1. main@ap-gto.groups.io
  2. Messages
   Date   
Re: Takahashi TOA-130 on a mach1

Luca Marinelli
 

Good point, Michael. I did use the extension to connect the CP4 to the mount so it clears the tripod as well.

Luca 

On Nov 15, 2021, at 3:23 PM, Michael Kelly via groups.io <Michael@...> wrote:


Linda,

I use the AP Q6280KIT bracket that attaches the control box adapter with the Mach1. I would suggest calling them and speak with George, he is a wealth of information and loves sharing his intel!

Best,

Michael

On Monday, November 15, 2021, 03:16:46 PM EST, Luca Marinelli <photo@...> wrote:


Hi Linda,

Congratulations on the new telescope! I have used the Mach 1 with an Avalon T-Pod 110 and you will not even need the flat surface adapter. The bolt pattern on the T-Pod is compatible with the ADATRI adapter for the Mach 1. The T-Pod is a fairly rigid tripod and it should be a good match for your optics. I used the Mach 1/T-Pod combination with a 10in f4 Newtonian for about a year until I moved the telescope to a AP1100 on a Losmandy tripod. Obviously the bigger mount and beefier tripod made for a much more substantial platform but the Mach1/T-Pod was no slouch either. If you have that equipment in your hands, no reason not to give it a go. The only limitation will be how much wind that system can tolerate.

Cheers,

Luca


-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Linda Thomas via groups.io
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 2:28 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Takahashi TOA-130 on a mach1

I recently bought a new-to-me but pristine TOA-130. I hadn’t planned to buy a larger telescope until I upgraded my mount from the current EQ6-r I’ve been using but this was too good an opportunity to pass up. The EQ6-r has actually done better than I expected but it’s really asking quite a lot of it for it to handle this  beast of a telescope.

I’m actually on the waiting list for a Mach2 but a friend with an older Mach1 is kindly going to lend me his mount in the meantime. I have an Avalon T-Pod 110 that I was thinking of mounting it on. Is that a good option for this combination? I won’t be traveling with this setup but it will have to set up/tear down periodically. I’ve got a scope cover I can use if the weather isn’t too scary but when the bigger storms come through it has the option to stay outside for longer periods.

I know I’l need the Flat Surface Adapter to attach the mount to the tripod. I’m also guessing I’ll need a pier extension to raise the mount up for the long telescope. I’m at 39N lattitude. Would an 8 inch extension be the right choice?

I might need a bracket to attach the control box to the tripod…not sure how he currently has his attached to a wood tripod now though I have that question out to him. If his current bracket isn’t suitable, what would I need for the T-Pod 110?

Thanks in advance!

Linda
Re: APPM Model sanity check (suggestion)

W Hilmo
 

Do you have any links to an alternative description of how this works?

The video on the first link is, as you say, in potato mode.  The YouTube link has legible video, but both videos are missing audio for me.  I may have a clear night or two this week and I would like to experiment with integrating creation of the dec-arc tracking model into my sequence.

Thanks,
-Wade

On 11/7/21 12:47 AM, Dale Ghent wrote:
Ack! I didn't realize that imgur reduced the video resolution to potato mode. Here's a better view:

https://youtu.be/OoJCp6sZhuo

On Nov 7, 2021, at 02:38, Dale Ghent <daleg@...> wrote:


I meant to get this rolling sooner, but life threw me a curveball last month. Thanks to Ray's additions to the upcoming APCC Pro 1.9.1.x, there's now an easy way to programmatically feed model creation parameters to APPM so that it can produce a model plan using that also considers the other things you might have configured in APPM - horizons, limits, ordering strategy and so on.

So I created a new sequencer instruction for my AP mount plugin for NINA called "Create Dec Arc Model". It will get the RA and dec of the current target and have APPM create a model plan based on that info. You would place this instruction at the start of a target's run so that a dec-arc model is created and put in place prior to getting down to business.

It'll currently create 3 arcs - 1 centered on or (or at least very near) the target's declination, and 2 additional arcs - one on the north side and the other on the south side of the target's declination, separated from the center arc by a configurable number of degrees. Point density along the arcs, in the RA, is another parameter that can be tuned. The arcs will begin (ie, their eastern-most extent) slightly before the target's current hour angle and extend to the configured minimum altitude or the western horizon limit, whichever is hit first. Obviously it's quite advantageous to use your local horizon limits in order to cut down on pointless (ha ha) map points.

