1200GTO as a portable mount?


Dean S
 

I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several star parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling the componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity, now at least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for an AP mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not really that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com


Herb York
 

You will NEVER be sorry you got the 1200
Thanks
Herb
ATWB

----- Original Message -----
From: Dean S
To: ap-gto@...
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:30 PM
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?


I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several star parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling the componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity, now at least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for an AP mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not really that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com







--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 119 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len


Richard Crisp
 

Dean I initially had a 1200GTo and then picked up a 900GTO as a second mount

I ended up selling the 900GTO to get a second 1200GTO. no question the 1200GTO is bigger and bulkier and heavier, but neither is very difficult for this 5'10" 180 lb guy to handle.

I love them both and if I could afford a third I'd have it in an instant!



Dean S <dean@...> wrote:
I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several star parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling the componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity, now at least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for an AP mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not really that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com


observe_m13
 

--- In ap-gto@..., "Dean S" <dean@...> wrote:

I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the
first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several
star parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling
the componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity,
now at least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My main
reason for an AP mount is to be able to go well past the meridian
during an imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not
really that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which
might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than I
really need.

Dean
Dean,
Go with your first thought, the AP900 for portability. I find the 1200
to be "luggable" and best used in a more permanent setting. Yes the
1200 comes apart but the largest part of the 1200 weighs as much as
the complete 900 mount, counterweight shaft included. The 900 is
positively a delight to use as a portable mount as long as you are
loading it with less than 60 to 70 pounds of telescope equipment. Do
not include the counterweight mass in your loading values.
Rick.


Joe Zeglinski
 

Hi Dean,

I am going to have to be on the other side, it seems.

I was in your shoes earlier this spring, wanting an AP mount the 900
seemed right, but I kept seeing posts about a 4 year wait, and there was an
AP1200 available on our local mart. Since the delta in weight didn't seem that
great, I tried to put in a bid on the AP1200.

I can't express how happy I was NOT to have won that bid, when my AP900
came up, surprisingly sooner than expected - thanks to the newly expanded
production facilities at AP. I'm also a 180 lb guy - (never been in shape, and
now retired don't expect any improvements). I think my eyes were bigger than
my good sense at the time, but the AP900 is plenty heavy enough, for me.

I just figured that when taken apart, the RA half (26 lbs), is less than a
fully assembled G11 (my second choice), which I prematurely bought two weeks
earlier - so I know what I am talking about. What I didn't take into account
is the tiny bits that add on to the carrying weight of even half an AP900. The
Pelican 1620 case for the RA half - foamed, but empty - adds another equal 26
lbs. So, we're upto about 52lbs and you might want to toss in the 10 lb
counterweight "bar" (alone) into this first case, of two or more. Now the
thought of lifting the luggage out of the car, and begin the portage, begins
to take on a "back wrenching challenge".

As I said, I am reaaaaaally glad I got the AP900 - at 70 lbs of instrument
load, plenty of capacity for most portable OTA's - unless you think a 14" or
16" SCT and a few added 21 lb steel weights to balance it, is truly portable.

I was supported in my decision by seeing a few ads posted on Astromart,
owners looking to trade their AP1200 down for an AP900. Of course, with
astrographs now being so popular, there are some who are looking to trade down
to an AP Mach1, for use with a refractor instead of their old SCT.

Basic suggestion, get the best mount that will fit your needs, and you can
carry, with some margin. The heavier it gets, the less you feel like hauling
it to a dark site, especially when it is cold, or the mosquitoes and black
flies are in season :-)

Don't take the snap decision to switch to an AP1200 lightly (pun
intended).

Whichever mount you decide upon, know that you are getting the finest
mount available. Well designed, superbly made and the unsurpassed support from
Rolando, Marj, and their crew is incomparable. For me, it's the pinnacle, a
once in a lifetime choice.

Joe

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dean S" <dean@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 4:30 PM
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?


I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the first of '08.
But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several star
parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling the
componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity, now at
least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for
an AP mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an imaging
session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not really
that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which might add some
weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than I really
need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com







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




Jim Janusz <jjanusz@...>
 

I used my 1200 as a portable for years and had no problems and I'm a skinny old guy.

I'm with Herb, go for the 1200, IMO it will be the last mount you will ever need.

