Date   

Re: Mach1GTO case recommendations?

richard payne
 

Use a small Pelican for the CW's,  2 cases
for the mount.  you might get the mount in a single case. My 1100 fits in a single Pelican
but its very heavy, and  big
Richard


On Mar 28, 2020, at 10:44 AM, Derek K. via Groups.Io <kirthgersenwall@...> wrote:

 Dear AP mount owners,

I have a Mach1 from the final production run and it’s been a pleasure to use in my backyard.
When transporting it in my sedan I’ve resorted to the original AP shipment box&foam plus towels to cushion the package. This worked ok (even on the long and winding road to a Lick observatory outreach event) but I’d like your thoughts on better options.

Ideally the case would also accommodate 14 and 9 point counterweights (one each), cables, GTOCP4, CBAPT, standard counterweight shaft and be resilient yet lightweight enough that I could use it for airline transport someday. Willing to consider other options if there isn’t a good compromise.
I saw an advert for a “Doro” waterproof case with foam shaped to fit the contours of the mount. Seemed nice but I was too late to snag it.

Regards and hope all are doing well in these troubled times,
Derek


Re: Case Foam CUTTING PATTERNS for AP Mounts

Charles Thompson
 

I second that!  I've tried to trace the foam it came in but it wasn't pretty :).



Thanks,
Charles

Sent from mobile device.


-------- Original message --------
From: Joe Zeglinski <J.Zeglinski@...>
Date: 4/14/20 1:33 PM (GMT-06:00)
To: "ap-gto.groups.io" <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: [ap-gto] Case Foam CUTTING PATTERNS for AP Mounts

Hi,
 
    Since this topic of cutting foam inserts for all kinds cases,  to house any of AP’s mounts (past and present models), comes up so often, I wonder if George or Howard could take on a customer project, to make accurate “cutting forms” for us.
   
    Howard did such an excellent job on his mount dimensions page, for many years now, I would assume it wouldn’t be difficult to provide a Silhouette cut-out pattern, from their CAD drawings, which we could then print for cutting our own foam blocks, to any size case – even if printed on two, or more, profile sheets, then  taped for production. Or, a single smaller sheet pattern, and each user would then enter a “scale factor” into their Print Option box, for a several sheet printout. We don’t need a large commercial printer for that – although that could also be done at a Print Shop with such CAD large, single sheet printers, if desired.
 
    It might be a bit tricky to account for the position of the rotated base angle, which depends on a user’s Latitude, but even that could be printed in two parts, swivelled and taped/stapled to the RA axle head paper section accordingly, prior to the case foam block’s surgery.
 
    The print pattern document should be scaled,  dimensioned, and a 12-inch and 30 cm. metric ruler printed beside it, just to be sure our printer’s output remains true to the same mount scale. That would save many of us hacking out terribly shaped foam blocks.
 
    I think this would be a very helpful, and useful project. Yet another example of Astro-Physics renowned attention to its loyal customers.
 
Joe Z.


Case Foam CUTTING PATTERNS for AP Mounts

Joe Zeglinski
 

Hi,
 
    Since this topic of cutting foam inserts for all kinds cases,  to house any of AP’s mounts (past and present models), comes up so often, I wonder if George or Howard could take on a customer project, to make accurate “cutting forms” for us.
   
    Howard did such an excellent job on his mount dimensions page, for many years now, I would assume it wouldn’t be difficult to provide a Silhouette cut-out pattern, from their CAD drawings, which we could then print for cutting our own foam blocks, to any size case – even if printed on two, or more, profile sheets, then  taped for production. Or, a single smaller sheet pattern, and each user would then enter a “scale factor” into their Print Option box, for a several sheet printout. We don’t need a large commercial printer for that – although that could also be done at a Print Shop with such CAD large, single sheet printers, if desired.
 
    It might be a bit tricky to account for the position of the rotated base angle, which depends on a user’s Latitude, but even that could be printed in two parts, swivelled and taped/stapled to the RA axle head paper section accordingly, prior to the case foam block’s surgery.
 
    The print pattern document should be scaled,  dimensioned, and a 12-inch and 30 cm. metric ruler printed beside it, just to be sure our printer’s output remains true to the same mount scale. That would save many of us hacking out terribly shaped foam blocks.
 
