Date   

Re: Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

Bill Long
 

Yeah the impressive thing for me isn't just the scope, as the Mach 2 can easily handle that within specification. It was how loaded down the total system was, it's size, AND the total length of the system at critical focus. 68 lbs of gear at that size and total length is asking a lot.

No problem for the Mach 2 though. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of J. Belden via groups.io <jjb4469@...>
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2021 4:22 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Back many years ago while waiting for my AP1100 mount, I had no issues imaging with my Mach 1 with my C14 black tube, so Im not really surprised that the Mach 2 can handle a 12.5” AGO and bigger.

Though, I ended up moving up to an AP1600 for my 12.5” AGO and 17” PW for my portable setup.  I might not have a collection of AP scopes but Im building my mount collection.  Still think the Mach 1 is the best looking one but my AP1600 AE is the best tracking mount that I have ever had bar none. 

Joe B






Re: Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

J. Belden
 

Back many years ago while waiting for my AP1100 mount, I had no issues imaging with my Mach 1 with my C14 black tube, so Im not really surprised that the Mach 2 can handle a 12.5” AGO and bigger.

Though, I ended up moving up to an AP1600 for my 12.5” AGO and 17” PW for my portable setup. I might not have a collection of AP scopes but Im building my mount collection. Still think the Mach 1 is the best looking one but my AP1600 AE is the best tracking mount that I have ever had bar none.

Joe B


Mach1 1200x move rate with 5.30.10 driver

Andy Ermolli
 

Since I updated the Ascom driver to the version 5.30.10 I am unable to move the Mach1 GTOCP3 with V chip at 1200x using the buttons in the driver window. 
The mount just won't move if I have 1200x selected.
If I select 600x, then I can move the mount but it moves at 1200x.
The 1200x works fine with the 1100. I have not tested it with the 900 yet.

Is it just me or are others having this issue?


Re: APCC virtual ports #APCC

ap@CaptivePhotons.com
 

@JoePetrick9 write:

 

  • I disabled a virtual port in device manager on win 10 PC and now when i create ports in APCC it does create the ports in APCC but not in my device manager so I cannot connect to V2 . Does anyone know how i can enable virtual port i disabled. There is no port showing up in device manager so i cant enable it there. I have deleted and reloaded APCC and V2 and Ascom but no help . I have checked "enable virtual ports" when i reloaded APCC. Driving me nuts.   Thanks in advance Joe

 

So… maybe.

 

This program:


http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/usb_devices_view.html

 

I find very useful for debugging USB issues.  It basically tells you everything Windows knows about every USB port it ever connected to (at least unless you clear some how).  Windows remembers stuff it does not show you; the intent is that reconnections should yield similar device information including COM port numbers.

 

I use it just to view, but it has tools to disable, enable, and remove connection information.  But at the least, it may let you find things.


Note the default display is REALLY wide, so you have to scroll way right at times to see certain info, like manufacturer, version, etc.

 

I’ve used it for years, it is “safe” in the sense there is nothing malicious, but it also has a certain amount of power, so use the options to change things carefully.

 

Linwood


APCC virtual ports #APCC

joepetrick9@...
 

I disabled a virtual port in device manager on win 10 PC and now when i create ports in APCC it does create the ports in APCC but not in my device manager so I cannot connect to V2 . Does anyone know how i can enable virtual port i disabled. There is no port showing up in device manager so i cant enable it there. I have deleted and reloaded APCC and V2 and Ascom but no help . I have checked "enable virtual ports" when i reloaded APCC. Driving me nuts.   Thanks in advance Joe


Re: Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

Bill Long
 

It's nice to know that even a bigger scope is possible on the Mach 2. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Chris White <chris.white@...>
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2021 5:39 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Really amazing results Bill!

Makes me hope and worry that my name will come up for one sometime in the near future.  I dont see myself ever getting a bigger scope than what you are using on here.  In fact I probably wont go bigger than my EDGE 925 and 130GTX, which this mount would not even realize if either is loaded!  Blown away by this performance you are reporting.  Congrats to AP for executing such a capable instrument. 


