[quote pid='574' dateline='1531367588']
OK, Ed, I stand corrected !!! The second HP table is NOT errant.
I chewed on a sample moon shot and found both table answers exactly the same... Its curious that I havent seen the second table instructions... That table adds some excitement to the reduction process... The more steps there are the more opportunity for errors - so when a reduction works out ok one feels great that all that hard work lead to something fairly accurate. However, to be clear, using the second HP table, the one without UL and LL division, the UL -30 correction is of no use?
thanks
Joe
[/quote]
Joe,
What UL -30 are you referring to? 'Don't know where that is.
Are you referring to the UL subtraction of SD (semi-diameter)?
Ed
OK, Ed, I stand corrected !!! The second HP table is NOT errant.
I chewed on a sample moon shot and found both table answers exactly the same... Its curious that I havent seen the second table instructions... That table adds some excitement to the reduction process... The more steps there are the more opportunity for errors - so when a reduction works out ok one feels great that all that hard work lead to something fairly accurate. However, to be clear, using the second HP table, the one without UL and LL division, the UL -30 correction is of no use?
thanks
Joe
[/quote]
Joe,
What UL -30 are you referring to? 'Don't know where that is.
Are you referring to the UL subtraction of SD (semi-diameter)?
Ed