    I think this would be a very helpful, and useful project. Yet another example of Astro-Physics renowned attention to its loyal customers.
 
Joe Z.


Re: Mach1GTO case recommendations?

rtlangland
 

Hi Michael,

The individual that first posted the Rigid case use goes by the “handle” Harley Davidson. However, I picked up on it and built a system to house and transport my Astro Physics 1100 mount.  I designed and built a custom system of rigid foam, recommended by George at Astro Physics.

The cut outs that I used would not work for the Mach1 but I used a carpet laying gage to get the outlines of the mount to cut the foam.  I think I sent you some pictures when I first did the system.
Hope this helps.

Bob Langland

On Mar 30, 2020, at 7:40 AM, Michael Hambrick via Groups.Io <mike.hambrick@...> wrote:

Joe - Was it you who posted the message on the forum showing how you used the stacking Rigid cases for your 1100 mount. Since the Rigid cases have bigger wheels they will probably roll a little bit easier.


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:        03/28/2020 04:37 PM
Subject:        Re: [ap-gto] Mach1GTO case recommendations?
Sent by:        main@ap-gto.groups.io




I agree, Woody.
 
    The Pelican 1620 case weighs 24.6 lbs – EMPTY !!!
 
Joe Z.




Re: Mach2 quick update

B Briggs
 

Given all of the effort  and investment on the part of Astro-physics and the continued  support (sometimes with impatience) of the hopeful purchasers I would concur with one of  the suggestions from Christopher-  the name  'Endeavor'.  Roland and company have put a tremendous amount of effort and time in developing and mfg. the Mach 2, and to then have the Covid-19  disrupt the process, they must be commended for their "ENDEAVORS".   As the highway construction signs say--"GIVE THEM A BRAKE".  Be patient, it will be worth the wait.


Re: ethernet connection troubles

Greg Vaughn
 

Hi Remy,

 

Out of habit, I always use the USB to Serial cable into the RS232 port on the CP4, but I wanted to test the Wi-Fi and Ethernet connections and was having difficulties.   I called George at Astro Physics (probably best to email him these days) and he was able to walk me through the process of setting it up properly in APCC and reaching a successful test.

 

One of the key features in his troubleshooting help was a newer JAVA polling applet called ‘FindMounts_VFM-XX-XX’  (  The newer script had features that were much more helpful than the previous one which I had been trying to use.

 

I would connect with George and he can give you some straightforward guidance on how to set it up with APCC.   I am not a network wizard either and George still managed to walk me through it and get me connected.

 

Cheers,

Greg

 

p.s.  I looked for George’s email which forwarded the polling script, but I can’t seem to find it.  I believe the current version is ‘FindMounts_VFM-01-02’

 


Virus-free. www.avast.com


Re: Question about wear on gear train on covered mount due to wind blowing.

Roland Christen
 

The geartrain won't be affected.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Berta <biker123@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Sun, Apr 12, 2020 9:04 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Question about wear on gear train on covered mount due to wind blowing.

I often  have my mount on a pier that has a heavy fitted cover over telescope, mount,  and everything else during the day awaiting night imaging to protect everything from hot sun, dust, etc. Sometimes it gets a bit windy. I was wondering if that wind blowing against the covered mount could possibly cause any negative damage to gear train. I keep the clutches tightened so wouldn't think it would suffer any negative issues.....but wanted to get the experts opinions.


Re: Mach2 quick update

 

I like anything but Theseus. In Amber Clad is a personal favorite, but a tad derivative. Rubicon has a nice ring to it.

 

Liam

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of uncarollo2 <chris1011@...> via groups.io
Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 10:26
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 quick update

 

HMS Hunter

 

Rolando

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Erickson <christopher.k.erickson@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Sat, Apr 11, 2020 9:42 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 quick update

I like the names that were given to some of the great sailing ships of the past.

 

Endeavour

Valiant

Intrepid

Enterprise

Star Flyer

Wind Song

Cutty Sark

Tenacious

Arctic Explorer

Indefatigable

Sea Nymph

Triumphant

Warrior

 


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

 

On Sat, Apr 11, 2020, 2:38 PM W Hilmo <y.groups@...> wrote:

I think that “Challenger” would have been a great name.  My first computer was called a “Challenger 1P”.

