Date   

Re: APCC

thefamily90 Phillips
 

Ye gads!!
😂

Thanks,

Jim


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Brian Valente <bvalente@...>
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2021 6:29:37 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC
 

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 3:19 PM thefamily90 Phillips <thefamily90@...> wrote:
I’m not sure why but somehow I found myself looking at the 2013 NEAF review of some Astro-physics mounts and software. I was blown away by the description of the APCC control of the mount. Is there a YouTube video or something else that explains how you set up and use the APCC control?

JimP 



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: APCC

 


On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 3:19 PM thefamily90 Phillips <thefamily90@...> wrote:
I’m not sure why but somehow I found myself looking at the 2013 NEAF review of some Astro-physics mounts and software. I was blown away by the description of the APCC control of the mount. Is there a YouTube video or something else that explains how you set up and use the APCC control?

JimP 



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


APCC

thefamily90 Phillips
 

I’m not sure why but somehow I found myself looking at the 2013 NEAF review of some Astro-physics mounts and software. I was blown away by the description of the APCC control of the mount. Is there a YouTube video or something else that explains how you set up and use the APCC control?

JimP 


Re: Small AP Mount Ideas

Christopher Erickson
 

The G-11 isn't much lighter than the Mach1. And the Losmandy worm block + motor designs are better these days than days past, but still crap.

The GM-8 combined with their Gemini-II isn't a bad solution for a portable mount and is better than all of the far-East stuff. Still nothing like a Mach1. And nothing like the Rainbow Astro mounts for portability. 

"My advice is always free and worth every penny!"

-Christopher Erickson
Observatory Engineer
Summit Kinetics
Waikoloa, Hawaii


Virus-free. www.avg.com


On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 4:48 AM Raymond Lillard <rlillard@...> wrote:

I am on the wait list for a Mach2, but from recent communication with
AP, it will be at least a year before my name comes up.  My concern with
the Mach2 is the weight.  I have a Mach1 which I can muscle around when
mobile and shooting with one of my big guns.  When my name comes up I
will need to think very carefully about its weight.

I also have an iOptron CEM25EC and a good collection of Nikon camera
lenses, the longest focal length is 300mm.  It is good enough to shoot 5
minute subs @300mm with the ASI2600MC.  The stars are just barely oval
at 7 minutes.  This is UNGUIDED with a very precise polar alignment.

I'll omit the details of the mechanical modifications I had to make to
get good polar alignment.  Take my word for it, the machining is
embarrassingly bad and I say the same about the software. I does work,
not because of, but in-spite of...

I said all of that to make a point that I would love to have an similar
offering from AP.  I don't think it would not need to retail for more
than $5k-ish as the tolerances for such wide-field work need not be as
tight as for AP's big mounts.

What about the crazy idea of AP working with Losmandy to put encoders on
a G11 ?  I'd buy one right now.  I'd even help with the firmware
development for free.  I am a semi-retired (sometimes just tired)
engineer who has managed many development projects and written miles of
code to control similar things.

I'm not sure how the Gemini thing would work in this scenario. Maybe it
goes away, maybe not.  A joint effort would not burden AP's overloaded
factory and Losmandy would not need to build a software team.

I too like the feature that the Mach1 and the G11 axes can be separated.

I should have warned everyone at the top that I never know where my
stream-of-consciousness posts will go when I get wound up.

--
Ray


On 4/27/21 4:06 PM, W Hilmo wrote:
> Certainly, if you don't separate the AP1100 axes, it's bigger and heavier than the Mach2.  I do separate them, though, for packing and transport.  The bin in which I carry it would need to be much larger if I didn't separate them.
>
> For what it's worth, I'm no stranger to using big mounts as "portable" mounts.  I take my AP1600 into the field at least once per year, for Oregon Star Party.  Occasionally, I take it to another event or two, but mostly I use the AP1100 as my portable imaging mount.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jeffc
> Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 2:09 PM
> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small AP Mount Ideas
>
>
>
>> On Apr 27, 2021, at 1:13 PM, W Hilmo <y.groups@...> wrote:
>>
>> and I don't think that it's any more portable than my AP1100, since
>> the axes don't separate.
>
> Fwiw… I transport the 1100 (non AE version) with the axis mated.
> It is easier/faster to setup this way given the Dec cable.    The removable Dec/saddle plate is nice because then the whole mount fits in a decent size tub with the Dec plate + 16” saddle removed.
>
> I’m finding the Mach2 definitely takes up less space in the vehicle than the 1100.   The weight of the Mach2 (the part I need to carry off the tripod) is a tad bit less than the 1100 Ra+Dec.
> But yes the Mach2 is surprisingly heavy.
>
> Just another perspective: I prefer the Mach2 over the 1100 since the biggest OTA I’m using is a 12” ACF SCT.   The Mach2 seems to carry it no problem.   (Of course the 1100 I own is non-AE ; this also biases me to the Mach2.)
>
> And for “portable” work , I don’t think I need the 1100 capacity (no observatory here until we move to a different location.)
>
> Background: I acquired the 1100 to “downsize” from a 1200.  Note: I still have the 1200 — it is a bit dated, but is also “portable” and imo a very nice mount.
> I signed up for the “Mach 1 replacement” and was also surprised by the Mach2 size when I saw it at AIC.   Now that I’m using the Mach2 for a bit I’m not at all disappointed by the larger size.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>