Jim

----- Original Message -----
From: "Herb York" <herb@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?


You will NEVER be sorry you got the 1200
Thanks
Herb
ATWB


----- Original Message -----
From: Dean S
To: ap-gto@...
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:30 PM
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?


I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several star parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling the componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity, now at least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for an AP mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not really that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com






--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 119 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len





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




Richard Crisp
 

adding one point to Jim's comment, I can also say that you can put a lot more on the '1200 than the '900 and if you are like me and many imagers I know, it is pretty hard to say for sure exactly what load you may be wanting to swing five years down the road.

for example when I had the 900 mount I really didn't have a good way to mount my AP180EDT on it: the nice AP ring plate I had is made exclusively for the 1200 mount

likewise my 18" classical cass wasn't something that the '900 could swing and it was something I decided well after owning the mounts that I wanted to build.

So my way of thinking is that you can always overmount things and expect good results but not good to be undermounted. Even a fully decked out C14 imaging rig is sort of up against what I would consider the upper end of the carrying capacity of the 900 for serious imaging....

For the record I usually unscrew my counterweight bar when transporting to keep things manageable. Setup is about 15-20 minutes typically for me....





Jim Janusz <jjanusz@...> wrote:
I used my 1200 as a portable for years and had no problems and I'm a skinny
old guy.

I'm with Herb, go for the 1200, IMO it will be the last mount you will ever
need.

Jim

----- Original Message -----
From: "Herb York" <herb@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?

You will NEVER be sorry you got the 1200
Thanks
Herb
ATWB


----- Original Message -----
From: Dean S
To: ap-gto@...
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:30 PM
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?


I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the first of
'08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several star
parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling the
componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity, now at
least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for
an AP mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an imaging
session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not really
that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which might add some
weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than I
really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com







--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 119 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len






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




Dean S
 

I'm still listening.......................... :)

Is the 10" pier a must, or will an 8" work? I have an 8" MI pier I really like.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Crisp" <rdcrisp@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 6:33 PM
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?


adding one point to Jim's comment, I can also say that you can put a lot more on the '1200 than the '900 and if you are like me and many imagers I know, it is pretty hard to say for sure exactly what load you may be wanting to swing five years down the road.

for example when I had the 900 mount I really didn't have a good way to mount my AP180EDT on it: the nice AP ring plate I had is made exclusively for the 1200 mount

likewise my 18" classical cass wasn't something that the '900 could swing and it was something I decided well after owning the mounts that I wanted to build.

So my way of thinking is that you can always overmount things and expect good results but not good to be undermounted. Even a fully decked out C14 imaging rig is sort of up against what I would consider the upper end of the carrying capacity of the 900 for serious imaging....

For the record I usually unscrew my counterweight bar when transporting to keep things manageable. Setup is about 15-20 minutes typically for me....





Jim Janusz <jjanusz@...> wrote:
I used my 1200 as a portable for years and had no problems and I'm a skinny
old guy.

I'm with Herb, go for the 1200, IMO it will be the last mount you will ever
need.

Jim

----- Original Message -----
From: "Herb York" <herb@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?

You will NEVER be sorry you got the 1200
Thanks
Herb
ATWB


----- Original Message -----
From: Dean S
To: ap-gto@...
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:30 PM
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?


I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the first of
'08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several star
parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling the
componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity, now at
least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for
an AP mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an imaging
session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not really
that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which might add some
weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than I
really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com






--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 119 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len





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











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





--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.10/1091 - Release Date: 10/24/2007 2:31 PM


Philip Perkins <ppml2@...>
 

Hi Dean,

It's horses for courses. Depends what you will do with the mount. If you will only ever have it set up in one place then it doesn't matter - probably better to go with the 1200 if you can afford it. But if you need to transport it regularly it may be a different matter.

Personally I transport my complete 'observatory' 2000 miles to southern France and back 3-4 times a year. The whole kaboodle - it completely fills a Landcruiser (with only me in the car) and even the rearmost seats removed. The 1200 simply wouldn't fit. It's not just the size of the mount, it's the portable pier as well.

My 900 GTO (which does fit) does everything I need and more. It carries my RCOS 12.5" very comfortably and with quality. And it works perfectly from only a 12v 3.3A source - has done for seven years. And it's not even sensitive to moderate imbalance.

