Date   

Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Michael Hambrick <mike.hambrick@...>
 

Your machinists would not thank you if you started making your mounts out of titanium. VERY tough to machine, and your cutting tool budget would probably triple.

How are your machinists doing during the stay at home orders. I hope they are doing OK. Your machinists are geniuses and I sure hope that you are able to keep them when this is all over.


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Michael Hambrick <mike.hambrick@...>
 

Good Points Joe.

Are you Canadian ? I ask because you mentioned Scouting International.

Anyway, the Boy Scouts of America offers an Astronomy merit badge that the scouts usually take at the summer camps. The requirements are pretty comprehensive. To name a few they must:
  • Describe the different types of telescopes including those that observe light beyond the visible spectrum, explain the purposes of at least three different types of instruments used with telescopes, and describe the procedures for cleaning and storage of telescopes and binoculars.
  • They have to identify in the night sky at least ten constellations including four that are in the zodiac.
  • They have to identify eight conspicuous stars, at least five of which are magnitude 1 or better.
  • Identify at least one red, yellow, and blue star and explain what makes them different colors.
  • They have make two sketches of the Big Dipper with the North Star at least four hours apart showing their orientation in the sky
  • List the five most visible planets in the night sky and note the ones that can be observed in phases. Look up (internet / book) to see when they will be visible.
  • Sketch the full moon and show at least five each seas and craters
  • Sketch the phase of the moon on at least four consecutive days at the same time and place.
  • Visit a planetarium or observatory and make a log book of what they saw.
  • Plan and participate in a three hour (minimum) observing session using binoculars or a telescope. List the objects observed and find each on a star chart
  • Investigate career opportunities in astronomy.
This is just a sampling of the requirements, but I was pretty impressed with what they were asking the scouts to do. You would have to agree that these activities would be a lot of fun to a scout who has an interest in astronomy.
Unfortunately, many of the summer scout camps are nothing more than merit badge mills, and even more unfortunately most of the counselors that the camps hire for the summer are just college kids looking for summer jobs, and they know little or nothing about the merit badge classes they are teaching. This is where the adult leaders (i.e scout's parents) come into the picture. The Boy Scouts have always tried to get the parents of the scouts engaged in the activities of their children's scouting activities, but unfortunately again there are far too few parents who will do this. Most just drop their kids off at the scout meetings and go out for a dinner. They see the week long summer and winter camps as an opportunity to take a vacation away from the kids. It is really sad.
Some of the scout camps get some extremely generous donations. At the first summer camp my son (an Eagle Scout by the way) attended they had two complete Celestron telescopes, a C8 and a C11 ! Unfortunately, the counselors had no idea how to set up and operate the scopes. Luckily I was there for the week and I was able to help them out, and I think the kids had a really good time on their observing nights. For the other seven weeks of camp sessions, the camp might have been lucky enough to get help from a knowledgeable adult leader for maybe one or two of the sessions at best.
Scouting has gotten a really bad rap in recent years. Some of it is deserved, but it is getting harder and harder for Boy Scouts to compete with the other things that kids are into. I think that a lot of this is the parents fault.
Sorry, but I kind of rambled on with this.

Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...




From:        "Joe Zeglinski" <J.Zeglinski@...>
To:        <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Date:        2020-04-23 04:44 PM
Subject:        Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
Sent by:        main@ap-gto.groups.io




Very well said, Chris,
 
    I never thought of it, but you are right-on.
Besides, an excellent scope and mount,  like those from AP, will eventually pass from hand to hand – as teachers retire, or the kids move on to more advanced equipment as it comes along.
 
    In the same vein, wouldn’t it be grand if Scouting International, established a special ASTRONOMY Badge, rather than something just relating to “outdoors and camping”. Maybe in the future they might concentrate less on finding their way through the forest – probably just streets, when we run out of woods -  than on travelling on pathways through the skies, as man’s journey inevitably reaches even farther afield, for our next generations.
 
Joe Z.
 

From: Christopher Erickson
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 5:23 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
 
Personally, I believe that we should...  
 
NEVER GIVE TELESCOPES TO SCHOOLS.
 
GIVE TELESCOPES TO TEACHERS OR STUDENTS INSTEAD.
 
