|
Re: Calculate flattener spacing for new camera from old camera
Eric Claeys
The PDF file’s resolution is much better and the words are easy to read. Thanks for uploading it. Eric
|
|
|
|
Re: Drift Alignment To Help With Unguided Images
Steve C. Mitchell, Sr., O.D.
I’m currently using Meade’s LX850 ACF OTA and like it a lot. I don’t seem to suffer from mirror flop as the built-in crayford focuser works smooth as glass, then I fine tune the focus with my Moonlite electric focuser. Love it. Carrying this on an AP1100 permanently mounted in my observatory. Steve
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
On Behalf Of CurtisC via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2020 4:49 PM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Drift Alignment To Help With Unguided Images
The guy who makes AG Optical's optics is a neighbor and personal friend of mine, so -- just speaking for myself -- I'd look at AGO first. As for PlaneWave -- they moved from Calif. to Michigan, which converts delivery from a simple drive
to the factory into a $1000 crating and shipping adventure. Of course, I'd have to pay for shipping an AGO scope, too, since his plant is in Alabama. But, of the two telescope manufacturers, the other consideration puts AGO at the top of my personal list.
|
|
|
|
Re: PEMPro vs PHD2
#Guiding
CurtisC <calypte@...>
Ray, I attempted to send you a PM about the zipped files which I uploaded to "Curtis in Anza" in the Files section. But since anybody can look at it, I don't suppose there's much need for secrecy.
|
|
|
|
Re: PEMPro vs PHD2
#Guiding
Joe Zeglinski
Hi Curtis,
Perhaps Bill felt I was bit unkind to MS, with my choice
of words, but Microsoft’s semi-annual major updates are scheduled in the
Fall and Spring of every year, and they “had been” neither
optional, nor avoidable for long.
Since you bought your PC in Aug. 2019 ... then you would
have been updated, perhaps by Christmas from your initial factory installed
Build Version #1903, that Fall - with Update Build “Version” #1909
(standing for Year 2019 and month 09). After that, the most recent wave was the
Spring 2020, Build #2004 (year 2020, month, 04, April).
Until now, our PC’s were just updated, without our
choice, on Microsoft’s individual customer schedule. However, with build
Version #2004, it appears that we can actually choose whether to accept the
updates and associated risks. You will see a new blue link line in your Win-10
SETTINGS-Updates & Security, and have to actually click on it to trigger the
Build’s download & install procedure. There are always surprises in each
version update and some are good, while others break perfectly working drivers
or programs.
If you wish to find out which Build number your PC is
running under, click on SETTINGS->SYSTEM ... and scroll down the left side
panel to “ABOUT”. Clicking on that you will see the full description,
specifically the section “Windows Specifications”.
It will also show you the date YOUR own PC was updated with your current
version number.
But the next regular update wave is already on the
doorstep, likely late this month (for version #2009 ?).
Joe
From: CurtisC via groups.io
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 10:55 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] PEMPro vs PHD2 #Guiding >
recent
Win-10 Build-2004 screw-up How recent is Build-2004? I bought this computer in Aug 2019. The message I saw didn't have the McAfee name or logo on it, unlike warnings I've had about firmware downloads.
|
|
|
|
Re: PEMPro vs PHD2
#Guiding
Ray Gralak
Hi Curtis,
Here's what you wrote: Last night I ran a PEMPro v.3 curve on my 2010-vintage Mach1GTO,Please include all logs, including debug logs, and PPC files from that night and that night only. You can use the PEMPro Log zipper to easily select the files. -Ray Gralak Author of PEMPro Author of APCC (Astro-Physics Command Center): https://www.astro-physics.com/apcc-pro Author of Astro-Physics V2 ASCOM Driver: https://www.siriusimaging.com/apdriver -----Original Message-----
|
|
|
|
Re: PEMPro vs PHD2
#Guiding
CurtisC <calypte@...>
> recent Win-10 Build-2004 screw-up
How recent is Build-2004? I bought this computer in Aug 2019. The message I saw didn't have the McAfee name or logo on it, unlike warnings I've had about firmware downloads.
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 issue: noise from dec motor housing, potential free screw inside
Andrea Lucchetti
Sure,
I bought it from Skypoint here in Italy. Andrea
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 issue: noise from dec motor housing, potential free screw inside
Andrea Lucchetti
Will do, thank you
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 issue: noise from dec motor housing, potential free screw inside
Andrea Lucchetti
Thank you Roland,
I hope to check on Sunday. Andrea
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 issue: noise from dec motor housing, potential free screw inside
Roland Christen
Hello again,
Can you tell me where you purchased the mount?
