Date   

Re: AP1100, Berlebach Planet, mounting CP4

Bill Long
 

I just use Sharpcap. If I'm away from the house, rapas plus Sharpcap.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Jeffc <jeffcrilly@...>
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 10:43 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] AP1100, Berlebach Planet, mounting CP4
 
I have and use a Rapas… when I’m observing visually and have no computer.  

When imaging, I use a polemaster and sharpcap to do polar alignment.    I’m curious which method allows for a “more precise” alignment; I assumed the polemaster+sharpcap.   

Both approaches are certainly very quick.  



On Jul 28, 2021, at 9:12 PM, Woody Schlom <woody_is@...> wrote:


I just remove the RAPAS after PA.  Cables want to hang up on it anyway.

Woody 

On July 28, 2021 8:08:13 PM "ap@..." <ap@...> wrote:

This is an old topic but now that I know how it works, I thought I would put some closure to it.

I got the AP1100, and it worked, first try, out of the box - no issues at all.  Ethernet connection, drivers worked, NINA connected to it, all good.  Now that's indoors as weather is not good but of three prior mounts this was by FAR the simplest to get working out of the boxes.

Anyway... 

The mating with the Planet was not so easy.  If you look at the photo on the first posting in this thread, it has the Berlebach custom AP1100 base.  It fits perfectly, in terms of the circular base, and all the holes line up, but... 

The screws from AP are WAY too short, or more precisely the thickness of the Berlebach base must be at a lot thicker, the screws will not even reach the holes. Trip to the hardware store mostly fixed it (had to get hex head not socket, but have some socket heads on order). 

This thickness also throws off the CP4 mount, especially since a screw hole hits exactly in the middle of the CP4 mount.  Basically you can't get the mount plate close enough to the mount base as the tripod base is too thick.  Leaving the screw (one of 6) out lets you mount it but it still is not flat -- I've got longer screws on order and some plastic spacers. 

But bottom line -- the custom Berlebach base is massively heavy duty and well built, but causes some (fixable) issues when you go to put it together.  Berlebach could fix that with a couple dollars worth of hardware accompanying the base.  It almost seems like they never actually tried it.

Anyway... 

The really good news is that the AP1100 is quite a bit larger than my MyT and positioned differently, and so I ended up with quite a bit more leg clearance -- my guess is I could go about an hour past transit without a leg crash.

The other aspect of this news is this: on the MyT I had more leg clearance with the counterweight between two legs, not over a leg.  It also was closer to the center of the tripod, and this did not cause an issue while loading counterweights.  On the AP1100 I can't mount it that way, it hangs out too far, when loading counterweights I think it would tip over (it's fine with it over the North leg).  But this became moot because the same over-hang also provided a lot more clearance, so there was no need to mount it backwards -- plenty of room in the standard configuration.  Lots of room.

Still got a lot to do, but it's going to work fine, with a bit of accomodation. 

Oh... one more issue not tripod related (below) 

<ap1100.jpg>


There was one surprise -- my refractor doesn't clear the RAPAS over quite a bit of its rotation angle.  When balanced the OAG lands directly over it.  Sideways it's fine, but either camera down, or certainly filterwheel down, it's a problem.

<rapas.jpg>


I'm going to get taller standoffs for the rings to raise it up.  I may also decide to put front weights on the dovetail so I can slide the OTA further back, but that just brings back some of the leg crash issues, so I think raising the OTA will at least solve the camera direction.  I can live with keeping the filter wheel not down, there's still about 270 degrees of rotation that won't hit.  I guess back weights and sliding forward is possible also, but no good place to mount those.

Anyway.... while some integration pains, I can't tell you how pleased I am that it all just came together and worked as soon as I fired up the software.

C11 sizing tomorrow, but I think that one is easier, as it is naturally taller. 

Now if only there was some clear skies. 

Linwood



Re: AP1100, Berlebach Planet, mounting CP4

Jeffc
 

I have and use a Rapas… when I’m observing visually and have no computer.  

