NavList:

Mr Herdt - this was quite interesting and the data seems to align to my observations (however, done without any statistical analysis).

Rather than a fluid artificial horizon, I typically use a carpenter's laser level as described here: NavList: Re: Ex RNZAF navigator keen to learn marine sextant ways (151660) (navlist.net).  The laser level is more intuitive and it allows me to shoot with a nautical sextant at any time of day, tho subject to having a suitable surface to shine the laser.

With this method, my LOPs miss my actual position typically by less than 1nm using a Tamaya Spica, C+P Horizon, and SNO-T.  I average 8 shots over 4 minutes and fit the average with the computed rate of change of the altitidue using Pub229.  Doing a 3-star fix, it is not unusual to get an asterisk thru my actual position.

I have taken quite a number of shots using Kollsman periscopic sextants using both mechanical (clockwork) and electronic averagers and reduced using Pub249/Polhemus and Pub229 methods.  My 3-star fixes are almost always under 2.5nm in error and frequently 1nm or less.  I find the electronic averager to be more accurate than the clockwork, but both sextants, when run without the averagers, also give excellent lines of position.

Thank you for sharing.

-- Art