NavList:

Greg R. wrote:
> Lu Abel wrote:
>
>
>>5. Throw in a little bit of electronic knowledge about the body
>>sighted, and with this and the above we go straight away from ho to
>>Hs,
>
>
> Not to detract from your otherwise fine list of improvements, but I
> think you probably mean "straight away from Hs to Ho" there?  :-)

Sorry, I somewhere my subscripts started going wrong.  I did mean Hs to Ho.


> And (assuming we were still going to use human sight-takers), I'd add a
> request for a zoom lens on the telescope. Never figured out why nobody
> has done that yet (that I'm aware of) - use the wide-angle setting to
> get the object into the field of view, then zoom in as necessary for
> that perfect horizon kiss.

Works very well with my idea of stabilization!


> The only other "flaw" I can find with your list would be the cost to
> produce this next-generation sextant. Can you get all of that
> technology out the door at the ~$500 price point for the current
> mid-range professional sextants?

We have to separate out R&D costs from manufacturing costs.  I expect
the R&D cost for all this electronics (especially something like totally
eliminating the optics) would be very expensive, but the actual
manufacturing cost would be reasonably inexpensive.   Anybody know of a
local university looking for an R&D project?

Once R&D costs have been covered, the price of electronics drops sharply
with demand (think of DVD players).  One startling example from the
boating field is that a full-bore fishfinder (depth sounder with full
surface-to-bottom echo display) is currently cheaper than a simple depth
sounder that just displays the depth of the bottom.  Conservative
boaters (and sailors) use the latter, many, many more fishermen want the
former.  High volume = low cost.

The startling low prices for GPS is far more due to demand from hikers,
automobile navigation systems, aircraft, etc, etc than to us few boaters.

So I rather suspect that this dream sextant would be unbelievably
expensive.  But that wasn't a parameter of the question, just (as I
understood it) what might have happened to the sextant if it hadn't been
sidelined by Loran and later GPS.

>
> Also, don't forget that price will also buy several GPS units, but
> we're only talking sextants here, right?...  ;-)

No argument from me, that's the reality of supply and demand.  About a
year ago I posed the question on this list "You have $1,000 to spend on
navigation instruments (not including charts) for a transoceanic voyage,
how would you spend it?"   A lot of traditionalists bought expensive
sextants.  Some of us realists bought about 3 GPS units (one to use and
the other two sealed in plastic bags), lots of batteries, and a Davis Mk
15 plastic sextant as backup.

BTW, I was reading through one of my electronics magazines and there was
an announcement in it of a highly capable GPS chip (everything from the
RF front end to the microprocessor that has to do a lot of hard work to
convert satellite data into a position) for $5(!) in production
quantities.  I'm not sure whether a separate microprocessor is needed
for dealing with waypoints, routes, navigational displays like XTE, but
to get raw GPS output for under $5 is just amazing!  It doesn't cost a
heck of a lot more to add waypoints, pushbuttons, and a display.

Lu Abel

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