Date   

The Elephant Trunk Nebula in the Hubble palette

Glenn
 

Hi gang,

I had a stretch of good weather recently and was able to capture the elephant trunk with narrowband filters over several nights. This is one of three images I was able to do during the first outing with my new 10-inch Newtonian scope. I was not sure if my Mach1 would be able to handle such a heavy and long scope, but it hardly seemed to notice. It is a testament to A-P mount design. 

For higher resolution and details, please check my AstroBin page. Thanks for looking!

Glenn


Re: Database load unsuccessful

Geert
 

Mike, I just asked, he used a serial cable and on the third time succeeded to upload  the database. The upload takes quite long, on the two instances I did it, I made sure PC sleepmode and screensavers were switched off, disconnected from internet, meticulously followed the instructions and then let the PC and mount alone for over an hour.  Presence in front of the PC is not needed while the process is runnng ;-)

Geert

Op za 24 jul. 2021 om 17:19 schreef Mike Garrett <mwg.jlg@...>:

Geert,

I'd be very interested to hear the result of your friends problem.
I use a FTDI serial to USB cable.  It has always worked for PC to mount communications and there were no anomalus
messages during the database load process.

Thanks
Mike


Re: Tool for saddle clamping

drgert1
 

Hello All,

I am not seeing a way to use the hex key. Has there been a production change of the knobs?



Cheers,
Gert


Re: Preventing Pier Crashes

Ray Gralak
 

Joe,

My concern is what would happen IF THE USER specified the wrong CPx model
being controlled by his APCC software?
In APCC you can select the mount type, but you cannot select the controller type. APCC detects the controller by the firmware version returned from the controller. CP4's version strings start with "VCP4". CP5's version strings start with "VCP5", and CP3's are just "V", or "Vx", where "x" is a digit.

That said, in some cases if the user selects the wrong mount then APCC can detect and fix that. For example, Mach2's only come with a CP5, so APCC will automatically select "Mach2" if it detects a CP5. If the user selects "Mach2" as the mount type and a CP5 is not detected the mount type will be changed to a 1100.

I hope this answers your question?

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Zeglinski
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2021 9:24 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Preventing Pier Crashes

Sorry, for MY confusion, Ray.

A bit muddle-headed this morning. Of course APCC is “PC software”. The difference in CP3 versus CP4
firmware, in this regard, had me briefly woolly-headed.

My concern was the last sentence in your OP reply.


If ... your 1100 has a CP4 its firmware handles counterweight-up slews in a "safe" manner by always
moving
> RA first to a counterweight-down position, then slewing to a target. Additionally, if the target is
counterweight-up,
> then the last slew will be in RA only also.

(If your mount has a CP3 controller, then APCC performs these moves ... instead of the mount
firmware.)
>
> -Ray


My concern is what would happen IF THE USER specified the wrong CPx model being controlled by his APCC
software?
Perhaps the APCC is for some reason, being used with a CP3 at the time, and the user forgot to change the CP
ID. Hopefully, APCC figures out the CPx controller model – currently attached to the mount - during its initialization
phase.

There have been times, for example, when I switched my CP4 back to running with an old CP3, for some bug
chasing as a comparison, or if m CP4 was out for repairs a couple of times. I would hate to think that the mount
was vulnerable to my pre-set APCC Limits confusion – whether the mount was going to perform the collision
avoidance slew “ballet pirouette”, or the APCC would do it in software (anyway) , if I forgot to change the CPx ID,
somewhere in its mount initialization settings.

Thanks,
Joe

From: Ray Gralak
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2021 11:00 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Preventing Pier Crashes

Joe,

- Does the APCC firmware itself, check whether it is communicating with a CP3, CP4, or CP5 –
and handles the “software mode” Limits & Meridian switch points, itself?
I don't know what you mean by "APCC firmware". Can you clarify that question?

APCC can set mount limits if configured to do so, but when *slewing*, mount limits are not changed in real-time as
declination changes. When the mount reaches the target's declination, then the meridian delay and mount limits will
be set, provided APCC is configured to do so.

-Ray


Re: Preventing Pier Crashes

Joe Zeglinski
 

Sorry, for MY confusion, Ray.
 
    A bit muddle-headed this morning. Of course  APCC is “PC software”. The difference in CP3 versus CP4 firmware, in this regard, had me  briefly woolly-headed.
 
    My concern was the last sentence in your OP reply.
 
If ... your 1100 has a CP4 its firmware handles counterweight-up slews in a "safe" manner by always moving
> RA first to a counterweight-down position, then slewing to a target. Additionally, if the target is counterweight-up,
> then the last slew will be in RA only also.
 