If you give it to a school, it inevitably ends up being controlled by school middle-management bureaucrats and spends the rest of its life in the back of a crowded supply closet, never to be seen by kids ever again. The tax write-off for giving it to a school will end up being next-to-nothing anyway.
 
If you give it to a dedicated teacher, that person is much more likely to learn how to use it properly and take it with them throughout their teaching career.
 
If you give it to a dedicated student, that person's life will be changed forever.
 
If it is a big, expensive, complicated telescope, consider selling it to another astro-nut who will love it, or work to establish an NPO in a local community to operate it, put it in an observatory, and perform outreach.
 
 
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 8:27 AM Michael Hambrick via groups.io [groups.io] <mike.hambrick@...> wrote:
That is a great suggestion. I have also thought about donating it to a local school. Only bad thing is I kept the pier to use with my 1100 mount.


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick

ARLANX
EO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...




Re: AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Lawrence Lopez
 

That's probably just unwinding the cables.


I think you could take a series of pictures of polaris for several days at the North Pole.



On Thu, Apr 23, 2020, 8:54 PM Benoit Schillings <benoit.schillings@...> wrote:
it is interesting, I had the issue that leaving theSky software
sometimes get's the mount to start tracking again, which recently
cause the mount to go for a few days... no damages, but resyncing the
mount causes it to go 360 around the RA axis the number of days I had
left the mount going. Looks like maybe the position of the mount in RA
does not cycle in a modulo 360 manner ?

-- benoit

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 5:49 PM uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via
groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
>
> Did I do any damage?
>
> Probably not. Especially if your clutches were not super tight.
>
> I left my Mach2 running all night last night, forgot to turn off power. This morning the scope was up against the pier. Nothing damaged except my self esteem. ;^(
>
> Rolando
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Darden <rick@...>
> To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
> Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 7:20 pm
> Subject: [ap-gto] AP1100 CP4 pier crash
>
> Hi All,
>
> It happened while I was sleeping and it was tracking on its target. I think it crashed maybe 5-10 min before I intervened. Did I do any damage? It scope is at a remote observatory 2100 miles away and can't get there to investigate.
>




Re: AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Charles Thompson
 

Won't the motor trip a fault and stop if it hits with the clutch tight?  I think I remember that happening to me once when my meridian flip time was off a little bit. 





Thanks,
Charles

Sent from mobile device.


-------- Original message --------
From: Rick Darden <rick@...>
Date: 4/23/20 7:58 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Good to hear. But my clutches are snug tight with a key. I am getting in tonight to see what the fall out is if any.



Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7 edge, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone



-------- Original message --------
From: "uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io" <chris1011@...>
Date: 4/23/20 8:49 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP1100 CP4 pier crash


Did I do any damage?
Probably not. Especially if your clutches were not super tight.

I left my Mach2 running all night last night, forgot to turn off power. This morning the scope was up against the pier. Nothing damaged except my self esteem. ;^(

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Darden <rick@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 7:20 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Hi All,

It happened while I was sleeping and it was tracking on its target. I think it crashed maybe 5-10 min before I intervened. Did I do any damage? It scope is at a remote observatory 2100 miles away and can't get there to investigate. 


Mount weight (was Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway)

Jeffc
 

I couldn't help replying to the moans of mobile setup.  I hear ya!

I have a 1200.  Its kinda heavy to setup, but works so very well, so solid... wind is not a problem at all.
It is a pleasure to use.  Especially for outreach.  Tho I mostly use it "in the field" (outreach) and it is a bit of chore to setup.
The 1200 RA axis is a "heavy lift" to get it on the 54" pier with my 5' 9" frame.

So years ago I got an 1100 thinking it would "lighten the setup".   But two things happened...
1) I decided to use a Losmandy HD tripod instead of a portable pier.
    This added another (?) 10 lbs of aluminum adapters to the bottom of the mount.
2) The 1100 has though-the-mount cabling (unlike the 1200) and is super nice.
    But splitting the DEC from RA is now a bit more tricky.

So I leave the 1100 assembled (minus the DEC saddle plate), with the Losmandy tripod adapter attached; it travels in a big foam lined storage box.
It turns out the 1100 assembled like this is about the same "lift" as the 1200 RA axis.
So much for "lighten the setup".   On the upside , the 1100 setup/teardown time is a bit quicker than the 1200.