When imaging, I use a polemaster and sharpcap to do polar alignment.    I’m curious which method allows for a “more precise” alignment; I assumed the polemaster+sharpcap.   

Both approaches are certainly very quick.  



On Jul 28, 2021, at 9:12 PM, Woody Schlom <woody_is@...> wrote:


I just remove the RAPAS after PA.  Cables want to hang up on it anyway.

Woody 

On July 28, 2021 8:08:13 PM "ap@..." <ap@...> wrote:

This is an old topic but now that I know how it works, I thought I would put some closure to it.

I got the AP1100, and it worked, first try, out of the box - no issues at all.  Ethernet connection, drivers worked, NINA connected to it, all good.  Now that's indoors as weather is not good but of three prior mounts this was by FAR the simplest to get working out of the boxes.

Anyway... 

The mating with the Planet was not so easy.  If you look at the photo on the first posting in this thread, it has the Berlebach custom AP1100 base.  It fits perfectly, in terms of the circular base, and all the holes line up, but... 

The screws from AP are WAY too short, or more precisely the thickness of the Berlebach base must be at a lot thicker, the screws will not even reach the holes. Trip to the hardware store mostly fixed it (had to get hex head not socket, but have some socket heads on order). 

This thickness also throws off the CP4 mount, especially since a screw hole hits exactly in the middle of the CP4 mount.  Basically you can't get the mount plate close enough to the mount base as the tripod base is too thick.  Leaving the screw (one of 6) out lets you mount it but it still is not flat -- I've got longer screws on order and some plastic spacers. 

But bottom line -- the custom Berlebach base is massively heavy duty and well built, but causes some (fixable) issues when you go to put it together.  Berlebach could fix that with a couple dollars worth of hardware accompanying the base.  It almost seems like they never actually tried it.

Anyway... 

The really good news is that the AP1100 is quite a bit larger than my MyT and positioned differently, and so I ended up with quite a bit more leg clearance -- my guess is I could go about an hour past transit without a leg crash.

The other aspect of this news is this: on the MyT I had more leg clearance with the counterweight between two legs, not over a leg.  It also was closer to the center of the tripod, and this did not cause an issue while loading counterweights.  On the AP1100 I can't mount it that way, it hangs out too far, when loading counterweights I think it would tip over (it's fine with it over the North leg).  But this became moot because the same over-hang also provided a lot more clearance, so there was no need to mount it backwards -- plenty of room in the standard configuration.  Lots of room.

Still got a lot to do, but it's going to work fine, with a bit of accomodation. 

Oh... one more issue not tripod related (below) 

<ap1100.jpg>


There was one surprise -- my refractor doesn't clear the RAPAS over quite a bit of its rotation angle.  When balanced the OAG lands directly over it.  Sideways it's fine, but either camera down, or certainly filterwheel down, it's a problem.

<rapas.jpg>


I'm going to get taller standoffs for the rings to raise it up.  I may also decide to put front weights on the dovetail so I can slide the OTA further back, but that just brings back some of the leg crash issues, so I think raising the OTA will at least solve the camera direction.  I can live with keeping the filter wheel not down, there's still about 270 degrees of rotation that won't hit.  I guess back weights and sliding forward is possible also, but no good place to mount those.

Anyway.... while some integration pains, I can't tell you how pleased I am that it all just came together and worked as soon as I fired up the software.

C11 sizing tomorrow, but I think that one is easier, as it is naturally taller. 

Now if only there was some clear skies. 

Linwood



Re: AP1100, Berlebach Planet, mounting CP4

Woody Schlom
 

I just remove the RAPAS after PA.  Cables want to hang up on it anyway.

Woody 

On July 28, 2021 8:08:13 PM "ap@..." <ap@...> wrote:

This is an old topic but now that I know how it works, I thought I would put some closure to it.

I got the AP1100, and it worked, first try, out of the box - no issues at all.  Ethernet connection, drivers worked, NINA connected to it, all good.  Now that's indoors as weather is not good but of three prior mounts this was by FAR the simplest to get working out of the boxes.

