Date   

Clutch Knobs vs. the Gearbox Release Levers

Andrew J
 

I have a question about when to use the Clutch Knobs vs. the Gearbox Release Levers. I currently have a Mach1 in my observatory and when balancing or moving the scope to different park positions I typically just use the Gearbox release levers rather then messing around with the clutch knobs. I have Arthritis in my hands, and getting the clutch knobs tightened without using an Allen wrench can be difficult. So I almost never use the clutches. However, I have read somewhere that I risk damaging the gears if I let the mount axis slip while releasing the Gearbox levers. I try to make sure I always have a firm hold on the scope before I release the gearbox levers, but I suppose there is always a little movement when the axis becomes free. I have never really fully understood when and why I would use the clutch knobs vs. the Gearbox release. The Gearbox release is obviously much easier and I don’t have to mess around with an Allen wrench. I am hoping some of the gurus here can provide some guidance on when to use one over the other when adjusting the position of an Axis.

 

I just put down a deposit for a 1100GTO-AEL mount and before I start using the new mount after it arrives I would like to better understand the intended purpose of Gearbox Release vs. the Clutch Knobs in order to minimize the risk of damaging the new mount. At some point I may send in my Mach1 to have it inspected just to make sure I have not damaged the gears over the years.

 

I also have a related question. How tight do the clutch knobs need to be in order for them to function properly? Given the limited strength in my hands, I tend to hand tighten them and then use and Allen wrench to give them another quarter turn. However, I have no idea if this is the “correct” way of tightening the clutches. Without needing to get out a torque wrench, is there a rule of thumb to follow when tighten the clutch knobs? Another reason I almost never used them on my Mach1 is that I didn’t want to have to worry about getting them tightened down correctly. I would think they should be loose enough so if there is ever a pier crash (hopefully never happens… again) that the mount would slip rather than keep pushing the OTA into the mount. After I tighten the clutch knobs I generally push against the OTA and see if I can get the clutches to move but still tight enough that they would not move without a fair bit of force. Once I get the clutches tightened, I then use the Gearbox release knobs to put it back in a known park position before unparking the mount.

 

Anyway, this is something that has always confused me so thought I would ask before I start using the new 1100GTO mount.

 

Thanks in advance for the useful feedback.

 

Clear Skies,

Andrew J


Re: Pay Attention to Those Declination Top Plate Locking Knobs

Jeffc
 

With the 1100, if one can handle the heft, the mount can be left in the "assembled" state (sans Dec plate and saddle) which reduces the setup/teardown time a bit (and simplifies the issue due to the through-mount cables).
Note the removable Dec place comes in real handy in this situation.
I also use the 1100 in a "portable" fashion... on a Losmandy HD (old style) tripod.   The Losmandy HD Tripod adapter remains on the mount for transport, and assembly just requires inserting the three large knurled bolts.    There are other details of course like installing the Control Box.    But I will warn... lifting the whole mount is a "heft".. i think it weighs about 40lbs... which to me seems about the same as the 1200 RA axis.   (I'm not sure I would recommend this tripod... it is definitely more than good enough for visual... with imaging the verdict is still out for me... I had some guiding issues but it might be operator error.)

Lick-Public-Program.jpeg


On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 9:44 PM Shailesh Trivedi <strivedi@...> wrote:
I use an A-P portable pier, and I set up and take the mount down every night, I only use the RAPAS for polar alignment,

Mike I am impressed that you can take the scope down every night and use RAPAS as the only polar alignment method. I have a TEC 180 currently on a Paramount MX and am contemplating using my AP1100 with AE. I too have a portable setup but with the Losmandy HD tripod.  I have tried 3x 20lb counter-weights (or could be 18lb, I forget), and one 10lb cw for balancing indoors,  to try the TEC on my AP1100 with a FLI 16803 + FW and MMOAG, My current AP1100 setup is a modest Tak FSQ106 with a Moravian G4 but I am still at the starting phase with getting it polar aligned using Pempro since I do not have visibility of Polaris even though I have the RAPAS.

