Date   

Re: having guiding problems

Alan Voetsch <alanv12952@...>
 

Hey Joe,

--- Joe Mize <jmize@...> wrote:
Alan, APML must be Snooz Time. It sure was fun during the film era.
We get a lot of DSLR and CCD posts, but there still are some who shoot film. Actually, it
averages out to be about as busy as this list.

I usually use '5' but something went wrong last night so I went with '3' to
save time. I
will go back to 5.
Whatever gets you the largest move across the ST-4 chip without running off
the chip will generate 'more accurate' Cal numbers.
I've asked that one before and the previous answer was that ST-4s aren't like that,
201XTs OTOH....

DON'T. What I'm hearing on the AP group is that A-P is now applying
individual mount PEC's to each mount before they leave the AP Labs. All you
need to do is turn it on.
Tell me more, I assumed that was always on. If not, where is it located so I can turn it
on.

Right now, I seem to have the ST-4 working well. I calibrated with 1x and guiding with
the same.

Alan






Astrophotography: http://www.pbase.com/avoetsch12952


Re: having guiding problems

Joe Mize
 

There's still a few of us left on APML, not many though. I think the total
number is...7.
Alan, APML must be Snooz Time. It sure was fun during the film era.
Looks like you're heading in the right direction, check your AP
documentation and use
the recomnded Guide speed settings, 1x. I
also was stuck in the 0.5x mode until Roland said to use 1x for guiding.
It works.

OK. So, I should use 1x to calibrate AND guide. That's one I haven't tried,
maybe I
out-smarted myself, not the first time. ;-)
Yes! The numbers generated in Calibration are used to Guide. If you Cal at
1x and Guide at 0.5x then you'll have trouble Correcting, and visa versa.
The Cal numbers say you will move x pixels per second at 1x speed, if you
use 0.5x speed then you'll be undercorrecting big time.
Your ST-4 settings sound pretty good to me except for the Cal Time. But
that's
dependant upon your optics so try to get the
highest Cal Time without running the star off the chip in either
direction. You may
find one axis requires a longer drive time
than the other. Good Luck...joe :)
I usually use '5' but something went wrong last night so I went with '3' to
save time. I
will go back to 5.
Whatever gets you the largest move across the ST-4 chip without running off
the chip will generate 'more accurate' Cal numbers.

Looks like I can also do a PEM run, that may help with the guiding spikes.
DON'T. What I'm hearing on the AP group is that A-P is now applying
individual mount PEC's to each mount before they leave the AP Labs. All you
need to do is turn it on.
You can use the AP-PemPro to run a series of worm cycles to see what your PE
is 'without' PEC being on. Then run another series 'with' PEC turned on and
see the difference. People are reporting the advertised <4arc.sec without
PEC and some are reporting ~2arc.sec with PEC turned on.
I'd highly advise you purchasing the full version of PemPro so you can
Refine the already loaded PEC even further. I have mine down in the
0.1arc.sec Peak to Peak. You cannot Refine the PEC with the AP-PemPro
version. On 'very' stable nights I can image 5mins without guiding, at
other times I'm fighting air turbulence.
If you do buy PemPro I suggest you make 10 complete cycles of the worm.
PemPro says you 'can' get a good result with as little as 6 worm cycles. I
use 10 cycles to get the best possible curve. Something for you to do
during the Full Moon cycle.
You're going to Love your AP1200...joe :)


Thanks Joe,
Alan



Astrophotography: http://www.pbase.com/avoetsch12952



To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-gto list
see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto
Yahoo! Groups Links


Re: having guiding problems

Alan Voetsch <alanv12952@...>
 

Hey Joe,

--- "jmize@..." <jmize@...> wrote:
Alan, you are an ol' warhorse, still using an ST-4 and film!!! Talk about being a
rarity, I wonder how many out there are still
film based.
There's still a few of us left on APML, not many though. I think the total number is...7.