Anyway... 

The mating with the Planet was not so easy.  If you look at the photo on the first posting in this thread, it has the Berlebach custom AP1100 base.  It fits perfectly, in terms of the circular base, and all the holes line up, but... 

The screws from AP are WAY too short, or more precisely the thickness of the Berlebach base must be at a lot thicker, the screws will not even reach the holes. Trip to the hardware store mostly fixed it (had to get hex head not socket, but have some socket heads on order). 

This thickness also throws off the CP4 mount, especially since a screw hole hits exactly in the middle of the CP4 mount.  Basically you can't get the mount plate close enough to the mount base as the tripod base is too thick.  Leaving the screw (one of 6) out lets you mount it but it still is not flat -- I've got longer screws on order and some plastic spacers. 

But bottom line -- the custom Berlebach base is massively heavy duty and well built, but causes some (fixable) issues when you go to put it together.  Berlebach could fix that with a couple dollars worth of hardware accompanying the base.  It almost seems like they never actually tried it.

Anyway... 

The really good news is that the AP1100 is quite a bit larger than my MyT and positioned differently, and so I ended up with quite a bit more leg clearance -- my guess is I could go about an hour past transit without a leg crash.

The other aspect of this news is this: on the MyT I had more leg clearance with the counterweight between two legs, not over a leg.  It also was closer to the center of the tripod, and this did not cause an issue while loading counterweights.  On the AP1100 I can't mount it that way, it hangs out too far, when loading counterweights I think it would tip over (it's fine with it over the North leg).  But this became moot because the same over-hang also provided a lot more clearance, so there was no need to mount it backwards -- plenty of room in the standard configuration.  Lots of room.

Still got a lot to do, but it's going to work fine, with a bit of accomodation. 

Oh... one more issue not tripod related (below) 



There was one surprise -- my refractor doesn't clear the RAPAS over quite a bit of its rotation angle.  When balanced the OAG lands directly over it.  Sideways it's fine, but either camera down, or certainly filterwheel down, it's a problem.



I'm going to get taller standoffs for the rings to raise it up.  I may also decide to put front weights on the dovetail so I can slide the OTA further back, but that just brings back some of the leg crash issues, so I think raising the OTA will at least solve the camera direction.  I can live with keeping the filter wheel not down, there's still about 270 degrees of rotation that won't hit.  I guess back weights and sliding forward is possible also, but no good place to mount those.

Anyway.... while some integration pains, I can't tell you how pleased I am that it all just came together and worked as soon as I fired up the software.

C11 sizing tomorrow, but I think that one is easier, as it is naturally taller. 

Now if only there was some clear skies. 

Linwood



Re: Mgbox placement?

 


On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 8:49 PM Kent Kirkley via groups.io <kgkirkley=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:
Pardon my ignorance.
What is a "MgBox" or "MigBox"?
What is its purpose?
Kent Kirkley



-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Zeglinski <J.Zeglinski@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Wed, Jul 28, 2021 9:26 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mgbox placement?

Hi,
 
    If used around an observatory, I think it should be mounted closer to the ground, or at most half way up, and as far away as possible from where you might be standing, or your work table & computer.   Otherwise, the unit might pick up the observer and/or guest’s body heat and breathe.
 
    If too high up, close to the top of the wall, it might be influenced by Venturi Cooling from even the slightest winds curling down over the edge.
 
        I suppose it depends on what environment you are interested in monitoring.
Maybe it should be mounted as far away as possible from indoor activity – perhaps outside the observatory, halfway up the wall, and shielded from direct wind gusts, using an open “container”.
 
    I don’t have a Migbox, but do use a couple of (remote) T & %RH data logger sensors –  One, permanently exposed outdoors, is kept  inside an opened  zip-lock bag for  shielding from winds,  on a bush branch about 10 feet from the scope, where I won’t come near it. Another is  fastened to the mount’s  tripod, on the leg away from where I might  possibly be standing for a moment (rarely actually). Its readings are only for comparing to the other unit’s true ambient outdoor conditions at some distance, against my “UNDEWER” T & %RH operation, keeping the scope dry, while  under a tarp.
 