Re: Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

Bill Long
 

For the sake of testing it. 🙂 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Manusfisch via groups.io <tjfischer653@...>
Sent: Friday, August 13, 2021 7:46 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Bill, why go from original 5 sec guide exposures to 1 sec, I have gone through the screen shot and can’t figure out the collective differences 

TJF Mobile

On Aug 13, 2021, at 04:27, Bill Long <bill@...> wrote:


Results tonight... Note the 1 second guide exposures. The Mach 2 is the best mount ever made. Period. This is with the same massive overloaded system I talked about before.

If the Mach 2 could not handle the load, this would not be possible. Period. 




From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Monday, August 2, 2021 12:09 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Not sure if it was the idea to move to neutral balance, or the seeing here is better. The guided performance is much better in this configuration. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, August 1, 2021 11:31 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Well then.... 20 mins here:




From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, August 1, 2021 9:08 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Had to take a break but should be back in the swing tonight with this combo. I took Rolands advice and neutral balanced both axis on the Mach 2. Here is a photo of the beast in route to a fun night.

Counterweights are 1x30, 3x18, 2x10, aka all the weights I own. 😂

She's perfectly balanced though. We'll see how the night goes. 

image/jpeg 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2021 12:14 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Night 5, still the same story. Excellent performance with a massive load on the Mach 2 mount. I have still done nothing at all in terms of the model, PA, or anything else.

I should probably add in for new people that this rig sits 2 stories in the air, on a wooden deck that is over 15 years old. If that doesn't show the power of this mount, nothing will. This is the ULTIMATE torture test. The mount is at its limits, and its environment is well past its limits. Yet -- with good equipment even you can image on a tightrope. 

😄 




From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 12:19 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Yep. Absolutely no problem at all.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 12:08 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Great! So, this combination mount and scope is a winner. Good to know.

Thanks,

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Wed, Jul 28, 2021 10:57 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

A total of 4 all night imaging runs with this combo and still not a single sub thrown out. Excellent tracking and guiding performance. I haven't touched PA, PHD2 settings, or the model since night one when I set the mount up outside. It just works. Tonight will be night 5.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 2:49 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
We had mild wind here about 5-6MPH and so I wanted to show that as well. No impact at all to subs, and the Mach 2 handled it fine. 






From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2021 8:47 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Here are some sample subs:


I took the highest and lowest FWHM from the data set and shared them. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2021 10:12 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Circling back on this as I finally got to test this out. I put my 12.5" AGO iDK, Moonlight Nitecrawler, FLI Proline 16803, CFW 5-7, Sagitta OAG, and Ultrastar guide camera on the Mach 2. Balancing the load was pretty easy to do, and I had just enough weights on hand for the job. This is pretty much at capacity for the mount based on the specifications. Might even be a tad over. 😁

Performance was stellar. I made a 98pt model in APPM, and used 5 second guide exposures. I took 5 hours worth of 20 minute HA subs and not a single one had any trailing at all. Very nice tight round stars in all of the images. Guiding was about 0.2-0.35" range throughout the night. Graph picture below.

I'll be getting some more data over the next few nights. I'll share some subs later this evening when I'm back on the Astro PC.

Conclusion: Mach 2 is a beastly mount that easily handled this challenge and passed with flying colors. Well done AP!

image/png


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2021 5:44 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Well, I've never tried that scope, but I have loaded my Mach2 to the limit and imaged/guided just fine. Balance is critical and is easy to do.

Weight makes for larger moment, which makes the mount slower to respond to external disturbance, like wind. If your scope is open tube with no shroud, wind will not be a problem.

I will be loading my Mach2 with a 12" F8 carbon fiber Maksutov astrograph in the next couple days. Weight is about the same as your system. I expect that it will handle it fine and will post some guiding results. Will be getting ready for galaxy season.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: AP-GTO Groups. io <ap-gto@groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Apr 23, 2021 7:07 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

What say ye?


46lbs, but would need to add focuser (8lbs), TCS System (1lb), and camera/accessories (call these 5 lbs). The OTA is about 18" tall (maybe 17.5" but lets call it 18") so this puts me at 18" and 60 lbs.  This puts me right on the yellow on the Mach 2 graph AP has. Length of everything, in focus with camera gear on would be about 45". 

