Date   

Re: 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

observe_m13
 

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

I am building an 18" Dob for visual use which I would also like to
convert for astroimaging riding on my 1200GTO. Is the 1200 going to
be able to handle a truss based 18" scope about 65" long? The mirror
will be in a truss tube specifically designed for the 1200 not just
placing the dob truss on the 1200, total weight will be about 75lbs.

Thanks,
Joe
Do not forget that you will need an excellent quality mirror cell with
an excellent 9 or 18 point floatation system and even edge support. A
Dobsonian "sling" design will not work.

I run my 16" on an AP1200 but I designed it first and foremost as a
Newtonian. You will need a mirror cell firmly mounted to a rigid truss
or tube and a rigid spider. My 16 has a 2 inch thick mirror, rolled
aluminum tube with aluminum compression rings to keep it round and the
complete scope weighs in at about 90 pounds. I looked at going with a
truss system but the additional cost of aluminum welding and build
precision deterred me at the time, even though I could have lightened
up the OTA by the weight of the rings I need to carry it, about 20 pounds.


Re: 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

Richard Crisp
 

Thanks Joe
 
the Cassegrain configuration is a lot easier to balance but it usually has a lot longer focal length too.
 
With a 5.7meter focal length I am able to get nice results consistently with little effort in the guiding side: i use a Lumicon Giant Easy Guider and an ST7E for guiding: even at 5.7 meters.
 
I do not use the PEM or any of the software to improve the PEM,. Maybe I will someday but I am happy with the results I have now and prefer less complexity versus more unless absolutely necessary.
 
there are a lot of single points of failure that can shoot us down so I like to minimize them to improve my odds in the field.
 
Good luck. I'd recommend really making a different sort of mirror cell. a holed primary is nice since it will not move laterally....

--- On Thu, 9/4/08, Joseph Colosi <joeastroc@...> wrote:

From: Joseph Colosi <joeastroc@...>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?
To: ap-gto@...
Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 11:07 AM






Richard,

Very impressive setup and results. I understand the possible (probable) issues with balancing you mention. I will be imaging with a DSLR and ST10, the DSLR should not be an issue as it is very lightweight (less than many eyepieces). The ST10/w filters will be a problem. I am willing to give it a shot, and by your results it looks like it is at least in the realm of possibility.

Thanks,
Joe

----- Original Message ----
From: Richard Crisp <rdcrisp@sbcglobal. net>
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups. com
Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2008 1:32:28 PM
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

maybe

the issue I predict will be balance with the camera load fore in the newtonian design and wind load

my 18" f/12.6 classical cassegrain weighs in about 100 lbs on my 1200 mount and it works great there: so long as the wind is light to non existent

the key difference in my config and yours will be the balance point

here are pix of mine and some images taken using it.

http://www.narrowba ndimaging. com/Stinger_ gallery_page. htm

here are some recent shots taken at f/12.6 (5760mm focal length)

http://www.narrowba ndimaging. com/dwb111_ mk1sn2_pl9k_ baader_halpha_ page.htm

http://www.narrowba ndimaging. com/ngc6888_ mk1sn2_f12_ pl9k_baader_ ha_page.htm

http://www.narrowba ndimaging. com/sh2_112_ mk1sn2_f12_ pl9k_baader_ ha_page.htm

if things are well collimated (needs tweaking about once a month or so) and the winds light and the seeing typical it gives very nice star shapes.




--- On Thu, 9/4/08, joeastroc <joeastroc@yahoo. com> wrote:

From: joeastroc <joeastroc@yahoo. com>
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups. com
Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 10:08 AM

I am building an 18" Dob for visual use which I would also like to
convert for astroimaging riding on my 1200GTO. Is the 1200 going to
be able to handle a truss based 18" scope about 65" long? The mirror
will be in a truss tube specifically designed for the 1200 not just
placing the dob truss on the 1200, total weight will be about 75lbs.

Thanks,
Joe

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

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


Re: 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

Richard Crisp
 

Kent brings up a good point: you need a "real" mirror support, not a sling...

--- On Thu, 9/4/08, KG KIRKLEY <kgkirkley@...> wrote:

From: KG KIRKLEY <kgkirkley@...>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?
To: ap-gto@...
Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 11:04 AM







In a message dated 09/04/08 12:55:38 Central Daylight Time, joeastroc@yahoo. com writes:
I hope the answer is yes too :-). The mirror is 1.625" thick (Swayze Optical).

Interesting idea........ however almost all 'Dob's I have seen and/or looked through do not have the rigidity to be imaging instruments.
They go out of collimation even when moving from 30 degrees above the horizon to 70 degrees. This would make imaging with one very frustrating.

Of course, you may already know this and are building your 18inch to address this.

Kent Kirkley

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















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


Re: 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

Joseph Colosi <joeastroc@...>
 

Richard,

Very impressive setup and results. I understand the possible (probable) issues with balancing you mention. I will be imaging with a DSLR and ST10, the DSLR should not be an issue as it is very lightweight (less than many eyepieces). The ST10/w filters will be a problem. I am willing to give it a shot, and by your results it looks like it is at least in the realm of possibility.