    I feel, for greater accuracy,  the sensor in an opened  zip-lock pouch, somewhat distanced away from the observing spot,  is a more reliable measurement, than one actually inside an observatory shared  with people and powered equipment.
 
Joe Z.



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: AP1100, Berlebach Planet, mounting CP4

Peter Nagy
 

Never leave RAPAS into the mount after finishing polar alignment. I guarantee you at least one of the cables will get caught. It happened to me when USB cable got caught during high speed slewing and ripped out the USB socket of SX Ultrastar guide camera connected to OAG.

Peter 


Re: Mgbox placement?

Kent Kirkley
 

Pardon my ignorance.
What is a "MgBox" or "MigBox"?
What is its purpose?
Kent Kirkley



-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Zeglinski <J.Zeglinski@...>
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Sent: Wed, Jul 28, 2021 9:26 pm
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mgbox placement?

Hi,
 
    If used around an observatory, I think it should be mounted closer to the ground, or at most half way up, and as far away as possible from where you might be standing, or your work table & computer.   Otherwise, the unit might pick up the observer and/or guest’s body heat and breathe.
 
    If too high up, close to the top of the wall, it might be influenced by Venturi Cooling from even the slightest winds curling down over the edge.
 
        I suppose it depends on what environment you are interested in monitoring.
Maybe it should be mounted as far away as possible from indoor activity – perhaps outside the observatory, halfway up the wall, and shielded from direct wind gusts, using an open “container”.
 
    I don’t have a Migbox, but do use a couple of (remote) T & %RH data logger sensors –  One, permanently exposed outdoors, is kept  inside an opened  zip-lock bag for  shielding from winds,  on a bush branch about 10 feet from the scope, where I won’t come near it. Another is  fastened to the mount’s  tripod, on the leg away from where I might  possibly be standing for a moment (rarely actually). Its readings are only for comparing to the other unit’s true ambient outdoor conditions at some distance, against my “UNDEWER” T & %RH operation, keeping the scope dry, while  under a tarp.
 
    I feel, for greater accuracy,  the sensor in an opened  zip-lock pouch, somewhat distanced away from the observing spot,  is a more reliable measurement, than one actually inside an observatory shared  with people and powered equipment.
 
Joe Z.


Re: AP1100, Berlebach Planet, mounting CP4

ap@CaptivePhotons.com
 

This is an old topic but now that I know how it works, I thought I would put some closure to it.

I got the AP1100, and it worked, first try, out of the box - no issues at all.  Ethernet connection, drivers worked, NINA connected to it, all good.  Now that's indoors as weather is not good but of three prior mounts this was by FAR the simplest to get working out of the boxes.

Anyway... 

The mating with the Planet was not so easy.  If you look at the photo on the first posting in this thread, it has the Berlebach custom AP1100 base.  It fits perfectly, in terms of the circular base, and all the holes line up, but... 

The screws from AP are WAY too short, or more precisely the thickness of the Berlebach base must be at a lot thicker, the screws will not even reach the holes. Trip to the hardware store mostly fixed it (had to get hex head not socket, but have some socket heads on order). 

This thickness also throws off the CP4 mount, especially since a screw hole hits exactly in the middle of the CP4 mount.  Basically you can't get the mount plate close enough to the mount base as the tripod base is too thick.  Leaving the screw (one of 6) out lets you mount it but it still is not flat -- I've got longer screws on order and some plastic spacers. 

But bottom line -- the custom Berlebach base is massively heavy duty and well built, but causes some (fixable) issues when you go to put it together.  Berlebach could fix that with a couple dollars worth of hardware accompanying the base.  It almost seems like they never actually tried it.

Anyway... 

The really good news is that the AP1100 is quite a bit larger than my MyT and positioned differently, and so I ended up with quite a bit more leg clearance -- my guess is I could go about an hour past transit without a leg crash.