Seems right at the limits, but likely safe. Any ideas on this from AP or others?

-Bill 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

Manusfisch
 

Bill, why go from original 5 sec guide exposures to 1 sec, I have gone through the screen shot and can’t figure out the collective differences 

TJF Mobile

On Aug 13, 2021, at 04:27, Bill Long <bill@...> wrote:


Results tonight... Note the 1 second guide exposures. The Mach 2 is the best mount ever made. Period. This is with the same massive overloaded system I talked about before.

If the Mach 2 could not handle the load, this would not be possible. Period. 




From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Monday, August 2, 2021 12:09 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Not sure if it was the idea to move to neutral balance, or the seeing here is better. The guided performance is much better in this configuration. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, August 1, 2021 11:31 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Well then.... 20 mins here:




From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, August 1, 2021 9:08 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Had to take a break but should be back in the swing tonight with this combo. I took Rolands advice and neutral balanced both axis on the Mach 2. Here is a photo of the beast in route to a fun night.

Counterweights are 1x30, 3x18, 2x10, aka all the weights I own. 😂

She's perfectly balanced though. We'll see how the night goes. 

image/jpeg 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2021 12:14 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Night 5, still the same story. Excellent performance with a massive load on the Mach 2 mount. I have still done nothing at all in terms of the model, PA, or anything else.

I should probably add in for new people that this rig sits 2 stories in the air, on a wooden deck that is over 15 years old. If that doesn't show the power of this mount, nothing will. This is the ULTIMATE torture test. The mount is at its limits, and its environment is well past its limits. Yet -- with good equipment even you can image on a tightrope. 

😄 




From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 12:19 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Yep. Absolutely no problem at all.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 12:08 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Great! So, this combination mount and scope is a winner. Good to know.

Thanks,

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Wed, Jul 28, 2021 10:57 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

A total of 4 all night imaging runs with this combo and still not a single sub thrown out. Excellent tracking and guiding performance. I haven't touched PA, PHD2 settings, or the model since night one when I set the mount up outside. It just works. Tonight will be night 5.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 2:49 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
We had mild wind here about 5-6MPH and so I wanted to show that as well. No impact at all to subs, and the Mach 2 handled it fine. 






From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2021 8:47 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Here are some sample subs:


I took the highest and lowest FWHM from the data set and shared them. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2021 10:12 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Circling back on this as I finally got to test this out. I put my 12.5" AGO iDK, Moonlight Nitecrawler, FLI Proline 16803, CFW 5-7, Sagitta OAG, and Ultrastar guide camera on the Mach 2. Balancing the load was pretty easy to do, and I had just enough weights on hand for the job. This is pretty much at capacity for the mount based on the specifications. Might even be a tad over. 😁

Performance was stellar. I made a 98pt model in APPM, and used 5 second guide exposures. I took 5 hours worth of 20 minute HA subs and not a single one had any trailing at all. Very nice tight round stars in all of the images. Guiding was about 0.2-0.35" range throughout the night. Graph picture below.

I'll be getting some more data over the next few nights. I'll share some subs later this evening when I'm back on the Astro PC.

Conclusion: Mach 2 is a beastly mount that easily handled this challenge and passed with flying colors. Well done AP!

image/png


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2021 5:44 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Well, I've never tried that scope, but I have loaded my Mach2 to the limit and imaged/guided just fine. Balance is critical and is easy to do.

Weight makes for larger moment, which makes the mount slower to respond to external disturbance, like wind. If your scope is open tube with no shroud, wind will not be a problem.

I will be loading my Mach2 with a 12" F8 carbon fiber Maksutov astrograph in the next couple days. Weight is about the same as your system. I expect that it will handle it fine and will post some guiding results. Will be getting ready for galaxy season.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: AP-GTO Groups. io <ap-gto@groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Apr 23, 2021 7:07 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

What say ye?


46lbs, but would need to add focuser (8lbs), TCS System (1lb), and camera/accessories (call these 5 lbs). The OTA is about 18" tall (maybe 17.5" but lets call it 18") so this puts me at 18" and 60 lbs.  This puts me right on the yellow on the Mach 2 graph AP has. Length of everything, in focus with camera gear on would be about 45". 