To really see how the mount performs you need to see an RCOS 12.5" image at f/9. Here is one from this year:
http://www.astrocruise.com/galaxies/M64_07.htm

Need anything better? The 900 GTO is a very strong mount. It tracks superbly with the RCOS 12.5" mounted. It seems to get better over time. It's a really beautiful mount.

Clear skies!
Philip
--

At 21:30 24/10/2007, you wrote:
I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several star parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling the componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity, now at least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for an AP mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not really that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com
Philip Perkins
<ppml2@...>
Wiltshire UK & Luberon France
www.astrocruise.com


Wiggins, Rick
 

Hi Dean,
I currently have a 1200 and 2 900s. I use the 1200 in my
observatory; however, I did use it portable for several years. The
1200 gets heavy for portable use. Now that I use the 900 for
portable use, it is really easy and I probably will never go back.
For sure, the 1200 is more sturdy, especially in winds, so if you
don't mind the loading and unloading, it is excellent for portable.
If your portable use is for long multi-day trips, then I would
probably opt for the 1200.
Obviously, the size and weight of your equipment have a hughe factor
in this. The 900 works well with Refractors up to 8 inches and
cassegrain or similar up to 11 inch. I had one friend that ran a
RCOS 12" on the 900 for years, but I think that is pushing it for
portable use.

In summary, if you only travel 2-4 times a year and go for at least
two or more days at a time, the 1200 would be really nice. If you
travel a lot (meaning at least every month) then the 900 is much
more friendly for loading and unloading.

Hope this helps,
Rick

--- In ap-gto@..., "Dean S" <dean@...> wrote:

I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the
first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to
several star parties a year, is there really much of a difference in
handling the componets between these? I don't really need the extra
capacity, now at least, however the lower PE would always be a
benefit. My main reason for an AP mount is to be able to go well
past the meridian during an imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not
really that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which
might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than
I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Ray Gralak <rgr@...>
 

Dean,

If you will be at AIC this weekend there will be at least one Ap1200 mount
there (mine!). When I break it down on Sunday you are welcome to check out
how heavy the RA/Dec assembly pieces are.

So if you are there come see me at the CCDWare table.

-Ray Gralak

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
On Behalf Of Dean S
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:31 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?

I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run
the first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to
several star parties a year, is there really much of a
difference in handling the componets between these? I don't
really need the extra capacity, now at least, however the
lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for an AP
mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an
imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs.
Not really that much difference. I would have to upgrade
piers which might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount
than I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com







William R. Mattil <wrmattil@...>
 

Richard Crisp wrote:
adding one point to Jim's comment, I can also say that you can put a lot more on the '1200 than the '900 and if you are like me and many imagers I know, it is pretty hard to say for sure exactly what load you may be wanting to swing five years down the road.
This is a very compelling argument. With Mounts at least size matters <g>
For the record I usually unscrew my counterweight bar when transporting to keep things manageable. Setup is about 15-20 minutes typically for me....
I have both an AP900 and an AP1200 and they both are pretty much the same setup time. Don't let the portability thing sway you here. It's a non issue.


And surprisingly enough there is less setup time than with a lot of less expensive mounts. Like Richard I leave the Counterweight Bar unscrewed during the transport process.

One small caveat .... very small, easily gotten around is that my FSQ/STL combination won't balance on the AP1200 <g> They don't weigh enough. So I added some ballast to the top of the mount in the form of a 253mm RCOS. But if I use the AP900's CW Shaft it will balance should the need ever arise.


Regards


Bill

--

William R. Mattil : http://www.celestial-images.com


William R. Mattil <wrmattil@...>
 

Dean S wrote:
I'm still listening.......................... :)

Is the 10" pier a must, or will an 8" work? I have an 8" MI pier I really like.



As long as you can get a pier cap made that will accept the AP plate you'd be good to go.


Regards

Bill

--

William R. Mattil : http://www.celestial-images.com


William R. Mattil <wrmattil@...>
 

Ray Gralak wrote:
Dean,

If you will be at AIC this weekend there will be at least one Ap1200 mount
there (mine!).


Ray,

Is that going to be one of the raffle prizes ? <g>


Bill

--

William R. Mattil : http://www.celestial-images.com


Dean S
 

Hi Ray,

Sorry I will be sitting in the rain this weekend here in Ky. Wish I could be there with you guys, sounds like an good event.