Looks like you're heading in the right direction, check your AP documentation and use
the recomnded Guide speed settings, 1x. I
also was stuck in the 0.5x mode until Roland said to use 1x for guiding. It works.
OK. So, I should use 1x to calibrate AND guide. That's one I haven't tried, maybe I
out-smarted myself, not the first time. ;-)

Your ST-4 settings sound pretty good to me except for the Cal Time. But that's
dependant upon your optics so try to get the
highest Cal Time without running the star off the chip in either direction. You may
find one axis requires a longer drive time
than the other. Good Luck...joe :)
I usually use '5' but something went wrong last night so I went with '3' to save time. I
will go back to 5.

Looks like I can also do a PEM run, that may help with the guiding spikes.

Thanks Joe,
Alan



Astrophotography: http://www.pbase.com/avoetsch12952


Re: having guiding problems

Joe Mize
 

Alan, you are an ol' warhorse, still using an ST-4 and film!!! Talk about being a rarity, I wonder how many out there are still
film based.

Looks like you're heading in the right direction, check your AP documentation and use the recomnded Guide speed settings, 1x. I
also was stuck in the 0.5x mode until Roland said to use 1x for guiding. It works.

Then go to the Backlash settings section and check what it should be, if I remember correctly mine says 0.3 in DEC, 0.0 in RA.
Since you have a newer AP1200 you my have a different setting recomendation in the documentaion. Once you've performed the
tests 'visually' confirming your star doesn't jump or hesitate when reversing direction then calibrate your ST-4.

Your ST-4 settings sound pretty good to me except for the Cal Time. But that's dependant upon your optics so try to get the
highest Cal Time without running the star off the chip in either direction. You may find one axis requires a longer drive time
than the other. Good Luck...joe :)


"May You Go Among The Imperishable Stars"

Joe Mize
StarFields Observatory http://www.cav-sfo.com/
Chiefland, FL 29:24'33.4"N 82:51'37.7"W

------- Original Message -------
From : Alan Voetsch[mailto:alanv12952@...]
Sent : 12/9/2007 1:41:56 PM
To : ap-gto@...
Cc :
Subject : RE: [ap-gto] having guiding problems

Hey all,

Still getting familiar with the new 1200 which arrived in late Oct. Had a few
opportunites (weather has sucked since mid-Sept) to use the FS-102 for a few comet shots
and managed to do the meridian delay alignment routine. There were no problems during
this time, other than operator errors.

My 12" LX200 'R' OTA arrived about 10 days ago. At this point it is balanced in both
axis', and OTA is collimated. Last night had some clearing so i tried to image the HH. I
am shooting film (OM-1) at prime focus and using a standalone ST-4 (no computer in my
observatory) and Taurus Tracker III OAG to guide.

All attempts to guide failed until I did the calibration at 0.5 speed, and guiding at
0.25. These settings worked for about 90 minutes, then the guidestar was lost. Actually i
think it's more a case of the ST-4 moving the GS TOO much, until it's off the chip. I may
try .25 for both next chance I get.

I plan to check RA and Dec backlash to see if either of those are a problem. I did not
stay out in the observatory the whole time, but I did notice that there were some large
spikes where the correction indicated was 'E' for a couple times, then it would settle
down to 1-4.

This OAG and ST-4 have worked well with the previous scope, a stock 12" LX200 classic.

So, I'm hoping that someone who has used a similar setup may have some areas for me to
check. Like I say, I am used to setting the the ST-4's parameters for a fork mounted
LX200 and possibly I am using a setting incorrectly. Last night i used 5 second exposure,
boost of '2', average, no backlash adjustment, cal '3' both ways, scintillation '4', and
a correction after each exposure.

Any suggestions?