Thanks,
Joe

----- Original Message ----
From: Richard Crisp <rdcrisp@...>
To: ap-gto@...
Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2008 1:32:28 PM
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?


maybe

the issue I predict will be balance with the camera load fore in the newtonian design and wind load

my 18" f/12.6 classical cassegrain weighs in about 100 lbs on my 1200 mount and it works great there: so long as the wind is light to non existent

the key difference in my config and yours will be the balance point

here are pix of mine and some images taken using it.

http://www.narrowba ndimaging. com/Stinger_ gallery_page. htm

here are some recent shots taken at f/12.6 (5760mm focal length)

http://www.narrowba ndimaging. com/dwb111_ mk1sn2_pl9k_ baader_halpha_ page.htm

http://www.narrowba ndimaging. com/ngc6888_ mk1sn2_f12_ pl9k_baader_ ha_page.htm

http://www.narrowba ndimaging. com/sh2_112_ mk1sn2_f12_ pl9k_baader_ ha_page.htm

if things are well collimated (needs tweaking about once a month or so) and the winds light and the seeing typical it gives very nice star shapes.




--- On Thu, 9/4/08, joeastroc <joeastroc@yahoo. com> wrote:

From: joeastroc <joeastroc@yahoo. com>
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups. com
Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 10:08 AM

I am building an 18" Dob for visual use which I would also like to
convert for astroimaging riding on my 1200GTO. Is the 1200 going to
be able to handle a truss based 18" scope about 65" long? The mirror
will be in a truss tube specifically designed for the 1200 not just
placing the dob truss on the 1200, total weight will be about 75lbs.

Thanks,
Joe


Re: 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

Kent Kirkley
 

In a message dated 09/04/08 12:55:38 Central Daylight Time, joeastroc@... writes:
I hope the answer is yes too :-). The mirror is 1.625" thick (Swayze Optical).




Interesting idea........however almost all 'Dob's I have seen and/or looked through do not have the rigidity to be imaging instruments.
They go out of collimation even when moving from 30 degrees above the horizon to 70 degrees. This would make imaging with one very frustrating.

Of course, you may already know this and are building your 18inch to address this.

Kent Kirkley


Re: 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

Joseph Colosi <joeastroc@...>
 

I hope the answer is yes too :-). The mirror is 1.625" thick (Swayze Optical).

Joe

----- Original Message ----
From: Jerry A. Wilson <JerryAWilson@...>
To: ap-gto@...
Sent: Thursday, September 4, 2008 1:16:27 PM
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?


Joe

I hope the answer is yes. I'm starting a similar project, with an 18
inch f/4. How thick is your mirror?

Jerry

At 10:08 AM 9/4/2008, you wrote:

I am building an 18" Dob for visual use which I would also like to
convert for astroimaging riding on my 1200GTO. Is the 1200 going to
be able to handle a truss based 18" scope about 65" long? The mirror
will be in a truss tube specifically designed for the 1200 not just
placing the dob truss on the 1200, total weight will be about 75lbs.

Thanks,
Joe


Re: 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

Richard Crisp
 

maybe
 
the issue I predict will be balance with the camera load fore in the newtonian design and wind load
 
my 18" f/12.6 classical cassegrain weighs in about 100 lbs on my 1200 mount and it works great there: so long as the wind is light to non existent
 
the key difference in my config and yours will be the balance point
 
here are pix of mine and some images taken using it.
 
http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/Stinger_gallery_page.htm
 
here are some recent shots taken at f/12.6 (5760mm focal length)
 
http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/dwb111_mk1sn2_pl9k_baader_halpha_page.htm
 
http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/ngc6888_mk1sn2_f12_pl9k_baader_ha_page.htm
 
http://www.narrowbandimaging.com/sh2_112_mk1sn2_f12_pl9k_baader_ha_page.htm
 
if things are well collimated (needs tweaking about once a month or so) and the winds light and the seeing typical it gives very nice star shapes.

--- On Thu, 9/4/08, joeastroc <joeastroc@...> wrote:

From: joeastroc <joeastroc@...>
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?
To: ap-gto@...
Date: Thursday, September 4, 2008, 10:08 AM






I am building an 18" Dob for visual use which I would also like to
convert for astroimaging riding on my 1200GTO. Is the 1200 going to
be able to handle a truss based 18" scope about 65" long? The mirror
will be in a truss tube specifically designed for the 1200 not just
placing the dob truss on the 1200, total weight will be about 75lbs.

Thanks,
Joe


Re: 1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

rags_the_cat
 

Joe

I hope the answer is yes. I'm starting a similar project, with an 18
inch f/4. How thick is your mirror?

Jerry

At 10:08 AM 9/4/2008, you wrote:

I am building an 18" Dob for visual use which I would also like to
convert for astroimaging riding on my 1200GTO. Is the 1200 going to
be able to handle a truss based 18" scope about 65" long? The mirror
will be in a truss tube specifically designed for the 1200 not just
placing the dob truss on the 1200, total weight will be about 75lbs.