Below is a short video of me futzing around with the new code. In it, I select a target in Stellarium (the CA nebula) and import it into NINA's Framing Assistant. I then create a target session using a small sequence template I made that has just the "Create Dec Arc Model" instruction in it. I then run that sequence. With debug logging on, the APPM configuration gets quoted in NINA's log file, so I copy and pasted that config into its own text file and loaded it into APPM to look at the point map. Presto, there's a 3-arc wide dec model based on the CA nebula's location at that time. Obviously this would all be automatic in practice, with a temporary config file being made and fed to APPM directly... this just lets me debug at each step as I work on the code.

I'll put some more polish and testing on it over the next days. If any NINA user here is interested in trying it out, see me on the NINA Discord chat.

https://i.imgur.com/jU1UQTa.mp4

On Nov 6, 2021, at 15:35, Ray Gralak <iogroups@...> wrote:

Hi Linwood,

Or... am I just crazy to consider reusing a model after a tear down and reassembly?
You could do a simple test to find out! Specifically, you could do a Verify run in APPM with a much smaller number of points than your model. That is, a Verify run does not have to use the same points as your active model. When you do this, take a look at the measured pointing errors in the table that APPM creates in the verify run.

BTW, in case anyone is wondering, there are two main differences between a normal APPM run and a verify:

1) The Verify run keeps the active model on, while a normal run would have modeling off.

2) The Verify run will not replace your active model. That is, APPM won't ask to load it into APCC, and APPM will even warn you if you try to load a verify run.

Also, a verify run will probably be much less useful if you are checking a few Dec Arc rows, because it wouldn't take much longer to create new Dec Arcs.

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of ap@...
Sent: Saturday, November 6, 2021 8:33 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] APPM Model sanity check (suggestion)

The discussion on refreshing reminds me to ask this.

I set up and tear down nightly, but fairly precisely in the same setup (example: I usually land within 5' of polar
aligned after I put things together).

I have built a nice model of the sky, but for just time constraints (and I guide) I do not build a new model each
night, and because I worry the model is no longer good, I generally do not use one at all.

I know that APPM has a verify process, that will check each model point for consistency (presumably to flush
out equipment variability that may be invalidating it from run to run).

Would it be possible to have a similar process, perhaps a "model sanity check", which would take 10% (or
some specified number of model points), and check just those. The idea is to see if your model is still good
but in far less time than a complete verify run (which basically takes the same time it would to build a model).

I am not sure how to interpret it, but some kind of correlation calculation could tell you if it looks good or bad,
and is worth using. The idea is spending 10 minutes to validate a fairly large model rather than 60-90 minutes
to build a new one.

Or... am I just crazy to consider reusing a model after a tear down and reassembly?

Linwood
Re: Tripod mounting of 1600GTO

Roland Christen
 

For the 1600 nothing beats an ATS for rigidity. I have found that wood tripods like the Berlebach will twist slightly with variable moisture in the atmosphere, and thus change the polar alignment. Not my choice for a permanent setup, but fine for portable use.

Our portable piers are also great for backyard setups and don't cost as much as the ATS.

Rolando

-----Original Message-----
From: Howard Ritter via groups.io <howard.ritter@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Mon, Nov 15, 2021 2:43 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Tripod mounting of 1600GTO

I have been hoping to put my 1600GTO mount, due in February, on a pedestal in my side yard. This is looking like it may not be feasible, and I’m thinking again of the idea of tripod mounting. I have a Meade Giant Field Tripod for my 16” LX200 that I could have an adapter machined for, but that tripod may be too much to deal with easily.

I have a spare Berlebach Planet tripod rated for 120 kg, but I don’t know whether it’s adequate for the 100 kg of mount, scope, and counterweights that I have in mind (PlaneWave 14”, or failing that, a C14).

If the Planet is marginal for astroimaging with this setup, what’s a good option? Berlebach makes a bigger tripod, the Graviton, rated for 220 kg, but it’s 5x the cost of a Planet. The listing fo the A-P Eagle doesn’t mention a mount as big as the 1600. That leaves the Bisque Pyramid.

Any thoughts? Experiences?

