Can you add to the list of sextant numbers?

[Daniel Paul Cotts]

Another Brandis on eBay Brandis 5687

Message sent to seller requesting info on any possible additional numbers on instrument or box.
I do not see a hint of a NO number on the center of the arc.

Seller replied. No additional numbers available on instrument or box.
Metal label on box suggests civilian use.

[Andrew M McKenna]

Seller confirms that the numbers on the instrument match the box

Brandis 4834
Navy 2564

Here is another one

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-WWII-U-S-NAVY-NAUTICAL-SEXTANT-BRANDIS-4834-c1930s-/201411583015?

Looks like the box is
Brandis #4834
Navy # 2564

On the instrument it looks like Navy 2564 as well.  I've asked the seller to verify the numbers on the instrument itself

amck

[Andrew M McKenna]

Andrew,

To expand on my last post here:  Is there a grouping number around the A.E. box number and the Brandis number that may indicate a large government (Navy) purchase?

Is there a grouping number around the A.E. box and the Navy's Observatories recallabration inspection numbers?

Ted

Ted

These are good questions.

On a high level scale, what we've been able to discern is that the sextant box found on Nikumaroro with two numbers fits a pattern of sextants that were once part of the US Navy inventory, i.e. they have both a Manufacturer's serial number, and also a second number that we now know was issued by the USNO upon being submitted for calibration at the USNO.  There is at best only a rough correlation  between USNO calibration numbers and Brandis numbers, so it would appear that the Navy numbers were issued not upon purchase by the Navy, but upon submission to the USNO for calibration, which may have been significantly after purchase and induction into the Navy inventory.  I imagine that new sextants were "calibrated" upon purchase and immediately sent to sea, and only after they'd been dinged and abused by swabees at sea and demonstrably off, were they then sent to be calibrated by the USNO.  Hence the USNO sequence of numbers being out of synch with the Brandis numbers.

What has become apparent recently is that there is a point where Brandis apparently moved from manufacturing 7.5 inch radius instruments to 6.5 inch radius instruments, and it seems likely that the move to the smaller radius instrument corresponds with the Brandis contract from the Navy in October 1917 to provide 1000, later expanded to 2400, new sextants to the Navy.

We've been collecting info on sextants for quite some time, but we have not been recording the association of instrument radius with sextant numbers - just an example of information we could have collected if we'd known what to collect - but with the small sample I've been able to collect, the switch between 7.5 radius and 6.5 radius instruments seems to have occurred between Brandis serial numbers 3987 and 4297.  All the instruments with serial numbers earlier than 3987 seem to be 7.5 inch radius units, and all the instruments after 4297 seem to be 6.5 inch radius instruments.  If this is correct, then it illustrates that the theoretical sextant Brandis 3500 found on Gardner island was likely a 7.5 inch radius instrument, as it predates the switch by Brandis to a 6.5 inch frame. 

All of this info on the differences in frames is something we did not know or recognize prior to this year.  If we'd abandoned the collection of information last year due to boredom, and I know it can be a bit boring, we'd never have known this bit of information.

So to answer your question, I don't know that the numbers indicate a significant purchase of instruments in and around the theoretical AE instrument #3500.  I rather think that the Navy purchase came later and was fulfilled with 6.5 inch instruments, so the AE theoretical instrument pre-dates the WWI purchase requisition of Oct 1917, and was already in the Navy inventory at the time of the war, but as others have postulated, not by much, as it may be that #3500 was manufactured during 1917.  See the Blog on Ghost of Gardner Island that has been referred to earlier in this string.

What is important is that of all the sextants we've looked at, the vast majority with two numbers are Brandis sextants with a US Navy number.  We're not seeing British, German or Russian sextants with two numbers, so the pattern we see would lead one to conclude that the box found on Gardner / Nikumaroro is a Brandis sextant that was once in the US Navy inventory approximately during WWI. 

The fact that we know Noonan carried such an instrument as his "preventer" make it all the more interesting.  If you think about it, a flying boat probably spent as much time on the water as in the air, and a nautical sextant may have been more practical during those surface intervals than an aeronautical octant (I'm not an expert here, just thinking out loud).  Most stops on the surface they should have known where they were, but what if you had to land in mid ocean, which instrument would be more useful, octant or sextant?

How box #3500 / 1542 got to Nikumaroro is an interesting question, one that has smoking gun potential if we can connect the dots between the US Navy inventory and Fred Noonan.  May not be possible, but sure is interesting to investigate.  If only we had the USNO archives at our disposal. 

I hope this has been helpful in answering your questions.

Best

Andrew

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

These are good questions.

Thanks for the great answer, Andrew!

I don't have time to insert this into the Ameliapedia article this week, but I hope to come back to it later.

[Frank Hajnal]

These are good questions.

Thanks for the great answer, Andrew!

I don't have time to insert this into the Ameliapedia article this week, but I hope to come back to it later.