Thanks,
Joe


1200GTO carrying 18" f/4.2 Newt?

joeastroc <joeastroc@...>
 

I am building an 18" Dob for visual use which I would also like to
convert for astroimaging riding on my 1200GTO. Is the 1200 going to
be able to handle a truss based 18" scope about 65" long? The mirror
will be in a truss tube specifically designed for the 1200 not just
placing the dob truss on the 1200, total weight will be about 75lbs.

Thanks,
Joe


Re: Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature

Richard Crisp
 

I too have installed the window heaters: I have had no problems since. before installing I was having a dewed window by morning. It makes it hard to re-use flats.

one of the things about being first is that you get to solve the problems for the rest of the industry.

of course there's no thanks or any other acknowledgement of the good work we do for others, that's the just the way the also-rans run their business

perhaps that's why they are also-rans?

----- Original Message -----
From: Marco Lorenzi
To: ap-gto@...
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 1:46 AM
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature


Hi Rick, thank you for your nice comment. Actually the windows should be heated, such a large chip once cooled produce a very strong thermal effect on the window despite the filling gas is an insulator. FLI however was very responsive in this matter and is working to upgrade my camera to fix the problem. Hope next new moon of September will have some chances to imaging with a sistem working at full capabilities.

The filter I was using are generation 1 Astrodon filters, as I found out they have much worse reflection issues than I used to have in the past with my Astronomics and Optec filter sets. Actualy searching in internet I discovered this is a (bad) caracteristic that has been already reported by several users in the past. Generation 2 should have a much better behaviour about that but don't have any direct experience with them.

Clear Skies
Marco

----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: Richard Crisp <rdcrisp@...>
A: ap-gto@...
Cc: narrowbandimaging@...; ccd-imaging-technology@...; FLI_Imaging_Systems@...; Astroimaging_filters@...
Inviato: Giovedì 4 settembre 2008, 11:53:41
Oggetto: Re: [ap-gto] Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature

Nice results and a great story Marco. That sensor you have is working very well. Too bad that the humidity got you. That's a big sensor very close to the glass: maybe a window heater is needed?

I didn't realize the Astrodon RGB filters had such bad haloes surrounding the brighter stars. Very interesting. ... I thought that was one of their key selling points: no haloes.

rdc

----- Original Message -----
From: Marco Lorenzi
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups. com ; tec-scopes@yahoogro ups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 8:36 PM
Subject: [ap-gto] Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature

Dear all, last month I eventually had a chance to test my new Microline 16803 with both my TEC140 and my new AP Mach1 mount under the dark skies of Isola del Giglio, an small island in Tuscany, Italy.

Despite the weather was fantastic (in one week I had only one night clouded, quite a surprise considering the presence of TWO new toys ^_~) unfortunately I had several problems with the high relative humidity of the place (always higher than 85%) that caused the CCD window to fog within minutes once the chip was cooled below the ambient temperature. I tried to find a solution on the field, e.g. putting some silica gel into the camera/FF adapter and sealing everything during the hot and dry day, but I had not success. So eventually had to call it and renounce to cool down the camera as I wanted, accepting to use it at +10°C.

To my surprise, the thermal noise of this sensor is so far below the KAI-11K I used in the past that several of the frames taken turned out to be still useful.

The mount worked flawlessly, not a single sub frame was lost even if a moderate wind was constantly blowing during the nights. I am really impressed with the tracking accuracy of this little jewel.

My trusty Apo on the other hand performed greatly, showing pinpoint stars all over the huge frame that is almost 52mm in diagonal.

For those interest to see how a modern CCD can work at a relative very high temperature you can see my images here:

http://astrosurf. com/lorenzi/ lastupdate. htm

Images are those posted from July 24th

Hope you will like them

Clear Skies
Marco Lorenzi

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
Do You Yahoo!?
Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi
http://mail. yahoo.it

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

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

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi
http://mail.yahoo.it

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


Re: Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature

marcolorenzi70
 

Hi Rick, thank you for your nice comment. Actually the windows should be heated, such a large chip once cooled produce a very strong thermal effect on the window despite the filling gas is an insulator. FLI however was very responsive in this matter and is working to upgrade my camera to fix the problem. Hope next new moon of September will have some chances to imaging with a sistem working at full capabilities.
 
The filter I was using are generation 1 Astrodon filters, as I found out they have much worse reflection issues than I used to have in the past with my Astronomics and Optec filter sets. Actualy searching in internet I discovered this is a (bad) caracteristic that has been already reported by several users in the past. Generation 2 should have a much better behaviour about that but don't have any direct experience with them.
 