Mach 2 is looking attractive... Mach 1 even more so.   AP 400 even more!

Fwiw, this weekend I picked up a "craigslist bargain" Super Polaris which I will use for "quick setup" visual occasions with the new AP Stowaway.

-Jeff

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 4:30 PM Woody Schlom <woody_is@...> wrote:

Very well put.  And so true.  My Mach1 gets heavier every year.

 

Woody

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Stelios via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 1:33 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

 

You ask if it would be worthwhile to split the Mach2 into two parts...

 

For me, absolutely. The main reason that (then) I chose the Mach1 over the MyT (despite my love of the red color :)) was the 28lb vs 35lb head, and the ability to break the Mach1 in two pieces--which, thankfully, I have not so far needed to use. 

 

When I heard about the Mach2 with encoders, I was thinking I *might* sell my Mach1 to upgrade--until I found out the weight which (for me) would be prohibitive, as I am mobile and will remain so for the foreseeable future. 

 

As you said, the AP crowd is graying. Muscles are dwindling, knees are twitching, backs are creaking. All while encroaching light pollution is forcing most to travel in order to image. 

 

Lightweight or modular should be the holy grail for mounts. 


Re: AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Rick Darden
 

Good to hear. But my clutches are snug tight with a key. I am getting in tonight to see what the fall out is if any.



Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S7 edge, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone



-------- Original message --------
From: "uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io" <chris1011@...>
Date: 4/23/20 8:49 PM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP1100 CP4 pier crash


Did I do any damage?
Probably not. Especially if your clutches were not super tight.

I left my Mach2 running all night last night, forgot to turn off power. This morning the scope was up against the pier. Nothing damaged except my self esteem. ;^(

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Darden <rick@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 7:20 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Hi All,

It happened while I was sleeping and it was tracking on its target. I think it crashed maybe 5-10 min before I intervened. Did I do any damage? It scope is at a remote observatory 2100 miles away and can't get there to investigate. 


Re: AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Benoit Schillings
 

it is interesting, I had the issue that leaving theSky software
sometimes get's the mount to start tracking again, which recently
cause the mount to go for a few days... no damages, but resyncing the
mount causes it to go 360 around the RA axis the number of days I had
left the mount going. Looks like maybe the position of the mount in RA
does not cycle in a modulo 360 manner ?

-- benoit

On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 5:49 PM uncarollo2 <chris1011@aol.com> via
groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:


Did I do any damage?

Probably not. Especially if your clutches were not super tight.

I left my Mach2 running all night last night, forgot to turn off power. This morning the scope was up against the pier. Nothing damaged except my self esteem. ;^(

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Darden <rick@keysaccounting.com>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 7:20 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Hi All,

It happened while I was sleeping and it was tracking on its target. I think it crashed maybe 5-10 min before I intervened. Did I do any damage? It scope is at a remote observatory 2100 miles away and can't get there to investigate.


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Roland Christen
 

If the first requirement is capacity, you really want a bigger mount. A 400 would have maybe 1/2 the capacity of the Mach2, my guess.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: David via groups.io <phrosty5@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 6:26 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

I would love a 400 or 600 sized mount with very precise tracking!  That sounds amazing.  What do you think the capacity might be on something that size?

David



On Apr 23, 2020, at 6:03 PM, uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:

Titanium is hard to machine. Carbon fiber is more practical. right now we do have a lot of holes and machine away lots of internal bulk on the Mach2. The motors I chose are much heavier and larger than those used on our Chinese competitor mounts, plus they have higher force magnetic structures. The old servo motors used on the Mach1 and 1100 are flea size in comparison. The base on the Mach2 was made wider because of complaints in the past about the Mach1 base parts being too narrow. The rotating assembly on the Mach2 base was also beefed up for the same reason. People tend to overload the mounts regardless of what we spec the limits to be.

Anyway, the old 400 mount was a nice compact design which can be brought back with some more modern touches. Internal wiring for accessories would not be an option, so if you want that, you will have to go the Chinese route. However, we can make the 400 a very precision tracking mount - we have the technology. And with my new keypad modeling you can do unguided imaging for sure - no guide camera needed. I did 20 minute unguided exposures in Hawaii with 1300mm focal length scope with only a 3 point model along the object track. All night long.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Erickson <christopher.k.erickson@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 4:37 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

YES!