 

I don’t think that it would have been at all disrespectful.

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Karen Christen
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2020 8:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 quick update

 

You guys are great.  During development, we very seriously considered naming it the Mach2 Challenger.  We had loads of reasons – it will challenge your perception of what a mount can do, it’s gorgeous and sexy (like the Dodge Challenger), etc, etc.  But we decided against it because we were loath to be even remotely disrespectful of the amazing men and women who died in the Challenger Space Shuttle.  With that said, after the month we’ve just put in and looking at the weeks/months ahead, I’m voting for the Challenge Edition. ;-)

Karen

AP

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Worsel via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2020 8:49 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 quick update

 

Mach2 Unity?  Unified?

Bryan


--
Karen Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Mach2 quick update

Roland Christen
 

HMS Hunter

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Erickson <christopher.k.erickson@...>
To: main <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Sent: Sat, Apr 11, 2020 9:42 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 quick update

I like the names that were given to some of the great sailing ships of the past.

Endeavour
Valiant
Intrepid
Enterprise
Star Flyer
Wind Song
Cutty Sark
Tenacious
Arctic Explorer
Indefatigable
Sea Nymph
Triumphant
Warrior


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

On Sat, Apr 11, 2020, 2:38 PM W Hilmo <y.groups@...> wrote:
I think that “Challenger” would have been a great name.  My first computer was called a “Challenger 1P”.
 
I don’t think that it would have been at all disrespectful.
 
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Karen Christen
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2020 8:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 quick update
 
You guys are great.  During development, we very seriously considered naming it the Mach2 Challenger.  We had loads of reasons – it will challenge your perception of what a mount can do, it’s gorgeous and sexy (like the Dodge Challenger), etc, etc.  But we decided against it because we were loath to be even remotely disrespectful of the amazing men and women who died in the Challenger Space Shuttle.  With that said, after the month we’ve just put in and looking at the weeks/months ahead, I’m voting for the Challenge Edition. ;-)
Karen
AP
 
From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Worsel via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2020 8:49 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 quick update
 
Mach2 Unity?  Unified?

Bryan

--
Karen Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: ethernet connection troubles

Chiri� R�my
 

Hello all,

today, the only possibility of using the mount is by a USB connection (and, of course, by RS232).

However, I want to pilot the mount remotely. So I need an ethernet connection between the computer and the mount.
This computer will be remotely controlled by wifi from another computer.
I am not a specialist in setting up a network (my apologies).

Completely lost after all these fumblings, now considering what I see (CP3 / CP4?), and now unable to reach the page “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll”, I therefore have an absolute need for a precise description, step by step, of this that it is necessary to configure and how to configure the computer and the GTOCP4 with screenshots at best.

I thank you in advance.

Rémy

Le 12 avr. 2020 à 23:44, Ben Lutch <procyon@...> a écrit :


I can't quite make out the text in the screen cap on your response, sorry.

On a previous email, you said:

this is the IP registered using the link “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll" :

followed by a blue box ("Advanced Ethernet Settings") that says "Default IP Address: 169.254.1.141".  If I'm understanding correctly, that is the IP address of your CP4.

In the same email, there is what I *think* is a picture of your Windows network settings, where you have statically set your IP ("Utiliser l'addresse IP suivante") to be the same IP address of your CP4 (169.254.1.141).

You'll want the CP4 and the Windows computer to have different IP addresses or else they'll be unable to communicate.  If you're statically setting the IP of your computer, use a different IP from the CP4.

Mr. Gralak would be the authority here.
b

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 11:04 AM Jeffc <jeffcrilly@...> wrote:
I haven't used CP4 (don't have one) , tho I have noted in passing the number of issues with networking (which isn't really surprising giving tcp/ip networking in general has lots of variables even with "standard" equipment).

That said, these 169.254.x.x address look suspicious to me.   (Tho the screenshots of the PC side look a bit confusing; I can't tell if both the PC and the mount have the same self-assigned address -- it looks like they do.)  169.254.x.x is a reserved block for "self assignment when dhcp fails".   (happens all the time on windows when the wifi is problematic.)