Clear Skies
Marco



----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: Richard Crisp <rdcrisp@...>
A: ap-gto@...
Cc: narrowbandimaging@...; ccd-imaging-technology@...; FLI_Imaging_Systems@...; Astroimaging_filters@...
Inviato: Giovedì 4 settembre 2008, 11:53:41
Oggetto: Re: [ap-gto] Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature


Nice results and a great story Marco. That sensor you have is working very well. Too bad that the humidity got you. That's a big sensor very close to the glass: maybe a window heater is needed?

I didn't realize the Astrodon RGB filters had such bad haloes surrounding the brighter stars. Very interesting. ... I thought that was one of their key selling points: no haloes.

rdc

----- Original Message -----
From: Marco Lorenzi
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups. com ; tec-scopes@yahoogro ups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 8:36 PM
Subject: [ap-gto] Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature

Dear all, last month I eventually had a chance to test my new Microline 16803 with both my TEC140 and my new AP Mach1 mount under the dark skies of Isola del Giglio, an small island in Tuscany, Italy.

Despite the weather was fantastic (in one week I had only one night clouded, quite a surprise considering the presence of TWO new toys ^_~) unfortunately I had several problems with the high relative humidity of the place (always higher than 85%) that caused the CCD window to fog within minutes once the chip was cooled below the ambient temperature. I tried to find a solution on the field, e.g. putting some silica gel into the camera/FF adapter and sealing everything during the hot and dry day, but I had not success. So eventually had to call it and renounce to cool down the camera as I wanted, accepting to use it at +10°C.

To my surprise, the thermal noise of this sensor is so far below the KAI-11K I used in the past that several of the frames taken turned out to be still useful.

The mount worked flawlessly, not a single sub frame was lost even if a moderate wind was constantly blowing during the nights. I am really impressed with the tracking accuracy of this little jewel.

My trusty Apo on the other hand performed greatly, showing pinpoint stars all over the huge frame that is almost 52mm in diagonal.

For those interest to see how a modern CCD can work at a relative very high temperature you can see my images here:

http://astrosurf. com/lorenzi/ lastupdate. htm

Images are those posted from July 24th

Hope you will like them

Clear Skies
Marco Lorenzi

____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
Do You Yahoo!?
Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi
http://mail. yahoo.it

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

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



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi
http://mail.yahoo.it

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


Re: Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature

Richard Crisp
 

Nice results and a great story Marco. That sensor you have is working very well. Too bad that the humidity got you. That's a big sensor very close to the glass: maybe a window heater is needed?

I didn't realize the Astrodon RGB filters had such bad haloes surrounding the brighter stars. Very interesting.... I thought that was one of their key selling points: no haloes.

rdc

----- Original Message -----
From: Marco Lorenzi
To: ap-gto@... ; tec-scopes@...
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 8:36 PM
Subject: [ap-gto] Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature


Dear all, last month I eventually had a chance to test my new Microline 16803 with both my TEC140 and my new AP Mach1 mount under the dark skies of Isola del Giglio, an small island in Tuscany, Italy.

Despite the weather was fantastic (in one week I had only one night clouded, quite a surprise considering the presence of TWO new toys ^_~) unfortunately I had several problems with the high relative humidity of the place (always higher than 85%) that caused the CCD window to fog within minutes once the chip was cooled below the ambient temperature. I tried to find a solution on the field, e.g. putting some silica gel into the camera/FF adapter and sealing everything during the hot and dry day, but I had not success. So eventually had to call it and renounce to cool down the camera as I wanted, accepting to use it at +10°C.

To my surprise, the thermal noise of this sensor is so far below the KAI-11K I used in the past that several of the frames taken turned out to be still useful.

The mount worked flawlessly, not a single sub frame was lost even if a moderate wind was constantly blowing during the nights. I am really impressed with the tracking accuracy of this little jewel.

My trusty Apo on the other hand performed greatly, showing pinpoint stars all over the huge frame that is almost 52mm in diagonal.

For those interest to see how a modern CCD can work at a relative very high temperature you can see my images here:

http://astrosurf.com/lorenzi/lastupdate.htm

Images are those posted from July 24th

Hope you will like them

Clear Skies
Marco Lorenzi

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi
http://mail.yahoo.it







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


Some CCD images taken at relative high sensor temperature

marcolorenzi70
 

Dear all, last month I eventually had a chance to test my new Microline 16803 with both my TEC140 and my new AP Mach1 mount under the dark skies of Isola del Giglio, an small island in Tuscany, Italy.
 
Despite the weather was fantastic (in one week I had only one night clouded, quite a surprise considering the presence of TWO new toys ^_~) unfortunately I had several problems with the high relative humidity of the place (always higher than 85%) that caused the CCD window to fog within minutes once the chip was cooled below the ambient temperature. I tried to find a solution on the field, e.g. putting some silica gel into the camera/FF adapter and sealing everything during the hot and dry day, but I had not success. So eventually had to call it and renounce to cool down the camera as I wanted, accepting to use it at +10°C.
 
To my surprise, the thermal noise of this sensor is so far below the KAI-11K I used in the past that several of the frames taken turned out to be still useful.
 
