Welcome to the NavList Message Boards.

NavList:

A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding

Compose Your Message

Message:αβγ
Message:abc
Add Images & Files
    Name or NavList Code:
    Email:
       
    Reply
    Re: Observations with pocket sextant in the Baltic
    From: Bill B
    Date: 2006 Jul 13, 18:25 -0500

    > Bill wrote,
    >
    >> These are a combination of the LARGEST on and off
    >> figures in each set, not an average or pairing.
    >> The average is almost
    >> always below the 4SD figure by 0.2' or more.
    >
    > Sorry, but I still don't understand your concern.
    > Within 0.2' of the correct 4SD is perfect.
    >
    > (The measurement is good if you are within 0.4'
    > of tabulated 2SD).
    
    Understood, it is the bias in that and other observations that concerns me.
    Lunars under, natural and artificial horizon observations under, Not by too
    much, 0.2' to 0.4', but there sees to be some systematic personal error.  IE
    checks with sun  0.5' higher than of IE checks with linear targets (horizon,
    distant tree line, building roof, radio tower, smoke stack etc.) Bowditch
    T15 & T16 observations put me too close 100% of the time.  Both that and the
    sun IE checks may indicate that my eye may be enlarging the objects along
    the vertical axis, so I am not matching what a perfect eye would see through
    the scope.  With point sources (star to star) things seem to be fine.  I
    feel the need need to correct for that if it is fact.  0.5' between sun and
    horizon IE's is, I think, a big deal.
    >
    > The expression "0.2' or more" I just do not understand.
    > How much more?
    
    The last round my 4SD's were under by 0.3, 0.3, 0.2 and 0.2.  By "more" I
    mean off by greater than 0.2', in my case under.
    
     > I understand when you say that your numbers seem biased
    > to one side. But if the bias in the 4SD is 0.2'
    > there is no reason of concern.
    > If the bias is 0.6' there are some reasons.
    
    I would expect that I should be on both sides of the target value if all
    systems were correct.  It should be a normal distribution?
    
    > If the bias is at most 0.4' in 80 % of all observations,
    > it is still OK on my opinion.
    >
    > Or let me put it in another way: how many observations you
    > have to reject by the "0.4 test"? More than 1/2 or less than 1/2?
    
    Less than 1/2.  After the first few months, I do not recall having to reject
    any 4SD.  Doesn't mean I didn't, just that I don't recall it ;-)
    >
    > Alex.
    
    
    --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
    To post to this group, send email to NavList@fer3.com
    To , send email to NavList-@fer3.com
    -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
    
    

       
    Reply
    Browse Files

    Drop Files

    NavList

    What is NavList?

    Get a NavList ID Code

    Name:
    (please, no nicknames or handles)
    Email:
    Do you want to receive all group messages by email?
    Yes No

    A NavList ID Code guarantees your identity in NavList posts and allows faster posting of messages.

    Retrieve a NavList ID Code

    Enter the email address associated with your NavList messages. Your NavList code will be emailed to you immediately.
    Email:

    Email Settings

    NavList ID Code:

    Custom Index

    Subject:
    Author:
    Start date: (yyyymm dd)
    End date: (yyyymm dd)

    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site
    Visit this site