Seems right at the limits, but likely safe. Any ideas on this from AP or others?

-Bill 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

Chris White
 

Really amazing results Bill!

Makes me hope and worry that my name will come up for one sometime in the near future.  I dont see myself ever getting a bigger scope than what you are using on here.  In fact I probably wont go bigger than my EDGE 925 and 130GTX, which this mount would not even realize if either is loaded!  Blown away by this performance you are reporting.  Congrats to AP for executing such a capable instrument. 


Re: Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

Bill Long
 

Results tonight... Note the 1 second guide exposures. The Mach 2 is the best mount ever made. Period. This is with the same massive overloaded system I talked about before.

If the Mach 2 could not handle the load, this would not be possible. Period. 




From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Monday, August 2, 2021 12:09 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Not sure if it was the idea to move to neutral balance, or the seeing here is better. The guided performance is much better in this configuration. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, August 1, 2021 11:31 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Well then.... 20 mins here:




From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, August 1, 2021 9:08 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Had to take a break but should be back in the swing tonight with this combo. I took Rolands advice and neutral balanced both axis on the Mach 2. Here is a photo of the beast in route to a fun night.

Counterweights are 1x30, 3x18, 2x10, aka all the weights I own. 😂

She's perfectly balanced though. We'll see how the night goes. 

image/jpeg 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2021 12:14 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Night 5, still the same story. Excellent performance with a massive load on the Mach 2 mount. I have still done nothing at all in terms of the model, PA, or anything else.

I should probably add in for new people that this rig sits 2 stories in the air, on a wooden deck that is over 15 years old. If that doesn't show the power of this mount, nothing will. This is the ULTIMATE torture test. The mount is at its limits, and its environment is well past its limits. Yet -- with good equipment even you can image on a tightrope. 

😄 




From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 12:19 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Yep. Absolutely no problem at all.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2021 12:08 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Great! So, this combination mount and scope is a winner. Good to know.

Thanks,

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Wed, Jul 28, 2021 10:57 am
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

A total of 4 all night imaging runs with this combo and still not a single sub thrown out. Excellent tracking and guiding performance. I haven't touched PA, PHD2 settings, or the model since night one when I set the mount up outside. It just works. Tonight will be night 5.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 2:49 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
We had mild wind here about 5-6MPH and so I wanted to show that as well. No impact at all to subs, and the Mach 2 handled it fine. 






From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2021 8:47 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Here are some sample subs:


I took the highest and lowest FWHM from the data set and shared them. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2021 10:12 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Circling back on this as I finally got to test this out. I put my 12.5" AGO iDK, Moonlight Nitecrawler, FLI Proline 16803, CFW 5-7, Sagitta OAG, and Ultrastar guide camera on the Mach 2. Balancing the load was pretty easy to do, and I had just enough weights on hand for the job. This is pretty much at capacity for the mount based on the specifications. Might even be a tad over. 😁

Performance was stellar. I made a 98pt model in APPM, and used 5 second guide exposures. I took 5 hours worth of 20 minute HA subs and not a single one had any trailing at all. Very nice tight round stars in all of the images. Guiding was about 0.2-0.35" range throughout the night. Graph picture below.

I'll be getting some more data over the next few nights. I'll share some subs later this evening when I'm back on the Astro PC.

Conclusion: Mach 2 is a beastly mount that easily handled this challenge and passed with flying colors. Well done AP!

image/png


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2021 5:44 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Well, I've never tried that scope, but I have loaded my Mach2 to the limit and imaged/guided just fine. Balance is critical and is easy to do.

Weight makes for larger moment, which makes the mount slower to respond to external disturbance, like wind. If your scope is open tube with no shroud, wind will not be a problem.

I will be loading my Mach2 with a 12" F8 carbon fiber Maksutov astrograph in the next couple days. Weight is about the same as your system. I expect that it will handle it fine and will post some guiding results. Will be getting ready for galaxy season.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: AP-GTO Groups. io <ap-gto@groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Apr 23, 2021 7:07 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

What say ye?