The mount worked flawlessly, not a single sub frame was lost even if a moderate wind was constantly blowing during the nights. I am really impressed with the tracking accuracy of this little jewel.
 
My trusty Apo on the other hand performed greatly, showing pinpoint stars all over the huge frame that is almost 52mm in diagonal.
 
For those interest to see how a modern CCD can work at a relative very high temperature you can see my images here:
 
http://astrosurf.com/lorenzi/lastupdate.htm
 
Images are those posted from July 24th
 
Hope you will like them
 
Clear Skies
Marco Lorenzi

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi
http://mail.yahoo.it

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


Re: Modelling - can of worms

Ladislav Nemec <nemecl@...>
 

It may well be the case. I certainly spend considerable time building a
Gemini model that seems to get corrupted fairly easily. Not having an AP
mount (except in my dreams) I should not really tell the AP folks
(manufacturers or users) what to do.



I loved to call myself a 'poor refugee from Communist Czechoslovakia' - it
is not THAT bad but Bill Gates I am not.



LN

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...] On Behalf Of
Bob Benamati
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 6:04 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: Modelling - can of worms



Very true. ;-)

I will say, though, as a recently former G11/Gemini owner (May), it's nice
to NOT have the pointing model residing in the mount firmware. Battery
resets; failures; other pointing/modeling difficulties and issues that you
can't "see" because the modeling parameters are "hidden" and you never know
until you've spent too much time trying to build a model all went away by
using an AP + the very affordable MaxPoint software for me.

Of course, free and user-selectable is always the way to go--but from my
experience, it's been much less headache by having it separate.

Take care,
Bob

www.pennastroimaging.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Ladislav Nemec
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups. <mailto:ap-gto%40yahoogroups.com> com
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 8:57 PM
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] Re: Modelling - can of worms

I think what had to be said was said. It was great for clarification of
several issues but I do not that anything has to be added.

LN

-----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
William R. Mattil
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 5:51 PM
To: ap-gto@yahoogroups. <mailto:ap-gto%40yahoogroups.com> com
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: Modelling - can of worms

Christopher Vedeler L.Ac. wrote:
Jerry

All professional observatories use modeling and their mounts are
phenomenally accurate.
It is entirely possible to add mount modeling to an AP mount in
*exactly* the same way that these professional Observatories do. Add a
Computer System to handle those details. Adding this feature to the
existing AP mounts is a complete waste of time. Almost as big a waste of
time as adding GPS. AP allows those users wishing to do so, to do it and
it still provides excellent performance by doing what it was designed to do.

If someone can't input Latitude and Longitude then I would doubt that
they would be able to use the mount anyway.

The reality is that no mechanical system can
match perfectly the real sky. The reality in the field is that polar
alignment will never be perfect, the atmosphere will always refract the
positions of the stars, and the scope will always flex relative to the
mount. All these things can be handled very well with software. Having
superior hardware just makes the modeling job easier as the errors
become smaller and more predictable.
Polar Alignment doesn't need to be perfect. Many can achieve great
results with just a Polar Alignment Scope. And if perhaps you are
meaning that Software could be used to bypass even that trivial detail
then I'll not waste my time further.



Modeling helps with pointing more than anything else.
Exactly. And I suspect there are literally hundreds of users of AP
Mounts that have no trouble finding the object they desire and having it
in the FOV of their OTA with little or no difficulty. So adding
modeling is again unnecessary. But hey .... if that's really your bag
then by all means connect up your computer and add the software of your
choice. It's easy to do. All of the World Class amateur mounts are the
same in this regard. They don't include modeling. It's better done by
the proper tool. Sheesh ... if all you have is a hammer then the whole
world must look like a nail ?

Frankly I am more than delighted that the AP mounts have little or
nothing in common with the lesser quality mounts. Do I need to point out
that adding chrome wheels to a Yugo still leaves you with a Yugo ?

For accurate
tracking without field rotation you need to be physically pointed to the
pole. However in real life use, in the field with a portable mount you
will never be perfectly polar aligned. Why not work from that
assumption and make the quite logical step to correct for these issues
in software as other mounts have done?
If it ain't broke why should it be fixed ? As I said hundreds if not
thousands of amateurs manage to get Polar Aligned and take very nice
images. So I don't see the problem.



If you have never worked with a mount that offers sophisticated modeling
you don't know how nice it is. It isn't hard, it isn't expensive and it
makes an already fantastic product even better. I don't understand why
not?
Actually some of us have. And believe it or not there wasn't a single
instance in which it was superior to what AP provides. I got *better*
modeling by providing a computer with better software. AP provides much
better tracking. Far superior Pointing and the ability to handle bigger
payloads. Much better user interface. Nope - it doesn't have a GPS
interface.... wow. What a bummer <lol>.

What I think some us are wondering, or at least I am, is why do certain
members used to to truly substandard mounts keep trying to drag AP down
to that same level ????

A previous poster mentioned that doing what you are suggesting is like
putting patches on a tire that is not in need of any.