Shailesh


Re: Pay Attention to Those Declination Top Plate Locking Knobs

Shailesh Trivedi
 

I use an A-P portable pier, and I set up and take the mount down every night, I only use the RAPAS for polar alignment,

Mike I am impressed that you can take the scope down every night and use RAPAS as the only polar alignment method. I have a TEC 180 currently on a Paramount MX and am contemplating using my AP1100 with AE. I too have a portable setup but with the Losmandy HD tripod.  I have tried 3x 20lb counter-weights (or could be 18lb, I forget), and one 10lb cw for balancing indoors,  to try the TEC on my AP1100 with a FLI 16803 + FW and MMOAG, My current AP1100 setup is a modest Tak FSQ106 with a Moravian G4 but I am still at the starting phase with getting it polar aligned using Pempro since I do not have visibility of Polaris even though I have the RAPAS.

Shailesh


Re: APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

Ray Gralak
 

Another question......what kind of problems might i see if i accidently left the pointing model
running during a camera guiding calibration and running of pempro?
That won't be a problem. You don't need to turn off tracking rate correction for autoguider calibration.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of david w pearson via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 7:32 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

Thanks Ray! Another question......what kind of problems might i see if i accidently left the pointing model
running during a camera guiding calibration and running of pempro? I think i had a brain fart and forgot to
turn off.
thanks
dave


On Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 06:39:10 PM PST, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:


Hi Dave,

The initial dec tracking error is probably just dec backlash runout. Until the backlash is taken up the dec axis
wasn’t moving despite the non-zero dec tracking rate.

Regarding pointing accuracy, try opening APPM and doing a plate solve and recal with APPM. If that doesn’t
help it may be time to create a new model.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of david w pearson via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:29 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

sorry for confusion......AP1200.
I understand that the APCC pointing model not only improved pointing but helped tracking according to Ray.
I experienced it myself after creating a pointing model.
Since i have an issue that involves APCC pointing model, maxim DL guiding, and AP1200 i need to
understand
APCC part in the process to determine how to resolve. I thought that APCC issues delta mount RA/DEC
commands according to the pointing model.
My question is does these delta RA/DEC commands require a convergence over time or not?
Meaning if the polar alignment error was vastly different from what the pointing models assumes, what
happens and how does APCC and mount behave?
thanks
dave



On Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 10:23:52 AM PST, Roland Christen via groups.io
<chris1011@...> wrote:




The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error

The Dec axis doesn't track. There is no tracking in Dec, only the RA axis tracks at sidereal rate. Do you mean
Dec Guiding by any chance?

APCC pointing model does not set custom tracking unless you turn on the custom rate in APPM.

Which mount are we talking about?


Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: david w pearson via groups.io <p.davidw@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Feb 23, 2021 11:43 am
Subject: [ap-gto] APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking



Notice something new with my autoguiding, Maxim DL,APCC pointing model setup upon initial guiding during
startup. thereafter it doesn't happen.
The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error before converging back to normal at
0.1 to 0.3 arcsec in about 60 seconds.
During this time, i use an aggressiveness of 10 In maxim DL. Does the APCC pointing model tracking
algorithm try to compensation for DEC tracking
errors, using the pointing model, that would account for the 60 sec tracking error convergence? Also i
have
noticed that my pointing point model probably needs to be redone as
my pointing errors seem to be worse than right after model build. My first impression is my polar alignment
may be further off than the pointing model is assuming?
Any insight that would direct me toward the solution would be appreciated.
thanks
dave

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics







Re: Pay Attention to Those Declination Top Plate Locking Knobs

M Hambrick
 

Hi Joe

Great suggestions about using tape to mark out setting circles. I may give that a try. I used pencil to make the marks because I wanted to be able to remove them if necessary. The pencil smudges very easily however.

Mike


Re: Pay Attention to Those Declination Top Plate Locking Knobs

M Hambrick
 

George & Shailesh

Good point about the holding screws. For some reason I seem to recall reading in the mount assembly instructions that they did not need to be installed if the user was planning to remove the declination top plate. Anyway, for whatever reason I never installed them. It was not long after I got the mount that I got a DOVELM162 which eliminated the need to ever remove the declination top plate. As soon as I finish this post I am going to install them.