I'm still listening guys..............................:)

Dean

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Gralak" <rgr@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:25 PM
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?


Dean,

If you will be at AIC this weekend there will be at least one Ap1200 mount
there (mine!). When I break it down on Sunday you are welcome to check out
how heavy the RA/Dec assembly pieces are.

So if you are there come see me at the CCDWare table.

-Ray Gralak

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
On Behalf Of Dean S
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:31 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?

I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run
the first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to
several star parties a year, is there really much of a
difference in handling the componets between these? I don't
really need the extra capacity, now at least, however the
lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for an AP
mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an
imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs.
Not really that much difference. I would have to upgrade
piers which might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount
than I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com







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





--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.10/1091 - Release Date: 10/24/2007 2:31 PM


Mal Speer <mal@...>
 

Why not get both! Seriously I had a 900 and went to the 1200. The
1200 is substantially heavier and takes up a lot more room in the
car. I only use it in the field, so whenever I observe I am lugging
it around. When setting it up I am thinking I should have stuck with
the 900. When using it I am thinking, wow this is a lot more stable
with my C-14, I am sure glad I have the 1200. Also when I first got
the 1200 I had the 8" ATS pier that I bought for the 900. I made an
adapter and used the 8" pier a few times until I got a 10" ATS pier.
The 1200 C-14 combo was not to steady on that 8" pier I wouldn't
recommend it. That is another thing the 10" ATS pier is a lot heavier
than the 8" of the same height and also takes up a lot more room. I
now use that 8" ATS pier with my AP 600 mount and my Tele Vue NP 127.
That setup is as solid as a rock.
Mal



--- In ap-gto@..., "Dean S" <dean@...> wrote:

I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the
first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to several
star parties a year, is there really much of a difference in handling
the componets between these? I don't really need the extra capacity,
now at least, however the lower PE would always be a benefit. My
main reason for an AP mount is to be able to go well past the
meridian during an imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not
really that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which
might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than
I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com





ayiomamitis
 

Dean,

I have both the Mach1GTO and 1200GTO and it is certain that I will be
looking for an additional (AP) mount over the next 12-18 months.
Having being spoiled ROTTEN by the 1200GTO, there is absolutely no way
I am going to turn my back on a second such mount when the time comes.

If at all possible, try and find someone locally who has an AP1200GTO
so that you can take a look at the masterpiece it really is. This is
not to suggest that an AP900GTO is anything less but then there is
only one "Mona Lisa". Also, remember that the price differntial is
such that it makes sense as well to pursue the 1200GTO in lieu of the
900GTO.

As for portability, it is certainly doable and especially if you are
talking for an excursion every few months for more than a day.

Seriously take a peek at a 1200GTO thanks to someone locally who has
one and I am convinced it will "Love at first sight"! :-)

Anthony.

--- In ap-gto@..., "Dean S" <dean@...> wrote:

Hi Ray,

Sorry I will be sitting in the rain this weekend here in Ky. Wish
I could
be there with you guys, sounds like an good event.

I'm still listening guys..............................:)

Dean


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ray Gralak" <rgr@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 7:25 PM
Subject: RE: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?


Dean,

If you will be at AIC this weekend there will be at least one
Ap1200 mount
there (mine!). When I break it down on Sunday you are welcome to
check out
how heavy the RA/Dec assembly pieces are.

So if you are there come see me at the CCDWare table.

-Ray Gralak

-----Original Message-----
From: ap-gto@... [mailto:ap-gto@...]
On Behalf Of Dean S
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:31 PM
To: ap-gto@...
Subject: [ap-gto] 1200GTO as a portable mount?

