Hi,
I have worked through the mechanical design issues regarding
flexure. The tandem arrangement can be made to work, but is much
more susceptible to flexure than a piggyback arrangement due to the
small (4 inch) metal bar between the center and lateral scopes. I
have seen this arrangement and I have used it, but it is not my
first preference.
Thanks, Rick

--- In ap-gto@..., "Samir Kharusi" <samirkharusi@...>
wrote:

Side-by-side Robin Casady tandem plate and dovetails enables
balancing any desired two OTAs without the moment arm

magnification

of piggybacking a heavyish second OTA.
--- In ap-gto@..., "Rick Wiggins" <rickwiggins@> wrote:

Hi,
I need the mechanical dimensions for the mounting surface of the

Dec

head of the AP1200 and the 18 inch mounting plate including the

hole

dimensions and locations. I think I have seen them somewhere,

but

couldn't find them today on the site.

Why: I am setting up an AP155 w/ FF and ST10xme camera; and a
piggyback FSQ with rotator, Takometer, and STL11k camera. I had

this

set up previously with a 8 inch dovetail plate on the AP1200 and

the

AP 155 set up with AP rings on 17 inch dovetail plates. The Tak

was

set up with Losmandy sliding adapters that were mounted on the

top

17 inch plate. With this setup, I had the AP 155 and the Tak

scopes

at the very end of each plate (towards the objective end of the
scopes) and the AP 155 plate/ring assembly pushed as far towards

the

objective direction of the dovetail receiver as possible. With

this

setup, I could balance the setup in Dec.

However; there is a flexure concern with the dovetail plates and
small dovetail receiver, so I wanted to use something more

sturdy.

I

choose the AP 18 inch solid plate and mounted everything up.

This

pushed all the cameras way back and caused a major unbalance in

Dec.

There seems to be no pretty way to balance this arrangement as

the

only way I have been able to balance it is to add lots of weight
cantilevered way out on the objective end.

I really like the rigidity of the solid AP 18 inch plate, but

need

to shift the entire setup about 9 inches (estimated) towards the
objective end of the setup. I have had several thoughts

regarding

solutions to my problem.

1) Have a custom plate made that resembles the 18 inch plate,

but

that is 9 inches longer and has another set of mounting holes

for

the AP1200 that is 9" (again, this is a crude estimate at this
point) inches offset from the center. This will shift my setup

back

to equilibrium without adding extra weights hanging out towards

the

objectives. I think this is the most elegant solution. It may be
worth setting up the plate to allow several offest points as

well

as

a center point.
2. Make an adapter plate made that shifts the AP 18" plate

forward

approximately 9". This is a not quite as nice as solution #1,

but

accomplishes nearly the same thing. It would require a plate

about

14 inches long that shifts the center approximately 9". Due to

the

mechanical interface between the plates it may not be quite as

rigid

as a single plate and it moves the entire setup vertically up

some

small distance as well.
3. Hang weights out at the objective end of the setup. This was
my "containment" short term fix until I get a better solution.

It

is

my least favorite long term solution.
4. Other?

I am guessing that I am not the first one to experience this

problem.

Would AP entertain fabricating such a plate as in my solution #1?
Has anyone got a good solutiuon?

Thanks, Rick

Hi Kent,
I share your concerns. I will design through the flexure issues and
get it working. The AP is no more likely to move in its rings with
the FSQ on top than it will with my old ST402/FS60C on top. That
setup was rock solid.
Thanks, Rick

--- In ap-gto@..., kgkirkley@... wrote:

In a message dated 12/3/08 6:49:44 PM, rickwiggins@... writes:

However; there is a flexure concern with the dovetail plates and
small dovetail receiver

This doesn't surprise me at all....too many 'plates' and heavy

equipment.