Roland
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Lucchetti <andlucchett@...> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Sent: Fri, Sep 4, 2020 5:35 pm Subject: [ap-gto] Mach2 issue: noise from dec motor housing, potential free screw inside Hello AP,
this evening I grabbed my Mach2 and noticed/heard the typical noise of a screw (small part in any case) going around in the DEC motor housing. it could be in the DEC housing but most probably in the motor housing. I think it is there from the very beginning, as the mount it is brand new: it arrived in July and has just 2 nights of operation. I'd like to open the motor housing to check but I will wait for directions from AP people. Thank you very much, Andrea-Italy
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 issue: noise from dec motor housing, potential free screw inside
Donald Rudny
Just a suggestion, Andrea, but take some photos as you do this. It will help Roland assess things and document your efforts. Best of luck in finding the problem.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Don Don Rudny Pepeekeo, Hawaii.
On Sep 4, 2020, at 1:03 PM, uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Re: Mach2 issue: noise from dec motor housing, potential free screw inside
Roland Christen
You can remove the back of the housing by removing the 4 Hex head screws. Take a look inside and contact us here at AP if you find anything loose. I will work with you to correct that.
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrea Lucchetti <andlucchett@...> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Sent: Fri, Sep 4, 2020 5:35 pm Subject: [ap-gto] Mach2 issue: noise from dec motor housing, potential free screw inside Hello AP,
this evening I grabbed my Mach2 and noticed/heard the typical noise of a screw (small part in any case) going around in the DEC motor housing. it could be in the DEC housing but most probably in the motor housing. I think it is there from the very beginning, as the mount it is brand new: it arrived in July and has just 2 nights of operation. I'd like to open the motor housing to check but I will wait for directions from AP people. Thank you very much, Andrea-Italy
|
|
|
|
Re: AP1100 vs mach2 decision
#Mach2GTO
#Absolute_Encoders
Roland Christen
On paper and in the real world, yes the 1100 has greater weight capacity. The reason is that the 2 gearwheels are larger on the 1100. That is the primary thing that determines how much scope you can put on a mount.
Gearwheel size is the single most important thing that determines a mount's capacity. The thickness of the base is the next important thing.
The pier or tripod that you put the mount on also needs to be robust. For the pier/tripod the important thing is not so much the weight rating, since most of them could hold up a Sumo wrestler, the important thing is how resistant it is to a twisting motion.
Rolando
-----Original Message-----
From: Ram Viswanathan <ramviswanathan@...> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io Sent: Fri, Sep 4, 2020 5:18 pm Subject: [ap-gto] AP1100 vs mach2 decision #Mach2GTO #Absolute_Encoders In terms of capacity, is there a significant difference between these mounts?
The 1100 seems very slightly heavier but can be separated easily into 2 parts. On paper, it appears to have much greater weight bearing capacity. What am I missing?
|
|
|
|
Mach2 issue: noise from dec motor housing, potential free screw inside
Andrea Lucchetti
Hello AP,
this evening I grabbed my Mach2 and noticed/heard the typical noise of a screw (small part in any case) going around in the DEC motor housing. it could be in the DEC housing but most probably in the motor housing. I think it is there from the very beginning, as the mount it is brand new: it arrived in July and has just 2 nights of operation. I'd like to open the motor housing to check but I will wait for directions from AP people. Thank you very much, Andrea-Italy
|
|
|
|
Re: AP1100 vs mach2 decision
#Mach2GTO
#Absolute_Encoders
Bill Long
It does. It's also more expensive with encoders.
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Ram Viswanathan <ramviswanathan@...>
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 3:18 PM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Subject: [ap-gto] AP1100 vs mach2 decision #Mach2GTO #Absolute_Encoders In terms of capacity, is there a significant difference between these mounts? What am I missing?
|
|
|
|
AP1100 vs mach2 decision
#Mach2GTO
#Absolute_Encoders
In terms of capacity, is there a significant difference between these mounts? What am I missing?
|
|
|
|
Re: PEMPro vs PHD2
#Guiding
Bill Long
Its not Windows Defender causing this problem. This is starting to get old.
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Joe Zeglinski <J.Zeglinski@...>
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 1:52 PM To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] PEMPro vs PHD2 #Guiding Hi Curtis and Ray,
If you aren’t aware, the “new Win-10 DEFENDER” antivirus program that always came free with the OS, has a newly “enabled” default feature in the recent Win-10 Build-2004 screw-up.
Defender is supposed to bow out and “deactivate itself” if it finds a paid subscription version of any other antivirus program, so there would be no potential conflict of interests. Otherwise, DEFENDER (now) does the same as the paid versions, and
(now) has its own Microsoft researched list of PUP’s (Potentially Unwanted Programs). It used to be check marked only on Enterprise versions of Win-10, but (now) is checkmark enabled for ALL versions.