—howard







--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics
Tripod mounting of 1600GTO

Howard Ritter
 

I have been hoping to put my 1600GTO mount, due in February, on a pedestal in my side yard. This is looking like it may not be feasible, and I’m thinking again of the idea of tripod mounting. I have a Meade Giant Field Tripod for my 16” LX200 that I could have an adapter machined for, but that tripod may be too much to deal with easily.

I have a spare Berlebach Planet tripod rated for 120 kg, but I don’t know whether it’s adequate for the 100 kg of mount, scope, and counterweights that I have in mind (PlaneWave 14”, or failing that, a C14).

If the Planet is marginal for astroimaging with this setup, what’s a good option? Berlebach makes a bigger tripod, the Graviton, rated for 220 kg, but it’s 5x the cost of a Planet. The listing fo the A-P Eagle doesn’t mention a mount as big as the 1600. That leaves the Bisque Pyramid.

Any thoughts? Experiences?

—howard
Re: Takahashi TOA-130 on a mach1

Michael Kelly
 

Linda,

I use the AP Q6280KIT bracket that attaches the control box adapter with the Mach1. I would suggest calling them and speak with George, he is a wealth of information and loves sharing his intel!

Best,

Michael

On Monday, November 15, 2021, 03:16:46 PM EST, Luca Marinelli <photo@...> wrote:


Hi Linda,

Congratulations on the new telescope! I have used the Mach 1 with an Avalon T-Pod 110 and you will not even need the flat surface adapter. The bolt pattern on the T-Pod is compatible with the ADATRI adapter for the Mach 1. The T-Pod is a fairly rigid tripod and it should be a good match for your optics. I used the Mach 1/T-Pod combination with a 10in f4 Newtonian for about a year until I moved the telescope to a AP1100 on a Losmandy tripod. Obviously the bigger mount and beefier tripod made for a much more substantial platform but the Mach1/T-Pod was no slouch either. If you have that equipment in your hands, no reason not to give it a go. The only limitation will be how much wind that system can tolerate.

Cheers,

Luca


-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Linda Thomas via groups.io
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 2:28 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Takahashi TOA-130 on a mach1

I recently bought a new-to-me but pristine TOA-130. I hadn’t planned to buy a larger telescope until I upgraded my mount from the current EQ6-r I’ve been using but this was too good an opportunity to pass up. The EQ6-r has actually done better than I expected but it’s really asking quite a lot of it for it to handle this  beast of a telescope.

I’m actually on the waiting list for a Mach2 but a friend with an older Mach1 is kindly going to lend me his mount in the meantime. I have an Avalon T-Pod 110 that I was thinking of mounting it on. Is that a good option for this combination? I won’t be traveling with this setup but it will have to set up/tear down periodically. I’ve got a scope cover I can use if the weather isn’t too scary but when the bigger storms come through it has the option to stay outside for longer periods.

I know I’l need the Flat Surface Adapter to attach the mount to the tripod. I’m also guessing I’ll need a pier extension to raise the mount up for the long telescope. I’m at 39N lattitude. Would an 8 inch extension be the right choice?

I might need a bracket to attach the control box to the tripod…not sure how he currently has his attached to a wood tripod now though I have that question out to him. If his current bracket isn’t suitable, what would I need for the T-Pod 110?

Thanks in advance!

Linda
Re: Takahashi TOA-130 on a mach1

Luca Marinelli
 

Hi Linda,

Congratulations on the new telescope! I have used the Mach 1 with an Avalon T-Pod 110 and you will not even need the flat surface adapter. The bolt pattern on the T-Pod is compatible with the ADATRI adapter for the Mach 1. The T-Pod is a fairly rigid tripod and it should be a good match for your optics. I used the Mach 1/T-Pod combination with a 10in f4 Newtonian for about a year until I moved the telescope to a AP1100 on a Losmandy tripod. Obviously the bigger mount and beefier tripod made for a much more substantial platform but the Mach1/T-Pod was no slouch either. If you have that equipment in your hands, no reason not to give it a go. The only limitation will be how much wind that system can tolerate.

Cheers,

Luca

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Linda Thomas via groups.io
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 2:28 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] Takahashi TOA-130 on a mach1

I recently bought a new-to-me but pristine TOA-130. I hadn’t planned to buy a larger telescope until I upgraded my mount from the current EQ6-r I’ve been using but this was too good an opportunity to pass up. The EQ6-r has actually done better than I expected but it’s really asking quite a lot of it for it to handle this beast of a telescope.