The other aspect of this news is this: on the MyT I had more leg clearance with the counterweight between two legs, not over a leg.  It also was closer to the center of the tripod, and this did not cause an issue while loading counterweights.  On the AP1100 I can't mount it that way, it hangs out too far, when loading counterweights I think it would tip over (it's fine with it over the North leg).  But this became moot because the same over-hang also provided a lot more clearance, so there was no need to mount it backwards -- plenty of room in the standard configuration.  Lots of room.

Still got a lot to do, but it's going to work fine, with a bit of accomodation. 

Oh... one more issue not tripod related (below) 



There was one surprise -- my refractor doesn't clear the RAPAS over quite a bit of its rotation angle.  When balanced the OAG lands directly over it.  Sideways it's fine, but either camera down, or certainly filterwheel down, it's a problem.



I'm going to get taller standoffs for the rings to raise it up.  I may also decide to put front weights on the dovetail so I can slide the OTA further back, but that just brings back some of the leg crash issues, so I think raising the OTA will at least solve the camera direction.  I can live with keeping the filter wheel not down, there's still about 270 degrees of rotation that won't hit.  I guess back weights and sliding forward is possible also, but no good place to mount those.

Anyway.... while some integration pains, I can't tell you how pleased I am that it all just came together and worked as soon as I fired up the software.

C11 sizing tomorrow, but I think that one is easier, as it is naturally taller. 

Now if only there was some clear skies. 

Linwood


Re: Mgbox placement?

Joe Zeglinski
 

Hi,
 
    If used around an observatory, I think it should be mounted closer to the ground, or at most half way up, and as far away as possible from where you might be standing, or your work table & computer.   Otherwise, the unit might pick up the observer and/or guest’s body heat and breathe.
 
    If too high up, close to the top of the wall, it might be influenced by Venturi Cooling from even the slightest winds curling down over the edge.
 
        I suppose it depends on what environment you are interested in monitoring.
Maybe it should be mounted as far away as possible from indoor activity – perhaps outside the observatory, halfway up the wall, and shielded from direct wind gusts, using an open “container”.
 
    I don’t have a Migbox, but do use a couple of (remote) T & %RH data logger sensors –  One, permanently exposed outdoors, is kept  inside an opened  zip-lock bag for  shielding from winds,  on a bush branch about 10 feet from the scope, where I won’t come near it. Another is  fastened to the mount’s  tripod, on the leg away from where I might  possibly be standing for a moment (rarely actually). Its readings are only for comparing to the other unit’s true ambient outdoor conditions at some distance, against my “UNDEWER” T & %RH operation, keeping the scope dry, while  under a tarp.
 
    I feel, for greater accuracy,  the sensor in an opened  zip-lock pouch, somewhat distanced away from the observing spot,  is a more reliable measurement, than one actually inside an observatory shared  with people and powered equipment.
 
Joe Z.


Re: Mgbox placement?

Worsel
 

Tom

Mine is mounted just below the top of the wall on a roll-off observatory.  It is sampling open air for T and RH almost as soon as the roof is open.  No hindrance from the walls for satellite acquisition.   It has its own USB cable to the observatory PC.

It is about 2 meters from the mount, which is inconsequential distance.

Bryan


Re: Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

Bill Long
 

A total of 4 all night imaging runs with this combo and still not a single sub thrown out. Excellent tracking and guiding performance. I haven't touched PA, PHD2 settings, or the model since night one when I set the mount up outside. It just works. Tonight will be night 5.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2021 2:49 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
We had mild wind here about 5-6MPH and so I wanted to show that as well. No impact at all to subs, and the Mach 2 handled it fine. 