I am totally guessing here on why ping works:   If the PC and the mount have the same self-assigned 169 address (seems plausible to me), then the PC "ping" command to that address is actually pinging the PC, not the mount.

After reading the CP4 manual, it seems the CP4 has a DHCP server for the "direct ethernet connection" known as "peer to peer" mode.  
I saw screenshots with "dhcp: client", which doesnt seem correct if "peer to peer" is the desired connection mode.
Here's the part from the manual:
  • Set the DHCP mode to SERVER ONLY if you will be connecting directly, peer-to-peer with a computer. Change these on the “Advanced Ethernet Settings” page of the GTOCP4 internal web page set.

  • If you wish to set the DHCP mode to BOTH, understand that the GTOCP4 will start out in "client" mode, and then switch to "server" mode if it is not assigned an IP address after a timeout period. Per IEEE standards, the switch to server mode will take place after more than 30 seconds, so you may need to be patient if waiting to use the GTOCP4 as a peer-to-peer device when set to "both.

Maybe the PC needs to be unplugged from ethernet for like 30 seconds after restarting the CP4 so that the CP4 can a) go into DHCP server mode, and then b) allow the PC to get a DHCP assigned address from the mount.

I don't know if there is some convention used with the CP4 for "wired without router" connection (crossover cable?) such that self-assigned addresses (169.254.x.x) are used, but in this case if I wanted to "hardwire" the mount and the computer (no wifi) I would :
- include a router in the mix, 
- wire the mount and the computer to the router over ethernet, 
- turn off wifi on both the computer and the mount.   
DHCP ~should~ work, (according to the manual the CP4 comes up as a client initially).  

As an alternative, the router should have a setting for static-ip range.   (Either in the 192.168.x.x , 172.16.x.x, or 10.0.x.x blocks). 
- Enable this feature on the router (usually enabled by default)
- pick two static IPs (different values) within the range for the mount and the PC.   
- In this case the PC and the Mount should have DHCP turned off.  
- Again , wifi turned off on both sides.

Finally, if you don't have a router, I believe you can use static IP addresses in the above mentioned blocks; and I presume the "DHCP Server" mode on the CP4.
Maybe the intent is to use the self-assigned addresses, but they will need to be different on the mount and PC.   And imo using the self-assigned range just confuses things.

Hope this helps, and doesnt confuse you further.

-Jeff

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 9:32 AM Chiri� R�my <remy.chirie@...> wrote:
….and now, here is some information obtained by questioning: “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll”…… incomprehensible !

All this seems to me more and more mysterious and need some efficient help .

Thank you .

Rémy
<Surprise4.JPG>


Le 12 avr. 2020 à 09:35, Chiri� R�my <remy.chirie@...> a écrit :

Ben, Roland,

how do you "see" that the computer’s IP address is the same as that of GTOCP4?


Do you confirm that the “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll” link allows us to indicate and / or modify the address of the GTOCP4, page “GTOCP4 Wired Ethernet Properties” (as this screen shot), 
<E1-Chgt adress.png>

and page “Wifi Interface Available on this GTOCP4” to enable / disable the Wifi connection and to connect / disconnect it  (as this 2nd screen shot)  ?

<Wifi enabled.JPG>


Would you tell me how to choose a manual IPv4 address with “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll” link, please.

Thank you very much for your help.

Rémy


Le 12 avr. 2020 à 03:16, Ben Lutch <procyon@...> a écrit :

<Non reco IP.JPG>








Question about wear on gear train on covered mount due to wind blowing.

Robert Berta
 
Edited

I often  have my mount on a pier that has a heavy fitted cover over telescope, mount,  and everything else during the day awaiting night imaging to protect everything from hot sun, dust, etc. The cover is lashed to the pier with tarp straps but sometimes it gets a bit windy and the cover gets some buffeting. I was wondering if that wind blowing against the covered mount could possibly cause any negative damage to gear train. I keep the clutches tightened so wouldn't think it would suffer any negative issues.....but wanted to get the experts opinions. 


Re: ethernet connection troubles

Ben Lutch
 


I can't quite make out the text in the screen cap on your response, sorry.

On a previous email, you said:

this is the IP registered using the link “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll" :

followed by a blue box ("Advanced Ethernet Settings") that says "Default IP Address: 169.254.1.141".  If I'm understanding correctly, that is the IP address of your CP4.