As for the 180 EDT on the 1100 GTO mount, I have had no issues with balancing. As far as loads go, I have the scope with a pretty large and heavy SBIG STXL16200 camera and filter wheel. For guiding I use a Tele-Vue Pronto with a SBIG ST2000-XM camera piggybacked on top of the 180 EDT rings. I also have a ST-i guiding camera, but I really like the wide field of view with the ST2000. It is much easier to find guide stars. For balancing you can see my counterweight arrangement in the attached sketch. If I had a couple more 18 lb counterweights I would move more of the weight up to the top of the counterweight shaft to minimize the moment arm.

My guiding is decent enough, but I think I could do better. With an image scale of 1.1 arc-seconds per pixel, the 180 EDT really shows poor guiding. Roland has stated on many occasions that it is a bad idea to use a piggyback guide scope due to flexure. I use an A-P portable pier, and I set up and take the mount down every night, I only use the RAPAS for polar alignment, but this seems to be pretty accurate. I have not updated the PEC since I bought the mount. 

I use MaxIm DL for guiding, running separate sessions for imaging and guiding. Lately I have been working on my guiding parameters (guide exposure time, exposure delay, etc) to see if I can get better guiding, and based on Roland's comments in another post, I am going to try multi-star guiding as well. I may try to invest in one of the A-P guide scopes that mounts directly on the main OTA to eliminate the piggyback guiding, but the 250 mm focal length of the A-P guide scope seems rather short for the 180.

Mike



Re: APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

david w pearson
 

Thanks Ray!  Another question......what kind of problems might i see if i accidently left the pointing model running during a camera guiding calibration and running of pempro?     I think i had a brain fart and forgot to turn off.
thanks
dave


On Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 06:39:10 PM PST, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:


Hi Dave,

The initial dec tracking error is probably just dec backlash runout. Until the backlash is taken up the dec axis wasn’t moving despite the non-zero dec tracking rate.

Regarding pointing accuracy, try opening APPM and doing a plate solve and recal with APPM. If that doesn’t help it may be time to create a new model.

-Ray


> -----Original Message-----
> From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of david w pearson via groups.io
> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:29 PM
> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking
>
> sorry for confusion......AP1200.
> I understand that the APCC pointing  model not only improved pointing but helped tracking according to Ray.
> I experienced it myself after creating a pointing model.
> Since i have an issue that involves APCC pointing model, maxim DL guiding, and AP1200 i need to understand
> APCC part in the process to determine how to resolve.  I thought that APCC issues delta mount RA/DEC
> commands according to the pointing model.
> My question is does these delta RA/DEC commands require a convergence over time or not?
> Meaning if the polar alignment error was vastly different from what the pointing models assumes, what
> happens and how does APCC and mount behave?
> thanks
> dave
>
>
>
> On Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 10:23:52 AM PST, Roland Christen via groups.io
> <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>     The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error
>
> The Dec axis doesn't track. There is no tracking in Dec, only the RA axis tracks at sidereal rate. Do you mean
> Dec Guiding by any chance?
>
> APCC pointing model does not set custom tracking unless you turn on the custom rate in APPM.
>
> Which mount are we talking about?
>
>
> Rolando
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: david w pearson via groups.io <p.davidw=yahoo.com@groups.io>
> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
> Sent: Tue, Feb 23, 2021 11:43 am
> Subject: [ap-gto] APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking
>
>
>
> Notice something new with my autoguiding, Maxim DL,APCC pointing model setup upon initial guiding during
> startup.  thereafter it doesn't happen.
> The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error before converging back to normal at
> 0.1 to 0.3 arcsec in about 60 seconds.
> During this time, i use an aggressiveness of 10 In maxim DL.      Does the APCC pointing model tracking
> algorithm try to compensation for DEC tracking
> errors, using the pointing model, that would account for the 60 sec tracking error convergence?      Also i have
> noticed that my pointing point model probably needs to be redone as
>  my pointing errors seem to be worse than right after model build.    My first impression is my polar alignment
> may be further off than the pointing model is assuming?
> Any insight that would direct me toward the solution would be appreciated.
> thanks
> dave
>
> --
> Roland Christen
> Astro-Physics
>







Re: APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Dave,

The initial dec tracking error is probably just dec backlash runout. Until the backlash is taken up the dec axis wasn’t moving despite the non-zero dec tracking rate.

