Date   

Re: Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver

Christopher Erickson
 

When troubleshooting USB connections...

1. Try a new, quality USB cable.
2. Try a different USB port.
3. See what Device Manager is saying.
4. This time, really do try a quality USB cable, and not just pretend to do so.
5. Try a different USB cable and a diff PC.
6. Come to this forum with your hat in hand.


-Christopher Erickson
Observatory engineer
Waikoloa, HI 96738
www.summitkinetics.com
   


On Fri, Oct 1, 2021, 8:41 PM Worsel via groups.io <bryancashion=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
Not to overwork it, but I also support Ethernet approach.

Once the mount is connected to a router,  you should be able to see the address assigned to the mount by either

1. Logging into your router
2. Using the Enet-WiFi-Polling utility that A-P provides
    CP4  https://www.astro-physics.info/index.htm?tech_support/mounts/cp4-update/cp4-update
    CP5  https://www.astro-physics.info/index.htm?tech_support/mounts/cp5-update/cp5-update

Bryan


Re: Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver

Worsel
 

Not to overwork it, but I also support Ethernet approach.

Once the mount is connected to a router,  you should be able to see the address assigned to the mount by either

1. Logging into your router
2. Using the Enet-WiFi-Polling utility that A-P provides
    CP4  https://www.astro-physics.info/index.htm?tech_support/mounts/cp4-update/cp4-update
    CP5  https://www.astro-physics.info/index.htm?tech_support/mounts/cp5-update/cp5-update

Bryan


Re: Hello All and pardon the newbie questions.....

Sébastien Doré
 

I have about 40 lbs of payload (EdgeHD 8in + SV70t + imaging gear) on my Mach2 and I use 2 x 18lbs at the very top of the shaft and 1 x 10 lbs for fine adjust about an inch below the second 18lbs (much like on Eric's photo).

I also bought a 5# in case I needed a little more versatility (and glad I did). For example, as an alternate balancing solution, while still placing both 18# at the top of the shaft, I omit the 10#, and add the 5# near the bottom. I actually find it easier to accurately achieve neutral balance this way...

Hope this helps.

Sébastien


Re: More basic mount questions

Worsel
 

Michael

I think if the scope is positioned face down and the dovetail could align with the saddle if dec clutches allow saddle to point vertical.

This is how I load a 14.5" OTA; although I did not need the elevating table, because I have an elevating pier.  I just built a table that is the right height for the front of the OTA when pointed down.  Once the clutches are released, the Dec axis can rotate through a full 360 degrees.
 
Bryan


Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

Bill Long
 

Awesome! Can you share some of the FITS from the testing? 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Howard Hedlund <howard@...>
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 10:17 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up
 
Hi Sébastien and group,

I am starting some serious testing on Ray's latest improvements to APCC's modeled pointing and tracking using our system in Chile.  This system is a 305mm f/8 Mak Cass on a 1600GTO AE.  With 2440 mm of focal length, this should provide enough challenge to give the improved modeling, and the Dec Arc Tracking a good evaluation.

I went ahead and made a huge mapping run in APPM - 487 points.  The mapping used Dec spacing of just 4° and RA spacing of 10° to provide full dec arc coverage over the entire sky.  The mapping also included a large number of CW-up points to add to the challenge.  The mapping run was unbelievable: 485 successful plate solutions out of 487 points, so I was really happy about that.  The entire run only took a few hours which is not a bad time investment for a permanent setup.

Preliminary tests using 10 min. unguided subs in several parts of the sky are yielding excellent results with flatness measurements below 0.1 and FWHM values that were as good as we ever get with guiding. 

Stay tuned!  If the weather and the wife cooperate, I'll be collecting more data over the next couple nights.

Mag. 7 or Better Skies!

Howard Hedlund
Astro-Physics, Inc.
AP Phone: 815-282-1513
Direct Phone:  815-315-7015
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.astro-physics.com%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C1d8edf759ae044aa83d908d984ff575a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637687054484212064%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=H8u8uABiDA%2BAu%2BmpTewmU71%2FdXb6M8H50AFc627xIHw%3D&amp;reserved=0
Please include this e-mail with your response.

 Consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ray Gralak
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 7:35
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

Hi Sébastien,

Two rows of sky data points will work, but Howard's suggestion for three rows of sky data points will yield even better tracking rate accuracy for a target.

> but I would like a confirmation
> that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other,
> meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections.