46lbs, but would need to add focuser (8lbs), TCS System (1lb), and camera/accessories (call these 5 lbs). The OTA is about 18" tall (maybe 17.5" but lets call it 18") so this puts me at 18" and 60 lbs.  This puts me right on the yellow on the Mach 2 graph AP has. Length of everything, in focus with camera gear on would be about 45". 

Seems right at the limits, but likely safe. Any ideas on this from AP or others?

-Bill 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: AP1200 servo fail warning

Luke Dodd
 

 

 

Powered up my mount last night and the keypad displayed this error message. I switched off ,removed motor cables, reattached cables and powered up. Mount ran fine for the evening. Am I correct in assuming I have some defective cables?

 

Regards Luke


Re: APCC "don't unpack" question

George
 

Linda,

 

Additionally, at the top left of APCC, click the “Advanced Settings” button and change the “Auto Initialize (secs)” to “0”.

 

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 Linda Thomas
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 3:37 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC "don't unpack" question

 

Tried a couple more times and it seems to behave. 

 

In my earlier, “it’s still happening” comments I was referring to the dialog popping up. I was expecting that to go away with the change George suggested but if it stays there but doesn’t actually unpark after it pops up or selects “ok” then we’re good.



On Aug 12, 2021, at 4:32 PM, Linda Thomas via groups.io <linda@...> wrote:

 

Well…I let the “I’m going to set the park to last parked” dialog time out and it stayed parked which is exactly what we wanted so maybe there isn’t an issue. Or the setting change that George suggested caused it to work the way I expected. I could swear I saw it start tracking after that which is what got me worried. I’ll keep an eye on it and see if its consistent or not. For the moment, all appears to be good.

 

Thanks, everyone, for your help. It is very much appreciated!



On Aug 12, 2021, at 4:25 PM, Linda Thomas via groups.io <linda@...> wrote:

 

Ray,

 

If I don’t hit cancel on the operation that says it’s going to unpark on me, then it does unpark and doesn’t repark. At least that is what i think is happening but I will verify that as soon as I can.



On Aug 12, 2021, at 3:44 PM, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:

 

Hi Linda, 


4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway


As Howard said, unparking is part of the mount initialization operations. 

APCC will initialize the mount, including the unpark operation, but then immediately repark the mount. Is it not doing that?

That said, afterward, I think APCC wants to reset the the unpark-type to "from last parked position". Is that the issue?

-Ray


-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Linda Thomas
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 10:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC "don't unpack" question

Here is the mount related portion of the startup:

1. power on the mount from the remote power switch
2. start apcc
3. click initialize (it’s set to don’t unpark and currently track to zero).
4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

Then it’s on to starting up other gear. is that sufficient? If anything else would help, let me know.



          On Aug 12, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Howard Hedlund <howard@...> wrote:

          Hi linda,
          What is your startup procedure - step by step?






 

 

 


Re: APCC "don't unpack" question

Linda Thomas
 

Tried a couple more times and it seems to behave. 

In my earlier, “it’s still happening” comments I was referring to the dialog popping up. I was expecting that to go away with the change George suggested but if it stays there but doesn’t actually unpark after it pops up or selects “ok” then we’re good.

On Aug 12, 2021, at 4:32 PM, Linda Thomas via groups.io <linda@...> wrote:

Well…I let the “I’m going to set the park to last parked” dialog time out and it stayed parked which is exactly what we wanted so maybe there isn’t an issue. Or the setting change that George suggested caused it to work the way I expected. I could swear I saw it start tracking after that which is what got me worried. I’ll keep an eye on it and see if its consistent or not. For the moment, all appears to be good.

Thanks, everyone, for your help. It is very much appreciated!

On Aug 12, 2021, at 4:25 PM, Linda Thomas via groups.io <linda@...> wrote:

Ray,

If I don’t hit cancel on the operation that says it’s going to unpark on me, then it does unpark and doesn’t repark. At least that is what i think is happening but I will verify that as soon as I can.

On Aug 12, 2021, at 3:44 PM, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:

Hi Linda, 

4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

As Howard said, unparking is part of the mount initialization operations. 

APCC will initialize the mount, including the unpark operation, but then immediately repark the mount. Is it not doing that?

That said, afterward, I think APCC wants to reset the the unpark-type to "from last parked position". Is that the issue?