(If your mount has a CP3 controller, then APCC performs these moves  ...  instead of the mount firmware.)
>
> -Ray
        My concern is what would happen IF THE USER specified the wrong CPx model being controlled by his APCC software? 
    Perhaps the APCC is  for some reason, being used with a CP3 at the time, and the user forgot to change the CP ID. Hopefully, APCC figures out the CPx controller model – currently attached to the mount -  during its initialization phase.
 
    There have been times, for example, when I switched my CP4 back to running with an old CP3, for some bug chasing as a comparison, or if m CP4 was out for repairs  a couple of times. I would hate to think that the mount was vulnerable to my pre-set APCC Limits confusion – whether the mount was going to perform the collision avoidance slew “ballet pirouette”, or the APCC would do it in software (anyway) , if I forgot to change the CPx ID,   somewhere in its mount initialization settings.
 
Thanks,
Joe
 
From: Ray Gralak
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2021 11:00 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Preventing Pier Crashes
 
Joe,

> - Does the APCC  firmware itself, check whether it is communicating with a CP3, CP4, or CP5 –
> and handles the “software mode” Limits & Meridian switch points,  itself?

I don't know what you mean by "APCC firmware". Can you clarify that question?

APCC can set mount limits if configured to do so, but when *slewing*, mount limits are not changed in real-time as declination changes. When the mount reaches the target's declination, then the meridian delay and mount limits will be set, provided APCC is configured to do so.

-Ray


Re: Database load unsuccessful

Mike Garrett
 

Geert,

I'd be very interested to hear the result of your friends problem.
I use a FTDI serial to USB cable.  It has always worked for PC to mount communications and there were no anomalus
messages during the database load process.

Thanks
Mike


Re: Preventing Pier Crashes

Ray Gralak
 

Joe,

- Does the APCC firmware itself, check whether it is communicating with a CP3, CP4, or CP5 –
and handles the “software mode” Limits & Meridian switch points, itself?
I don't know what you mean by "APCC firmware". Can you clarify that question?

APCC can set mount limits if configured to do so, but when *slewing*, mount limits are not changed in real-time as declination changes. When the mount reaches the target's declination, then the meridian delay and mount limits will be set, provided APCC is configured to do so.

-Ray



-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Joe Zeglinski
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2021 7:47 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Preventing Pier Crashes

Ray,

I have been away from the APCC for quite a while. Please remind me
- Does the APCC firmware itself, check whether it is communicating with a CP3, CP4, or CP5 – and handles the
“software mode” Limits & Meridian switch points, itself? Or, does the user have to make sure the controller is “user
configured” in the APCC, as is done for the Keypad?
I assume it is automated, to avoid confusion and possible improper mount behaviour.

Joe

From: Ray Gralak
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2021 8:21 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Preventing Pier Crashes

Hi Alex,

Are the collision zones you mentioned in counterweight-up or counterweight-down position?

APCC's Meridian Tracking Limits feature is designed to stop *tracking* at an hour angle limit and define mount flip
points. If your 1100 has a CP4 its firmware handles counterweight-up slews in a "safe" manner by always moving
RA first to a counterweight-down position, then slewing to a target. Additionally, if the target is counterweight-up,
then the last slew will be in RA only also. (If your mount has a CP3 controller, then APCC performs these moves
instead of the mount firmware.)

-Ray


Re: Preventing Pier Crashes

Joe Zeglinski
 

Ray,
 
    I have been away from the APCC for quite a while. Please remind me
- Does the APCC  firmware itself, check whether it is communicating with a CP3, CP4, or CP5 – and handles the “software mode” Limits & Meridian switch points,  itself? Or, does the user have to make  sure the controller is “user configured” in the APCC, as is done for the Keypad?
    I assume it is  automated, to avoid confusion and possible improper mount behaviour.
 
Joe
 

From: Ray Gralak
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2021 8:21 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Preventing Pier Crashes
 
Hi Alex,

Are the collision zones you mentioned in counterweight-up or counterweight-down position?

APCC's Meridian Tracking Limits feature is designed to stop *tracking* at an hour angle limit and define mount flip points. If your 1100 has a CP4 its firmware handles counterweight-up slews in a "safe" manner by always moving RA first to a counterweight-down position, then slewing to a target. Additionally, if the target is counterweight-up, then the last slew will be in RA only also. (If your mount has a CP3 controller, then APCC performs these moves instead of the mount firmware.)

-Ray


Re: Preventing Pier Crashes

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Alex,

Are the collision zones you mentioned in counterweight-up or counterweight-down position?