Re: Small AP Mount Ideas

Raymond Lillard
 

I am on the wait list for a Mach2, but from recent communication with AP, it will be at least a year before my name comes up. My concern with the Mach2 is the weight. I have a Mach1 which I can muscle around when mobile and shooting with one of my big guns. When my name comes up I will need to think very carefully about its weight.

I also have an iOptron CEM25EC and a good collection of Nikon camera lenses, the longest focal length is 300mm. It is good enough to shoot 5 minute subs @300mm with the ASI2600MC. The stars are just barely oval at 7 minutes. This is UNGUIDED with a very precise polar alignment.

I'll omit the details of the mechanical modifications I had to make to get good polar alignment. Take my word for it, the machining is embarrassingly bad and I say the same about the software. I does work, not because of, but in-spite of...

I said all of that to make a point that I would love to have an similar offering from AP. I don't think it would not need to retail for more than $5k-ish as the tolerances for such wide-field work need not be as tight as for AP's big mounts.

What about the crazy idea of AP working with Losmandy to put encoders on a G11 ? I'd buy one right now. I'd even help with the firmware development for free. I am a semi-retired (sometimes just tired) engineer who has managed many development projects and written miles of code to control similar things.

I'm not sure how the Gemini thing would work in this scenario. Maybe it goes away, maybe not. A joint effort would not burden AP's overloaded factory and Losmandy would not need to build a software team.

I too like the feature that the Mach1 and the G11 axes can be separated.

I should have warned everyone at the top that I never know where my stream-of-consciousness posts will go when I get wound up.

--
Ray

On 4/27/21 4:06 PM, W Hilmo wrote:
Certainly, if you don't separate the AP1100 axes, it's bigger and heavier than the Mach2. I do separate them, though, for packing and transport. The bin in which I carry it would need to be much larger if I didn't separate them.
For what it's worth, I'm no stranger to using big mounts as "portable" mounts. I take my AP1600 into the field at least once per year, for Oregon Star Party. Occasionally, I take it to another event or two, but mostly I use the AP1100 as my portable imaging mount.
-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jeffc
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 2:09 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small AP Mount Ideas

On Apr 27, 2021, at 1:13 PM, W Hilmo <y.groups@hilmo.net> wrote:

and I don't think that it's any more portable than my AP1100, since
the axes don't separate.
Fwiw… I transport the 1100 (non AE version) with the axis mated.
It is easier/faster to setup this way given the Dec cable. The removable Dec/saddle plate is nice because then the whole mount fits in a decent size tub with the Dec plate + 16” saddle removed.
I’m finding the Mach2 definitely takes up less space in the vehicle than the 1100. The weight of the Mach2 (the part I need to carry off the tripod) is a tad bit less than the 1100 Ra+Dec.
But yes the Mach2 is surprisingly heavy.
Just another perspective: I prefer the Mach2 over the 1100 since the biggest OTA I’m using is a 12” ACF SCT. The Mach2 seems to carry it no problem. (Of course the 1100 I own is non-AE ; this also biases me to the Mach2.)
And for “portable” work , I don’t think I need the 1100 capacity (no observatory here until we move to a different location.)
Background: I acquired the 1100 to “downsize” from a 1200. Note: I still have the 1200 — it is a bit dated, but is also “portable” and imo a very nice mount.
I signed up for the “Mach 1 replacement” and was also surprised by the Mach2 size when I saw it at AIC. Now that I’m using the Mach2 for a bit I’m not at all disappointed by the larger size.