Bill


Re: Modelling - can of worms

Ladislav Nemec <nemecl@...>
 

I am not aware of that but it is irrelevant. I will NEVER have the money to
buy a Paramount - as excellent it may be.



AP mount is still conceivable. Paramount is NOT.



LN

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...] On Behalf Of
William R. Mattil
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 5:54 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: Modelling - can of worms



Ladislav Nemec wrote:

[snip]


I am just looking at a mount in 'mint condition' on Astromart for some
$8,200. If my G11 refuses to operate for much longer, I will have to
consider such expense. And, I admit, being used to Gemini modeling, I
would
like to see it on such expensive piece of equipment (Paramount is, of
course, even more expensive).
Certainly you are aware that a Bisque Mount requires a computer to
operate ?!?!? So then Adding modeling software to that is simply a
matter of adding software to that laptop.

Bill


Re: Modelling - can of worms

rags_the_cat
 

Agreed.

Jerry

At 05:57 PM 9/3/2008, you wrote:

I think what had to be said was said. It was great for clarification of
several issues but I do not that anything has to be added.

LN

-----Original Message-----
From: <mailto:ap-gto%40yahoogroups.com>ap-gto@...
[mailto:ap-gto@...] On Behalf Of
William R. Mattil
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 5:51 PM
To: <mailto:ap-gto%40yahoogroups.com>ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: Modelling - can of worms

Christopher Vedeler L.Ac. wrote:
Jerry

All professional observatories use modeling and their mounts are
phenomenally accurate.
It is entirely possible to add mount modeling to an AP mount in
*exactly* the same way that these professional Observatories do. Add a
Computer System to handle those details. Adding this feature to the
existing AP mounts is a complete waste of time. Almost as big a waste of
time as adding GPS. AP allows those users wishing to do so, to do it and
it still provides excellent performance by doing what it was designed to do.

If someone can't input Latitude and Longitude then I would doubt that
they would be able to use the mount anyway.

The reality is that no mechanical system can
match perfectly the real sky. The reality in the field is that polar
alignment will never be perfect, the atmosphere will always refract the
positions of the stars, and the scope will always flex relative to the
mount. All these things can be handled very well with software. Having
superior hardware just makes the modeling job easier as the errors
become smaller and more predictable.
Polar Alignment doesn't need to be perfect. Many can achieve great
results with just a Polar Alignment Scope. And if perhaps you are
meaning that Software could be used to bypass even that trivial detail
then I'll not waste my time further.



Modeling helps with pointing more than anything else.
Exactly. And I suspect there are literally hundreds of users of AP
Mounts that have no trouble finding the object they desire and having it
in the FOV of their OTA with little or no difficulty. So adding
modeling is again unnecessary. But hey .... if that's really your bag
then by all means connect up your computer and add the software of your
choice. It's easy to do. All of the World Class amateur mounts are the
same in this regard. They don't include modeling. It's better done by
the proper tool. Sheesh ... if all you have is a hammer then the whole
world must look like a nail ?

Frankly I am more than delighted that the AP mounts have little or
nothing in common with the lesser quality mounts. Do I need to point out
that adding chrome wheels to a Yugo still leaves you with a Yugo ?

For accurate
tracking without field rotation you need to be physically pointed to the
pole. However in real life use, in the field with a portable mount you
will never be perfectly polar aligned. Why not work from that
assumption and make the quite logical step to correct for these issues
in software as other mounts have done?
If it ain't broke why should it be fixed ? As I said hundreds if not
thousands of amateurs manage to get Polar Aligned and take very nice
images. So I don't see the problem.



If you have never worked with a mount that offers sophisticated modeling
you don't know how nice it is. It isn't hard, it isn't expensive and it
makes an already fantastic product even better. I don't understand why
not?
Actually some of us have. And believe it or not there wasn't a single
instance in which it was superior to what AP provides. I got *better*
modeling by providing a computer with better software. AP provides much
better tracking. Far superior Pointing and the ability to handle bigger
payloads. Much better user interface. Nope - it doesn't have a GPS
interface.... wow. What a bummer <lol>.

What I think some us are wondering, or at least I am, is why do certain
members used to to truly substandard mounts keep trying to drag AP down
to that same level ????

A previous poster mentioned that doing what you are suggesting is like
putting patches on a tire that is not in need of any.

Bill




Re: Modelling - can of worms

Bob Benamati
 

Very true. ;-)

I will say, though, as a recently former G11/Gemini owner (May), it's nice to NOT have the pointing model residing in the mount firmware. Battery resets; failures; other pointing/modeling difficulties and issues that you can't "see" because the modeling parameters are "hidden" and you never know until you've spent too much time trying to build a model all went away by using an AP + the very affordable MaxPoint software for me.

Of course, free and user-selectable is always the way to go--but from my experience, it's been much less headache by having it separate.

Take care,
Bob

www.pennastroimaging.com

----- Original Message -----
From: Ladislav Nemec
To: ap-gto@...
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 8:57 PM
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] Re: Modelling - can of worms


I think what had to be said was said. It was great for clarification of
several issues but I do not that anything has to be added.