As Brian previously pointed out, you must enable tracking rate corrections to use Dec Arc tracking.

> Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a
> case? Maybe since the model is generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ?

The problem is not the number of sky points, but the lack of distribution of data points across the sky. The all-sky model will be much more accurate if there is a wide distribution of sky data points.

> Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case
> I would like to switch target in the same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range?

There is no definitive answer for this, as it depends on the setup as a whole. But usually, pointing will not be as good outside of the narrow range of sky points that were collected. However, that shouldn't be a problem as many of the imaging programs have a "plate solve and re-center" feature.

-Ray



> -----Original Message-----
> From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf
> Of Seb@stro
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 1:21 PM
> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for
> field set up
>
> Hello Howard,
>
> I'm also trying to learn the ropes of the new Dec Arc Tracking feature
> for portable use (with a new model each night). Please keep in mind
> I'm totally new at modeling in general. At this point, I believe I
> have quite managed to understand the global idea from the a little
> experimentation (did a complete Dec Arc mapping run successfully), reading the manual and some recent posts but I'm still left with the following questions about the pointing model tab in APCC.
>
> My general understanding is that the tracking corrections will use the
> "all-sky algorithm" to compute the correction terms from the mapped
> points unless the Dec Arc Tracking is also enabled in which case
> another algorithm (taking also other variables into account) to compute more accurately the correction terms for the current declination arc. Am I getting this right ?
>
>
>
> If so, I was wondering if I should ONLY tick the "Enable Dec Arc
> Tracking" checkbox or if I do also need to tick the "Enable Tracking
> Correction" box for the Dec Arc tracking corrections to be actually
> sent to the mount ? It seems the latter is required from what I see in
> the Tracking Status window, but I would like a confirmation that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other, meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections.
>
> Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a
> case? Maybe since the model is generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ?
> Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case
> I would like to switch target in the same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range?
>
>
> Thanks for your time,
>
> Sébastien
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> De : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> de la part de
> Howard Hedlund <howard@astro- physics.com> Envoyé : 30 septembre 2021
> 12:50 À : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Objet : Re:
> [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up
>
>
> Hi Andrea, for portable setups, the APCC Dec Arc feature is amazing!  It is perfect for your situation.
>
>
>
> I would definitely run 3 arcs if you can spare the time – one right on
> the target declination, and two more – one a couple degrees north, and the other a couple degrees south of your target dec.
>
>
>
> As for the RA density, I would experiment a little.  You presently do
> 2 arcs each with 10 or so points giving 20 total.  3 arcs totaling between 25 and 30 should rock!
>
>
>
> Mag. 7 or Better Skies!
>
>
>
> Howard Hedlund
>
> Astro-Physics, Inc.
>
> AP Phone: 815-282-1513
>
> Direct Phone:  815-315-7015
>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.astro-physics.com%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C1d8edf759ae044aa83d908d984ff575a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637687054484222024%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=Z5SDCCArwi5RAr00ZzAFQKXMJpngGrRYzcnITuLrLsc%3D&amp;reserved=0 <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.astro-physics.com%2F&amp;data=04%7C01%7C%7C1d8edf759ae044aa83d908d984ff575a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637687054484222024%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&amp;sdata=Z5SDCCArwi5RAr00ZzAFQKXMJpngGrRYzcnITuLrLsc%3D&amp;reserved=0>
>
> Please include this e-mail with your response.
>
>
>
> P Consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>
>
> From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of
> Andrea Lucchetti
> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 6:16
> To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
> Subject: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field
> set up
>
>
>
> Hi, the new functionality is now more mature and I assume some of you have some good data to share.
>
> I usually shoot one subject per night.
> Given the declination, what is the best combination of :
>
> -number of dec arcs
> -total number of points
> -RA spacing
>
> my present strategy is to run 2 arcs one degree north /south of the object declination for a total of 20 points.
> But I wonder if there is a better approach. I think I can increase the
> number of total points while still investing a reasonable amount of time.
> it is better to increase the number of points in the two arcs or may
> be have one middle arc running on the object declination?
>
> Also, Someone recommended a new feature to easily model these points:
> I think that it would be very useful for people with a nomad set up.
>
> Thank you,
> Andrea
>
>












Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

Sébastien Doré
 

Thank you Ray, Brian and Roland ! That pretty much covers the configuration part of my question. Now, does my understanding of the internal modeling "magic" seems about right ?

