Date   

Scavenger Hunt - 4" Flattener and TCC (S155EDFFF and 155TCC)

Tyrel Smith
 

Have this on the AP-UG as well. Trying to track down these two items. If anyone knows where I might find one that can be coaxed from the grips of its owner, please message me off-list. I have a 140 begging to be used for imaging.

4" Prime Focus Field Flattener (S155EDFFF)

0.76x CCD Telecompressor Corrector (155TCC)


Re: Mach2 - Pollux not in correct position

Don Anderson
 

Liam
Is the bug in the 4.19 version as well?

Don Anderson


On Tuesday, March 30, 2021, 02:42:53 p.m. MDT, Liam Plybon <liam@...> wrote:


Howdy,

 

I took a closer look at the database around Pollux. 5 stars are affected. Here is a table of the affected stars in the database, and the coordinates that they currently have. As a workaround for now, you can use the star on the left to slew to the star on the right. Note that Algiedi is correct in the database.

 

Star in Database:

Coordinates go to:

PolarisA

Polis

Polis

Pollux

Pollux

Porrima

Porrima

Praecipua

Praecipu

Algiedi

 

Thanks for helping us find and confirm this bug, everyone! We will work on a fix for this and it will be in the next release of the V5 keypad firmware.

 

Liam Plybon

Astro-Physics

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Eric Weiner
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2021 11:35 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 - Pollux not in correct position

 

It’s not just Pollux


Re: Mach2 - Pollux not in correct position

M Hambrick
 

Thanks Liam

As for the keypad software, is there any timing on when the latest version will be available to the CP4 users ? There were several forum members (myself included) who were interested in sending their keypads in to have the RA / DEC / REV button replaced to match the function with the new software.

Mike


Re: Mach2 transport case?

ernie.mastroianni@...
 

My apologies Jeff and the A-P group, and glad you looked closely. I was mistaken, I have the Seahorse 920, and NOT the 830. It has a width of 13.88 inches, which is critical to get the width of the mount to fit snugly. The Mach 2 would never fit into the 830. 

To be clear, pictured here is the Seahorse 920
Ernie


Re: Mach2 - Pollux not in correct position

Mike Pigney
 

Thanks for finding the source of the problem Liam.

Mike


Re: Mach2 transport case?

Jeffc
 

Thx for the pointer!   I was also looking ay Seahorse as a less expensive alternative .. I will be transporting the mount myself and don't need an airline safe case.
It is a tad tight for me... I have the saddle up on the rear set of holes... and then the other day I switched to the 16" saddle for the 12" SCT.
I'm also looking for a case that doesn't have alot of volume in the vertical -- I'm challenged for vertical space in the car.
And... I believe these are HALF the weight of an empty pelican if the specs on amazon are correct.

According to amazon, the 830 has a "width" of 11 inches inside.   I could probably go up a size and it still wont break the bank.
E.g. the 920 is "interior Dimensions: 22.12 x 13.54 x 8.50 . Case weight: 14.23 lbs"
I think something like this will be better than the Lowe's "Commander" storage tote bin (which i have been using for the 1100).

thx

-jeff


On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 1:46 PM <ernie.mastroianni@...> wrote:
Hi Jeff C.

Thanks for this post, you inspired me to look for a travel case. I found this: A Seahorse 830 equipment case. Arrived today. It fits my Mach2 precisely, without removing the dovetail clamp or adjusting my latitude of 43 degrees north. When I close the case, it does not even move around inside, despite the complete lack of padding. I'll probably add a bottom layer anyway. Ordered from Specialtycases.com.
Ernie


Re: Mach2 transport case?

ernie.mastroianni@...
 

Hi Jeff C.

Thanks for this post, you inspired me to look for a travel case. I found this: A Seahorse 830 equipment case. Arrived today. It fits my Mach2 precisely, without removing the dovetail clamp or adjusting my latitude of 43 degrees north. When I close the case, it does not even move around inside, despite the complete lack of padding. I'll probably add a bottom layer anyway. Ordered from Specialtycases.com.
Ernie


Re: Mach2 - Pollux not in correct position

 

Howdy,

 

I took a closer look at the database around Pollux. 5 stars are affected. Here is a table of the affected stars in the database, and the coordinates that they currently have. As a workaround for now, you can use the star on the left to slew to the star on the right. Note that Algiedi is correct in the database.