Thanks,
Alan

Astrophotography: http://www.pbase.com/avoetsch12952



To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-gto list
see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gto
Yahoo! Groups Links


having guiding problems

Alan Voetsch <alanv12952@...>
 

Hey all,

Still getting familiar with the new 1200 which arrived in late Oct. Had a few
opportunites (weather has sucked since mid-Sept) to use the FS-102 for a few comet shots
and managed to do the meridian delay alignment routine. There were no problems during
this time, other than operator errors.

My 12" LX200 'R' OTA arrived about 10 days ago. At this point it is balanced in both
axis', and OTA is collimated. Last night had some clearing so i tried to image the HH. I
am shooting film (OM-1) at prime focus and using a standalone ST-4 (no computer in my
observatory) and Taurus Tracker III OAG to guide.

All attempts to guide failed until I did the calibration at 0.5 speed, and guiding at
0.25. These settings worked for about 90 minutes, then the guidestar was lost. Actually i
think it's more a case of the ST-4 moving the GS TOO much, until it's off the chip. I may
try .25 for both next chance I get.

I plan to check RA and Dec backlash to see if either of those are a problem. I did not
stay out in the observatory the whole time, but I did notice that there were some large
spikes where the correction indicated was 'E' for a couple times, then it would settle
down to 1-4.

This OAG and ST-4 have worked well with the previous scope, a stock 12" LX200 classic.

So, I'm hoping that someone who has used a similar setup may have some areas for me to
check. Like I say, I am used to setting the the ST-4's parameters for a fork mounted
LX200 and possibly I am using a setting incorrectly. Last night i used 5 second exposure,
boost of '2', average, no backlash adjustment, cal '3' both ways, scintillation '4', and
a correction after each exposure.

Any suggestions?

Thanks,
Alan

Astrophotography: http://www.pbase.com/avoetsch12952


Re: Mach 1 counterweight

Kurt Mihalco <mihalco@...>
 

Hi Jean-Yves,
If you have the short, large diameter shaft, then yes, you can add
the shaft extension. See:
http://www.astro-physics.com/products/accessories\;
/mounting_acc/cwshaftoptions.htm
You can also use one of the longer shafts. I use the 14"x1-7/8"
shaft on my Mach1 and it works well.
Regards,
Kurt Mihalco

--- In ap-gto@..., "jybeninger" <jy@...> wrote:

Hi,

I have a question about counterweights:
I tested last night my LX200R10" + AO7 + ST8XME on the Mach1.

I was short in counterweights: I use the shorter optional shaft and
the
reduced offset distance does not give enought moment of inertia to
balance the OTA +++

I realised this morning that I could screw the normal shaft to the
end
of the optional shaft and that addaitional offset weight would give
me
a good balance.

Has anyone already done it? Any counter indications? Or does Astro-
Physics sell a shaft extension for taht short optional shaft?

Thanks

Jean-Yves


Mach 1 counterweight

jybeninger
 

Hi,

I have a question about counterweights:
I tested last night my LX200R10" + AO7 + ST8XME on the Mach1.

I was short in counterweights: I use the shorter optional shaft and the
reduced offset distance does not give enought moment of inertia to
balance the OTA +++

I realised this morning that I could screw the normal shaft to the end
of the optional shaft and that addaitional offset weight would give me
a good balance.

Has anyone already done it? Any counter indications? Or does Astro-
Physics sell a shaft extension for taht short optional shaft?

Thanks

Jean-Yves


Re: Mach1 Mount production

ayiomamitis
 

Bruce,

People are notified only when it is certain they will be receiving an
item from the current production run or a run about to start. There is
*** NO *** scenario of you sending a deposit and then waiting for
years. Yes, a few months with the balance being due when the item is
ready to ship but certainly not years as you specify (or think).

As for accessories etc, I am not sure this is a valid point. For
starters, they are standard and do not change and, secondly, any wait
you experience will be for a few months and no more.

Anthony.

--- In ap-gto@..., "reddbarron2000" <bbarron1@...> wrote:

I also am on the Anacortes's list and received a similar email asking
for a deposit and suggesting that we order some of the required
accessories.