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Linda Thomas
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 10:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC "don't unpack" question

Here is the mount related portion of the startup:

1. power on the mount from the remote power switch
2. start apcc
3. click initialize (it’s set to don’t unpark and currently track to zero).
4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

Then it’s on to starting up other gear. is that sufficient? If anything else would help, let me know.



On Aug 12, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Howard Hedlund <howard@...> wrote:

Hi linda,
What is your startup procedure - step by step?










Re: APCC "don't unpack" question

Linda Thomas
 

Well…I let the “I’m going to set the park to last parked” dialog time out and it stayed parked which is exactly what we wanted so maybe there isn’t an issue. Or the setting change that George suggested caused it to work the way I expected. I could swear I saw it start tracking after that which is what got me worried. I’ll keep an eye on it and see if its consistent or not. For the moment, all appears to be good.

Thanks, everyone, for your help. It is very much appreciated!

On Aug 12, 2021, at 4:25 PM, Linda Thomas via groups.io <linda@...> wrote:

Ray,

If I don’t hit cancel on the operation that says it’s going to unpark on me, then it does unpark and doesn’t repark. At least that is what i think is happening but I will verify that as soon as I can.

On Aug 12, 2021, at 3:44 PM, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:

Hi Linda, 

4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

As Howard said, unparking is part of the mount initialization operations. 

APCC will initialize the mount, including the unpark operation, but then immediately repark the mount. Is it not doing that?

That said, afterward, I think APCC wants to reset the the unpark-type to "from last parked position". Is that the issue?

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Linda Thomas
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 10:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC "don't unpack" question

Here is the mount related portion of the startup:

1. power on the mount from the remote power switch
2. start apcc
3. click initialize (it’s set to don’t unpark and currently track to zero).
4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

Then it’s on to starting up other gear. is that sufficient? If anything else would help, let me know.



On Aug 12, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Howard Hedlund <howard@...> wrote:

Hi linda,
What is your startup procedure - step by step?









Re: APCC "don't unpack" question

George
 

Linda,

 

Unparking is not the same as tracking.    Look at the very bottom of APCC (the white horizontal band at the base.   Does it say that it is unparked and  tracking or unparked and zero tracking?

 

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 Linda Thomas
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 3:25 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC "don't unpack" question

 

Ray,

 

If I don’t hit cancel on the operation that says it’s going to unpark on me, then it does unpark and doesn’t repark. At least that is what i think is happening but I will verify that as soon as I can.



On Aug 12, 2021, at 3:44 PM, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:

 

Hi Linda, 


4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway


As Howard said, unparking is part of the mount initialization operations. 

APCC will initialize the mount, including the unpark operation, but then immediately repark the mount. Is it not doing that?

That said, afterward, I think APCC wants to reset the the unpark-type to "from last parked position". Is that the issue?

-Ray


-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Linda Thomas
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 10:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC "don't unpack" question

Here is the mount related portion of the startup:

1. power on the mount from the remote power switch
2. start apcc
3. click initialize (it’s set to don’t unpark and currently track to zero).
4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

Then it’s on to starting up other gear. is that sufficient? If anything else would help, let me know.



          On Aug 12, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Howard Hedlund <howard@...> wrote:

          Hi linda,
          What is your startup procedure - step by step?






 


Re: APCC "don't unpack" question

Linda Thomas
 

Ray,

If I don’t hit cancel on the operation that says it’s going to unpark on me, then it does unpark and doesn’t repark. At least that is what i think is happening but I will verify that as soon as I can.

On Aug 12, 2021, at 3:44 PM, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:

Hi Linda, 

4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

As Howard said, unparking is part of the mount initialization operations. 

APCC will initialize the mount, including the unpark operation, but then immediately repark the mount. Is it not doing that?

That said, afterward, I think APCC wants to reset the the unpark-type to "from last parked position". Is that the issue?

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Linda Thomas
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 10:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC "don't unpack" question

Here is the mount related portion of the startup:

1. power on the mount from the remote power switch
2. start apcc
3. click initialize (it’s set to don’t unpark and currently track to zero).
4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

Then it’s on to starting up other gear. is that sufficient? If anything else would help, let me know.