I would LOVE a lightweight Half-Mach to perfectly-match my Stowaway when travelling for eclipses.

Use high-tech materials like titanium and/or carbon fiber to get the weight down as much as possible without losing rigidity. 

Bulk wouldn't be as important as weight.

Round or triangular holes to reduce weight in places where the missing material wouldn't effect rigidity.

Splitting in half for transport and assembly would be nice too.

Scale it to be able to handle a Stowaway, a double-stack Coronado 90 and a full-frame dSLR.

Or maybe have a standard aluminum version and a much-more-expensive-and-much-lighter titanium version.

Hopefully that would cover all of the bases.

I would be very happy to spend serious coin on a titanium Half-Mach.


On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:55 AM uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
Interesting. I just weighed the two components of the Mach1. Ra weighs 17.20 lb. Dec weighs 11.95 lb. for a total of 29.15lb. That's without the dovetail plate which can weigh +- depending if it's the short one or the long Losmandy one. That's about a pound and half more than the 1100 RA axis alone. Hardly a back breaker.

I also weighed an older 400 GTO mount which came in at 19.5 lb. We had people throwing heavy long 6" refractors on it, so that's why we replaced it with the larger Mach1. Maybe we need to go back to making a newer version of the 400 for use with more modern short focus imaging refractors and the smaller (8 inch) SCTs.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Ken M <kmurfitt@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 2:13 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

If I may say so - when I weigh my MACH1 GTO and 1100 RA (no encoders) both 2018 models-
The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
The 1100 GTO RA is 27lbs
This is why I like the 1100 so much - it's actually a bit easier to set up (less bulky and lighter) though it takes a bit longer to do so due to the DEC axis (which is even lighter than RA)


Re: AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Roland Christen
 


Did I do any damage?
Probably not. Especially if your clutches were not super tight.

I left my Mach2 running all night last night, forgot to turn off power. This morning the scope was up against the pier. Nothing damaged except my self esteem. ;^(

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Darden <rick@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 7:20 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Hi All,

It happened while I was sleeping and it was tracking on its target. I think it crashed maybe 5-10 min before I intervened. Did I do any damage? It scope is at a remote observatory 2100 miles away and can't get there to investigate. 


AP1100 CP4 pier crash

Rick Darden
 

Hi All,

It happened while I was sleeping and it was tracking on its target. I think it crashed maybe 5-10 min before I intervened. Did I do any damage? It scope is at a remote observatory 2100 miles away and can't get there to investigate. 


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

dvjbaja
 

Why not just reissue the Mach 1?  No development needed, just manufacturing capacity.  All of the tooling is there.  It's a much lower price point than the M2.  If the manufacturing capacity is not there, farm out the job to another US based shop.  

Cheers 

Jg



Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note9, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: "David via groups.io" <phrosty5@...>
Date: 4/23/20 2:41 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

I would love it if you made another smaller mount.  Hopefully one as accurate as the Mach1.  I picked up a small iOptron CEM40 as a little grab and go mount that complements my 1100.  Its so light and easy to setup, its a pleasure.  It’ll easily carry 25 lbs for imaging.  I got this because there was nothing from AP in this size, but I sure wish there was.  Please make another small one…maybe a little brother to the Mach1.  Dont need encoders on something that small, just something as accurate as the Mach1 would be great!
Plus, you now have a price point hole where the Mach1 was before.

David



On Apr 23, 2020, at 3:55 PM, uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:


The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
Interesting. I just weighed the two components of the Mach1. Ra weighs 17.20 lb. Dec weighs 11.95 lb. for a total of 29.15lb. That's without the dovetail plate which can weigh +- depending if it's the short one or the long Losmandy one. That's about a pound and half more than the 1100 RA axis alone. Hardly a back breaker.