LN

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...] On Behalf Of
William R. Mattil
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 5:51 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: Modelling - can of worms

Christopher Vedeler L.Ac. wrote:
> Jerry
>
> All professional observatories use modeling and their mounts are
> phenomenally accurate.

It is entirely possible to add mount modeling to an AP mount in
*exactly* the same way that these professional Observatories do. Add a
Computer System to handle those details. Adding this feature to the
existing AP mounts is a complete waste of time. Almost as big a waste of
time as adding GPS. AP allows those users wishing to do so, to do it and
it still provides excellent performance by doing what it was designed to do.

If someone can't input Latitude and Longitude then I would doubt that
they would be able to use the mount anyway.

> The reality is that no mechanical system can
> match perfectly the real sky. The reality in the field is that polar
> alignment will never be perfect, the atmosphere will always refract the
> positions of the stars, and the scope will always flex relative to the
> mount. All these things can be handled very well with software. Having
> superior hardware just makes the modeling job easier as the errors
> become smaller and more predictable.

Polar Alignment doesn't need to be perfect. Many can achieve great
results with just a Polar Alignment Scope. And if perhaps you are
meaning that Software could be used to bypass even that trivial detail
then I'll not waste my time further.

>
>
> Modeling helps with pointing more than anything else.

Exactly. And I suspect there are literally hundreds of users of AP
Mounts that have no trouble finding the object they desire and having it
in the FOV of their OTA with little or no difficulty. So adding
modeling is again unnecessary. But hey .... if that's really your bag
then by all means connect up your computer and add the software of your
choice. It's easy to do. All of the World Class amateur mounts are the
same in this regard. They don't include modeling. It's better done by
the proper tool. Sheesh ... if all you have is a hammer then the whole
world must look like a nail ?

Frankly I am more than delighted that the AP mounts have little or
nothing in common with the lesser quality mounts. Do I need to point out
that adding chrome wheels to a Yugo still leaves you with a Yugo ?

> For accurate
> tracking without field rotation you need to be physically pointed to the
> pole. However in real life use, in the field with a portable mount you
> will never be perfectly polar aligned. Why not work from that
> assumption and make the quite logical step to correct for these issues
> in software as other mounts have done?

If it ain't broke why should it be fixed ? As I said hundreds if not
thousands of amateurs manage to get Polar Aligned and take very nice
images. So I don't see the problem.

>
>
> If you have never worked with a mount that offers sophisticated modeling
> you don't know how nice it is. It isn't hard, it isn't expensive and it
> makes an already fantastic product even better. I don't understand why
> not?
>

Actually some of us have. And believe it or not there wasn't a single
instance in which it was superior to what AP provides. I got *better*
modeling by providing a computer with better software. AP provides much
better tracking. Far superior Pointing and the ability to handle bigger
payloads. Much better user interface. Nope - it doesn't have a GPS
interface.... wow. What a bummer <lol>.

What I think some us are wondering, or at least I am, is why do certain
members used to to truly substandard mounts keep trying to drag AP down
to that same level ????

A previous poster mentioned that doing what you are suggesting is like
putting patches on a tire that is not in need of any.

Bill


Re: Modelling - can of worms

Ladislav Nemec <nemecl@...>
 

I think what had to be said was said. It was great for clarification of
several issues but I do not that anything has to be added.

LN

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...] On Behalf Of
William R. Mattil
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 5:51 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Re: Modelling - can of worms



Christopher Vedeler L.Ac. wrote:
Jerry

All professional observatories use modeling and their mounts are
phenomenally accurate.
It is entirely possible to add mount modeling to an AP mount in
*exactly* the same way that these professional Observatories do. Add a
Computer System to handle those details. Adding this feature to the
existing AP mounts is a complete waste of time. Almost as big a waste of
time as adding GPS. AP allows those users wishing to do so, to do it and
it still provides excellent performance by doing what it was designed to do.

If someone can't input Latitude and Longitude then I would doubt that
they would be able to use the mount anyway.

The reality is that no mechanical system can
match perfectly the real sky. The reality in the field is that polar
alignment will never be perfect, the atmosphere will always refract the
positions of the stars, and the scope will always flex relative to the
mount. All these things can be handled very well with software. Having
superior hardware just makes the modeling job easier as the errors
become smaller and more predictable.
Polar Alignment doesn't need to be perfect. Many can achieve great
results with just a Polar Alignment Scope. And if perhaps you are
meaning that Software could be used to bypass even that trivial detail
then I'll not waste my time further.



Modeling helps with pointing more than anything else.
Exactly. And I suspect there are literally hundreds of users of AP
Mounts that have no trouble finding the object they desire and having it
in the FOV of their OTA with little or no difficulty. So adding
modeling is again unnecessary. But hey .... if that's really your bag
then by all means connect up your computer and add the software of your
choice. It's easy to do. All of the World Class amateur mounts are the
same in this regard. They don't include modeling. It's better done by
the proper tool. Sheesh ... if all you have is a hammer then the whole
world must look like a nail ?