Regarding pointing accuracy, try opening APPM and doing a plate solve and recal with APPM. If that doesn’t help it may be time to create a new model.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of david w pearson via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:29 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

sorry for confusion......AP1200.
I understand that the APCC pointing model not only improved pointing but helped tracking according to Ray.
I experienced it myself after creating a pointing model.
Since i have an issue that involves APCC pointing model, maxim DL guiding, and AP1200 i need to understand
APCC part in the process to determine how to resolve. I thought that APCC issues delta mount RA/DEC
commands according to the pointing model.
My question is does these delta RA/DEC commands require a convergence over time or not?
Meaning if the polar alignment error was vastly different from what the pointing models assumes, what
happens and how does APCC and mount behave?
thanks
dave



On Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 10:23:52 AM PST, Roland Christen via groups.io
<chris1011@...> wrote:




The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error

The Dec axis doesn't track. There is no tracking in Dec, only the RA axis tracks at sidereal rate. Do you mean
Dec Guiding by any chance?

APCC pointing model does not set custom tracking unless you turn on the custom rate in APPM.

Which mount are we talking about?


Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: david w pearson via groups.io <p.davidw@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Feb 23, 2021 11:43 am
Subject: [ap-gto] APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking



Notice something new with my autoguiding, Maxim DL,APCC pointing model setup upon initial guiding during
startup. thereafter it doesn't happen.
The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error before converging back to normal at
0.1 to 0.3 arcsec in about 60 seconds.
During this time, i use an aggressiveness of 10 In maxim DL. Does the APCC pointing model tracking
algorithm try to compensation for DEC tracking
errors, using the pointing model, that would account for the 60 sec tracking error convergence? Also i have
noticed that my pointing point model probably needs to be redone as
my pointing errors seem to be worse than right after model build. My first impression is my polar alignment
may be further off than the pointing model is assuming?
Any insight that would direct me toward the solution would be appreciated.
thanks
dave

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

david w pearson
 

sorry for confusion......AP1200.
I understand that the APCC pointing  model not only improved pointing but helped tracking according to Ray.
I experienced it myself after creating a pointing model.
Since i have an issue that involves APCC pointing model, maxim DL guiding, and AP1200 i need to understand APCC part in the process to determine how to resolve.  I thought that APCC issues delta mount RA/DEC commands according to the pointing model.
My question is does these delta RA/DEC commands require a convergence over time or not?
Meaning if the polar alignment error was vastly different from what the pointing models assumes, what happens and how does APCC and mount behave?
thanks
dave



On Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 10:23:52 AM PST, Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:



The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error
The Dec axis doesn't track. There is no tracking in Dec, only the RA axis tracks at sidereal rate. Do you mean Dec Guiding by any chance?
APCC pointing model does not set custom tracking unless you turn on the custom rate in APPM.
Which mount are we talking about?

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: david w pearson via groups.io <p.davidw@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Feb 23, 2021 11:43 am
Subject: [ap-gto] APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

 
Notice something new with my autoguiding, Maxim DL,APCC pointing model setup upon initial guiding during startup.   thereafter it doesn't happen.
The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error before converging back to normal at 0.1 to 0.3 arcsec in about 60 seconds.
During this time, i use an aggressiveness of 10 In maxim DL.      Does the APCC pointing model tracking algorithm try to compensation for DEC tracking 
errors, using the pointing model, that would account for the 60 sec tracking error convergence?      Also i have noticed that my pointing point model probably needs to be redone as
 my pointing errors seem to be worse than right after model build.     My first impression is my polar alignment may be further off than the pointing model is assuming?
Any insight that would direct me toward the solution would be appreciated.
thanks
dave

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Sticky 600E Controller Button

George
 

John,

 

If you want to send it to us, we can replace the buttons for you.

 

Regards,

 

George

 

George Whitney

Astro-Physics, Inc.

Phone:  815-222-6538 (direct line)

Phone:  815-282-1513 (office)

Email:  george@...