I also weighed an older 400 GTO mount which came in at 19.5 lb. We had people throwing heavy long 6" refractors on it, so that's why we replaced it with the larger Mach1. Maybe we need to go back to making a newer version of the 400 for use with more modern short focus imaging refractors and the smaller (8 inch) SCTs.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Ken M <kmurfitt@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 2:13 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

If I may say so - when I weigh my MACH1 GTO and 1100 RA (no encoders) both 2018 models-
The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
The 1100 GTO RA is 27lbs
This is why I like the 1100 so much - it's actually a bit easier to set up (less bulky and lighter) though it takes a bit longer to do so due to the DEC axis (which is even lighter than RA)


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Woody Schlom
 

Very well put.  And so true.  My Mach1 gets heavier every year.

 

Woody

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Stelios via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 1:33 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

 

You ask if it would be worthwhile to split the Mach2 into two parts...

 

For me, absolutely. The main reason that (then) I chose the Mach1 over the MyT (despite my love of the red color :)) was the 28lb vs 35lb head, and the ability to break the Mach1 in two pieces--which, thankfully, I have not so far needed to use. 

 

When I heard about the Mach2 with encoders, I was thinking I *might* sell my Mach1 to upgrade--until I found out the weight which (for me) would be prohibitive, as I am mobile and will remain so for the foreseeable future. 

 

As you said, the AP crowd is graying. Muscles are dwindling, knees are twitching, backs are creaking. All while encroaching light pollution is forcing most to travel in order to image. 

 

Lightweight or modular should be the holy grail for mounts. 


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

David
 

I would love a 400 or 600 sized mount with very precise tracking!  That sounds amazing.  What do you think the capacity might be on something that size?

David



On Apr 23, 2020, at 6:03 PM, uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:

Titanium is hard to machine. Carbon fiber is more practical. right now we do have a lot of holes and machine away lots of internal bulk on the Mach2. The motors I chose are much heavier and larger than those used on our Chinese competitor mounts, plus they have higher force magnetic structures. The old servo motors used on the Mach1 and 1100 are flea size in comparison. The base on the Mach2 was made wider because of complaints in the past about the Mach1 base parts being too narrow. The rotating assembly on the Mach2 base was also beefed up for the same reason. People tend to overload the mounts regardless of what we spec the limits to be.

Anyway, the old 400 mount was a nice compact design which can be brought back with some more modern touches. Internal wiring for accessories would not be an option, so if you want that, you will have to go the Chinese route. However, we can make the 400 a very precision tracking mount - we have the technology. And with my new keypad modeling you can do unguided imaging for sure - no guide camera needed. I did 20 minute unguided exposures in Hawaii with 1300mm focal length scope with only a 3 point model along the object track. All night long.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Erickson <christopher.k.erickson@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 4:37 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

YES!

I would LOVE a lightweight Half-Mach to perfectly-match my Stowaway when travelling for eclipses.

Use high-tech materials like titanium and/or carbon fiber to get the weight down as much as possible without losing rigidity. 

Bulk wouldn't be as important as weight.

Round or triangular holes to reduce weight in places where the missing material wouldn't effect rigidity.

Splitting in half for transport and assembly would be nice too.

Scale it to be able to handle a Stowaway, a double-stack Coronado 90 and a full-frame dSLR.

Or maybe have a standard aluminum version and a much-more-expensive-and-much-lighter titanium version.

Hopefully that would cover all of the bases.

I would be very happy to spend serious coin on a titanium Half-Mach.


On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:55 AM uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
Interesting. I just weighed the two components of the Mach1. Ra weighs 17.20 lb. Dec weighs 11.95 lb. for a total of 29.15lb. That's without the dovetail plate which can weigh +- depending if it's the short one or the long Losmandy one. That's about a pound and half more than the 1100 RA axis alone. Hardly a back breaker.

I also weighed an older 400 GTO mount which came in at 19.5 lb. We had people throwing heavy long 6" refractors on it, so that's why we replaced it with the larger Mach1. Maybe we need to go back to making a newer version of the 400 for use with more modern short focus imaging refractors and the smaller (8 inch) SCTs.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Ken M <kmurfitt@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 2:13 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

If I may say so - when I weigh my MACH1 GTO and 1100 RA (no encoders) both 2018 models-
The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
The 1100 GTO RA is 27lbs
This is why I like the 1100 so much - it's actually a bit easier to set up (less bulky and lighter) though it takes a bit longer to do so due to the DEC axis (which is even lighter than RA)


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Worsel
 


Re: Case Foam CUTTING PATTERNS for AP Mounts

Glenn
 

For those who are interested in making custom cases for their equipment, mycasebuilder.com is running a special. I just received an email from them that said:

We also want to thank our loyal customers with a 15% discount on any MyCaseBuilder purchase. That’s cases, foam or both. This offer is good until May 31, 2020. Just use the code SPRING20 at check-out and your discount will automatically be applied to your order.
Happy case designing!