From: Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2021 8:47 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Here are some sample subs:


I took the highest and lowest FWHM from the data set and shared them. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2021 10:12 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Circling back on this as I finally got to test this out. I put my 12.5" AGO iDK, Moonlight Nitecrawler, FLI Proline 16803, CFW 5-7, Sagitta OAG, and Ultrastar guide camera on the Mach 2. Balancing the load was pretty easy to do, and I had just enough weights on hand for the job. This is pretty much at capacity for the mount based on the specifications. Might even be a tad over. 😁

Performance was stellar. I made a 98pt model in APPM, and used 5 second guide exposures. I took 5 hours worth of 20 minute HA subs and not a single one had any trailing at all. Very nice tight round stars in all of the images. Guiding was about 0.2-0.35" range throughout the night. Graph picture below.

I'll be getting some more data over the next few nights. I'll share some subs later this evening when I'm back on the Astro PC.

Conclusion: Mach 2 is a beastly mount that easily handled this challenge and passed with flying colors. Well done AP!

image/png


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Roland Christen via groups.io <chris1011@...>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 2021 5:44 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?
 
Well, I've never tried that scope, but I have loaded my Mach2 to the limit and imaged/guided just fine. Balance is critical and is easy to do.

Weight makes for larger moment, which makes the mount slower to respond to external disturbance, like wind. If your scope is open tube with no shroud, wind will not be a problem.

I will be loading my Mach2 with a 12" F8 carbon fiber Maksutov astrograph in the next couple days. Weight is about the same as your system. I expect that it will handle it fine and will post some guiding results. Will be getting ready for galaxy season.

Rolando



-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Long <bill@...>
To: AP-GTO Groups. io <ap-gto@groups.io>
Sent: Fri, Apr 23, 2021 7:07 pm
Subject: [ap-gto] Mach 2 + 12.5" AGO iDK?

What say ye?


46lbs, but would need to add focuser (8lbs), TCS System (1lb), and camera/accessories (call these 5 lbs). The OTA is about 18" tall (maybe 17.5" but lets call it 18") so this puts me at 18" and 60 lbs.  This puts me right on the yellow on the Mach 2 graph AP has. Length of everything, in focus with camera gear on would be about 45". 

Seems right at the limits, but likely safe. Any ideas on this from AP or others?

-Bill 

--
Roland Christen
Astro-Physics


Re: Mgbox placement?

W Hilmo
 

I’ve been setting mine on the flat surface under the RA axis, between the supports.

 

This seems to be a place where it’s unlikely to be affected by heat from any gear.  Also, it’s somewhat protected from direct sunlight during the day, and also from wind (which may or may not affect the pressure reading).  The only concern that I had when I first tried it there, was whether or not it would get a good GPS lock, but it seems to work fine.

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of Keith Olsen
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 1:50 PM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mgbox placement?

 

Great question, I would like to know also.  


Re: Mgbox placement?

Keith Olsen
 

Great question, I would like to know also.  


Re: Tutorials or manuals for pointing model?

 

Hi Tom

if you are talking about building the pointing model, Ray does a great job covering it in this video he did with AIC


On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 1:09 PM Tom Blahovici <tom.va2fsq@...> wrote:
Hi
Are there any good tutorials for the pointing model software? What about manuals?
Thanks



--
Brian 



Brian Valente


Re: M27 OSC and Mono combined

Robert Chozick
 

I would be glad to look at it. 

Robert 


On Jul 28, 2021, at 3:02 PM, Alex <alex@...> wrote:

Thanks for the links, very helpful and nice images. Also, thanks for the info on the camera sensors.
The difference between 14 and 16 bit is 16384 to 65536. Therefore, the 2600 does have an advantage over the 2400. Not sure how much difference this factor of 4 would make in an actual image but it would be fun to compare. Here is an image from the ZWO website that highlights the difference in smoothness and dynamic range of the two options:

<bit_comparison copy.jpg>


Last night I took some stacks of M27 with the longest exposure being 600s. Only had a second to glance at the results but will be working on the images tonight. Nice to have your image as a reference. I did notice some color difference in the center of the nebula with what seemed to be some gold tones but overall similar to your image in the above link. Once I get done processing the image (After several nights) I will send you a link to see what you think?

Alex


Re: Imaging in the Wind

Don Anderson
 

Very slick John and nice pic! Love my AP900 and AP portable pier.

