etc.) that's one less thing to
worry about. Casio's WaveCeptors work really well, though if I were
using it in a real navigation situation I'd probably check it against a
radio time signal on a regular basis as well. I also keep a "navigation
watch" set to GMT so I never have to worry about the ZT corrections.

--
GregR




--- glapook@PACBELL.NET wrote:

>
> Gary LaPook writes:
>
> I use the inverse of your method, I start counting seconds from the
> time of the sight until I can look at my watch, never more than 3
> seconds so less opportunity for the count to get off by any
> significant amount. I use a digital watch that has a push button for
> illumination at night. I check its error after the round of sights
> using a more accurate watch or radio time signal.
>
> gl
>
> On Oct 22, 10:29 am, Lu Abel  wrote:
> > Gary J. LaPook wrote:
> > > Gary LaPook wrote:
> >
> > > I use one of those little hand held dictaphones. I put it in my
> shirt
> > > pocket, start it recording and then just talk into it with the
> sextant
> > > altitude and time.M uch easier than trying to juggle sextant,
> pencil and
> > > paper especially if taking many sights. Go below and play it back
> and
> > > write down the figures.
> >
> > I think everyone's experience will be different, but at one point
> in
> > learning celestial I took a lot of sights without a helper.
> >
> > How?  First, I pre-adjusted my sextant to be close to the expected
> Hs.
> > Then I looked at my watch and noted time to the second.  Then I
> simply
> > started counting one-one hundred, two-two hundred, ... while I
> adjusted
> > my sextant to its final reading.  Then noted time and reading in my
> > notebook.
> >
> > With this method, you should be able to get a sextant reading
> within 15
> > to 20 seconds of starting counting.  I did a few trial runs of
> simply my
> > time counting to make sure I wasn't counting too fast or slow.  I
> > believe that even after 30 seconds I was within one second or less.
> >
> > I was taking sights from a known position and my readings were no
> less
> > accurate than what I got when using a helper on previous
> expeditions.
> >
> > Lu Abel
>
>
> >
>



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com
To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

   

Reply