Glenn


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Roland Christen
 

Titanium is hard to machine. Carbon fiber is more practical. right now we do have a lot of holes and machine away lots of internal bulk on the Mach2. The motors I chose are much heavier and larger than those used on our Chinese competitor mounts, plus they have higher force magnetic structures. The old servo motors used on the Mach1 and 1100 are flea size in comparison. The base on the Mach2 was made wider because of complaints in the past about the Mach1 base parts being too narrow. The rotating assembly on the Mach2 base was also beefed up for the same reason. People tend to overload the mounts regardless of what we spec the limits to be.

Anyway, the old 400 mount was a nice compact design which can be brought back with some more modern touches. Internal wiring for accessories would not be an option, so if you want that, you will have to go the Chinese route. However, we can make the 400 a very precision tracking mount - we have the technology. And with my new keypad modeling you can do unguided imaging for sure - no guide camera needed. I did 20 minute unguided exposures in Hawaii with 1300mm focal length scope with only a 3 point model along the object track. All night long.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Erickson <christopher.k.erickson@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 4:37 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

YES!

I would LOVE a lightweight Half-Mach to perfectly-match my Stowaway when travelling for eclipses.

Use high-tech materials like titanium and/or carbon fiber to get the weight down as much as possible without losing rigidity. 

Bulk wouldn't be as important as weight.

Round or triangular holes to reduce weight in places where the missing material wouldn't effect rigidity.

Splitting in half for transport and assembly would be nice too.

Scale it to be able to handle a Stowaway, a double-stack Coronado 90 and a full-frame dSLR.

Or maybe have a standard aluminum version and a much-more-expensive-and-much-lighter titanium version.

Hopefully that would cover all of the bases.

I would be very happy to spend serious coin on a titanium Half-Mach.


On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 9:55 AM uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
Interesting. I just weighed the two components of the Mach1. Ra weighs 17.20 lb. Dec weighs 11.95 lb. for a total of 29.15lb. That's without the dovetail plate which can weigh +- depending if it's the short one or the long Losmandy one. That's about a pound and half more than the 1100 RA axis alone. Hardly a back breaker.

I also weighed an older 400 GTO mount which came in at 19.5 lb. We had people throwing heavy long 6" refractors on it, so that's why we replaced it with the larger Mach1. Maybe we need to go back to making a newer version of the 400 for use with more modern short focus imaging refractors and the smaller (8 inch) SCTs.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Ken M <kmurfitt@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 2:13 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

If I may say so - when I weigh my MACH1 GTO and 1100 RA (no encoders) both 2018 models-
The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
The 1100 GTO RA is 27lbs
This is why I like the 1100 so much - it's actually a bit easier to set up (less bulky and lighter) though it takes a bit longer to do so due to the DEC axis (which is even lighter than RA)


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Michael Hambrick <mike.hambrick@...>
 

Point well taken Chris.

I recently "loaned for as long as they needed it" my mid-power model rocket launch control system to a local school for a project they were working on with the promise that I would help them when they got ready to launch their rocket. They never got the chance to launch their rocket, and I am still trying to figure out how to get my gear back.

I would have already found a deserving recipient to give or sell my old 800 mount to, but since I kept the 8-inch portable pier to use with my 1100 mount, I have been reluctant to give the old mount to someone who will then be forced to spend another $800 to $1000 to get a pier or tripod so that they can use it. I will probably end up selling it on Astro-Mart or Cloudy Nights.


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Roland Christen
 

We will consider it. I am exploring some things that might work for our present mount. It would remove about 12.5 lb part from the mount head which would then be brought back together in the field setup.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Stelios via groups.io <stelios_t@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 3:32 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

You ask if it would be worthwhile to split the Mach2 into two parts...

For me, absolutely. The main reason that (then) I chose the Mach1 over the MyT (despite my love of the red color :)) was the 28lb vs 35lb head, and the ability to break the Mach1 in two pieces--which, thankfully, I have not so far needed to use. 