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Elenillor
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 3:24 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Sticky 600E Controller Button

 

Not a goto mount but my mid 90's 600E stepper motor hand controller has an intermittently sticky north button. Any suggestions on how to fix it? 

Taking the cover off the controller it seems straightfoward to unsolder and replace a button. Any suggestion of a decent replacement button?

I removed the covers on the N and W buttons so it was easy to feel the difference in the dark.

John


Sticky 600E Controller Button

Elenillor
 

Not a goto mount but my mid 90's 600E stepper motor hand controller has an intermittently sticky north button. Any suggestions on how to fix it? 

Taking the cover off the controller it seems straightfoward to unsolder and replace a button. Any suggestion of a decent replacement button?

I removed the covers on the N and W buttons so it was easy to feel the difference in the dark.

John


Re: Pay Attention to Those Declination Top Plate Locking Knobs

Shailesh Trivedi
 

Mike,

Are you referring to the silver knobs under the DEC plate? If they come lose do you not have holding screws? 

On a side note: do you have any tracking or balancing issues with the 180EDT? Is it on a permanent pier or a tripod? 

I have a TEC180 and am wondering about a moment-arm for my AP1100. 

Shailesh


Re: Pay Attention to Those Declination Top Plate Locking Knobs

Joe Zeglinski
 

Hi Mike,
 
   Nice job on your pencilled setting circles.  I was thinking the same thing about perhaps AP providing “stick-on-tape” setting circles as visual aids for their mounts, as an option. That would save production work and materials & stocking for the old fashioned types. However, I suppose the pencil (or inked) marked ones can easily wash off or smudge, after all that hard work.
 
    Easy to make permanent ones – just measure and test print such setting angle strips  first, on paper. Later , when they seem to be correct with their ends taped/joined, plastic ones could then be printed with a laser printer,  onto “overhead projection cell” material, as a clear acetate glue-on. You might have to print on the sheet’s diagonal, depending on axle cap diameter, to fit – or even as two pieces, 180 degree strips. I would first “reverse” the printing image, so that once it is printed (mirror imaged) and flipped over, the lettering would be on the back side of the strip, protected from dew etc.
 
    Might even glue the printed strips onto “Glow in the dark”  tape, before applying that tape to the axle. That way, it will be easier to read the angles with the glow backlighting effect,  even without a permanent battery operated LED indicator bulb. But don’t forget to account for the tape’s thickness, adding to the diameter, when measuring the printed setting circle  strips.
 
Joe Z.


Re: APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

Roland Christen
 


The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error
The Dec axis doesn't track. There is no tracking in Dec, only the RA axis tracks at sidereal rate. Do you mean Dec Guiding by any chance?
APCC pointing model does not set custom tracking unless you turn on the custom rate in APPM.
Which mount are we talking about?

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: david w pearson via groups.io <p.davidw@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Feb 23, 2021 11:43 am
Subject: [ap-gto] APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

 
Notice something new with my autoguiding, Maxim DL,APCC pointing model setup upon initial guiding during startup.   thereafter it doesn't happen.
The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error before converging back to normal at 0.1 to 0.3 arcsec in about 60 seconds.
During this time, i use an aggressiveness of 10 In maxim DL.      Does the APCC pointing model tracking algorithm try to compensation for DEC tracking 
errors, using the pointing model, that would account for the 60 sec tracking error convergence?      Also i have noticed that my pointing point model probably needs to be redone as
 my pointing errors seem to be worse than right after model build.     My first impression is my polar alignment may be further off than the pointing model is assuming?
Any insight that would direct me toward the solution would be appreciated.
thanks
dave

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


APCC pointing model effects on DEC tracking

david w pearson
 

 
Notice something new with my autoguiding, Maxim DL,APCC pointing model setup upon initial guiding during startup.   thereafter it doesn't happen.
The DEC axis tracking error grows up to about 2-3 arc-sec tracking error before converging back to normal at 0.1 to 0.3 arcsec in about 60 seconds.
During this time, i use an aggressiveness of 10 In maxim DL.      Does the APCC pointing model tracking algorithm try to compensation for DEC tracking 
errors, using the pointing model, that would account for the 60 sec tracking error convergence?      Also i have noticed that my pointing point model probably needs to be redone as
 my pointing errors seem to be worse than right after model build.     My first impression is my polar alignment may be further off than the pointing model is assuming?
Any insight that would direct me toward the solution would be appreciated.
thanks
dave


Re: Celestial Fireworks

Peter Nagy
 

Submit to APOD!!!!