In the same email, there is what I *think* is a picture of your Windows network settings, where you have statically set your IP ("Utiliser l'addresse IP suivante") to be the same IP address of your CP4 (169.254.1.141).

You'll want the CP4 and the Windows computer to have different IP addresses or else they'll be unable to communicate.  If you're statically setting the IP of your computer, use a different IP from the CP4.

Mr. Gralak would be the authority here.
b

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 11:04 AM Jeffc <jeffcrilly@...> wrote:
I haven't used CP4 (don't have one) , tho I have noted in passing the number of issues with networking (which isn't really surprising giving tcp/ip networking in general has lots of variables even with "standard" equipment).

That said, these 169.254.x.x address look suspicious to me.   (Tho the screenshots of the PC side look a bit confusing; I can't tell if both the PC and the mount have the same self-assigned address -- it looks like they do.)  169.254.x.x is a reserved block for "self assignment when dhcp fails".   (happens all the time on windows when the wifi is problematic.)

I am totally guessing here on why ping works:   If the PC and the mount have the same self-assigned 169 address (seems plausible to me), then the PC "ping" command to that address is actually pinging the PC, not the mount.

After reading the CP4 manual, it seems the CP4 has a DHCP server for the "direct ethernet connection" known as "peer to peer" mode.  
I saw screenshots with "dhcp: client", which doesnt seem correct if "peer to peer" is the desired connection mode.
Here's the part from the manual:
  • Set the DHCP mode to SERVER ONLY if you will be connecting directly, peer-to-peer with a computer. Change these on the “Advanced Ethernet Settings” page of the GTOCP4 internal web page set.

  • If you wish to set the DHCP mode to BOTH, understand that the GTOCP4 will start out in "client" mode, and then switch to "server" mode if it is not assigned an IP address after a timeout period. Per IEEE standards, the switch to server mode will take place after more than 30 seconds, so you may need to be patient if waiting to use the GTOCP4 as a peer-to-peer device when set to "both.

Maybe the PC needs to be unplugged from ethernet for like 30 seconds after restarting the CP4 so that the CP4 can a) go into DHCP server mode, and then b) allow the PC to get a DHCP assigned address from the mount.

I don't know if there is some convention used with the CP4 for "wired without router" connection (crossover cable?) such that self-assigned addresses (169.254.x.x) are used, but in this case if I wanted to "hardwire" the mount and the computer (no wifi) I would :
- include a router in the mix, 
- wire the mount and the computer to the router over ethernet, 
- turn off wifi on both the computer and the mount.   
DHCP ~should~ work, (according to the manual the CP4 comes up as a client initially).  

As an alternative, the router should have a setting for static-ip range.   (Either in the 192.168.x.x , 172.16.x.x, or 10.0.x.x blocks). 
- Enable this feature on the router (usually enabled by default)
- pick two static IPs (different values) within the range for the mount and the PC.   
- In this case the PC and the Mount should have DHCP turned off.  
- Again , wifi turned off on both sides.

Finally, if you don't have a router, I believe you can use static IP addresses in the above mentioned blocks; and I presume the "DHCP Server" mode on the CP4.
Maybe the intent is to use the self-assigned addresses, but they will need to be different on the mount and PC.   And imo using the self-assigned range just confuses things.

Hope this helps, and doesnt confuse you further.

-Jeff

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 9:32 AM Chiri� R�my <remy.chirie@...> wrote:
….and now, here is some information obtained by questioning: “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll”…… incomprehensible !

All this seems to me more and more mysterious and need some efficient help .

Thank you .

Rémy


Le 12 avr. 2020 à 09:35, Chiri� R�my <remy.chirie@...> a écrit :

Ben, Roland,

how do you "see" that the computer’s IP address is the same as that of GTOCP4?


Do you confirm that the “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll” link allows us to indicate and / or modify the address of the GTOCP4, page “GTOCP4 Wired Ethernet Properties” (as this screen shot), 
<E1-Chgt adress.png>

and page “Wifi Interface Available on this GTOCP4” to enable / disable the Wifi connection and to connect / disconnect it  (as this 2nd screen shot)  ?