I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run
the first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to
several star parties a year, is there really much of a
difference in handling the componets between these? I don't
really need the extra capacity, now at least, however the
lower PE would always be a benefit. My main reason for an AP
mount is to be able to go well past the meridian during an
imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs.
Not really that much difference. I would have to upgrade
piers which might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount
than I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






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





--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.10/1091 - Release Date:
10/24/2007 2:31 PM


Wiggins, Rick
 

Hi Dean,
I have one more thing to add here. I just want to make sure you
fully understand the pros and cons so that you are happy.
Many people here have discussed how the 1200 is only 50 lbs for the
heaviest component. That is very true. The EASIEST !!! part of the
setup is carrying the mount halves over to place on the pier. The
part that gets old is packing and unpacking the mount parts in their
cases. In the case, the RA section is fairly bulky and if you put it
in a pelican case or similar, then it weighs in the 80+ lbs range.
Lugging the cased parts and the larger pier around from your garage
or storage - to the truck - to your set up site - back to the truck -
back in storage is the part that gets very tiring...remember that
you have just been out for days with nearly zero sleep! That said, I
did just that at least once every month for three years. When I got
my observatory, I placed the 1200 in there and now carry the 900
every month to shoot wide fields while the larger scope operates in
the observatory. The 900 is exceptionally easy and if you use
Roland's original shipping boxes as your case, the 900 is very light
to carry around...even in the "case".

Since you indicated that it will be mostly in the observatory, I
would probably opt for the 1200 and get a 900 to compliment it ASAP!
You can't miss with either choice. Good luck.
Rick


--- In ap-gto@..., "Dean S" <dean@...> wrote:

I am on the list for a 900GTO which should come up next run the
first of '08. But 1200's are available now I see.

I have an observatory with permanant pier, but I also go to
several star parties a year, is there really much of a difference in
handling the componets between these? I don't really need the extra
capacity, now at least, however the lower PE would always be a
benefit. My main reason for an AP mount is to be able to go well
past the meridian during an imaging session.

My current mount weighs 36 & 28 lbs, the 1200 is 50 & 31 lbs. Not
really that much difference. I would have to upgrade piers which
might add some weight too.

Hmmm, just trying to see if I can talk myself into more mount than
I really need.

Dean
www.doghouseastronomy.com





Joe Zeglinski
 

Hi Anthony,

I really don't understand the difference between the AP900 and the
AP1200 - except of course for the greater "mass and wind" load carrying
capacity of the 1200.
After all, both are identically designed, and identically manufactured using
the same machinery. They are effectively twins, with the only difference being
a 1.21 factor of scale, and thus load capacity.

But if you limit yourself to the SCT load range of the AP900, upto a 2"
SCT for example, won't they perform identically well? The choice then reaches
a breakpoint for a 14" SCT, and the decision of mount versus human load
carrying capacity does become an issue. Similarly, if you have a long and wide
refractor OTA (or a Newtonian), wind conditions will favour the AP1200 in this
shoot out, but on a relatively calm night, I suspect there will be no visible
difference.

Joe

----- Original Message -----
From: "ayiomamitis" <ayiomami@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 7:11 AM
Subject: [ap-gto] Re: 1200GTO as a portable mount?


Dean,

Snip
This is
not to suggest that an AP900GTO is anything less but then there is
only one "Mona Lisa".


Dean S
 

Hi Joe,

I am think that the large RA gear on the 1200 gives it a lower PE? But
other than that your right about it just being a larger scale.

Can one ever have too much mount? Bill had said earlier that he has balance
issue with a too small of scope. Right now I use about 30&40lbs to balance
both of my scope set ups so I shouldn't have a problem I hope.

Dean

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Zeglinski" <J.Zeglinski@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 12:45 PM
Subject: [ap-gto] Re: 1200GTO as a portable mount?


Hi Anthony,

I really don't understand the difference between the AP900 and the
AP1200 - except of course for the greater "mass and wind" load carrying
capacity of the 1200.
After all, both are identically designed, and identically manufactured
using
the same machinery. They are effectively twins, with the only difference
being
a 1.21 factor of scale, and thus load capacity.

But if you limit yourself to the SCT load range of the AP900, upto a
2"
SCT for example, won't they perform identically well? The choice then
reaches
a breakpoint for a 14" SCT, and the decision of mount versus human load
carrying capacity does become an issue. Similarly, if you have a long and
wide
refractor OTA (or a Newtonian), wind conditions will favour the AP1200 in
this
shoot out, but on a relatively calm night, I suspect there will be no
visible
difference.

Joe

----- Original Message -----
From: "ayiomamitis" <ayiomami@...>
To: <ap-gto@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 7:11 AM
Subject: [ap-gto] Re: 1200GTO as a portable mount?


Dean,

Snip
This is
not to suggest that an AP900GTO is anything less but then there is
only one "Mona Lisa".




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