 

Star in Database:

Coordinates go to:

PolarisA

Polis

Polis

Pollux

Pollux

Porrima

Porrima

Praecipua

Praecipu

Algiedi

 

Thanks for helping us find and confirm this bug, everyone! We will work on a fix for this and it will be in the next release of the V5 keypad firmware.

 

Liam Plybon

Astro-Physics

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Eric Weiner
Sent: Monday, March 29, 2021 11:35 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 - Pollux not in correct position

 

It’s not just Pollux


Re: Mach2 Slew Speed, Power, and Voltage Question #Mach2GTO

Seb@stro
 

Thank you Mike! Much appreciated!

Sébastien 


Re: Mach2 Slew Speed, Power, and Voltage Question #Mach2GTO

John Upton
 

Mike,

   Thank you so much! That seals it then; I will continue to use the 24 volt converter for a dedicated power connection to the Mach2. I can understand the need for the hysteresis although I had not considered that aspect before. Nice touch! Thanks again for the details.

John


Re: Mach2 Slew Speed, Power, and Voltage Question #Mach2GTO

michaeljhanson@...
 

Gents,

To answer the prior question, the input voltage threshold for limiting the max slew speed to 1200x is 19.0 volts on the way up, and 18.0 volts on the way down.  Meaning, you're limited to 1200x until the input voltage rises above 19.0,  Once it rises above 19.0, you'll retain 1800x unless the input voltage then drops below 18.0. The 1.0V hysteresis window is to avoid "flickering" back and forth between thresholds.  Realize there will be losses in the power cable, and a (Schottky) diode voltage drop in the unit as well.  So, the input voltage seen by the GTOCP5 will be lower than what is reported at a power supply.  This means a 19.0 volt power source will not quite allow you to get 1800x slew rate.

Regards,
Mike Hanson


Re: Mach2 Slew Speed, Power, and Voltage Question #Mach2GTO

Seb@stro
 

John,

I am where I want to be. I am using a NUC10 system with an i7 six core processor. I spec'ed it that way for several reasons.

Of course, only you know your requirements.  With such a beast, I suppose you can Live Stack, watch a 4K/60fps movie and play GTA-V while you do planetary imaging... (Does it make coffee ? kidding 😉). To me, apart from low power, size and weight were also a main consideration as it'll be piggybacked on an EdgeHD 8 + small refractor riding the Mach2.

FWIW, the NEO comes with 8GB DDR4 2400MHz (upgradable to 16) and a Quad-core CPU clocked at 1.5 GHz (turbo up to 2.8), 240GB SATA SSD and only cost around $300. But I haven't tried it in the field yet, so real world power consumption is TBD.

Nice battery box BTW.

I am a bit surprised no one from AP answered your original question yet (max slew speed vs input voltage threshold). That would interest me as well. For now anyway, I'll stick with 12V all around as I don't need the ultrafast slewing.

Sébastien

_._,_._,_


Re: 2021 production plans for the 1600GTO?

Brian McFarland
 

Hello Karen,

Thank you for the reply! I have to admit I'm a little surprised at all this.  I've shopped with OPT for years and always had good experiences, and they are a solid supporter of our local astronomy club and our outreach efforts.  Now it sounds like I unknowingly provided them with an interest-free loan!

Having said all that I'm inclined to let it ride, at least for now. I can always get a refund from them if things look like they're going south.  The timeline you describe is fine (I'm not in a huge hurry), and in fact prior to my "loan to OPT", I signed up on your website for notification to be added to the waiting list (I think that's what it's called). At any rate, I look forward to receiving and installing it in my observatory in the near future.

Thank you again,

Brian McFarland


Re: Refining Pempro PEC curves?

Ray Gralak
 

The curves should be added unless the original curve had to be inverted before uploading.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tom Blahovici
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 9:36 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Refining Pempro PEC curves?

Hi Ray,
I have not actually tried this. I'm just trying to understand what is going on. In the files section here is a post from
Roland, where he does this for the 1100. It's the first folder in the list. Here he subtracts the curve which makes more
sense. In your tutorial you show it being added.
Tom


Re: Refining Pempro PEC curves?