Re: Question re: Checking RAPAS with initial Pempro Polar Align via drift

skester@...
 

Hi Jill,

I would not use the guide scope as the image scale is likely too low to give you the most accurate answer, along with the potential for flexure that you pointed out.  I would use your primary imaging scope/camera, and even prefer a longer focal length than an Esprit 80 if you have one.  I think you mentioned an MN190 over at CN?

I recently went through the same exercise of verifying my RAPAS, but rather than a PemPro Drift I used PHD2 drift.  Without adjustment the RAPAS had the PA within 40 arc seconds, way better than I need for a travel setup with guiding, so I left it alone.  Since you have Sharpcap that would also be a quick/easy way to verify the RAPAS.  I guide with an OAG as well and found Sharpcap PA worked great using the primary OTA and imaging camera to polar align, even when I have my C11 mounted, producing very accurate results.

Scott


Re: Zodiacal light over the Pacific

thefamily90 Phillips
 

What a Gorgeous view. Stunning!
I know there are many reasons but this certainly is one of the reasons you like Hawaii so much! Wow!!

Jim


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Jeff B <mnebula946@...>
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 11:26:48 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Cc: main@ap-ug.groups.io <main@ap-ug.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Zodiacal light over the Pacific
 
Sounds like you and Marj had a great and relaxing time Roland.  You all deserve a nice break and thanks for supporting us in our wonderful hobby.

Jeff

On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 8:48 PM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
My latest entry at Astrobin:


Back in April Marj and I visited Hawaii Island for a short vacation. We had some very clear nights with bright Milky Way overhead, and I did some observing with friends and neighbors with our 175 refractor. Someone mentioned that Saturn was her favorite planet because it has rings. I added that actually many of the planets had rings, including our Earth. I had them look west over the Pacific where the Zodiacal light rose straight up, reaching overhead into the Milky way. I explained that this is a ring of dust that is being illuminated by the sun, and we can see it every night after sunset in this pristine sky.

I was able to capture it on the following night with my 12mm Rokinon lens on my little Sony camera. It took a number of tries because some images were ruined by airplanes in their decent towards the Kona airport. But eventually I got five 30 second exposures that i combined in this shot.

I also spent quite a few nights getting acquainted with the southern skies using both 100mm binoculars and our 175 refractor. No imaging, just visual the way people used to look at the skies. Down here in the south Pacific, one can see Omega Centauri quite high up, and easily see the Carina Nebula and other deep sky objects in that part of the sky. I eventually went to bed as the Scorpion rose over Mauna Kea and the gibbous Moon appeared over the top of Kohala mountain. From my observatory I have a view of 5 volcanoes - Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, Hualalai, Kohala, and Maui's Haleakala.

Rolando

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Zodiacal light over the Pacific

fernandorivera3
 

Roland thanks for sharing the Hawaii trip experience with the group 👍

Fernando


Re: Small AP Mount Ideas

Jeffc
 

Well... originally this thread was about a small portable mount.... which equates to something that can also be setup quickly.  Maybe I should have stressed that a bit more in my comment regarding portability.

My initial experience with the 1100 setup was that mating the axis , fishing the cables, etc. is not a "quick" operation.
However, the beauty of the 1100 is that it _can_ be transported as a single unit, and while I am no strongman/weightlifter, I can lift the assembled 1100 mount onto a tripod/pier.

After (?) 20+ years of "going portable" either for imaging or visual work, I've gone from 5 minute setup/teardown times, to hour long setup/teardown durations (e.g. the 1200 is tedious, and I'm sure you will agree the same with the 1600).   
So with the 1100 I was looking at reducing the setup/teardown time... and indeed it is better than the 1200 and also a smaller footprint transport size than the 1200.    My point is the Mach2 takes it a step further, and without much downside.   

TBH, when I got the 1100 I was impressed with the compactness of the shipping boxes.   
But then I realized I would never be able to use the "compact shipping" configuration for "portable transport"... just way too many things to fiddle with getting it setup.   

¯\_()_/¯


On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 4:06 PM W Hilmo <y.groups@...> wrote:
Certainly, if you don't separate the AP1100 axes, it's bigger and heavier than the Mach2.  I do separate them, though, for packing and transport.  The bin in which I carry it would need to be much larger if I didn't separate them.

