Re: APCC Pro model details #APCC

Brent Boshart

Hi Ray,
None would be essential but maybe useful.  For polar alignment I should have said to verify alignment instead of refine it.  I have a permanent pier and build models (probably more often than I need to) a lot more than adjust polar alignment. Seeing those values in the model verify that polar alignment is still reasonable. The only times I need to adjust is when the frosts sets in and then spring time - it seems to nudge my pier a little. Or sometimes when I do some sort of maintenance around the pier/mount.  So I guess I'm saying not as a tool for polar alignment, but data available to verify polar alignment when doing a model anyway.
Yes, as a tool to measure cone error.  While the model corrects this, I have two OTAs and have adjusted my second OTA to reasonably match the other in terms of cone error. I can swap OTAs during a session and still have reasonably good pointing - of course I could always build a model for each OTA.
Thanks for the comments about flexure.  I believe my current setup has more flexure than it should, I want to try a few things to improve that and having a measure would be good.  Maybe I am misinterpreting, but could a model with a high RMS indicate flexure (probably not specifically)?  I recall you commenting on another post that an user's RMS appeared high for a refractor. My usual RMS with my refractor is at least as high or higher so I suspected inconsistent flexure.  Thanks.

Join to automatically receive all group messages.