Also, speaking of forum étiquette in another thread, thanks to Andrea for posting this in the first place too. My apologies if I hi-jacked your post. I felt like my questions were relevant to the topic and may be complementary to yours and might be interesting to other portable imager new at modeling as well...

Clear skies,
Sébastien


Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

Howard Hedlund
 

Hi Sébastien and group,

I am starting some serious testing on Ray's latest improvements to APCC's modeled pointing and tracking using our system in Chile. This system is a 305mm f/8 Mak Cass on a 1600GTO AE. With 2440 mm of focal length, this should provide enough challenge to give the improved modeling, and the Dec Arc Tracking a good evaluation.

I went ahead and made a huge mapping run in APPM - 487 points. The mapping used Dec spacing of just 4° and RA spacing of 10° to provide full dec arc coverage over the entire sky. The mapping also included a large number of CW-up points to add to the challenge. The mapping run was unbelievable: 485 successful plate solutions out of 487 points, so I was really happy about that. The entire run only took a few hours which is not a bad time investment for a permanent setup.

Preliminary tests using 10 min. unguided subs in several parts of the sky are yielding excellent results with flatness measurements below 0.1 and FWHM values that were as good as we ever get with guiding.

Stay tuned! If the weather and the wife cooperate, I'll be collecting more data over the next couple nights.

Mag. 7 or Better Skies!

Howard Hedlund
Astro-Physics, Inc.
AP Phone: 815-282-1513
Direct Phone: 815-315-7015
www.astro-physics.com
Please include this e-mail with your response.

 Consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ray Gralak
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 7:35
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

Hi Sébastien,

Two rows of sky data points will work, but Howard's suggestion for three rows of sky data points will yield even better tracking rate accuracy for a target.

but I would like a confirmation
that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other,
meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections.
As Brian previously pointed out, you must enable tracking rate corrections to use Dec Arc tracking.

Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a
case? Maybe since the model is generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ?
The problem is not the number of sky points, but the lack of distribution of data points across the sky. The all-sky model will be much more accurate if there is a wide distribution of sky data points.

Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case
I would like to switch target in the same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range?
There is no definitive answer for this, as it depends on the setup as a whole. But usually, pointing will not be as good outside of the narrow range of sky points that were collected. However, that shouldn't be a problem as many of the imaging programs have a "plate solve and re-center" feature.

-Ray



-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf
Of Seb@stro
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 1:21 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for
field set up

Hello Howard,

I'm also trying to learn the ropes of the new Dec Arc Tracking feature
for portable use (with a new model each night). Please keep in mind
I'm totally new at modeling in general. At this point, I believe I
have quite managed to understand the global idea from the a little
experimentation (did a complete Dec Arc mapping run successfully), reading the manual and some recent posts but I'm still left with the following questions about the pointing model tab in APCC.

My general understanding is that the tracking corrections will use the
"all-sky algorithm" to compute the correction terms from the mapped
points unless the Dec Arc Tracking is also enabled in which case
another algorithm (taking also other variables into account) to compute more accurately the correction terms for the current declination arc. Am I getting this right ?



If so, I was wondering if I should ONLY tick the "Enable Dec Arc
Tracking" checkbox or if I do also need to tick the "Enable Tracking
Correction" box for the Dec Arc tracking corrections to be actually
sent to the mount ? It seems the latter is required from what I see in
the Tracking Status window, but I would like a confirmation that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other, meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections.

Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a
case? Maybe since the model is generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ?
Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case
I would like to switch target in the same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range?


Thanks for your time,

Sébastien



________________________________

De : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> de la part de
Howard Hedlund <howard@astro- physics.com> Envoyé : 30 septembre 2021
12:50 À : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> Objet : Re:
[ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up


Hi Andrea, for portable setups, the APCC Dec Arc feature is amazing! It is perfect for your situation.



I would definitely run 3 arcs if you can spare the time – one right on
the target declination, and two more – one a couple degrees north, and the other a couple degrees south of your target dec.



As for the RA density, I would experiment a little. You presently do
2 arcs each with 10 or so points giving 20 total. 3 arcs totaling between 25 and 30 should rock!



Mag. 7 or Better Skies!



Howard Hedlund

Astro-Physics, Inc.

AP Phone: 815-282-1513

Direct Phone: 815-315-7015

www.astro-physics.com <http://www.astro-physics.com/>

Please include this e-mail with your response.