I assumed that a Decmeber delivery was a bit optimistic but I'm
concerned about your statement that some people have been waiting
several years. I'm concerned about having them hold my deposit that
long. I am also concerned that the accessories that I ordered in
advance may not be compatible with changes that may be introduced in
the next few years, let alone having these items just sitting around
for that long.

Bruce

--- In ap-gto@..., "Marj" <marj@> wrote:

There are many parts associated with the mount and they are not
quite finished yet. Please note that we have NOT accepted any orders
for these mounts yet. You are probably on Herb's waiting list.


Marj Christen
Astro-Physics, Inc
11250 Forest Hills Road
Machesney Park, IL 61115
Phone: 815-282-1513
Fax: 815-282-9847
www.astro-physics.com
Please include this e-mail with your response.

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]On
Behalf Of teche70
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2007 4:10 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Re: Mach1 Mount production



Thank you Marj.

I got on the list through Anacortes and they notified me I would
receive one December/January-ish. That was just their estimate. I
was just curious if thigs got backed up (or moved forward) due to
the
holidays. Thanks for the update and Happy Holidays!

Todd

--- In ap-gto@yahoogroups. <mailto:ap-gto%40yahoogroups.com>
com, "Marj" <marj@> wrote:

Dear Todd,

We have quite a few parts completed or nearly completed. haven't
reviewed the situation totally, but my rough estimate is that we
could start shipping in late January or early February. We have not
started the notification process yet and may not until after the
first of the year. The notification list goes back to late August
2004 (from the old 400 and 600E list).


Marj Christen
Astro-Physics, Inc
11250 Forest Hills Road
Machesney Park, IL 61115
Phone: 815-282-1513
Fax: 815-282-9847
www.astro-physics.com
Please include this e-mail with your response.

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@yahoogroups. <mailto:ap-gto%40yahoogroups.com> com
[mailto: ap-gto@yahoogroups. <mailto:ap-gto%40yahoogroups.com> com]On
Behalf Of teche70
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 9:35 AM
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups. <mailto:ap-gto%40yahoogroups.com> com
Subject: [ap-gto] Mach1 Mount production



Anyone here any details on when the Mach1 mounts may start
shipping?
Just curious.
Todd







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]








Re: Mach1GTO Travel Cases

observe_m13
 

Hi,

Check out Pelican's web page at:

http://pelican.ca/cases_detail_specs.php?Case=1560

The list it at 20 pounds (9kg) with foam.

Rick


--- In ap-gto@..., "ayiomamitis" <ayiomami@...> wrote:

--- In ap-gto@..., "Rick K" <JunkMailGoesHere@> wrote:

Yes and no. First off, the case does not weigh 42 pounds. Maybe 20
Please see
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260191218062 ...
I wonder if he accidentally reversed the digits.

pounds but it could be less. Last time I flew with the Mach1, the case
weighted in at 55 pounds. I took out the counterweight shaft, the
Dove15 plate and the keypad and placed them into my clothing luggage
bag. The 1560 weighed just under 49 pounds and everyone was happy.
Okay, this is good to know since I am looking to go to Russia next
summer with my Mach1GTO and Tak FSQ for the eclipse.

Check the files section for the pictures I put up almost a year ago (
Mach1GTO Pelican 1560 case ).
Will do.

Thanks!

Anthony.


Rick.


--- In ap-gto@..., "ayiomamitis" <ayiomami@> wrote:

Larry et al,

The Pelican 1560 case weighs 42 lbs without the foam. I was
wondering
if the total weight (with foam and Mach1GTO) would exceed the limits
imposed by airlines?


Re: ScopeGuard AP Mach1 GTO Cases

Don Holcombe <donholco@...>
 

Sorry, the photos are in the files section as ScopeGuard AP Mach1 GTO
Cases.