APCC's Meridian Tracking Limits feature is designed to stop *tracking* at an hour angle limit and define mount flip points. If your 1100 has a CP4 its firmware handles counterweight-up slews in a "safe" manner by always moving RA first to a counterweight-down position, then slewing to a target. Additionally, if the target is counterweight-up, then the last slew will be in RA only also. (If your mount has a CP3 controller, then APCC performs these moves instead of the mount firmware.)

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Alex
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 11:04 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Preventing Pier Crashes

I have an 1100 with absolute encoders, and I'm having the occasional problem of the mount crashing my camera
into my pier during slews. My pier has a fairly wide base, and there are a couple zones near the meridian where the
camera will hit the pier. I defined the meridian limits in APCC Pro which define this danger zone, but apparently it
isn't being honored. Occasionally when slewing to an object, the path the mount takes will crash my camera into the
pier. There must me some setting I'm getting wrong, but I'm as a loss as to what it is.

Can somebody please tell me how to set it up so the mount will never slew to certain positions? I'm now afraid to
use the mount without being personally there to abort a slew.

Alex


Preventing Pier Crashes

Alex
 

I have an 1100 with absolute encoders, and I'm having the occasional problem of the mount crashing my camera into my pier during slews. My pier has a fairly wide base, and there are a couple zones near the meridian where the camera will hit the pier. I defined the meridian limits in APCC Pro which define this danger zone, but apparently it isn't being honored. Occasionally when slewing to an object, the path the mount takes will crash my camera into the pier. There must me some setting I'm getting wrong, but I'm as a loss as to what it is.

Can somebody please tell me how to set it up so the mount will never slew to certain positions? I'm now afraid to use the mount without being personally there to abort a slew.

Alex


Re: Database load unsuccessful

Geert
 

How was the connection between the mount and pc? I changed batteries on my two handsets and uploaded the database on each one without issues using the good old serial cables. However a friend of mine had the same problem you have after changing the battery in his handset, I did not hear from him if it was resolved now.

Best regards,

Geert

Op za 24 jul. 2021 3:00 a.m. schreef Mike Garrett <mwg.jlg@...>:

Yes Sir.

That was the original problem.  The battery was dead.
I replaced the battery and followed the AP instructions to reload the database. 
I've tried 3 times so far all unsuccessful.
Everything appears to be normal during the reload process.

Regards
Mike


Re: Tool for saddle clamping

Eric Weiner
 

“Yes, it's called a 3/16" hex key ;)”

+1

On Jul 23, 2021, at 16:54, Dale Ghent <daleg@elemental.org> wrote:

Yes, it's called a 3/16" hex key ;)


Re: 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

Christopher Erickson
 

I am going to assume that the only fair way is that everyone only gets to sign up once.

And only one entry per household.

And that cheaters will be disqualified.

I also assume that it would only be fair if existing Stowaway owners wouldn't be allowed to play either (darn!)

And that entries must have a verifiable name, verifiable email address, verifiable phone number and a verifiable physical address to qualify.

Did I miss anything? LOL

-Christopher Erickson
Observatory Engineer
Summit Kinetics
Waikoloa, Hawaii


On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 6:16 PM Jim H <jamesnhead@...> wrote:
I hope not, I'd be on the astro-physics site 24/7.

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 8:11 PM dvjbaja <jpgleasonid@...> wrote:
Can you sign up more than once?  That would make it a little more interesting.  Do you have to be present to win?  ;-)



Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note9, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: thefamily90 Phillips <thefamily90@...>
Date: 7/23/21 5:52 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

In a week. Starting July 31.

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 4:28 PM Karen Christen <karen@...> wrote:

You may sign up directly on the website, Marcelo. 

Karen

AP

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Marcelo Figueroa via groups.io
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 3:06 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

 

Chile. I have bought my Mach1 (sold) and Mach2 through my local dealer without any problems.

 

For now I'm just being curious and haven't decided anything yet ;).


--
Karen Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

Jim H
 

I hope not, I'd be on the astro-physics site 24/7.


On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 8:11 PM dvjbaja <jpgleasonid@...> wrote:
Can you sign up more than once?  That would make it a little more interesting.  Do you have to be present to win?  ;-)



Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note9, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: thefamily90 Phillips <thefamily90@...>
Date: 7/23/21 5:52 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

In a week. Starting July 31.

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 4:28 PM Karen Christen <karen@...> wrote:

You may sign up directly on the website, Marcelo. 

Karen

AP

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Marcelo Figueroa via groups.io
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 3:06 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

 

Chile. I have bought my Mach1 (sold) and Mach2 through my local dealer without any problems.

 

For now I'm just being curious and haven't decided anything yet ;).


--
Karen Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

dvjbaja
 

Can you sign up more than once?  That would make it a little more interesting.  Do you have to be present to win?  ;-)



Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note9, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: thefamily90 Phillips <thefamily90@...>
Date: 7/23/21 5:52 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

In a week. Starting July 31.