Don't tell me you are trying to guide the AP155 with the FSQ

or....image with

both at the same time?
Been there, tried that.... also with an AP155 but with a Traveler.
I found that the 155 was moving in its rings.
I removed the Traveler and mounted the Remote Guide Head with

efinder ON the

155's focuser cell.
No more flexure.

I'm not saying that someone else might be successful or that there

may be a

plate-ring system that will not allow any movement but I think

it's a long

shot.

Kent Kirkley










**************
Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?

optin=new-dp&amp;

icid=aolcom40vanity&amp;ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)

In a message dated 12/3/08 6:49:44 PM, rickwiggins@... writes:

However; there is a flexure concern with the dovetail plates and
small dovetail receiver

The only way to make a guidescope work is to attach it directly
to the main scope tube assembly. Not to the rings, not to the mounting plate
but directly to the tube itself. The guide scope must be very light
and it must sit rigidly in its rings. The guide scope rings can be
attached to a separate set of tube rings that are attached to the main scope
and these rings cannot be attached in any way to the cradle plate,
but must float free. There still may be flexure from the camera and
focuser, so the exposure time may be limited.

Rolando

Inspired by Dean Rowe's CBT1 image a few months ago I gave this puppy a shot. Because of his warning, it's quite faint, I used ~23hrs total of Bin-1 data. Probably as much processing time went into bringing out all details possible of this 58arc.min SNR. The nebula streams along the left of the image are edges of a much older, larger and fainter SNR, G 116.5 +1.1. As usual, Enjoy...joe :)

12x9" Image and details, http://www.cav-sfo.com/LBN576ccd.html
60% image, 35x26" at 1505K, http://www.cav-sfo.com/LBN576ccdL.jpg

"May You Go Among The Imperishable Stars"
Joe Mize www.cav-sfo.com
Chiefland Astronomy Village, Fla.

Side-by-side Robin Casady tandem plate and dovetails enables
balancing any desired two OTAs without the moment arm magnification
of piggybacking a heavyish second OTA.
--- In ap-gto@..., "Rick Wiggins" <rickwiggins@...> wrote:

Hi,
I need the mechanical dimensions for the mounting surface of the

Dec

head of the AP1200 and the 18 inch mounting plate including the

hole

dimensions and locations. I think I have seen them somewhere, but
couldn't find them today on the site.

Why: I am setting up an AP155 w/ FF and ST10xme camera; and a
piggyback FSQ with rotator, Takometer, and STL11k camera. I had

this

set up previously with a 8 inch dovetail plate on the AP1200 and

the

AP 155 set up with AP rings on 17 inch dovetail plates. The Tak was
set up with Losmandy sliding adapters that were mounted on the top
17 inch plate. With this setup, I had the AP 155 and the Tak scopes
at the very end of each plate (towards the objective end of the
scopes) and the AP 155 plate/ring assembly pushed as far towards

the

objective direction of the dovetail receiver as possible. With this
setup, I could balance the setup in Dec.

However; there is a flexure concern with the dovetail plates and
small dovetail receiver, so I wanted to use something more sturdy.

I

choose the AP 18 inch solid plate and mounted everything up. This
pushed all the cameras way back and caused a major unbalance in

Dec.

There seems to be no pretty way to balance this arrangement as the
only way I have been able to balance it is to add lots of weight
cantilevered way out on the objective end.

I really like the rigidity of the solid AP 18 inch plate, but need
to shift the entire setup about 9 inches (estimated) towards the
objective end of the setup. I have had several thoughts regarding
solutions to my problem.

1) Have a custom plate made that resembles the 18 inch plate, but
that is 9 inches longer and has another set of mounting holes for
the AP1200 that is 9" (again, this is a crude estimate at this
point) inches offset from the center. This will shift my setup back
to equilibrium without adding extra weights hanging out towards the
objectives. I think this is the most elegant solution. It may be
worth setting up the plate to allow several offest points as well

as

a center point.
2. Make an adapter plate made that shifts the AP 18" plate forward
approximately 9". This is a not quite as nice as solution #1, but
accomplishes nearly the same thing. It would require a plate about
14 inches long that shifts the center approximately 9". Due to the
mechanical interface between the plates it may not be quite as

rigid

as a single plate and it moves the entire setup vertically up some
small distance as well.
3. Hang weights out at the objective end of the setup. This was
my "containment" short term fix until I get a better solution. It

is

my least favorite long term solution.
4. Other?