For what it's worth, I'm no stranger to using big mounts as "portable" mounts.  I take my AP1600 into the field at least once per year, for Oregon Star Party.  Occasionally, I take it to another event or two, but mostly I use the AP1100 as my portable imaging mount.

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jeffc
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 2:09 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small AP Mount Ideas



> On Apr 27, 2021, at 1:13 PM, W Hilmo <y.groups@...> wrote:
>
> and I don't think that it's any more portable than my AP1100, since
> the axes don't separate.

Fwiw… I transport the 1100 (non AE version) with the axis mated.
It is easier/faster to setup this way given the Dec cable.    The removable Dec/saddle plate is nice because then the whole mount fits in a decent size tub with the Dec plate + 16” saddle removed.

I’m finding the Mach2 definitely takes up less space in the vehicle than the 1100.   The weight of the Mach2 (the part I need to carry off the tripod) is a tad bit less than the 1100 Ra+Dec.
But yes the Mach2 is surprisingly heavy.

Just another perspective: I prefer the Mach2 over the 1100 since the biggest OTA I’m using is a 12” ACF SCT.   The Mach2 seems to carry it no problem.   (Of course the 1100 I own is non-AE ; this also biases me to the Mach2.)

And for “portable” work , I don’t think I need the 1100 capacity (no observatory here until we move to a different location.)

Background: I acquired the 1100 to “downsize” from a 1200.  Note: I still have the 1200 — it is a bit dated, but is also “portable” and imo a very nice mount.
I signed up for the “Mach 1 replacement” and was also surprised by the Mach2 size when I saw it at AIC.   Now that I’m using the Mach2 for a bit I’m not at all disappointed by the larger size.



















Re: Zodiacal light over the Pacific

Jeff B
 

Sounds like you and Marj had a great and relaxing time Roland.  You all deserve a nice break and thanks for supporting us in our wonderful hobby.

Jeff

On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 8:48 PM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
My latest entry at Astrobin:


Back in April Marj and I visited Hawaii Island for a short vacation. We had some very clear nights with bright Milky Way overhead, and I did some observing with friends and neighbors with our 175 refractor. Someone mentioned that Saturn was her favorite planet because it has rings. I added that actually many of the planets had rings, including our Earth. I had them look west over the Pacific where the Zodiacal light rose straight up, reaching overhead into the Milky way. I explained that this is a ring of dust that is being illuminated by the sun, and we can see it every night after sunset in this pristine sky.

I was able to capture it on the following night with my 12mm Rokinon lens on my little Sony camera. It took a number of tries because some images were ruined by airplanes in their decent towards the Kona airport. But eventually I got five 30 second exposures that i combined in this shot.

I also spent quite a few nights getting acquainted with the southern skies using both 100mm binoculars and our 175 refractor. No imaging, just visual the way people used to look at the skies. Down here in the south Pacific, one can see Omega Centauri quite high up, and easily see the Carina Nebula and other deep sky objects in that part of the sky. I eventually went to bed as the Scorpion rose over Mauna Kea and the gibbous Moon appeared over the top of Kohala mountain. From my observatory I have a view of 5 volcanoes - Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, Hualalai, Kohala, and Maui's Haleakala.

Rolando

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Zodiacal light over the Pacific

Roland Christen
 

My latest entry at Astrobin:

https://www.astrobin.com/full/0ueuhs/0/?nc=Uncarollo

Back in April Marj and I visited Hawaii Island for a short vacation. We had some very clear nights with bright Milky Way overhead, and I did some observing with friends and neighbors with our 175 refractor. Someone mentioned that Saturn was her favorite planet because it has rings. I added that actually many of the planets had rings, including our Earth. I had them look west over the Pacific where the Zodiacal light rose straight up, reaching overhead into the Milky way. I explained that this is a ring of dust that is being illuminated by the sun, and we can see it every night after sunset in this pristine sky.

I was able to capture it on the following night with my 12mm Rokinon lens on my little Sony camera. It took a number of tries because some images were ruined by airplanes in their decent towards the Kona airport. But eventually I got five 30 second exposures that i combined in this shot.