Frankly I am more than delighted that the AP mounts have little or
nothing in common with the lesser quality mounts. Do I need to point out
that adding chrome wheels to a Yugo still leaves you with a Yugo ?

For accurate
tracking without field rotation you need to be physically pointed to the
pole. However in real life use, in the field with a portable mount you
will never be perfectly polar aligned. Why not work from that
assumption and make the quite logical step to correct for these issues
in software as other mounts have done?
If it ain't broke why should it be fixed ? As I said hundreds if not
thousands of amateurs manage to get Polar Aligned and take very nice
images. So I don't see the problem.



If you have never worked with a mount that offers sophisticated modeling
you don't know how nice it is. It isn't hard, it isn't expensive and it
makes an already fantastic product even better. I don't understand why
not?
Actually some of us have. And believe it or not there wasn't a single
instance in which it was superior to what AP provides. I got *better*
modeling by providing a computer with better software. AP provides much
better tracking. Far superior Pointing and the ability to handle bigger
payloads. Much better user interface. Nope - it doesn't have a GPS
interface.... wow. What a bummer <lol>.

What I think some us are wondering, or at least I am, is why do certain
members used to to truly substandard mounts keep trying to drag AP down
to that same level ????

A previous poster mentioned that doing what you are suggesting is like
putting patches on a tire that is not in need of any.

Bill


Re: Modelling - can of worms

William R. Mattil <wrmattil@...>
 

Ladislav Nemec wrote:

[snip]

I am just looking at a mount in 'mint condition' on Astromart for some
$8,200. If my G11 refuses to operate for much longer, I will have to
consider such expense. And, I admit, being used to Gemini modeling, I would
like to see it on such expensive piece of equipment (Paramount is, of
course, even more expensive).
Certainly you are aware that a Bisque Mount requires a computer to operate ?!?!? So then Adding modeling software to that is simply a matter of adding software to that laptop.

Bill


Re: Modelling - can of worms

William R. Mattil <wrmattil@...>
 

Christopher Vedeler L.Ac. wrote:
Jerry
All professional observatories use modeling and their mounts are
phenomenally accurate.
It is entirely possible to add mount modeling to an AP mount in *exactly* the same way that these professional Observatories do. Add a Computer System to handle those details. Adding this feature to the existing AP mounts is a complete waste of time. Almost as big a waste of time as adding GPS. AP allows those users wishing to do so, to do it and it still provides excellent performance by doing what it was designed to do.

If someone can't input Latitude and Longitude then I would doubt that they would be able to use the mount anyway.


The reality is that no mechanical system can
match perfectly the real sky. The reality in the field is that polar
alignment will never be perfect, the atmosphere will always refract the
positions of the stars, and the scope will always flex relative to the
mount. All these things can be handled very well with software. Having
superior hardware just makes the modeling job easier as the errors
become smaller and more predictable.
Polar Alignment doesn't need to be perfect. Many can achieve great results with just a Polar Alignment Scope. And if perhaps you are meaning that Software could be used to bypass even that trivial detail then I'll not waste my time further.


Modeling helps with pointing more than anything else.
Exactly. And I suspect there are literally hundreds of users of AP Mounts that have no trouble finding the object they desire and having it in the FOV of their OTA with little or no difficulty. So adding modeling is again unnecessary. But hey .... if that's really your bag then by all means connect up your computer and add the software of your choice. It's easy to do. All of the World Class amateur mounts are the same in this regard. They don't include modeling. It's better done by the proper tool. Sheesh ... if all you have is a hammer then the whole world must look like a nail ?

Frankly I am more than delighted that the AP mounts have little or nothing in common with the lesser quality mounts. Do I need to point out that adding chrome wheels to a Yugo still leaves you with a Yugo ?

For accurate
tracking without field rotation you need to be physically pointed to the
pole. However in real life use, in the field with a portable mount you
will never be perfectly polar aligned. Why not work from that
assumption and make the quite logical step to correct for these issues
in software as other mounts have done?
If it ain't broke why should it be fixed ? As I said hundreds if not thousands of amateurs manage to get Polar Aligned and take very nice images. So I don't see the problem.


If you have never worked with a mount that offers sophisticated modeling
you don't know how nice it is. It isn't hard, it isn't expensive and it
makes an already fantastic product even better. I don't understand why
not?
Actually some of us have. And believe it or not there wasn't a single instance in which it was superior to what AP provides. I got *better* modeling by providing a computer with better software. AP provides much better tracking. Far superior Pointing and the ability to handle bigger payloads. Much better user interface. Nope - it doesn't have a GPS interface.... wow. What a bummer <lol>.

What I think some us are wondering, or at least I am, is why do certain members used to to truly substandard mounts keep trying to drag AP down to that same level ????

A previous poster mentioned that doing what you are suggesting is like putting patches on a tire that is not in need of any.

Bill