P Consider the environment before printing this e-mail.



From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of
Andrea Lucchetti
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 6:16
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field
set up



Hi, the new functionality is now more mature and I assume some of you have some good data to share.

I usually shoot one subject per night.
Given the declination, what is the best combination of :

-number of dec arcs
-total number of points
-RA spacing

my present strategy is to run 2 arcs one degree north /south of the object declination for a total of 20 points.
But I wonder if there is a better approach. I think I can increase the
number of total points while still investing a reasonable amount of time.
it is better to increase the number of points in the two arcs or may
be have one middle arc running on the object declination?

Also, Someone recommended a new feature to easily model these points:
I think that it would be very useful for people with a nomad set up.

Thank you,
Andrea


Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Sébastien,

Two rows of sky data points will work, but Howard's suggestion for three rows of sky data points will yield even better tracking
rate accuracy for a target.

but I would like a confirmation
that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other, meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that
is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections.
As Brian previously pointed out, you must enable tracking rate corrections to use Dec Arc tracking.

Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a case? Maybe since the model is
generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ?
The problem is not the number of sky points, but the lack of distribution of data points across the sky. The all-sky model will be
much more accurate if there is a wide distribution of sky data points.

Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case I would like to switch target in the
same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range?
There is no definitive answer for this, as it depends on the setup as a whole. But usually, pointing will not be as good outside of
the narrow range of sky points that were collected. However, that shouldn't be a problem as many of the imaging programs have a
"plate solve and re-center" feature.

-Ray



-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Seb@stro
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 1:21 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

Hello Howard,

I'm also trying to learn the ropes of the new Dec Arc Tracking feature for portable use (with a new model each
night). Please keep in mind I'm totally new at modeling in general. At this point, I believe I have quite managed
to understand the global idea from the a little experimentation (did a complete Dec Arc mapping run
successfully), reading the manual and some recent posts but I'm still left with the following questions about
the pointing model tab in APCC.

My general understanding is that the tracking corrections will use the "all-sky algorithm" to compute the
correction terms from the mapped points unless the Dec Arc Tracking is also enabled in which case another
algorithm (taking also other variables into account) to compute more accurately the correction terms for the
current declination arc. Am I getting this right ?



If so, I was wondering if I should ONLY tick the "Enable Dec Arc Tracking" checkbox or if I do also need to
tick the "Enable Tracking Correction" box for the Dec Arc tracking corrections to be actually sent to the mount
? It seems the latter is required from what I see in the Tracking Status window, but I would like a confirmation
that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other, meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that
is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections.

Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a case? Maybe since the model is
generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ?
Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case I would like to switch target in the
same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range?


Thanks for your time,

Sébastien



________________________________

De : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> de la part de Howard Hedlund <howard@astro-
physics.com>
Envoyé : 30 septembre 2021 12:50
À : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Objet : Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up


Hi Andrea, for portable setups, the APCC Dec Arc feature is amazing! It is perfect for your situation.



I would definitely run 3 arcs if you can spare the time – one right on the target declination, and two more – one
a couple degrees north, and the other a couple degrees south of your target dec.



As for the RA density, I would experiment a little. You presently do 2 arcs each with 10 or so points giving 20
total. 3 arcs totaling between 25 and 30 should rock!



Mag. 7 or Better Skies!



Howard Hedlund

Astro-Physics, Inc.

AP Phone: 815-282-1513

Direct Phone: 815-315-7015

www.astro-physics.com <http://www.astro-physics.com/>

Please include this e-mail with your response.



P Consider the environment before printing this e-mail.



From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Andrea Lucchetti
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 6:16
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up



Hi, the new functionality is now more mature and I assume some of you have some good data to share.

I usually shoot one subject per night.
Given the declination, what is the best combination of :

-number of dec arcs
-total number of points
-RA spacing

my present strategy is to run 2 arcs one degree north /south of the object declination for a total of 20 points.
But I wonder if there is a better approach. I think I can increase the number of total points while still investing a
reasonable amount of time.
it is better to increase the number of points in the two arcs or may be have one middle arc running on the
object declination?

Also, Someone recommended a new feature to easily model these points: I think that it would be very useful
for people with a nomad set up.

Thank you,
Andrea


Re: Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver

Peter Nagy
 

I agree with Thomas about using Ethernet cable and IP address. Always connects 200% of the time.