I also spent quite a few nights getting acquainted with the southern skies using both 100mm binoculars and our 175 refractor. No imaging, just visual the way people used to look at the skies. Down here in the south Pacific, one can see Omega Centauri quite high up, and easily see the Carina Nebula and other deep sky objects in that part of the sky. I eventually went to bed as the Scorpion rose over Mauna Kea and the gibbous Moon appeared over the top of Kohala mountain. From my observatory I have a view of 5 volcanoes - Mauna Kea, Mauna Loa, Hualalai, Kohala, and Maui's Haleakala.

Rolando

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Meridian

thefamily90 Phillips
 

Great!!


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 8:24:00 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Meridian
 

Can I still use the GOTO for my next double star if Antares has crossed to the west side of the Meridian?
Certainly you can acquire the next star. No need to ever start over.

Roland


-----Original Message-----
From: thefamily90 Phillips <thefamily90@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Tue, Apr 27, 2021 6:25 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Meridian

I know this is probably in a manual somewhere but if someone knows the answer I would appreciate it.
 If I observing double stars and am following Antares (eyepiece on the west side of the mount and Antares on the east side of the Meridian) Can I still use the GOTO for my next double star if Antares has crossed to the west side of the Meridian? Or, do I have to re-calibrate or start over? I have AP 600 GOTO and AP Mach1 mounts.

JimP


--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Meridian

Roland Christen
 


Can I still use the GOTO for my next double star if Antares has crossed to the west side of the Meridian?
Certainly you can acquire the next star. No need to ever start over.

Roland


-----Original Message-----
From: thefamily90 Phillips <thefamily90@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Tue, Apr 27, 2021 6:25 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Meridian

I know this is probably in a manual somewhere but if someone knows the answer I would appreciate it.
 If I observing double stars and am following Antares (eyepiece on the west side of the mount and Antares on the east side of the Meridian) Can I still use the GOTO for my next double star if Antares has crossed to the west side of the Meridian? Or, do I have to re-calibrate or start over? I have AP 600 GOTO and AP Mach1 mounts.

JimP


--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Meridian

thefamily90 Phillips
 

I know this is probably in a manual somewhere but if someone knows the answer I would appreciate it.
 If I observing double stars and am following Antares (eyepiece on the west side of the mount and Antares on the east side of the Meridian) Can I still use the GOTO for my next double star if Antares has crossed to the west side of the Meridian? Or, do I have to re-calibrate or start over? I have AP 600 GOTO and AP Mach1 mounts.

JimP


Re: Small AP Mount Ideas

W Hilmo
 

Certainly, if you don't separate the AP1100 axes, it's bigger and heavier than the Mach2. I do separate them, though, for packing and transport. The bin in which I carry it would need to be much larger if I didn't separate them.

For what it's worth, I'm no stranger to using big mounts as "portable" mounts. I take my AP1600 into the field at least once per year, for Oregon Star Party. Occasionally, I take it to another event or two, but mostly I use the AP1100 as my portable imaging mount.

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jeffc
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 2:09 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small AP Mount Ideas



On Apr 27, 2021, at 1:13 PM, W Hilmo <y.groups@hilmo.net> wrote:

and I don't think that it's any more portable than my AP1100, since
the axes don't separate.
Fwiw… I transport the 1100 (non AE version) with the axis mated.
It is easier/faster to setup this way given the Dec cable. The removable Dec/saddle plate is nice because then the whole mount fits in a decent size tub with the Dec plate + 16” saddle removed.

I’m finding the Mach2 definitely takes up less space in the vehicle than the 1100. The weight of the Mach2 (the part I need to carry off the tripod) is a tad bit less than the 1100 Ra+Dec.
But yes the Mach2 is surprisingly heavy.

Just another perspective: I prefer the Mach2 over the 1100 since the biggest OTA I’m using is a 12” ACF SCT. The Mach2 seems to carry it no problem. (Of course the 1100 I own is non-AE ; this also biases me to the Mach2.)

And for “portable” work , I don’t think I need the 1100 capacity (no observatory here until we move to a different location.)

Background: I acquired the 1100 to “downsize” from a 1200. Note: I still have the 1200 — it is a bit dated, but is also “portable” and imo a very nice mount.
I signed up for the “Mach 1 replacement” and was also surprised by the Mach2 size when I saw it at AIC. Now that I’m using the Mach2 for a bit I’m not at all disappointed by the larger size.


Re: What Level of Cone Error Requires Mechanical Adjustment?

mjb87@...
 

Hi Roland,

This is an 1100/CP4 without encoders (at least not yet) with a CFF 300 Cassegrain at f/15, but typically reduced to f/10 with a CCDT67. 