I am guessing that I am not the first one to experience this

problem.

Would AP entertain fabricating such a plate as in my solution #1?
Has anyone got a good solutiuon?

Thanks, Rick

Hi,
I need the mechanical dimensions for the mounting surface of the Dec
head of the AP1200 and the 18 inch mounting plate including the hole
dimensions and locations. I think I have seen them somewhere, but
couldn't find them today on the site.

Why: I am setting up an AP155 w/ FF and ST10xme camera; and a
piggyback FSQ with rotator, Takometer, and STL11k camera. I had this
set up previously with a 8 inch dovetail plate on the AP1200 and the
AP 155 set up with AP rings on 17 inch dovetail plates. The Tak was
set up with Losmandy sliding adapters that were mounted on the top
17 inch plate. With this setup, I had the AP 155 and the Tak scopes
at the very end of each plate (towards the objective end of the
scopes) and the AP 155 plate/ring assembly pushed as far towards the
objective direction of the dovetail receiver as possible. With this
setup, I could balance the setup in Dec.

However; there is a flexure concern with the dovetail plates and
small dovetail receiver, so I wanted to use something more sturdy. I
choose the AP 18 inch solid plate and mounted everything up. This
pushed all the cameras way back and caused a major unbalance in Dec.
There seems to be no pretty way to balance this arrangement as the
only way I have been able to balance it is to add lots of weight
cantilevered way out on the objective end.

I really like the rigidity of the solid AP 18 inch plate, but need
to shift the entire setup about 9 inches (estimated) towards the
objective end of the setup. I have had several thoughts regarding
solutions to my problem.

1) Have a custom plate made that resembles the 18 inch plate, but
that is 9 inches longer and has another set of mounting holes for
the AP1200 that is 9" (again, this is a crude estimate at this
point) inches offset from the center. This will shift my setup back
to equilibrium without adding extra weights hanging out towards the
objectives. I think this is the most elegant solution. It may be
worth setting up the plate to allow several offest points as well as
a center point.
2. Make an adapter plate made that shifts the AP 18" plate forward
approximately 9". This is a not quite as nice as solution #1, but
accomplishes nearly the same thing. It would require a plate about
14 inches long that shifts the center approximately 9". Due to the
mechanical interface between the plates it may not be quite as rigid
as a single plate and it moves the entire setup vertically up some
small distance as well.
3. Hang weights out at the objective end of the setup. This was
my "containment" short term fix until I get a better solution. It is
my least favorite long term solution.
4. Other?

I am guessing that I am not the first one to experience this problem.

Would AP entertain fabricating such a plate as in my solution #1?
Has anyone got a good solutiuon?

Thanks, Rick

In a message dated 12/3/08 6:49:44 PM, rickwiggins@... writes:

However; there is a flexure concern with the dovetail plates and
small dovetail receiver

This doesn't surprise me at all....too many 'plates' and heavy equipment.
Don't tell me you are trying to guide the AP155 with the FSQ or....image with
both at the same time?
Been there, tried that.... also with an AP155 but with a Traveler.
I found that the 155 was moving in its rings.
I removed the Traveler and mounted the Remote Guide Head with efinder ON the
155's focuser cell.
No more flexure.

I'm not saying that someone else might be successful or that there may be a
plate-ring system that will not allow any movement but I think it's a long
shot.