Don Anderson


On Wednesday, July 28, 2021, 08:50:05 a.m. MDT, John Love <wd5ikx@...> wrote:


I have found my SkyBox to be a real "game changer" since I am often imaging at windy star parties after everyone else has given up and gone to bed.  Screen tarps would reduce wind loading on the structure but the frame is quite rigid when the tarps are installed and the tied downs keep the structure anchored to the ground.  I prefer the regular tarps to block stray light as well as wind.  During a recent trip to my dark site my 6x10x6H SkyBox withstood a 53 mph wind gust and sustained winds of about 45 mph.   The next night I took this image of NGC5033 with 25 mph wind with a 10" RC @ 2000mm on my AP900. 


Tutorials or manuals for pointing model?

Tom Blahovici
 

Hi
Are there any good tutorials for the pointing model software? What about manuals?
Thanks


Re: M27 OSC and Mono combined

Alex
 

Thanks for the links, very helpful and nice images. Also, thanks for the info on the camera sensors.
The difference between 14 and 16 bit is 16384 to 65536. Therefore, the 2600 does have an advantage over the 2400. Not sure how much difference this factor of 4 would make in an actual image but it would be fun to compare. Here is an image from the ZWO website that highlights the difference in smoothness and dynamic range of the two options:



Last night I took some stacks of M27 with the longest exposure being 600s. Only had a second to glance at the results but will be working on the images tonight. Nice to have your image as a reference. I did notice some color difference in the center of the nebula with what seemed to be some gold tones but overall similar to your image in the above link. Once I get done processing the image (After several nights) I will send you a link to see what you think?

Alex


Mgbox placement?

Tom Blahovici
 

Hi,
Where is the best location for an mgbox when used with an AP mount? On the scope? What if you are in an observatory? Won't the temperature and humidity be different?
Thanks, Tom


Re: Imaging in the Wind

jimwc@...
 

Google swap meet tent supply's

Jim

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io On Behalf Of W Hilmo
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 09:42 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Imaging in the Wind

 

So does anyone have a parts list and plan so that I can get a head start on building one of these?

 

I tried to source parts on Amazon, but finding the metal tubing and fittings has been a challenge.  The motorhome is going to be on the road for most of the time between now and mid-September, so I can’t continue to use it as a wind break.

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of John Love
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 7:50 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Imaging in the Wind

 

I have found my SkyBox to be a real "game changer" since I am often imaging at windy star parties after everyone else has given up and gone to bed.  Screen tarps would reduce wind loading on the structure but the frame is quite rigid when the tarps are installed and the tied downs keep the structure anchored to the ground.  I prefer the regular tarps to block stray light as well as wind.  During a recent trip to my dark site my 6x10x6H SkyBox withstood a 53 mph wind gust and sustained winds of about 45 mph.   The next night I took this image of NGC5033 with 25 mph wind with a 10" RC @ 2000mm on my AP900. 

Attachments:


Re: Imaging in the Wind

W Hilmo
 

So does anyone have a parts list and plan so that I can get a head start on building one of these?

 

I tried to source parts on Amazon, but finding the metal tubing and fittings has been a challenge.  The motorhome is going to be on the road for most of the time between now and mid-September, so I can’t continue to use it as a wind break.

 

From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> On Behalf Of John Love
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 7:50 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Imaging in the Wind

 

I have found my SkyBox to be a real "game changer" since I am often imaging at windy star parties after everyone else has given up and gone to bed.  Screen tarps would reduce wind loading on the structure but the frame is quite rigid when the tarps are installed and the tied downs keep the structure anchored to the ground.  I prefer the regular tarps to block stray light as well as wind.  During a recent trip to my dark site my 6x10x6H SkyBox withstood a 53 mph wind gust and sustained winds of about 45 mph.   The next night I took this image of NGC5033 with 25 mph wind with a 10" RC @ 2000mm on my AP900. 

Attachments:

1441 - 1460 of 81049