Don


ScopeGuard AP Mach1 GTO Cases

Don Holcombe <donholco@...>
 

I noticed the thread on travel cases and thought I would show what we
have to offer. Our SG/AP Mach1 GTO case continues to be a very
popular model.

I've added a folder with a few photos of the ScopeGuard AP Mach1 GTO
cases. Our standard case exterior dimensions are 24"L x 20"W x 8"D,
weight 20#-25# depending on material, options, etc.

We offer as standard open cell foam, a closed cell Ethafoam is
optional. The slot for the Mach1 GTO is cut to the customer latitude
using an adjustable template allowing you to keep the mount at the
end user setting.

There are slots for the GTO keypad, control box and CW shaft, either
size or both (dual cut slot).

We offer optional corner casters, extension or folding handles,
locking latches and custom name plates.

Regards,
Don Holcombe


Re: Mach1GTO Travel Cases

ayiomamitis
 

--- In ap-gto@..., "Rick K" <JunkMailGoesHere@...> wrote:

Yes and no. First off, the case does not weigh 42 pounds. Maybe 20
Please see
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=260191218062 ...
I wonder if he accidentally reversed the digits.

pounds but it could be less. Last time I flew with the Mach1, the case
weighted in at 55 pounds. I took out the counterweight shaft, the
Dove15 plate and the keypad and placed them into my clothing luggage
bag. The 1560 weighed just under 49 pounds and everyone was happy.
Okay, this is good to know since I am looking to go to Russia next
summer with my Mach1GTO and Tak FSQ for the eclipse.

Check the files section for the pictures I put up almost a year ago (
Mach1GTO Pelican 1560 case ).
Will do.

Thanks!

Anthony.


Rick.


--- In ap-gto@..., "ayiomamitis" <ayiomami@> wrote:

Larry et al,

The Pelican 1560 case weighs 42 lbs without the foam. I was wondering
if the total weight (with foam and Mach1GTO) would exceed the limits
imposed by airlines?


Re: Mach1GTO Travel Cases

observe_m13
 

--- In ap-gto@..., "Lane Davis" <lane_davis@...> wrote:

I store/carry my Mach1 in a Pelican 1610, which is a really good fit.
There is enough room for the mount, fully assembled, as well as the
declination shaft and the knobs that bind the mount to the tripod.

The trick is to rotate the RA shaft so the saddle is next to the
Altitude adjustment knob on the base of the mount. This is an
unintuitive position for the mount but makes it very compact for
storage.

I used to have a 1560 case and I suspect it would be too small but I
don't know for sure.

Lane
See the files section under Mach1GTO Pelican 1560 case. IIRC the 1440s
file shows the case open with the mount inside fully intact. The
altitude has been adjusted to about 35 or 40 degrees and the RA knobs
have been loosened so that the Dec portion can rotate into the
position shown. Everything fits nicely. The foam is extremely rigid
open cell shipping foam. The Berleback tripod with ADATRI attached,
counterweights and electronic battery charger travel inside in a foam
spaced hard shell golf case. Last year I took a Traveler to Hawaii as
carry-on. This year I am working on taking an AP130, partially
disassembled with me.

Rick.


Re: Mach1GTO Travel Cases

observe_m13
 

Yes and no. First off, the case does not weigh 42 pounds. Maybe 20
pounds but it could be less. Last time I flew with the Mach1, the case
weighted in at 55 pounds. I took out the counterweight shaft, the
Dove15 plate and the keypad and placed them into my clothing luggage
bag. The 1560 weighed just under 49 pounds and everyone was happy.
Check the files section for the pictures I put up almost a year ago (
Mach1GTO Pelican 1560 case ).

Rick.

--- In ap-gto@..., "ayiomamitis" <ayiomami@...> wrote:

Larry et al,

The Pelican 1560 case weighs 42 lbs without the foam. I was wondering
if the total weight (with foam and Mach1GTO) would exceed the limits
imposed by airlines?