Perhaps Andrew could write an updated Tighar Research Bulletin on the sextant box.  The last report was 'Numbers Game' bulletin #52, seven years ago.  We're now up to bulletin #76.

[Andrew M McKenna]

Frank says

"Perhaps Andrew could write an updated Tighar Research Bulletin on the sextant box."

Probably worth doing, if only I had the time.  Sigh.....

I'd have to refresh myself on where the search for the archives trailed off.  Maybe something I can tackle later this fall.

amck

[Dave Thaker]

A Keuffel and Esser sextant with a Naval Observatory number is listed on eBay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/231662444989

K&E number 37508, USNO number 1595, and a USN number, 161-USN-252194.

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

A Keuffel and Esser sextant with a Naval Observatory number is listed on eBay:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/231662444989

K&E number 37508, USNO number 1595, and a USN number, 161-USN-252194.

OK, I've added it to the table.   I may not have been paying strict attention over the years, but I feel that this is the first time I've put in a USN number in addition to a USNO number.

Edit: I do see another in the list:

Brandis

2539

166 - USN 25222 (?)

ebay; "U.S. Navy on one end of arc; "161 - USN - 25222" hand-engraved;

[Daniel Paul Cotts]

Yet another Brandis on eBay Navy#945
Number on box by right hinge = 3268
Large stenciled number on front of box = 882
U.S. Navy number on arc = 945


Asked seller for Brandis number on left hand end of arc plus radius of arc.

Update: Seller reports Brandis number on arc as 3738.
Seller reports radius as 6&7/8in from the axis to the outer edge of the vernier. (does that count as a 6&1/2" radius?

Seller already answered question about the stenciled "882" by stating they purchased the sextant at a market and thus have no idea of its significance.

What's interesting is in reply #339 of this thread Andrew lists a box with 883 stenciled on the outside.

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

Number on box by right hinge = 3268
Large stenciled number on front of box = 882
U.S. Navy number on arc = 945

OK.  I put it in the table.

What's interesting is in reply #339 of this thread Andrew lists a box with 883 stenciled on the outside.

Mind-boggling.

They look like the same font to me--same kind of stencil.

[Daniel Paul Cotts]

The seller for Andrew's 883 box was located in Chicago.
The seller for  the 882 box is located in Forest Park, IL - a suburb of Chicago.

I'll guess the two instruments shared a common home at some time. Maybe a school teaching navigation. Maybe U.S. Navy (however the instrument in the 883 box did not have a NO number).

Marty, See my update above. Box and sextant numbers do not match. No calibration certificate in box.

[Andrew M McKenna]

Number on box by right hinge = 3268
Large stenciled number on front of box = 882
U.S. Navy number on arc = 945

Update: Seller reports Brandis number on arc as 3738.


Seller reports radius as 6&7/8in from the axis to the outer edge of the vernier. (does that count as a 6&1/2" radius?

Seller already answered question about the stenciled "882" by stating they purchased the sextant at a market and thus have no idea of its significance.

What's interesting is in reply #339 of this thread Andrew lists a box with 883 stenciled on the outside.

Marty

I think you need to correct something on the table.  If I understand what we have, it should be:

On the Sextant
Brandis 3738
Navy 945

On the box
Brandis 3268
Navy (?) 882 (stenciled on outside of box)

amck

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

I think you need to correct something on the table.  If I understand what we have, it should be:

On the Sextant
Brandis 3738
Navy 945

On the box
Brandis 3268
Navy (?) 882 (stenciled on outside of box)

OK.  Table updated.

[Andrew M McKenna]

Another Brandis Sextant on eBay

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WW2-WWII-USN-NAUTICAL-BRANDIS-SONS-SEXTANT-W-ORIGINAL-BOX-LOCK-KEY-/191721005143?&autorefresh=true

From the photos, it would appear that we have
Brandis 1899
Navy 159 and or 010852, both on a little brass plate attached to the front of the box

No indication that there is a USNO number etched on the arc where we'd expect it.
No indication of a number stamped or stenciled on the box other than an index card indicating sextant # 1899 from 9/5/44

Interestingly...
The Brandis # is imprinted at the right end of the arc as opposed to the left end.
This instrument is similar to, but not quite the same as the usual 7.5 inch radius units we've been seeing.
On the arc is F.E. Brandis, Sons & Co. which is an early Brandis marking, most likely from between 1880 and 1916.
The serial number would also indicate an earlier manufactured instrument.

I think I'll ping the seller about other numbers that may be visible.

Andrew

[Martin X. Moleski, SJ]

The Brandis # is imprinted at the right end of the arc as opposed to the left end.

I read "NO 1899" on the right end of the arc.

I don't think that is the serial number.

Hmm.  It's not the standard, stylized NO seem on other sextants.

There may not be a period after the N (N.0. = Naval Observatory).

And the "1" does not look much like a 1.  Except the maker of the file
card did read it as a "1".

The second number on the brass plate might be read as "January 8, 1952" (010852).

"154" doesn't SEEM like the N.O. number to me.

So bizarre!