<Wifi enabled.JPG>


Would you tell me how to choose a manual IPv4 address with “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll” link, please.

Thank you very much for your help.

Rémy


Le 12 avr. 2020 à 03:16, Ben Lutch <procyon@...> a écrit :

<Non reco IP.JPG>



Re: ethernet connection troubles

Jeffc
 

I haven't used CP4 (don't have one) , tho I have noted in passing the number of issues with networking (which isn't really surprising giving tcp/ip networking in general has lots of variables even with "standard" equipment).

That said, these 169.254.x.x address look suspicious to me.   (Tho the screenshots of the PC side look a bit confusing; I can't tell if both the PC and the mount have the same self-assigned address -- it looks like they do.)  169.254.x.x is a reserved block for "self assignment when dhcp fails".   (happens all the time on windows when the wifi is problematic.)

I am totally guessing here on why ping works:   If the PC and the mount have the same self-assigned 169 address (seems plausible to me), then the PC "ping" command to that address is actually pinging the PC, not the mount.

After reading the CP4 manual, it seems the CP4 has a DHCP server for the "direct ethernet connection" known as "peer to peer" mode.  
I saw screenshots with "dhcp: client", which doesnt seem correct if "peer to peer" is the desired connection mode.
Here's the part from the manual:
  • Set the DHCP mode to SERVER ONLY if you will be connecting directly, peer-to-peer with a computer. Change these on the “Advanced Ethernet Settings” page of the GTOCP4 internal web page set.

  • If you wish to set the DHCP mode to BOTH, understand that the GTOCP4 will start out in "client" mode, and then switch to "server" mode if it is not assigned an IP address after a timeout period. Per IEEE standards, the switch to server mode will take place after more than 30 seconds, so you may need to be patient if waiting to use the GTOCP4 as a peer-to-peer device when set to "both.

Maybe the PC needs to be unplugged from ethernet for like 30 seconds after restarting the CP4 so that the CP4 can a) go into DHCP server mode, and then b) allow the PC to get a DHCP assigned address from the mount.

I don't know if there is some convention used with the CP4 for "wired without router" connection (crossover cable?) such that self-assigned addresses (169.254.x.x) are used, but in this case if I wanted to "hardwire" the mount and the computer (no wifi) I would :
- include a router in the mix, 
- wire the mount and the computer to the router over ethernet, 
- turn off wifi on both the computer and the mount.   
DHCP ~should~ work, (according to the manual the CP4 comes up as a client initially).  

As an alternative, the router should have a setting for static-ip range.   (Either in the 192.168.x.x , 172.16.x.x, or 10.0.x.x blocks). 
- Enable this feature on the router (usually enabled by default)
- pick two static IPs (different values) within the range for the mount and the PC.   
- In this case the PC and the Mount should have DHCP turned off.  
- Again , wifi turned off on both sides.

Finally, if you don't have a router, I believe you can use static IP addresses in the above mentioned blocks; and I presume the "DHCP Server" mode on the CP4.
Maybe the intent is to use the self-assigned addresses, but they will need to be different on the mount and PC.   And imo using the self-assigned range just confuses things.

Hope this helps, and doesnt confuse you further.

-Jeff


On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 9:32 AM Chiri� R�my <remy.chirie@...> wrote:
….and now, here is some information obtained by questioning: “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll”…… incomprehensible !

All this seems to me more and more mysterious and need some efficient help .

Thank you .

Rémy


Le 12 avr. 2020 à 09:35, Chiri� R�my <remy.chirie@...> a écrit :

Ben, Roland,

how do you "see" that the computer’s IP address is the same as that of GTOCP4?


Do you confirm that the “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll” link allows us to indicate and / or modify the address of the GTOCP4, page “GTOCP4 Wired Ethernet Properties” (as this screen shot), 
<E1-Chgt adress.png>

and page “Wifi Interface Available on this GTOCP4” to enable / disable the Wifi connection and to connect / disconnect it  (as this 2nd screen shot)  ?

<Wifi enabled.JPG>


Would you tell me how to choose a manual IPv4 address with “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll” link, please.

Thank you very much for your help.