Tom Blahovici
 

Hi Ray,
I have not actually tried this. I'm just trying to understand what is going on. In the files section here is a post from Roland, where he does this for the 1100. It's the first folder in the list. Here he subtracts the curve which makes more sense. In your tutorial you show it being added.
Tom


Re: Mac Desktop version of SkySafari Updated today to 6.8.X

midmoastro
 

Thank you. You were clear I just had 'ipad version' stuck in my head for some reason. After going to the App Store and searching for SkySafari 6 Pro, I can see the update. 


Re: Mac Desktop version of SkySafari Updated today to 6.8.X

Allen Ruckle
 

midmoastro,

maybe I wasn’t clear enough,  this is the Mac OS version of SkySafari that is now available,  updated to include the Astro-Physics mount parking positions that have been available since January in the iOS version.

aruckle


Re: Mac Desktop version of SkySafari Updated today to 6.8.X

midmoastro
 

Thanks for this. I wonder how far behind MacOS will be. I'd like to get this update for my Mac.


Re: Mach2 Slew Speed, Power, and Voltage Question #Mach2GTO

Kenneth Tan
 

Most NUCs will run on 12 v but if it drops below that it will Cut off. So better to be higher or if not to get a voltage stabiliser

On Tue, 30 Mar 2021 at 20:57, ap@... <ap@...> wrote:

That’s not necessarily true.  If you browse the specifications at the Intel site, it varies a lot.  Some generations are strictly 19v, some are a mixture of 12-24v, some 12-19v.   It varies by CPU (maybe and kit but it looked more like CPU).

 

The marketing literature is often vague, but Intel publishes the actual requirements.  Here’s an example side by side of two 11th gen models:

 

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/compare.html?productIds=205038,212519

 

The first is 19 only, the second 12-24.

 

Buy carefully.

 

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Tom Blahovici via groups.io
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2021 12:18 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 Slew Speed, Power, and Voltage Question #Mach2GTO

 

Hi

BTW, if you are using an Intel NUC, 19V is not necessary. They work just fine at 12V as per specs.
My NUC is an i5 with SSD, and thurnderbird 3 to 10G Base T adapter. It works reliably with no issues.
Might save a little space and battery power.
Tom


Re: Mach2 Slew Speed, Power, and Voltage Question #Mach2GTO

John Upton
 

Seb@stro & Kenneth Tan.

   Regarding the suggestions that I need a lower power mount-side computer, I am where I want to be. I am using a NUC10 system with an i7 six core processor. I spec'ed it that way for several reasons. You are right that DSO imaging is not very taxing on a PC. However, there are other imaging methods than just long exposure DSO and some of them require more compute cycles from the CPU.

   I built my mount-side mini-PC to be power efficient in normal use. The NUC is running with 16 GB RAM and 500 GB fast NVMe storage. If I turn it loose, it draws as much as 90+ Watts. However, I use a custom configuration which allows it to run DSO imaging at an average of about 12 W with an average of 15% CPU utilization. I think that compares well to lower end Mini-PCs which run at similar power levels of 8 to 12 W at 50% or higher CPU utilization.

   I have plenty of battery power available to me. As of now with the Mach2, it is about the highest power consumption component of my imaging rig. My testing so far is showing a total power usage of about 35 Watts with the Mach2, cameras, and NUC (running Cartes du Ciel, PHD2, Sequence Generator Pro, APCC Pro, and PixInsight (also with a low power configuration)). Prior to the Mach2, this was running about 24 W with my SkyWatcher mounts so the Mach2 has increased the power draw substantially. (For the benefits, though, the Mach2 is worth that extra current it uses.)

   My last set of changes for my Mach2 addition is to rewire my DIY battery box for direct output to the Mach2 using only Anderson PowerPole connections. I currently use the standard astronomy / automotive 12 v cigarette sockets for all power plugs on the battery. (That was done because I once saw a person at a regional star party whose imaging was shut down due to a failure of a custom PowerPole power cable for his rig. No one else there had a spare PowerPole cable to loan him. Lots of folks had spare cigarette cables to offer. The lesson learned by me is to make up spares of any custom cables or else keep them all standard.)

   I knew that the cigarette plug was the weak link for higher currents. It has served me well but I had never had a need to draw up to 7+ Amps through one before. It was interesting to see the effects of significant overheating inside the plug from the Mach2 high speed slews.

John

4821 - 4840 of 82281