I’m actually on the waiting list for a Mach2 but a friend with an older Mach1 is kindly going to lend me his mount in the meantime. I have an Avalon T-Pod 110 that I was thinking of mounting it on. Is that a good option for this combination? I won’t be traveling with this setup but it will have to set up/tear down periodically. I’ve got a scope cover I can use if the weather isn’t too scary but when the bigger storms come through it has the option to stay outside for longer periods.

I know I’l need the Flat Surface Adapter to attach the mount to the tripod. I’m also guessing I’ll need a pier extension to raise the mount up for the long telescope. I’m at 39N lattitude. Would an 8 inch extension be the right choice?

I might need a bracket to attach the control box to the tripod…not sure how he currently has his attached to a wood tripod now though I have that question out to him. If his current bracket isn’t suitable, what would I need for the T-Pod 110?

Thanks in advance!

Linda
Takahashi TOA-130 on a mach1

Linda Thomas
 

I recently bought a new-to-me but pristine TOA-130. I hadn’t planned to buy a larger telescope until I upgraded my mount from the current EQ6-r I’ve been using but this was too good an opportunity to pass up. The EQ6-r has actually done better than I expected but it’s really asking quite a lot of it for it to handle this beast of a telescope.

I’m actually on the waiting list for a Mach2 but a friend with an older Mach1 is kindly going to lend me his mount in the meantime. I have an Avalon T-Pod 110 that I was thinking of mounting it on. Is that a good option for this combination? I won’t be traveling with this setup but it will have to set up/tear down periodically. I’ve got a scope cover I can use if the weather isn’t too scary but when the bigger storms come through it has the option to stay outside for longer periods.

I know I’l need the Flat Surface Adapter to attach the mount to the tripod. I’m also guessing I’ll need a pier extension to raise the mount up for the long telescope. I’m at 39N lattitude. Would an 8 inch extension be the right choice?

I might need a bracket to attach the control box to the tripod…not sure how he currently has his attached to a wood tripod now though I have that question out to him. If his current bracket isn’t suitable, what would I need for the T-Pod 110?

Thanks in advance!

Linda
Re: APCC Not Restarting Cleanly

Ray Gralak
 

Jerry,

APCC has an auto-shutdown option in APCC's Advanced Settings. If you enable that option, APCC will automatically close itself once all clients disconnect from the driver and the driver closes down.

Please take a look here:

https://www.apastrosoftware.com/help/apcc-pro/index.html?advanced_settings.htm

-Ray

-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jerome A Yesavage
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 8:52 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] APCC Not Restarting Cleanly

Ray,
This is the line in Bob's Shutdown.js:

if(!StopProcess("AstroPhysicsCommandCenter.exe"))
Console.PrintLine("**Failed to stop AstroPhysicsCommandCenter");

Normally that closes APCC but sometimes the ASCOM driver is left running and if your restart APCC, it will
not connect to the ports. What I have noticed now is that I do not see the driver running and APCC will not
start up again without giving me an error about creating the virtual ports.

Is there a "best practices" to do this in the shutdown script?

Thanks,

JY
Re: APCC Not Restarting Cleanly

Jerome A Yesavage
 

Ray,
This is the line in Bob's Shutdown.js:

if(!StopProcess("AstroPhysicsCommandCenter.exe"))
        Console.PrintLine("**Failed to stop AstroPhysicsCommandCenter");

Normally that closes APCC but sometimes the ASCOM driver is left running and if your restart APCC, it will not connect to the ports.  What I have noticed now is that I do not see the driver running and APCC will not start up again without giving me an error about creating the virtual ports.

Is there a "best practices" to do this in the shutdown script?

Thanks,

JY
Re: APCC Not Restarting Cleanly

Ray Gralak
 

Hi Jerry,

I am using ACP and Expert Scheduler. Normally after a night's run everything shuts down including APCC but
I have never been able to get the ASCOM driver to reliably shut down.
The ASCOM driver will automatically shutdown when all clients are disconnected from it. It's as simple as that. Disconnect all clients, and the driver will close.

That said, I believe that ACP users have been told it is okay to kill applications. This is not a good thing! If you kill an application that is connected to the driver, the driver will not be able to automatically shutdown in the future. That's because the client did not disconnect before it was terminated, so the driver's client client can never count down to zero. So, keep in mind that it's not the driver's fault if you kill an application connected to it.