Kent Kirkley










**************
Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
favorite sites in one place. Try it now. (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&;
icid=aolcom40vanity&amp;ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)

Hi Rick - thanks very much for your good advice. I live in the
country under pretty dark skies and really have never moved my setup
to a remote site. The PT pier I am looking at is the Tri-Pier1 (does
not raise/lower) which is portable but can be made permanent by using
an optional anchor plate when the obs is completed. I was hoping to
set up the pier and leave it covered outside and then use it later as
my permanent pier. Seemed reasonable (and economical) to use the
same pier for both purposes if possible. All I would need to do to
convert it from "portable" to permanent is fold up the legs and bolt
it down. Tougher pier decision than had I anticipated.

Thanks again for you reply.

Ron

--- In ap-gto@..., "Rick Wiggins" <rickwiggins@...> wrote:

Hi Ron,
The Pier Tech's work well and some people really like them for the
ability to raise the mount (especially those with roll-off roofs.
They do move a bit when rasied and lowered, so you may have to

tweak

polar alignment and your T-point model if you use one.

My 2 cents say get a solid pier for the observatory and lock that
bad boy down. You will never regret it. Use a heafty 10" or 12"
pipe. GO with the largest footprint that doesn't interfere with teh
telescope travel. Sturdy is the name of the game and diameter is
much more important than wall thickness in the pier. Get a good
portable pier for portable use. You could use it in the observatory
in a pinch until you can afford a permanent mount. I use ATS
portable piers for my AP 900 and AP1200. They are very sturdy, look
nice, and go up in around a minute!

http://home.earthlink.net/~rickwiggins/wigginsfineartstipstutorialsam

ptools/id1.html

Good luck,
Rick

--- In ap-gto@..., "raf_1948" <rfrisk@> wrote:

I will be receiving my 1200 in January and I'm in the market for

a

pier

to support it along with a 10" RC, guide scope and camera(s).

Since it

will be 12-18 months before I build an observatory, I would

prefer

to

use the same pier for the portable and permanent solution. I

reviewed

all the threads here I could find and they were very

informative.

One

thing troubles me and I could use some help. I'm looking at the

Pier-

Tech Tri-Pier 1 Portable telescope pier (48") which I can make
permanent with the addition of an optional base plate. Since

I've

never seen one personally, it's hard to get a sense for its

stability

and "robustness". My issue is that I'm concerned that the

rigidity of

the open aluminum frame will not compete with a 10" pier pipe. I

would

appreciate any comments.

Thanks.

Ron

Hi Ron,
The Pier Tech's work well and some people really like them for the
ability to raise the mount (especially those with roll-off roofs.
They do move a bit when rasied and lowered, so you may have to tweak
polar alignment and your T-point model if you use one.

My 2 cents say get a solid pier for the observatory and lock that
bad boy down. You will never regret it. Use a heafty 10" or 12"
pipe. GO with the largest footprint that doesn't interfere with teh
telescope travel. Sturdy is the name of the game and diameter is
much more important than wall thickness in the pier. Get a good
portable pier for portable use. You could use it in the observatory
in a pinch until you can afford a permanent mount. I use ATS
portable piers for my AP 900 and AP1200. They are very sturdy, look
nice, and go up in around a minute!
http://home.earthlink.net/~rickwiggins/wigginsfineartstipstutorialsam
ptools/id1.html

Good luck,
Rick

--- In ap-gto@..., "raf_1948" <rfrisk@...> wrote:

I will be receiving my 1200 in January and I'm in the market for a

pier

to support it along with a 10" RC, guide scope and camera(s).

Since it

will be 12-18 months before I build an observatory, I would prefer

to

use the same pier for the portable and permanent solution. I

reviewed

all the threads here I could find and they were very informative.

One

thing troubles me and I could use some help. I'm looking at the

Pier-

Tech Tri-Pier 1 Portable telescope pier (48") which I can make
permanent with the addition of an optional base plate. Since I've
never seen one personally, it's hard to get a sense for its

stability

and "robustness". My issue is that I'm concerned that the

rigidity of

the open aluminum frame will not compete with a 10" pier pipe. I

would

appreciate any comments.

