1. posterid:1448562
  2. AP 1200 - Robotic Capabilities

Re: AP 1200 - Robotic Capabilities

Yves Laroche
 

Hi Mark,

In comparing TPOINT (TheSky) and ACP (PinPoint), did you use TheSky Controlled-Telescope driver for both? i.e. ACP (Pinpoint) to control the mount via TheSky (without TPOINT) and ACP (without PinPoint) to control the mount via TheSky (TPOINT enabled).

My point of view is that TPOINT may have better pointing accuracy if the mapping run could be built via ACP with its consistent approach slewing. ACP with its consistent approach slewing may add more precision when using with the PinPoint engine than just using TheSky and TPOINT in standalone mode (without consistent approach slewing).

A more detail explanation of how you have done this comparaison will be very appreciated.

Any comments are welcome.

Regards,
Yves




aajohnah wrote:

I did an experiment with the AP 1200 mount and T-point and ACP to see what
program was best for pointing with my set-up

I ran a 875 t-point model, maybe over kill but this was the last model I
ran, after running 20+ models to make sure that I really understood the
program the best to my ability in a months time. I had a total of 13 terms

I then ran ACP4 and a 125 point model. Not terms added like in the t-point
model.

For me the ACP model was more accurate than the t-point model. I am not
saying that the t-point model did not put the object on my chip each time (
SBIG 10xe scope FL/2348) Just the ACP model was closer to center on a
consistent basis.

I also run Dimension 4 and update my computer time every 5 min. I start up
my AP mount with Pulse guide too.

I can not comment no the Paramount ME since I do not use one. Just know how
my AP mount responded to t-point vs. ACP
Mark
www.aajonahfish.com/astronomyhaven.htm
N 27 52' 20"
W 082 28' 57"
Join main@ap-gto.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.