Now I not longer see the driver in running Tasks and APCC will not restart saying it cannot create the virtual
port... have to reboot the system.
Killing the driver and/or APCC can leave settings in an indeterminate state. If need to shut the driver down manually, double-click the client counter box in the driver's UI. You will get a confirmation prompt, which if you accept will shut down the driver cleanly.

-Ray


-----Original Message-----
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Jerome A Yesavage
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2021 4:10 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: [ap-gto] APCC Not Restarting Cleanly

Hi,

I am using ACP and Expert Scheduler. Normally after a night's run everything shuts down including APCC but
I have never been able to get the ASCOM driver to reliably shut down. If it is alive APCC does not start
cleanly the following night. To prevent this I look in the Task Manager and end the task if it is still running the
following day. A minor pain but it works.

Now I not longer see the driver in running Tasks and APCC will not restart saying it cannot create the virtual
port... have to reboot the system.

Is it going under another name or is it one of the runtime brokers...?

Jerry Y

PS Proud owner of a new ZWO ASI6200M Pro.
APCC Not Restarting Cleanly

Jerome A Yesavage
 

Hi,

I am using ACP and Expert Scheduler.  Normally after a night's run everything shuts down including APCC but I have never been able to get the ASCOM driver to reliably shut down.  If it is alive APCC does not start cleanly the following night.  To prevent this I look in the Task Manager and end the task if it is still running the following day.  A minor pain but it works. 

Now I not longer see the driver in running Tasks and APCC will not restart saying it cannot create the virtual port... have to reboot the system. 

Is it going under another name or is it one of the runtime brokers...?

Jerry Y

PS  Proud owner of a new ZWO ASI6200M Pro.
Heavy piggyback considerations

eja24601
 

Hi all,

Our backyard observatory's current configuration is a TMB-152 on an AP1200GTO, with a light (Borg 90FL) piggybacked. Please see attachment as an illustration. The TMB rides on the mount via rings bolted on to a Losmandy dovetail bar.

I'd like to occasionally piggyback a heavier scope on the TMB. Specifically, a Takahashi FSQ-106 with an STL-series camera. Maybe even an AP130 Gran Turismo.

I believe I've seen a picture on this group (or perhaps the old Yahoo group) of a Mak piggybacked on a refractor (with Roland standing by), so it does appear that such a configuration is feasible (anyone know where that picture is?).

Are there any considerations or concerns about this configuration (a smaller, but heavy, refractor piggybacked on the TMB)? Specifically, should I be concerned (or not at all) about the weight of the piggybacked scope affecting (stressing) the TMB OTA? Or is the structural load actually borne by the rings and I don't have anything to be concerned with?

Thanks,
Eric
Re: Lost in space update

Astrobob
 

Thank you Roland and Mike,

 

I will try everything you’ve suggested on the next clear night and report back.

 

Thanks again,

Bob

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 
Re: Mount Status Not Updating in MaxIm DL Observatory Control Window

M Hambrick
 

I ran another series of indoor experiments last night trying to duplicate the problem I experienced on November 8

I set up using my normal configuration with the 1100 mount connected to APCC via ethernet cable and to the AP-V2 Driver through a virtual port. Next I started up MaxIm DL and connected to my cameras (STXL16200 imaging and ST2000-XM guiding). This time, instead of plugging the camera USB cables directly into the USB ports on the laptop I plugged them into the REX unit of an Icron Ranger 2304. Finally, I connected MaxIm DL to the mount through the AP-V2 driver. 

Even when running the cameras through the USB hub (not recommended by Diffraction Ltd) I was not able to replicate the issue from the other night. I put the mount through a series of GoTo commands from both the Catalog tab in the MaxIm DL Observatory Control window, and from the Target Coordinates window in the Telescope tab. Each time I moved the mount I took several images after the slewing was completed. In every case the telescope status and position in MaxIm DL matched what it was in APCC and the AP-V2 driver.

Although it is not normal to try to slew the mount while guiding (except by mistake) I want to try another variation of this experiment with the guider running. But since I can not really simulate guiding indoors I will have to set up outdoors to do so. The theory is that excessive "traffic" in the USB cables may be causing MaxIm DL to lose its way.