Thanks.

Ron

Hi Dick,
I have used oak board scraps and bricks. Metal plates also work. Not
pretty, but they work. Adding a screw leveler as suggested is more
elegant and would work fine as well.
Thanks, Rick

--- In ap-gto@..., "dtlnew" <dtlnew@...> wrote:

Thanks, I do that too, but a couple of the places I set up at are

on

grass and very uneven.

-Dick Locke

--- In ap-gto@..., "William R. Mattil" <wrmattil@>

wrote:

dtlnew wrote:

Has anyone found a commercial product that can be used or

easily

adapted to help level an AP pier on an uneven surface? I'm
specifically referring to the AP portable pier, as used with a

900GTO

in this case.

Thanks for any thoughts or suggestions.

Hi Dick,

I use a very inexpensive small level purchased at a hardware

store. I

lay that across the Rotating Pier Adapter while tightening up

the

turnbuckles for minor adjustments, or manipulating the ground for

larger

adjustments.


Regards

Bill

Hi Kerry - I believe it's the 1200FSA but confirm that.

Good luck.

Ron

--- In ap-gto@..., "kerrywaz1" <kerry.williams@...> wrote:

I have ordered a Pier-Tech TriPier1 w/AP1200 mounting plate. What

kind

of adapter do I really need to attach the AP1200 to the pier?

Thanks,
Kerry

Hi Adam - thanks for taking the time to reply. Good to know it worked
with your equipment. One thing I noticed is how small the "footprint"
appears when the pier is set to its shortest height - sort of looks top
heavy. Of course if it's stable the smaller footprint is a huge plus.
Really difficult to make a decision without actually seeing the pier
set up. I'll give P-T a call to discuss.

Thanks again,

Ron

--- In ap-gto@..., "Klein, Adam" <atk@...> wrote:

I've used the pier tech w/ an AP 1200 GTO mount and RCOS 12.5. The

thing is well built and very stable. And it can be used in the field as
well.

Adam

Roy,

It's Rolando's revised instruction for re-setting worm geat mesh. As
he said in previous message, "don't use a mallet [as the AP website
currently recommends.] Simply loosen the screws that hold the

motor assembly, push gently into mesh using one finger pressure,
tighten the screws and check by gently pressing back and forth on

the end of the counterweight shaft."

Bob

--- In ap-gto@..., "Roy Uyematsu" <roystarman@...> wrote:

Changing your RA mesh will change your Periodic error. So you may

have to

redo that as well. What is the one finger method?

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...] On

Behalf Of

Robert Gillette
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 10:05 AM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Re: AP 900 Movement Excursions

Rolando,

Thanks. I haven't detected any play in the RA axis, but will try

the "new"

one-finger method to improve gear mesh. No backlash is currently

dialed in,

but I'll see what a small amount does for me.

In defense of the previous owner, he treated the mount as well or

better

than his dogs and sold it only to upgrade to a 1200 :)

Bob

--- In ap-gto@..., "uncarollo2" <chris1011@> wrote:

--- In ap-gto@..., "Robert Gillette" <tekic545@>

wrote:

Well,in fact I did correct an earlier Dec gear mesh problem with

the

prescribed rubber mallet, following a nasty cable snag that

seemed to

have unmeshed the gears. (I did buy the mount used, but it was

handed

off, not shipped.)

Perhaps the onset of cold weather has caused some additional
contraction in the RA mesh. But if so, why would this rear its

head

so consistently when using the MaxIm "nudge" buttons and so

rarely

with the keypad?

Bob

Well, it was probably there all along, and that's why the last

person

sold it (since he probably never understood what was happening).

The

reason the keypad didn't do it is because it probably has some RA
backlash dialed in, which compensates when you use the keypad,

but

Maxim is not that smart.