Peter


Re: Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver

ap@CaptivePhotons.com
 

Thomas Giannaccini wrote:

 

  • Is it not easier to use an Ethernet cable and the IP address?

 

Yeah, I did that first, never tired USB at all.  Worked first time and every time since, none of this COM-ports-musical-chairs windows is prone to.  😊

 

Thank you AP/Ray for providing IP!


Well, and Wifi, but as someone who has done wifi in huge facilities, if I need reliable I run a wire!

 


Re: Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver

Thomas Giannaccini
 


Is it not easier to use an Ethernet cable and the IP address?



On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 8:41 PM Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

My 1100GTO mount is back to its old tricks.
Believe me, it's not the mount that's not connecting. It's strictly a computer issue. You have to go into Device Manager and find out which com port is available to the mount and then set the ASCOM driver to that com port.

I know, it always seems like the mount won't connect, but unfortunately it's the computer in every case.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: David Woolf <go4itbass@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Thu, Sep 30, 2021 6:35 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver

My 1100GTO mount is back to its old tricks.  It has been connecting fine for weeks, and all I did was change out the battery in the laptop, and last night all I got was “No response from mount”  Restarted APCC, laptop, mount, traded out USB ports, cables, even connected to the mount WIFI.  

I'm no computer whiz.  Is there a troubleshooting “flow” for this error?  

My mount is in an off-the-grid observatory.  Could I take home the GTOCP4 and test connections that way, or does it need to be connected to motors and such?

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


--
CN: HasAnyoneSeenMyNeblua


Re: Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver

Roland Christen
 


My 1100GTO mount is back to its old tricks.
Believe me, it's not the mount that's not connecting. It's strictly a computer issue. You have to go into Device Manager and find out which com port is available to the mount and then set the ASCOM driver to that com port.

I know, it always seems like the mount won't connect, but unfortunately it's the computer in every case.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: David Woolf <go4itbass@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Thu, Sep 30, 2021 6:35 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver

My 1100GTO mount is back to its old tricks.  It has been connecting fine for weeks, and all I did was change out the battery in the laptop, and last night all I got was “No response from mount”  Restarted APCC, laptop, mount, traded out USB ports, cables, even connected to the mount WIFI.  

I'm no computer whiz.  Is there a troubleshooting “flow” for this error?  

My mount is in an off-the-grid observatory.  Could I take home the GTOCP4 and test connections that way, or does it need to be connected to motors and such?

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Connection issues. . .. again #ASCOM_V2_Driver

David Woolf
 

My 1100GTO mount is back to its old tricks.  It has been connecting fine for weeks, and all I did was change out the battery in the laptop, and last night all I got was “No response from mount”  Restarted APCC, laptop, mount, traded out USB ports, cables, even connected to the mount WIFI.  


I'm no computer whiz.  Is there a troubleshooting “flow” for this error?  

My mount is in an off-the-grid observatory.  Could I take home the GTOCP4 and test connections that way, or does it need to be connected to motors and such?


Re: More basic mount questions

michael mccann
 

Lots of ideas. I’m liking the hydraulic table from harbor freight because I’m loading a truss tube RC, 14”, about 65lbs without focuser and the rest. So no tube rings just dovetail. I’m out in the country, listening to some roosters crowing now, and my neighbors are more than a mile away. So most of my Astro-buddies are 20 plus miles away.
I think if the scope is positioned face down and the dovetail could align with the saddle if dec clutches allow saddle to point vertical.

The tricky part is adding gear (camera, focuser guide camera, etc.) and CW . I can predetermine the center of gravity on the OTA and gear.

Still working on that. I plan to get help from my friends, but I also trying to make it easier for all of us.

Cheers


Re: More basic mount questions

Worsel
 

Michael

There was a thread a while back on loading a heavy OTA on a tall pier/mount.

https://ap-gto.groups.io/g/main/topic/82488870#78246

Useful approaches from several people, including Roland stating

"Park2 is usually recommended for easy loading. Open the rings, lift the scope up into the rings and close them.
 
Trying to load a scope that has the dovetail already attached to the scope is a nightmare. Put the dovetail into the cradle instead of trying to slide the scope with dovetail into the cradle.
 
Hint: I have never recommended using Park3 for loading a scope."


Bryan


Re: More basic mount questions

Nick Iversen
 

No need to go "some more" beyond finger tight. I have actually forgotten to tighten the clutches at all and not noticed - slewing and guiding still worked.


Re: Hello All and pardon the newbie questions.....