AP Wooden Tripod Spreader

MrGrytt
 

Oops, I forgot to post to this group.
Arrangements for another run of the tripod spreader originally
sold by Richard Lapides has been made. Many people missed out on them
in the past and have been kicking themselves ever since.
Just in case this doesn't happen again you might want to get on
board for one so you don't miss out this time.
All I know is that the price will be in the $500 range and the
timing is not known with any certainty. It will be as soon as it can
get done while still giving people a fair opportunity to find out
about this project. It would be a shame to miss out again due to not
knowing about it.
We needed 10 orders to get the machine shop to agree to do this.
In less than two days we have well over that number so production
will definitely take place.
If you are interested in obtaining one please contact me at...

mrgrytt at ix dot netcom dot com

How long we can allow people to get on the list will most likely
depend on when the materials are ordered and when production will take
place. It will be as soon as possible.

Regards,
Harvey


Re: Mach1GTO Travel Cases

ayiomamitis
 

Larry et al,

The Pelican 1560 case weighs 42 lbs without the foam. I was wondering
if the total weight (with foam and Mach1GTO) would exceed the limits
imposed by airlines?

Anthony.

--- In ap-gto@..., "Larry Phillips" <llp41astro@...> wrote:

Good info. I wondered how well the Mach1 would fit in a 1560 case
without separating the two halves.

Larry

--- In ap-gto@..., "DJ McCracken" <djmcc@> wrote:

I have added three photos to the files section (Mach1GTO Travel
Cases) that show a solution to transporting my Mach1GTO to
observing
sites and back to the house for storage. I don't need to ship the
mount so that isn't a consideration. I do need to lift everything
into the back of my vehicle. I can lift 50#, but find nowadays
that
75# in a larger case is a bit much, so opted for two cases. Other
considerations were:

1) Everything asociated with the mount (except the power supply)
had
to fit in the two cases.
2) The case for the mount had to hold it ready to go with the
adapter
in the Park 2 position.
3) The main case had to have wheels and be able to roll the two
cases
with one hand.

I saved the foam supplied with the 1560 case and if I ever need to
ship the mount, then I could set it up as shown in the other file,
Mach1GTO - Pelican 1560, which provides more padding, but the mount
must be "folded up".

Best regards,
DJ


Re: Mach1GTO Travel Cases

Lane Davis
 

I store/carry my Mach1 in a Pelican 1610, which is a really good fit.
There is enough room for the mount, fully assembled, as well as the
declination shaft and the knobs that bind the mount to the tripod.

The trick is to rotate the RA shaft so the saddle is next to the
Altitude adjustment knob on the base of the mount. This is an
unintuitive position for the mount but makes it very compact for
storage.

I used to have a 1560 case and I suspect it would be too small but I
don't know for sure.

Lane


Re: Mach1GTO Travel Cases

Larry Phillips
 

Good info. I wondered how well the Mach1 would fit in a 1560 case
without separating the two halves.

Larry

--- In ap-gto@..., "DJ McCracken" <djmcc@...> wrote:

I have added three photos to the files section (Mach1GTO Travel
Cases) that show a solution to transporting my Mach1GTO to
observing
sites and back to the house for storage. I don't need to ship the
mount so that isn't a consideration. I do need to lift everything
into the back of my vehicle. I can lift 50#, but find nowadays
that
75# in a larger case is a bit much, so opted for two cases. Other
considerations were:

1) Everything asociated with the mount (except the power supply)
had
to fit in the two cases.
2) The case for the mount had to hold it ready to go with the
adapter
in the Park 2 position.
3) The main case had to have wheels and be able to roll the two
cases
with one hand.

I saved the foam supplied with the 1560 case and if I ever need to
ship the mount, then I could set it up as shown in the other file,
Mach1GTO - Pelican 1560, which provides more padding, but the mount
must be "folded up".