Rémy


Le 12 avr. 2020 à 03:16, Ben Lutch <procyon@...> a écrit :

<Non reco IP.JPG>



Re: Mach2 quick update

Don Anderson
 

As well as Thermopylae.

Don Anderson


On Saturday, April 11, 2020, 08:42:08 p.m. MDT, Christopher Erickson <christopher.k.erickson@...> wrote:


I like the names that were given to some of the great sailing ships of the past.

Endeavour
Valiant
Intrepid
Enterprise
Star Flyer
Wind Song
Cutty Sark
Tenacious
Arctic Explorer
Indefatigable
Sea Nymph
Triumphant
Warrior


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

On Sat, Apr 11, 2020, 2:38 PM W Hilmo <y.groups@...> wrote:

I think that “Challenger” would have been a great name.  My first computer was called a “Challenger 1P”.

 

I don’t think that it would have been at all disrespectful.

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Karen Christen
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2020 8:58 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 quick update

 

You guys are great.  During development, we very seriously considered naming it the Mach2 Challenger.  We had loads of reasons – it will challenge your perception of what a mount can do, it’s gorgeous and sexy (like the Dodge Challenger), etc, etc.  But we decided against it because we were loath to be even remotely disrespectful of the amazing men and women who died in the Challenger Space Shuttle.  With that said, after the month we’ve just put in and looking at the weeks/months ahead, I’m voting for the Challenge Edition. ;-)

Karen

AP

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io [mailto:main@ap-gto.groups.io] On Behalf Of Worsel via groups.io
Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2020 8:49 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach2 quick update

 

Mach2 Unity?  Unified?

Bryan


--
Karen Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: ethernet connection troubles

Chiri� R�my
 

….and now, here is some information obtained by questioning: “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll”…… incomprehensible !

All this seems to me more and more mysterious and need some efficient help .

Thank you .

Rémy


Le 12 avr. 2020 à 09:35, Chiri� R�my <remy.chirie@...> a écrit :

Ben, Roland,

how do you "see" that the computer’s IP address is the same as that of GTOCP4?


Do you confirm that the “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll” link allows us to indicate and / or modify the address of the GTOCP4, page “GTOCP4 Wired Ethernet Properties” (as this screen shot), 
<E1-Chgt adress.png>

and page “Wifi Interface Available on this GTOCP4” to enable / disable the Wifi connection and to connect / disconnect it  (as this 2nd screen shot)  ?

<Wifi enabled.JPG>


Would you tell me how to choose a manual IPv4 address with “GTOCP4 Ethernet - Wifi Poll” link, please.

Thank you very much for your help.

Rémy


Le 12 avr. 2020 à 03:16, Ben Lutch <procyon@...> a écrit :

<Non reco IP.JPG>



Re: Mach2 quick update

Joe Zeglinski
 

 
Since we are just having fun with names ... how about  “Star Cruiser”.
 
 
Joe Z.


Re: Mach2 quick update

Rick Socarras
 

All Great.  Star Trek has a ship called the DEFIANT.  Let's add that one to the list.

-Rick


Re: Mach2 quick update

Dominique Durand
 

there is a before and an after it seems?
Therefore

Next day  or Next day CV16


Re: Mach2 quick update

David Johnson
 

To go in a different direction, you could call it the Mach2 Skyrocket or the Crossfield or something else that relates to Mach 2.

(Scott Crossfield was the first person to achieve Mach 2 in the Douglas D-558-2 Skyrocket).

Actually, just plain Mach2 is fine.  Appreciate the update on progress.  Stay safe.


Re: Meridian flip slew aborted?

 

Hi,

Similiar problem here, since last week all meridian flips are failing with SGP and APCC. It started from one imaging session to another without having changed or touched anything…same object, consecutive nights. From the logs it looks like the slews were abortet within milliseconds (last night I watched the mount actually moving briefly upon the attempted flip and then the sequence aborted).

Been staring at all the logs now for days but I am at a loss, it definitely looks like a command was sent to abort the slew but I cannot think of where this was coming from.

I have uploaded the logs from last night let me know if you need more information, the flip started at around 01:06:30:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/2oooztnhimaxyan/AADL8fDKvP1gSMVzX_GPDfR0a?dl=0


Thank you,

Andre

9401 - 9420 of 79030