Lastly, don't use a mallet. Simply loosen the screws that hold

the

motor assembly, push gently into mesh using one finger pressure,
tighten the screws and check by gently pressing back and forth on

the

end of the counterweight shaft. this is something you can do
occasionally - it is not difficult, and yes, we need to revise

the

website to get rid of the rubber mallet method. Howard, please

note ;^))

Just because the mount was handed to you, it does not mean that it

did

not get some harsh treatment before your time. Cold weather has

no

effect on worm mesh. Everything expands and contracts together

since

everything is made from the same material - aluminum.

Rolando

------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-gto list see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gtoYahoo! Groups Links

I've used the pier tech w/ an AP 1200 GTO mount and RCOS 12.5. The thing is well built and very stable. And it can be used in the field as well.

Adam

________________________________

From: ap-gto@...
To: ap-gto@...
Sent: Mon Dec 01 16:35:39 2008
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO portable to permanent pier


I will be receiving my 1200 in January and I'm in the market for a pier
to support it along with a 10" RC, guide scope and camera(s). Since it
will be 12-18 months before I build an observatory, I would prefer to
use the same pier for the portable and permanent solution. I reviewed
all the threads here I could find and they were very informative. One
thing troubles me and I could use some help. I'm looking at the Pier-
Tech Tri-Pier 1 Portable telescope pier (48") which I can make
permanent with the addition of an optional base plate. Since I've
never seen one personally, it's hard to get a sense for its stability
and "robustness". My issue is that I'm concerned that the rigidity of
the open aluminum frame will not compete with a 10" pier pipe. I would
appreciate any comments.

Thanks.

Ron

I will be receiving my 1200 in January and I'm in the market for a pier
to support it along with a 10" RC, guide scope and camera(s). Since it
will be 12-18 months before I build an observatory, I would prefer to
use the same pier for the portable and permanent solution. I reviewed
all the threads here I could find and they were very informative. One
thing troubles me and I could use some help. I'm looking at the Pier-
Tech Tri-Pier 1 Portable telescope pier (48") which I can make
permanent with the addition of an optional base plate. Since I've
never seen one personally, it's hard to get a sense for its stability
and "robustness". My issue is that I'm concerned that the rigidity of
the open aluminum frame will not compete with a 10" pier pipe. I would
appreciate any comments.

Thanks.

Ron

You use the force of one finger to push the motor into the gear
(after loosening the screws) instead of tapping with a mallot. It's
AP "gentler" New Year's Resolution ;-)

Tom
--- In ap-gto@..., "Roy Uyematsu" <roystarman@...> wrote:

Changing your RA mesh will change your Periodic error. So you may

have to

redo that as well. What is the one finger method?

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...] On

Behalf Of

Robert Gillette
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 10:05 AM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Re: AP 900 Movement Excursions

Rolando,

Thanks. I haven't detected any play in the RA axis, but will try

the "new"

one-finger method to improve gear mesh. No backlash is currently

dialed in,

but I'll see what a small amount does for me.

In defense of the previous owner, he treated the mount as well or

better

than his dogs and sold it only to upgrade to a 1200 :)

Bob

--- In ap-gto@..., "uncarollo2" <chris1011@> wrote:

--- In ap-gto@..., "Robert Gillette" <tekic545@>

wrote:

Well,in fact I did correct an earlier Dec gear mesh problem

with

the

prescribed rubber mallet, following a nasty cable snag that

seemed to

have unmeshed the gears. (I did buy the mount used, but it was

handed

off, not shipped.)

Perhaps the onset of cold weather has caused some additional
contraction in the RA mesh. But if so, why would this rear its

head

so consistently when using the MaxIm "nudge" buttons and so

rarely

with the keypad?

Bob

Well, it was probably there all along, and that's why the last

person

sold it (since he probably never understood what was happening).