Best regards,
DJ


Mach1GTO Travel Cases

DJ McCracken <djmcc@...>
 

I have added three photos to the files section (Mach1GTO Travel
Cases) that show a solution to transporting my Mach1GTO to observing
sites and back to the house for storage. I don't need to ship the
mount so that isn't a consideration. I do need to lift everything
into the back of my vehicle. I can lift 50#, but find nowadays that
75# in a larger case is a bit much, so opted for two cases. Other
considerations were:

1) Everything asociated with the mount (except the power supply) had
to fit in the two cases.
2) The case for the mount had to hold it ready to go with the adapter
in the Park 2 position.
3) The main case had to have wheels and be able to roll the two cases
with one hand.

I saved the foam supplied with the 1560 case and if I ever need to
ship the mount, then I could set it up as shown in the other file,
Mach1GTO - Pelican 1560, which provides more padding, but the mount
must be "folded up".

Best regards,
DJ


Re: Mating AP900 to Meade field tripod

masterson_harold <hfm5022@...>
 

P.S. The azimuth adjuster block is on the plate. It is behind one of
the black knobs and hard to see.

--- In ap-gto@..., "masterson_harold" <hfm5022@...> wrote:

Although it does not show it in the pictures I posted there is a
½" -
13 round head bolt under the adaptor plate. This bolt extends
through the tripod head down to the spreader bar. I use a wing
nut
to tighten the whole assembly. It's very stable. I had to grind
down the round head of the of the bolt so it would be flush with
the top of the tripod head and not interfere with the adaptor
plate.
It's not a big deal but if you could find a ½"-13 flat head bolt
you
can skip this step. The azimuth adjuster block can be ordered
from
AP. Actually Roland's guys could bang out this plate very quickly.

--- In ap-gto@..., "eddwen2001" <Eddwen@> wrote:

The AP900 on the Celestron Super HD tripod is a very solid
transportable set-up for my AP155 EDF with piggy-backed ED80
guide
scope. I presume the Meade tripod you have is equivalent. The
three
mounting bolts that hold the plate to the tripod are 5/16"-18.

Note, if you adapt the AP plate to the tripod you will have the
post
for the azimuth adjustment. Harold's plate doesn't seem to have
that. Not absolutely necessary for a permanent pier, but useful
in
the field.

A couple of other things to mention, I had to use multiple
washers
on
the bolts to keep them from protruding above the top of the plate
where the AP900 mounts and I shortened the .50" dia. centering
pin
which is located on the plate. This is not absolutely necessary
as
it can be backed out slightly (to keep it from protruding below
the
plate).

Clear skies,

Edd Weninger
Overgaard AZ

--- In ap-gto@..., "sandmanchang" <sandmanchang@>
wrote:

Thanks Edd, is your set-up stable? waht scope are you using
with
this arrangement?

Sandy


I'm not sure what the top of the Meade tripod looks like. but
I
drilled and tapped the AP pier adapter to fit the existing
holes
in
the Celestron Super HD tripod for my AP900. Did not need to
have
an
adapter made.

Edd Weninger
Overgaard AZ

--- In ap-gto@..., "sandmanchang" <sandmanchang@>
wrote:

Thanks Harold, your adapter looks really solid. This is the
way
I'll
go to. Maybe Precise Parts could help.

Sandy


--- In ap-gto@..., "masterson_harold"
<hfm5022@>
wrote:



Sandy,

I have posted two photos (look under Meade tripod) of an
adaptor
plate
that I had made for the Meade giant tripod. Others have
used
the
AP
pier adaptor and drill and taped into the top of the
tripod.
I
tried
this approach and messed it up so I had the adaptor made.
I
found
the
aluminum plate on e-bay and had a local shop drill and
tap
it
for
me.
I think it cost about $140 total and it is very secure.


--- In ap-gto@..., "sandmanchang"
<sandmanchang@>
wrote:

Dear group.

I would like to mate a AP900 to a standard Meade field
tripod
for
greater portability. Does anyone know where I might
purchase
such an
adapter? Thanks,

Sandy