Mike
Re: Lost in space update

Roland Christen
 


Then using the Keypad, I pointed the scope on Vega and did a recall with The Sky6.
Try not to mix 2 seperate programs when you do parks or go-to and recals, at least for the sake of troubleshooting it is much more straight forward to know what is going on if you use just one external app to control the mount. The Keypad is an external app, by the way. I'm betting that you have different time, date or location between the two programs. Remove SkyX from the equation and just get the keypad working first.

By the way, when you post your sequence below, it would help to know which program you used to send the mount to Park3. Keypad, or SkyX or ASCOM driver? Best to do everything, at least for setups or troubleshooting with one program. It's also important to have time, date, etc. correct and the same in every external app.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Astrobob <imager1940@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Sat, Nov 13, 2021 6:12 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Lost in space update

Well, I’ve loosened the clutches, told the mount to goto park 3 and when the mount stopped, I placed the axes manually
in park 3 position and tightened the clutches. Then I chose Vega from The Sky 6 pro. The mount proceeded to point
somewhere in the North West. Then using the Keypad, I pointed the scope on Vega and did a recall with The Sky6.
I then told the mount to goto Deneb and the scope took off to the east and stopped on nowhere.
As I said in a previous email, all I did prior to this was lubricate my mount.
 
AP1200 #863     The Sky 6 pro     Windows 10     Keypad External
 
Thank you for any help,
 
Bob
 
 
Sent from Mail for Windows
 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics
Re: Lost in space update

Mike Dodd
 

On 11/13/2021 7:12 PM, Astrobob wrote:
Well, I’ve loosened the clutches, told the mount to goto park 3 and
when the mount stopped, I placed the axes manually in park 3 position and tightened the clutches. Then I chose Vega from The Sky 6 pro. The mount proceeded to point somewhere in the North West.
Oops! Did you do an Unpark from Park3 first?

The entire reason for leveling the mount in Park3 (Park5 is preferred) is to then unpark from that known position, so the CP has a reference point. THEN slew to a known star and do a sync in SkyX (remember to set the ASCOM driver to use Recalibrate for Sync commands).

--- Mike
Lost in space update

Astrobob
 

Well, I’ve loosened the clutches, told the mount to goto park 3 and when the mount stopped, I placed the axes manually

in park 3 position and tightened the clutches. Then I chose Vega from The Sky 6 pro. The mount proceeded to point

somewhere in the North West. Then using the Keypad, I pointed the scope on Vega and did a recall with The Sky6.

I then told the mount to goto Deneb and the scope took off to the east and stopped on nowhere.

As I said in a previous email, all I did prior to this was lubricate my mount.

 

AP1200 #863     The Sky 6 pro     Windows 10     Keypad External

 

Thank you for any help,

 

Bob

 

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 
Re: Lost in space

Roland Christen
 

Similar but not quite the same. Objects Menu brings up the database which allows you to enter objects and do a Goto. Main menu is for setup.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Astrobob <imager1940@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Sat, Nov 13, 2021 1:15 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Lost in space

Hi Roland,
 
What is meant by “Go to Objects Menu” ? Is that the same as “Find” in The Sky6 pro?
 
Thanks,
Bob
 
Sent from Mail for Windows
 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics
Re: Lost in space

Astrobob
 

Hi Roland,

 

What is meant by “Go to Objects Menu” ? Is that the same as “Find” in The Sky6 pro?

 

Thanks,

Bob

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 
Re: M31 from Paducah Skies Observatory

Robert Chozick <rchozick@...>
 

Thanks Steve

Robert 


On Nov 12, 2021, at 7:27 PM, Steven Panish <scpanish@...> wrote:


Very, very nice!  Worth all the time.

Steve

On Sun, Nov 7, 2021 at 8:43 PM Robert Chozick via groups.io <rchozick=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
I got a lot of data for this M31 shot.  I took 4 hours of OSC, 20 min of OSC 30 second for the core, 3 hours of RGB, 5.5 hours of Luminosity and 2 hours of Ha.  I used my ASI2600MC for OSC and ASI2600MM for the others.  I played with different combinations and did find the RGB does look better than fhe OSC but not by a whole lot.  The main difference was that the RGB had more varied and deeper color.  I need to learn some new process for combining all this but I think it came out ok.  I really want to learn how to better combine the Ha into this.  For this I just put about 25% of the Ha into the Luminosity.  I know Pixinsight has a process but I do not know how to use Pixel Math.

Robert
4081 - 4100 of 86940