On Aug 12, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Howard Hedlund <howard@...> wrote:

Hi linda,
What is your startup procedure - step by step?








Re: APCC "don't unpack" question

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Linda,

4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway
As Howard said, unparking is part of the mount initialization operations.

APCC will initialize the mount, including the unpark operation, but then immediately repark the mount. Is it not doing that?

That said, afterward, I think APCC wants to reset the the unpark-type to "from last parked position". Is that the issue?

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Linda Thomas
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2021 10:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC "don't unpack" question

Here is the mount related portion of the startup:

1. power on the mount from the remote power switch
2. start apcc
3. click initialize (it’s set to don’t unpark and currently track to zero).
4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

Then it’s on to starting up other gear. is that sufficient? If anything else would help, let me know.



On Aug 12, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Howard Hedlund <howard@astro-physics.com> wrote:

Hi linda,
What is your startup procedure - step by step?



Re: APCC "don't unpack" question

Sam Saeed
 

Hi Brian

 

If power to mount is not recycled, and last command was to Park, Everything would work as expected. In my case because I have to power down everything in my observatory between visits, it always behaves as Linda had described.

 

Sam

 

_____________________________________________________________________________-

 

 

 

Hi Linda

 

I don't know if this will help, but here's how i do it for complete automation and starting the sequences well before the actual start time

 

when I first initialize my 1600, i then park it (park 3). 

 

When the imaging sequence finishes for the night, it parks the telescope, and it sits there waiting for the next night. 

 

I do not power cycle the mount, and instead leave everything powered on

 

so for me the initialize/park issue is only when we power cycle everything (which also includes the computer, so i'm focused on re-setting up everything anyways)

 

 

Brian

 

 

 

On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 10:35 AM Linda Thomas <linda@...> wrote:

Thanks, Howard, for all those details. 

 

I verified that it’s set to zero in the “Edit Initialize Mount Settings” dialog and then verified the same behavior still exists.

 

Perhaps if I clarify why I’m trying to do this someone might suggest a better alternative. It seemed the simplest solution at first glance but clearly it has complexity that I wasn’t aware of.

 

The mount is in a remote observatory and given the time difference anyone on the team might kick up the evening’s run off well before actual imaging time. The script should park the mount but in case something went wrong somewhere we wanted to make sure the mount was in it’s most secure state and not capable of moving on its own. I know setitng tracking to zero keeps it from moving but parked seemed like the safer alternative. If Voyager were to crash or get otherwise confused we didn’t want the mount to be moving, potentially for hours, without anyone paying attention.

 

Right now, we have to make sure we catch that “you didn’t really mean it” dialog and it wouldn’t be hard to miss if someone got distracted when doing startup. That’s the impetus for my question.

 

If there is a better way to do this, I can change the way we do startup.

 

thanks!

 



On Aug 12, 2021, at 12:55 PM, Howard Hedlund <howard@...> wrote:

 

Hi Sam and Linda,

 

George and I will get together with Ray and see if we can clarify all of this.  (Ray, please don’t make any changes until we talk.) For now, here are some additional comments:

  • Unparking a mount is an integral part of initialization.  This is not something inherent to APCC or the AP V2 driver.  It is instead inherent to the AP GTO system and has been a part of the GTOCPx since the outset back in the late 1990s.  There is a single command which completes the initialization and simultaneously unparks the mount.  Completing initialization necessarily unparks the mount.
  • Initialization unparks the mount, but unparking the mount does not necessarily involve initialization.  Initialization only happens once per power-cycle (power-on / power-off). 
  • If you park the mount in mid-session to wait for the next target to get high enough, or to go grab a slice of pizza, you won’t reinitialize the mount when you unpark it. 
  • Either scenario for unparking can be set so that it does NOT start tracking by setting the tracking rate to zero before unparking.  This is done as George described below.
  • The  * Stop Tracking after unparking * checkbox in APCC’s Park tab is intended for mid-session parks and unparks.  It does not really apply to initialization.
  • We added the behavior in APCC to always revert to unparking from last parked.  This is why APCC doesn’t appear to believe you, Linda when you set it to:  * Don’t Unpark. *.  In hindsight, we should have included an exception for the * Don’t Unpark * option.
  • Finally Linda, Tracking must be set to zero in the  * Edit Initialize Mount Settings * window – NOT the plain old * Initialize Mount * window.  You know you have the right place if there is a * Save * button at the bottom, and of course, you want to save the new settings before testing. 