I originally disabled Defender when I discovered from its history list, that it removed apps that I had used for decades. Then, upon further reading MS website explanations for each such case, I discovered that Defender is in fact “more meticulous”,
than perhaps most others. So, I re-enabled DEFENDER, because it seemed to find Bloatware we sometimes miss, or ignore.
Microsoft’s Defender now Quarantines and eventually removes any “Bloatware” that tags along with some downloads. For example, CCLEAN from Piriform (now fully owned by AVAST), is found quite acceptable by something like MalwareBytes, but Defender
will NOT let such downloaded PUP extras remain very long on the PC. It might be a free copy of AVAST antivirus (or other things), that the user “missed unchecking” during the initial download screens. Defender does not tolerate tag-along apps that are usually,
bit not always, third-party programs, even free trial opps.
So, I wonder if the real problem you have been having, is that CCDWARE adds a checkmark (by default), for other trial CCDWARE (or other apps like Chrome Browser), which then makes it look like a “PUP” to Defender lurking behind the scene, blocking
further download.
In the end, it isn’t CCDWARE that is the problem, offering website visitors more extra’s, than the perhaps less tolerant MS DEFENDER would like them to do.
Joe Z.
From: CurtisC via groups.io
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 1:46 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] PEMPro vs PHD2 #Guiding
CCDWare: I have McAfee. I would have preferred Norton, but McAfee came with my Dell computer. Last night it flagged CCDWare as "suspicious," just as Chris reports.
|
|
|
|
Re: PEMPro vs PHD2
#Guiding
Joe Zeglinski
Hi Curtis and Ray,
If you aren’t aware, the “new Win-10 DEFENDER” antivirus
program that always came free with the OS, has a newly “enabled” default feature
in the recent Win-10 Build-2004 screw-up.
Defender is supposed to bow out and “deactivate
itself” if it finds a paid subscription version of any other antivirus program,
so there would be no potential conflict of interests. Otherwise, DEFENDER (now)
does the same as the paid versions, and (now) has its own Microsoft researched
list of PUP’s (Potentially Unwanted Programs). It used to be check marked only
on Enterprise versions of Win-10, but (now) is checkmark enabled for ALL
versions.
I originally disabled Defender when I discovered from
its history list, that it removed apps that I had used for decades. Then, upon
further reading MS website explanations for each such case, I discovered that
Defender is in fact “more meticulous”, than perhaps most others. So, I
re-enabled DEFENDER, because it seemed to find Bloatware we sometimes miss, or
ignore.
Microsoft’s Defender now Quarantines and eventually
removes any “Bloatware” that tags along with some downloads. For example, CCLEAN
from Piriform (now fully owned by AVAST), is found quite acceptable
by something like MalwareBytes, but Defender will NOT let such downloaded PUP
extras remain very long on the PC. It might be a free copy of AVAST
antivirus (or other things), that the user “missed unchecking” during the
initial download screens. Defender does not tolerate tag-along apps that are
usually, bit not always, third-party programs, even free trial opps.
So, I wonder if the real problem you have been having,
is that CCDWARE adds a checkmark (by default), for other trial CCDWARE (or other
apps like Chrome Browser), which then makes it look like a “PUP” to Defender
lurking behind the scene, blocking further download.
In the end, it isn’t CCDWARE that is the problem,
offering website visitors more extra’s, than the perhaps less
tolerant MS DEFENDER would like them to do.
Joe Z.
From: CurtisC via groups.io
Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 1:46 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] PEMPro vs PHD2 #Guiding CCDWare:
I have McAfee. I would have preferred Norton, but McAfee came with my Dell
computer. Last night it flagged CCDWare as "suspicious," just as Chris
reports.
|
|
|
|
Re: PEMPro vs PHD2
#Guiding
CurtisC <calypte@...>
CCDWare: I have McAfee. I would have preferred Norton, but McAfee came with my Dell computer. Last night it flagged CCDWare as "suspicious," just as Chris reports.
|
|
|
|
Re: PEMPro vs PHD2
#Guiding
Ray, I have lots of logs, going back to July. I eliminated all but the latest one. I put the old ones in an "old" folder. I didn't throw them away. You want to see them all? A few are aborted runs -- I didn't like where it was going on, so I killed it. I've been doing PEMPro runs almost every night, twice last night. I'll fiddle with the balance (which is spot-on exact now) or gear mesh and try again. Last night I was getting 19+ p-to-p, but it was smooth, so I loaded it to the mount. Probably unrelated, but just before I shut down and went to bed last night, I tried some 5 min test shots of NGC 7331, and I had fantastic guiding, even the tiniest stars were round.
Edited to add: It's often said that one definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result. Guilty!
|
|
|