NavList:

I had read and tried an article some time ago using the technique for averaging altitude sights whereby you determine what the slope of the time/altitude line should be from calculated altitudes, then using the known slope with parallells, projecting that into ones own series of graphed sights to determine the best average. It avoids some guesswork on determining what sight is the duffer if you are only averaging a few.

I had a pretty good set of 4 chaise lounge lunars from a few weeks ago. 3 were within +/- .5' and one was a duffer..2' out....from messing up writing things down as it turns out..........

I tried the technique of using the actual cleared corrected lunars for the start and end times to set a correctly sloped line based on the assumption that relative slope would be the same. The lunars are all within 30 minutes or so, so scaling a short segment worked pretty well.  If I was using the technique of scaling actual time from my lunar distance and the calculated lunar distance difference the whole hour before/after, it would seem all but the graphing is already done anyway.

It did indeed appear to kick out the known duffer sight...and put me almost dead on, as my variations happened to be minor +/- for the other three.  It appeared to prove which sight was best, and It appears I could have taken an altitude and time from the average line instead of the actuals and been really happy as well. 

Would this line slope technique be considered applicable to all Lunars with our wobbly moon, so long as the sights are a close series within the hour or so?