Peter 


Re: Pay Attention to Those Declination Top Plate Locking Knobs

George
 

Mike,

 

Remember that there are also Safety Screws for each axis.

 

Regards,

 

George

 

George Whitney

Astro-Physics, Inc.

Phone:  815-222-6538 (direct line)

Phone:  815-282-1513 (office)

Email:  george@...

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of M Hambrick
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 10:59 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Pay Attention to Those Declination Top Plate Locking Knobs

 

Here's a little lesson learned tidbit that I just discovered on my 1100 mount:

I have been noticing lately when setting up the mount with my 180 EDT that there is some play in the dec. axis. I thought that maybe the clutches were not tight enough, but when I checked them they were all tight. Today I was setting up the mount inside the house to do some rebalancing, and when I was attaching the declination axis I noticed a significant movement when I was holding the axis by the mounting plate. When I looked closer it turns out that it was actually the declination top plate that was moving, and when I checked the locking knobs they were loose.

I never touch these knobs, but over the months they must have worked their way loose. So the lesson I took away from this is to check those locking knobs every time I set up the mount.

Check those hand-drawn declination setting circles out in the photo. It sure would be nice to have something more permanent (hint - hint). I made these with a pencil. 

Mike


Pay Attention to Those Declination Top Plate Locking Knobs

M Hambrick
 

Here's a little lesson learned tidbit that I just discovered on my 1100 mount:

I have been noticing lately when setting up the mount with my 180 EDT that there is some play in the dec. axis. I thought that maybe the clutches were not tight enough, but when I checked them they were all tight. Today I was setting up the mount inside the house to do some rebalancing, and when I was attaching the declination axis I noticed a significant movement when I was holding the axis by the mounting plate. When I looked closer it turns out that it was actually the declination top plate that was moving, and when I checked the locking knobs they were loose.

I never touch these knobs, but over the months they must have worked their way loose. So the lesson I took away from this is to check those locking knobs every time I set up the mount.

Check those hand-drawn declination setting circles out in the photo. It sure would be nice to have something more permanent (hint - hint). I made these with a pencil. 

Mike


Re: [ap-ug] Celestial Fireworks

Roland Christen
 

That is one nice image of Jupiter! Thanks for posting

Roland


-----Original Message-----
From: thefamily90 Phillips <thefamily90@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>; main@ap-ug.groups.io <main@ap-ug.groups.io>
Cc: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2021 7:29 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] [ap-ug] Celestial Fireworks

I’ve got one of those original AP 10” F/14.6 Maksutovs. Great for lunar and planetary imaging also.

AP 10”
Damian Peach, Dave Tyler, Jim Phillips

Image.jpeg


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Pete Lardizabal <p14@...>
Sent: Monday, February 22, 2021 8:16:22 PM
To: main@ap-ug.groups.io <main@ap-ug.groups.io>
Cc: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] [ap-ug] Celestial Fireworks
 
“BAM!”

😎

Pete

On Feb 22, 2021, at 7:57 PM, Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:


With the lousy weather this February I decided to reprocess a couple of images taken back in 2011. Can't get decent skies this week or next according to long term weather outlook.
This image was taken with my original 10" F14.6 Mak-Cass. Who says you have to shoot at F5 to get anything. This is with my old STL11K camera, which is still working great.

https://www.astrobin.com/n5nn5a/

Rolando

--
Jim Phillips

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Celestial Fireworks

Roland Christen
 

Back then I almost always did 20 minute exposures.

Roland



-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Mumbower <pmumbower@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Mon, Feb 22, 2021 7:12 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Celestial Fireworks

Wow that is one heck of an image! Do you recall any exposure times, even overall?

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

14101 - 14120 of 90528