Eric Weiner
 

No problem. 

In hindsight you can probably get away with 2-18, 1-10, 1-5. Notice on my photo how the 10 is almost flush with the 18s up top.  The 10 is in the middle when I have my imaging train on the OTA. So, there is still wiggle room for a few extra pounds. Sure, you want to keep the inertial moment arm small by keeping the weight high up the shaft, but I believe you’ll be able to achieve balance on 55lbs with 2-18 up top and the 10 lower on the shaft. Especially if you have a 5 too for fine tuning. You can always order another 18. 

Cheers,
Eric 


On Sep 30, 2021, at 13:25, Michael Kelly <Michael@...> wrote:

 Eric, thanks for the input!  I’ve got that same honking hunk of optical magic!!  

So maybe;

3-18
1-10
1-5


Sent from Smallbiz Yahoo Mail for iPhone

On Thursday, September 30, 2021, 2:54 PM, Eric Weiner <weinere@...> wrote:

I’m assuming your Mach1 has the upgraded shaft since the previous owner is using those CW on the 1100. Make sure it’s the 1.875” shaft before ordering.

I don’t think the 30lb will fit as the highest cw on the Mach1 so keep that in mind. Mach1 owners can chime in on that.

I have a Mach2 with ~50lb of loading with my largest OTA imaging setup. I use 2 x 18lb + 1 x 10 lb. you can see that on the attached photo (setup for visual but with a honking monster of an ep attached). I also have 1 x 5lb for lighter visual configurations. You could add one more 18lb and be good.









Re: Hello All and pardon the newbie questions.....

W Hilmo
 

I run a C14 on my AP1100, which is close to 55 lb with accessories.

I use 3 of the larger diameter weights and it’s just about perfect with the weights at the top of the shaft.

The counterweights came with my 1100, which I bought used, and I have never weighed them.  I think that they are the 30 lb ones, though.

On Sep 30, 2021, at 12:04 PM, Shailesh Trivedi <strivedi@...> wrote:

In my experience if your OTA+imaging train weighs 55lbs you need more than this since it is recommended to keep the largest CWs close to the top to reduce moment arm swings and then fine balance with a lighter CW lowering on the shaft . You can begin with 1 30lbs, 2 18lb and maybe 1 10lb; also order a 5lb just for posterity.

Shailesh


Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

 

Hey Sébastien - just one thing I can comment on:

>>>If so, I was wondering if I should ONLY tick the "Enable Dec Arc Tracking" checkbox or if I do also need to tick the "Enable Tracking Correction" box for the Dec Arc tracking corrections to be actually sent to the mount ?

Dec Arc Tracking is a type of tracking enhancement, so you definitely need to enable tracking correction regardless of whether you use dec arc or not. Then in your case enable dec arc tracking, assuming that is your preferred approach. If you disable tracking correction, no tracking corrections are applied at all

>>>

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 1:21 PM Seb@stro <sebastiendore1@...> wrote:
Hello Howard,

I'm also trying to learn the ropes of the new Dec Arc Tracking feature for portable use (with a new model each night). Please keep in mind I'm totally new at modeling in general. At this point, I believe I have quite managed to understand the global idea from the a little experimentation (did a complete Dec Arc mapping run successfully), reading the manual and some recent posts but I'm still left with the following questions about the pointing model tab in APCC.

My general understanding is that the tracking corrections will use the "all-sky algorithm" to compute the correction terms from the mapped points unless the Dec Arc Tracking is also enabled in which case another algorithm (taking also other variables into account) to compute more accurately the correction terms for the current declination arc. Am I getting this right ? 

If so, I was wondering if I should ONLY tick the "Enable Dec Arc Tracking" checkbox or if I do also need to tick the "Enable Tracking Correction" box for the Dec Arc tracking corrections to be actually sent to the mount ? It seems the latter is required from what I see in the Tracking Status window, but I would like a confirmation that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other, meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections.

Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a case? Maybe since the model is generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ? Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case I would like to switch target in the same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range?

Thanks for your time,
Sébastien




De : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> de la part de Howard Hedlund <howard@...>
Envoyé : 30 septembre 2021 12:50
À : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Objet : Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up
 

Hi Andrea, for portable setups, the APCC Dec Arc feature is amazing!  It is perfect for your situation. 

 

I would definitely run 3 arcs if you can spare the time – one right on the target declination, and two more – one a couple degrees north, and the other a couple degrees south of your target dec. 