HH

 


 

--

Brian 

 

 

 

Brian Valente


Re: APCC "don't unpack" question

Linda Thomas
 

Here is the mount related portion of the startup:

1. power on the mount from the remote power switch
2. start apcc
3. click initialize (it’s set to don’t unpark and currently track to zero).
4. Make sure to hit cancel before it auto unparks anyway

Then it’s on to starting up other gear. is that sufficient? If anything else would help, let me know.


On Aug 12, 2021, at 1:42 PM, Howard Hedlund <howard@...> wrote:

Hi linda,
What is your startup procedure - step by step?


Re: APCC "don't unpack" question

 

Hi Linda

I don't know if this will help, but here's how i do it for complete automation and starting the sequences well before the actual start time

when I first initialize my 1600, i then park it (park 3). 

When the imaging sequence finishes for the night, it parks the telescope, and it sits there waiting for the next night. 

I do not power cycle the mount, and instead leave everything powered on

so for me the initialize/park issue is only when we power cycle everything (which also includes the computer, so i'm focused on re-setting up everything anyways)


Brian



On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 10:35 AM Linda Thomas <linda@...> wrote:
Thanks, Howard, for all those details. 

I verified that it’s set to zero in the “Edit Initialize Mount Settings” dialog and then verified the same behavior still exists.

Perhaps if I clarify why I’m trying to do this someone might suggest a better alternative. It seemed the simplest solution at first glance but clearly it has complexity that I wasn’t aware of.

The mount is in a remote observatory and given the time difference anyone on the team might kick up the evening’s run off well before actual imaging time. The script should park the mount but in case something went wrong somewhere we wanted to make sure the mount was in it’s most secure state and not capable of moving on its own. I know setitng tracking to zero keeps it from moving but parked seemed like the safer alternative. If Voyager were to crash or get otherwise confused we didn’t want the mount to be moving, potentially for hours, without anyone paying attention.

Right now, we have to make sure we catch that “you didn’t really mean it” dialog and it wouldn’t be hard to miss if someone got distracted when doing startup. That’s the impetus for my question.

If there is a better way to do this, I can change the way we do startup.

thanks!


On Aug 12, 2021, at 12:55 PM, Howard Hedlund <howard@...> wrote:

Hi Sam and Linda,

 

George and I will get together with Ray and see if we can clarify all of this.  (Ray, please don’t make any changes until we talk.) For now, here are some additional comments:
  • Unparking a mount is an integral part of initialization.  This is not something inherent to APCC or the AP V2 driver.  It is instead inherent to the AP GTO system and has been a part of the GTOCPx since the outset back in the late 1990s.  There is a single command which completes the initialization and simultaneously unparks the mount.  Completing initialization necessarily unparks the mount.
  • Initialization unparks the mount, but unparking the mount does not necessarily involve initialization.  Initialization only happens once per power-cycle (power-on / power-off). 
  • If you park the mount in mid-session to wait for the next target to get high enough, or to go grab a slice of pizza, you won’t reinitialize the mount when you unpark it. 
  • Either scenario for unparking can be set so that it does NOT start tracking by setting the tracking rate to zero before unparking.  This is done as George described below.
  • The  * Stop Tracking after unparking * checkbox in APCC’s Park tab is intended for mid-session parks and unparks.  It does not really apply to initialization.
  • We added the behavior in APCC to always revert to unparking from last parked.  This is why APCC doesn’t appear to believe you, Linda when you set it to:  * Don’t Unpark. *.  In hindsight, we should have included an exception for the * Don’t Unpark * option.
  • Finally Linda, Tracking must be set to zero in the  * Edit Initialize Mount Settings * window – NOT the plain old * Initialize Mount * window.  You know you have the right place if there is a * Save * button at the bottom, and of course, you want to save the new settings before testing. 
HH



--
Brian 



Brian Valente

6481 - 6500 of 86432