When I heard about the Mach2 with encoders, I was thinking I *might* sell my Mach1 to upgrade--until I found out the weight which (for me) would be prohibitive, as I am mobile and will remain so for the foreseeable future. 

As you said, the AP crowd is graying. Muscles are dwindling, knees are twitching, backs are creaking. All while encroaching light pollution is forcing most to travel in order to image. 

Lightweight or modular should be the holy grail for mounts. 


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

Joe Zeglinski
 

Very well said, Chris,
 
    I never thought of it, but you are right-on.
Besides, an excellent scope and mount,  like those from AP, will eventually pass from hand to hand – as teachers retire, or the kids move on to more advanced equipment as it comes along.
 
    In the same vein, wouldn’t it be grand if Scouting International, established a special ASTRONOMY Badge, rather than something just relating to “outdoors and camping”. Maybe in the future they might concentrate less on finding their way through the forest – probably just streets, when we run out of woods -  than on travelling on pathways through the skies, as man’s journey inevitably reaches even farther afield, for our next generations.
 
Joe Z.
 

From: Christopher Erickson
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 5:23 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway
 
Personally, I believe that we should... 
 
NEVER GIVE TELESCOPES TO SCHOOLS.
 
GIVE TELESCOPES TO TEACHERS OR STUDENTS INSTEAD.
 
If you give it to a school, it inevitably ends up being controlled by school middle-management bureaucrats and spends the rest of its life in the back of a crowded supply closet, never to be seen by kids ever again. The tax write-off for giving it to a school will end up being next-to-nothing anyway.
 
If you give it to a dedicated teacher, that person is much more likely to learn how to use it properly and take it with them throughout their teaching career.
 
If you give it to a dedicated student, that person's life will be changed forever.
 
If it is a big, expensive, complicated telescope, consider selling it to another astro-nut who will love it, or work to establish an NPO in a local community to operate it, put it in an observatory, and perform outreach.
 
 
On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 8:27 AM Michael Hambrick via groups.io <mike.hambrick@...> wrote:
That is a great suggestion. I have also thought about donating it to a local school. Only bad thing is I kept the pier to use with my 1100 mount.


Best Regards

Michael Hambrick
ARLANXEO
TSR Global Manufacturing Support
PO Box 2000
Orange, TX 77631-2000
Phone: +1 (409) 882-2799
email: mike.hambrick@...


Re: Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

David
 

I would love it if you made another smaller mount.  Hopefully one as accurate as the Mach1.  I picked up a small iOptron CEM40 as a little grab and go mount that complements my 1100.  Its so light and easy to setup, its a pleasure.  It’ll easily carry 25 lbs for imaging.  I got this because there was nothing from AP in this size, but I sure wish there was.  Please make another small one…maybe a little brother to the Mach1.  Dont need encoders on something that small, just something as accurate as the Mach1 would be great!
Plus, you now have a price point hole where the Mach1 was before.

David



On Apr 23, 2020, at 3:55 PM, uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io <chris1011@...> wrote:


The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
Interesting. I just weighed the two components of the Mach1. Ra weighs 17.20 lb. Dec weighs 11.95 lb. for a total of 29.15lb. That's without the dovetail plate which can weigh +- depending if it's the short one or the long Losmandy one. That's about a pound and half more than the 1100 RA axis alone. Hardly a back breaker.

I also weighed an older 400 GTO mount which came in at 19.5 lb. We had people throwing heavy long 6" refractors on it, so that's why we replaced it with the larger Mach1. Maybe we need to go back to making a newer version of the 400 for use with more modern short focus imaging refractors and the smaller (8 inch) SCTs.

Rolando


-----Original Message-----
From: Ken M <kmurfitt@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Thu, Apr 23, 2020 2:13 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Which to Choose; Absolute Encoders or 92 mm Stowaway

If I may say so - when I weigh my MACH1 GTO and 1100 RA (no encoders) both 2018 models-
The MACH1 GTO is 31 lbs
The 1100 GTO RA is 27lbs
This is why I like the 1100 so much - it's actually a bit easier to set up (less bulky and lighter) though it takes a bit longer to do so due to the DEC axis (which is even lighter than RA)

9161 - 9180 of 79040