 

As for the RA density, I would experiment a little.  You presently do 2 arcs each with 10 or so points giving 20 total.  3 arcs totaling between 25 and 30 should rock!

 

Mag. 7 or Better Skies!

 

Howard Hedlund

Astro-Physics, Inc.

AP Phone: 815-282-1513

Direct Phone:  815-315-7015

www.astro-physics.com

Please include this e-mail with your response.

 

P Consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Andrea Lucchetti
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 6:16
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

 

Hi, the new functionality is now more mature and I assume some of you have some good data to share.

I usually shoot one subject per night.
Given the declination, what is the best combination of :

-number of dec arcs
-total number of points
-RA spacing

my present strategy is to run 2 arcs one degree north /south of the object declination for a total of 20 points.
But I wonder if there is a better approach. I think I can increase the number of total points while still investing a reasonable amount of time.
it is better to increase the number of points in the two arcs or may be have one middle arc running on the object declination?

Also, Someone recommended a new feature to easily model these points: I think that it would be very useful for people with a nomad set up.

Thank you,
Andrea



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

Roland Christen
 

Dec arc tracking is for doing unguided imaging on one object along the track. It really isn't intended for pointing, so it is of limited use for that. If you want both, you need to make a full sky model.

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: Seb@stro <sebastiendore1@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Sep 30, 2021 3:21 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up

Hello Howard,

I'm also trying to learn the ropes of the new Dec Arc Tracking feature for portable use (with a new model each night). Please keep in mind I'm totally new at modeling in general. At this point, I believe I have quite managed to understand the global idea from the a little experimentation (did a complete Dec Arc mapping run successfully), reading the manual and some recent posts but I'm still left with the following questions about the pointing model tab in APCC.

My general understanding is that the tracking corrections will use the "all-sky algorithm" to compute the correction terms from the mapped points unless the Dec Arc Tracking is also enabled in which case another algorithm (taking also other variables into account) to compute more accurately the correction terms for the current declination arc. Am I getting this right ? 

If so, I was wondering if I should ONLY tick the "Enable Dec Arc Tracking" checkbox or if I do also need to tick the "Enable Tracking Correction" box for the Dec Arc tracking corrections to be actually sent to the mount ? It seems the latter is required from what I see in the Tracking Status window, but I would like a confirmation that both types of corrections are not conflicting with each other, meaning that it is the Dec Arc algorithm that is actually the one being used to compute the tracking corrections.

Also, would you recommend to "Enable Pointing Correction" in such a case? Maybe since the model is generally rather small (< 50 pts) the pointing corrections would not be accurate enough across the sky ? Would it harm to keep the pointing corrections enabled anyway in case I would like to switch target in the same declination range for example ? What about a target outside of the "dec arc model" range?

Thanks for your time,
Sébastien




De : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> de la part de Howard Hedlund <howard@...>
Envoyé : 30 septembre 2021 12:50
À : main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Objet : Re: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up
 
Hi Andrea, for portable setups, the APCC Dec Arc feature is amazing!  It is perfect for your situation. 
 
I would definitely run 3 arcs if you can spare the time – one right on the target declination, and two more – one a couple degrees north, and the other a couple degrees south of your target dec. 
 
As for the RA density, I would experiment a little.  You presently do 2 arcs each with 10 or so points giving 20 total.  3 arcs totaling between 25 and 30 should rock!
 
Mag. 7 or Better Skies!
 
Howard Hedlund
Astro-Physics, Inc.
AP Phone: 815-282-1513
Direct Phone:  815-315-7015
Please include this e-mail with your response.
 
P Consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
 
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Andrea Lucchetti
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 6:16
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Dec Arc APPM mode: any l best practices for field set up
 
Hi, the new functionality is now more mature and I assume some of you have some good data to share.

I usually shoot one subject per night.
Given the declination, what is the best combination of :

-number of dec arcs
-total number of points
-RA spacing

my present strategy is to run 2 arcs one degree north /south of the object declination for a total of 20 points.
But I wonder if there is a better approach. I think I can increase the number of total points while still investing a reasonable amount of time.
it is better to increase the number of points in the two arcs or may be have one middle arc running on the object declination?

Also, Someone recommended a new feature to easily model these points: I think that it would be very useful for people with a nomad set up.

Thank you,
Andrea

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics

2601 - 2620 of 84255