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 4:28 PM Karen Christen <karen@...> wrote:

You may sign up directly on the website, Marcelo. 

Karen

AP

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Marcelo Figueroa via groups.io
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 3:06 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

 

Chile. I have bought my Mach1 (sold) and Mach2 through my local dealer without any problems.

 

For now I'm just being curious and haven't decided anything yet ;).


--
Karen Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Database load unsuccessful

Mike Garrett
 

Yes Sir.

That was the original problem.  The battery was dead.
I replaced the battery and followed the AP instructions to reload the database. 
I've tried 3 times so far all unsuccessful.
Everything appears to be normal during the reload process.

Regards
Mike


Re: 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

thefamily90 Phillips
 

In a week. Starting July 31.

On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 4:28 PM Karen Christen <karen@...> wrote:

You may sign up directly on the website, Marcelo. 

Karen

AP

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Marcelo Figueroa via groups.io
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 3:06 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 92mm Stowaway 4th Run Update

 

Chile. I have bought my Mach1 (sold) and Mach2 through my local dealer without any problems.

 

For now I'm just being curious and haven't decided anything yet ;).


--
Karen Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Trouble getting a good PEC with PEMPro on my 1100GTO

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Brad,

PEC works best with consistent data. Your data with PEC off shows a variation in the 1.0x fundamental's magnitude with time, so the result is not optimal. This may be caused by very poor seeing conditions (tube currents), incorrect gear meshing, or possibly some contaminants in the grease.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Bradley Rode
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 3:08 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Trouble getting a good PEC with PEMPro on my 1100GTO

Ray (and others), I'm hoping you can help diagnose a problem I'm having getting a good PEC on my 1100GTO.
The guiding has been erratic recently, so I decided to redo the PEC.

I've included the following log files and associated PPC files:
1. PEMPro-2021-07-22-223127 is the original capture of 6 cycles with PEC off;
2. using only the worm fundamental and ignoring all others, I generated a PPC and loaded it into the mount;
3. PEMPro-2021-07-23-000156 is the verification run of 5 cycles with PEC on;
4. I then tried a refinement (fundamentals 1 and 2) by adding the xxx127 and xxx156 curves and reloaded that into
the mount;
5. PEMPro-2021-07-23-010201 vfy is the verification run of the refined curve.

Unless I'm totally misreading the data, I'm not getting much, if any improvement. I'm certainly not getting down into
the sub-0.5" range that I've seen others talk about. I'm seeing some odd frequencies in the graphs, but not sure how
hard to chase correction on those.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. I'm losing too much sleep on this :)

Brad


Re: Imaging in the Wind

W Hilmo
 

Thanks again for the suggestions.

 

I’m thinking that I’ll probably build an 8x8, 6’ tall barrier that surrounds most of the site where I’m currently setting up.  I was already thinking about going with some kind of screen, instead of impermeable tarps.

 

I’m also thinking about the earlier comment about the turnbuckles in the wind.  I grew up sailing in the Seattle area, so I am very familiar with what happens to the rigging on the boat.  I’ve been thinking that wind hitting the scope was the problem, but it’s certainly possible that the wind is getting the turnbuckles to vibrate.

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Robert Chozick via groups.io
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 7:14 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Imaging in the Wind

 

We have found that the smaller the structure the less this effect you mention applies.   8x8 seems to be optimal.   Light is always a concern for me.   



On Jul 23, 2021, at 7:53 AM, Len Fulham <lfulham@...> wrote:

I would like to make a comment re wind barrier and effectiveness.  With a impervious barrier such as a metal fence or tarp, there can be quite high forces applied to the structure and a lot of turbulence in the air as wind rolls in behind the barrier. It is my understanding that a barrier with perforations suppresses wind and reduces the turbulence effects and lowers the forces acting on the structure. Coarsely applied, this can be seen in canvas signs which often have holes cut in them. I have seen good effects from shade cloth and fly screen used in this role.

If anyone is making a tarp based barrier for portable use it is a simple process to try the fly mesh or a fairly open shade cloth instead of a tight material like a tarp. If the purpose is mainly as a light barrier then a opaque sheet would be preferred of course.

Just another idea to make your choices harder!

Len.


Re: Tool for saddle clamping

Dale Ghent
 

Yes, it's called a 3/16" hex key ;)

On Jul 23, 2021, at 18:25, drgert1 via groups.io <drgert1=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Hello All,

I just saw this helpful tool for ADM saddle bolts.

https://www.admaccessories.com/product/rosette-knob-hand-tool/

Is there the same for AP product ??

Cheers
Gert

3721 - 3740 of 83230