The

reason the keypad didn't do it is because it probably has some

RA

backlash dialed in, which compensates when you use the keypad,

but

Maxim is not that smart.

Lastly, don't use a mallet. Simply loosen the screws that hold

the

motor assembly, push gently into mesh using one finger pressure,
tighten the screws and check by gently pressing back and forth on

the

end of the counterweight shaft. this is something you can do
occasionally - it is not difficult, and yes, we need to revise

the

website to get rid of the rubber mallet method. Howard, please

note ;^))

Just because the mount was handed to you, it does not mean that

it

did

not get some harsh treatment before your time. Cold weather has

no

effect on worm mesh. Everything expands and contracts together

since

everything is made from the same material - aluminum.

Rolando

------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE, or for general information on the ap-gto list see
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ap-gtoYahoo! Groups Links

--- In ap-gto@..., "jjbadal2003" <jbadal21169@...> wrote:

I think some 3600's are shipping soon, most I guess are destined for
pier mounting in observatories. I am looking for tripod options for
portable use. I see there is an ATS offering. I believe PWT made a

few

12 inch pinnacles,that could handle this mount. Meades tripod for
their "Max" looked pretty robust (85lbs./wt.-$3000?!), but would
require fabricating a mounting plate.Are their other options, or am I
the only one seeing this mount as portable? Joe

I use the ATS with my AP1200 and also plan to use an ATS with my
AP3600. They are awesome in both form and function.

RP

Changing your RA mesh will change your Periodic error. So you may have to
redo that as well. What is the one finger method?

Rolando,

Thanks. I haven't detected any play in the RA axis, but will try
the "new" one-finger method to improve gear mesh. No backlash is
currently dialed in, but I'll see what a small amount does for me.

In defense of the previous owner, he treated the mount as well or
better than his dogs and sold it only to upgrade to a 1200 :)

Bob

--- In ap-gto@..., "uncarollo2" <chris1011@...> wrote:

--- In ap-gto@..., "Robert Gillette" <tekic545@> wrote:

Well,in fact I did correct an earlier Dec gear mesh problem with

the

prescribed rubber mallet, following a nasty cable snag that

seemed to

have unmeshed the gears. (I did buy the mount used, but it was

handed

off, not shipped.)

Perhaps the onset of cold weather has caused some additional
contraction in the RA mesh. But if so, why would this rear its

head

so consistently when using the MaxIm "nudge" buttons and so

rarely

with the keypad?

Bob

Well, it was probably there all along, and that's why the last

person

sold it (since he probably never understood what was happening).

The

reason the keypad didn't do it is because it probably has some RA
backlash dialed in, which compensates when you use the keypad, but
Maxim is not that smart.

Lastly, don't use a mallet. Simply loosen the screws that hold the
motor assembly, push gently into mesh using one finger pressure,
tighten the screws and check by gently pressing back and forth on

the

end of the counterweight shaft. this is something you can do
occasionally - it is not difficult, and yes, we need to revise the
website to get rid of the rubber mallet method. Howard, please

note ;^))

Just because the mount was handed to you, it does not mean that it

did

not get some harsh treatment before your time. Cold weather has no
effect on worm mesh. Everything expands and contracts together

since

everything is made from the same material - aluminum.

Rolando

Santa's cloud mustache in that second shot is great. He's got a bit of a beard as well....

-- Jeff.


From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...] On Behalf Of uncarollo2
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 8:45 AM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] Moon, Venus, Jupiter from Hawaii


Hi All,

Just had to post a couple of pictures of this conjunction. The first
one was shot during sunset, with the cloudes presenting some really
wimsical images. The second one occured later in the evening, and I
swear that it looked like Santa peering down on us.
http://www.astromart.com/common/image_popup.asp?
image=/images/forums/638000-638999/638582.jpg
http://www.astromart.com/common/image_popup.asp?
image=/images/forums/638000-638999/638583.jpg

Aloha,
Rolando