Marty


Re: Small AP Mount Ideas

Jeffc
 

On Apr 27, 2021, at 1:13 PM, W Hilmo <y.groups@hilmo.net> wrote:

and I don't think that it's any more portable than
my AP1100, since the axes don't separate.
Fwiw… I transport the 1100 (non AE version) with the axis mated.
It is easier/faster to setup this way given the Dec cable. The removable Dec/saddle plate is nice because then the whole mount fits in a decent size tub with the Dec plate + 16” saddle removed.

I’m finding the Mach2 definitely takes up less space in the vehicle than the 1100. The weight of the Mach2 (the part I need to carry off the tripod) is a tad bit less than the 1100 Ra+Dec.
But yes the Mach2 is surprisingly heavy.

Just another perspective: I prefer the Mach2 over the 1100 since the biggest OTA I’m using is a 12” ACF SCT. The Mach2 seems to carry it no problem. (Of course the 1100 I own is non-AE ; this also biases me to the Mach2.)

And for “portable” work , I don’t think I need the 1100 capacity (no observatory here until we move to a different location.)

Background: I acquired the 1100 to “downsize” from a 1200. Note: I still have the 1200 — it is a bit dated, but is also “portable” and imo a very nice mount.
I signed up for the “Mach 1 replacement” and was also surprised by the Mach2 size when I saw it at AIC. Now that I’m using the Mach2 for a bit I’m not at all disappointed by the larger size.


Re: Small AP Mount Ideas

W Hilmo
 

That's kind of my position on this.

When I think past my own desires and consider the market, it seems like a
very small mount, made to Astro-Physics standards, might not be a huge
seller. The biggest problem is that the scopes that such a mount would
carry would be really small. Smaller scopes are lots more forgiving of the
mount. Because of that, I would think that most people would think that the
current offerings are "good enough". Certainly, the "success" of the
RST-135 shows that there is a market for highly portable mounts (I have
"success" in quotes because I am basing it just on the discussion that I can
see as a user. I have no idea how many of these things they actually sell.)

The question then is, can Astro-Physics make a mount that is both price
competitive with the RST-135 and meet Astro-Physics quality standards?
Based on the conversation so far, I'm skeptical that's possible. Of course,
there are some people who would be happy to pay more for Astro-Physics
quality, but the "masses" are interested in good enough, at the lowest price
(again in quotes, because "masses" probably doesn't apply to part of the
amateur astronomy market...)

For my own part, I'm a bit disappointed that the Mach1 is no more. The
Mach2 is a vastly superior mount, to be sure. But for me, the Mach1 hit a
sweet spot in price to size to performance. The Mach2 exceeds my
requirements for a third mount by a wide margin - but it also exceeds my
budget for a third mount, and I don't think that it's any more portable than
my AP1100, since the axes don't separate. I'll probably keep my eyes open
for a nice used Mach1. But there is probably a 50/50 chance that I'll
eventually just buy a Mach2. So AP's marketing strategy will probably be
successful at extracting some more of my cash at some point, without
designing any new mounts...

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of richard
payne
Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2021 12:41 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Small AP Mount Ideas

The AP400GTO, a sweet mount and fairly small. The money is probably the
issue.
It would cost the same as a Mach 1 to manufacture.
Richard


Re: Small AP Mount Ideas

richard payne
 

The AP400GTO, a sweet mount and fairly small. The money is probably the issue.
It would cost the same as a Mach 1 to manufacture.
Richard


Re: What Level of Cone Error Requires Mechanical Adjustment?

Roland Christen
 

8 arc minutes is probably too small to mess with. What scope are you working with and what mount?

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: mjb87 via groups.io <mjb87@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Tue, Apr 27, 2021 12:14 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] What Level of Cone Error Requires Mechanical Adjustment?

I have been getting squirrelly results from various APPM runs which could easily be attributed to a suboptimal camera setup (15x20 arc minute FOV, very low image scale) which I am in the process of correcting with a different camera, if USPS ever delivers it.

Some of those runs suggested a high degree of cone error, on the order of 3-5 degrees, which I found hard to believe. So I thought I'd check it out. I just ran Cone Sharp and it concluded my cone error was just over 8 arcminutes.

I assume that a proper APPM model will easily correct for that. Or should I mechanically shim first to reduce the cone error? I'd rather not attempt that.

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

3181 - 3200 of 81307