Ray Gralak <rgr@...> wrote:

Hello everyone, I've decided that I will install and use PemProAP for my 1200 to improve its tracking accuracy. Any useful hint to a first time user? Information on how to avoid the steepest part of

That's possible, but as you point out already it makes modeling (and correction) even more complex. -Ray

star if generally amount of rate is don't I have to disagree about the flexure part. A calculated change in tracking rate due to a calculated change in atmospheric refraction has absolutely nothing to

Then you may run into differential flexure, again ESPECIALLY when you are using longer focal length telescopes. -Ray

I should have said "structure" rather than "shell". You can see mine here.... http://www.starrynights.us/Equipment/Equipment.htm Steve... you winds it. even object.

That's interesting as it implies that you are technically limited to a maximum level of tracking accuracy using a separated system, and that this would be below the levels being aimed at in these

Hence the need for a separate guide scope and camera - which would probably be cheaper and more reliable in many ways. Murray Ray Gralak <rgr@...> wrote: > I

Yes, it could be much harder for an autoguider to guide on a guide star if the guidestar has insufficient brightness (say, because it is behind a narrow band filter). And as you increase focal length

modify number of possible to do 5 tracking. image. Giong you need to do would have used narrow band. I understand the concept but I still don't understand the why. If you are jumping all over the sky

When you start imaging with longer focal lengths tracking rate correction becomes very beneficial. If you are imaging in narrowband with an SBIG camera (behind a narrowband filter) then the ability to

I'm not saying it can't be done and I'm certainly not saying it shouldn't be done. I just don't see the reasoning behind doing it unless it is part of long term unguided imaging. After all, if a

Why not? How is that bad if your autoguider has to work less? -Ray

alignment and both RA different this pulse-driven of the it is perfection? Or is working on Roland, why would this be necessary unless it were for long term totally unguided imaging? I can certainly

I re-read your question and still come to the conclusions of why bother? Are you planning on unguided imaging for several hours per exposure? I have no idea why you would need to correct the

Why bother with this small part of the overall pointing errors. This is basically taken care of with software such as T-point which also zero's out other mechanical errors of the telescope system.

Hmmm...that's an interesting thought. What kind of hard shell did you come up with? I have a C14 on mine so it would take a pretty good sized barrel or drum... Morgan

Morgan, For a time, I kept my AP1200 with OTA in a bag. We had some high winds and something flying in the air hit the OTA putting a dent into it. So I recommend a hard shell rather than a bag. I

mphammick@... writes: Differential flexure. Rolando ************** Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.