Mach 2 First Impressions (Quick Post)


Bill Long
 

The guided performance was great for long extended periods. Seeing last night was maybe 2/5. Not all that great. I did some wide field m106 without the guider running and the frames were excellent. In my experience with a model and encoders the broadband data is usually gravy.

My jokes about the 1100 should be called out again. It works perfectly, and the Mach 2 is it's excellent little brother!


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Cheng-Yang Tan via groups.io <cytan299@...>
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 6:35 AM
To: AP-GTO Groups. io <ap-gto@groups.io>; main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 First Impressions (Quick Post)
 
Hi Bill,
   You said you were joking about the AP1100, I certainly hope so :)

   It's really good to get total rms error below 0.3". But from my experience, I can get this type of error both with my Mach1 and AP1100AE, but that's only for short periods for my Bortle 6-7 site, like for about 15 min. 

  Do you consistently get < 0.3" at your site?

  And I did swap my AP130GT focuser with a NiteCrawle for zero backlash auto-focusing. I also need the camera to match images from the same object taken on different nights (which can be 1 year apart :) ). I need to do this because I set up every night and the image frames can be 5 deg rotated w.r.t. images from the first night.

cytan

On Thursday, March 11, 2021, 12:47:51 AM CST, Bill Long <bill@...> wrote:


Bill Long has shared a OneDrive file with you. To view it, click the link below.
I have more work to do, but here is a PHD2 graph in its entirety from the Mach 2, 5 min Lum sub. No model, just PHD2 calibration. 

Sub here:


Note that there is a little tilt in this, not much, but was part of the test. I was testing whether or not the AP130GTX focuser was causing any sag in the train with the following gear:

FLI PL16803
FLI CFW5-7
7 x Chroma LRGB + SHO 3nm
Optec Sagitta OAG
Astro-Physics 133FF for GTX

My findings here show that the NiteCrawler focuser shows the exact same tilt pattern that the AP 130 GTX focuser shows. In both cases it is extremely minor and most imagers would not even know it was there.

That is an incredibly heavy imaging system and the GTX focuser was all the part that the NiteCrawler was. So, if you have a GTX, dont bother replacing your focuser. 🙂 

More data to come, as I have a model going, but so far I am impressed. My 1100 with encoders does not perform as well as this Mach 2. Maybe I should send it in? 😳 

-Bill



Cheng-Yang Tan
 

Hi Bill,
   You said you were joking about the AP1100, I certainly hope so :)

   It's really good to get total rms error below 0.3". But from my experience, I can get this type of error both with my Mach1 and AP1100AE, but that's only for short periods for my Bortle 6-7 site, like for about 15 min. 

  Do you consistently get < 0.3" at your site?

  And I did swap my AP130GT focuser with a NiteCrawle for zero backlash auto-focusing. I also need the camera to match images from the same object taken on different nights (which can be 1 year apart :) ). I need to do this because I set up every night and the image frames can be 5 deg rotated w.r.t. images from the first night.

cytan

On Thursday, March 11, 2021, 12:47:51 AM CST, Bill Long <bill@...> wrote:


Bill Long has shared a OneDrive file with you. To view it, click the link below.
I have more work to do, but here is a PHD2 graph in its entirety from the Mach 2, 5 min Lum sub. No model, just PHD2 calibration. 

Sub here:


Note that there is a little tilt in this, not much, but was part of the test. I was testing whether or not the AP130GTX focuser was causing any sag in the train with the following gear:

FLI PL16803
FLI CFW5-7
7 x Chroma LRGB + SHO 3nm
Optec Sagitta OAG
Astro-Physics 133FF for GTX

My findings here show that the NiteCrawler focuser shows the exact same tilt pattern that the AP 130 GTX focuser shows. In both cases it is extremely minor and most imagers would not even know it was there.

That is an incredibly heavy imaging system and the GTX focuser was all the part that the NiteCrawler was. So, if you have a GTX, dont bother replacing your focuser. 🙂 

More data to come, as I have a model going, but so far I am impressed. My 1100 with encoders does not perform as well as this Mach 2. Maybe I should send it in? 😳 

-Bill



Bill Long
 

Sorry I was just being funny with that comment.


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Edward Beshore via groups.io <ebeshore@...>
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 5:34 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 First Impressions (Quick Post)
 
Hi Bill - Impressive stats on Mach 2. You are concerned about your 1100, what is its performance like with a similar setup?

Ed


Edward Beshore
 

Hi Bill - Impressive stats on Mach 2. You are concerned about your 1100, what is its performance like with a similar setup?

Ed


Bill Long
 

When the quality of your focus frames (admittedly on a very large 16803 chip) are the exact same, at 5 mins as they are at 5 seconds.... you know you have something great on your hands.

My 1100 cannot do this. Why that is, I am now perplexed. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 12:09 AM
To: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [ap-gto] Mach 2 First Impressions (Quick Post)
 
I clearly need to send my 1100 in for repair or something. This Mach 2 is killing it. Keep in mind, my 1100 has AE as well, and the Mach 2 is shredding it like lettuce. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 10:47 PM
To: AP-GTO Groups.io <ap-gto@groups.io>
Subject: [ap-gto] Mach 2 First Impressions (Quick Post)
 
I have more work to do, but here is a PHD2 graph in its entirety from the Mach 2, 5 min Lum sub. No model, just PHD2 calibration. 

Sub here:


Note that there is a little tilt in this, not much, but was part of the test. I was testing whether or not the AP130GTX focuser was causing any sag in the train with the following gear:

FLI PL16803
FLI CFW5-7
7 x Chroma LRGB + SHO 3nm
Optec Sagitta OAG
Astro-Physics 133FF for GTX

My findings here show that the NiteCrawler focuser shows the exact same tilt pattern that the AP 130 GTX focuser shows. In both cases it is extremely minor and most imagers would not even know it was there.

That is an incredibly heavy imaging system and the GTX focuser was all the part that the NiteCrawler was. So, if you have a GTX, dont bother replacing your focuser. 🙂 

More data to come, as I have a model going, but so far I am impressed. My 1100 with encoders does not perform as well as this Mach 2. Maybe I should send it in? 😳 

-Bill



Bill Long
 

I clearly need to send my 1100 in for repair or something. This Mach 2 is killing it. Keep in mind, my 1100 has AE as well, and the Mach 2 is shredding it like lettuce. 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 10:47 PM
To: AP-GTO Groups.io <ap-gto@groups.io>
Subject: [ap-gto] Mach 2 First Impressions (Quick Post)
 
I have more work to do, but here is a PHD2 graph in its entirety from the Mach 2, 5 min Lum sub. No model, just PHD2 calibration. 

Sub here:


Note that there is a little tilt in this, not much, but was part of the test. I was testing whether or not the AP130GTX focuser was causing any sag in the train with the following gear:

FLI PL16803
FLI CFW5-7
7 x Chroma LRGB + SHO 3nm
Optec Sagitta OAG
Astro-Physics 133FF for GTX

My findings here show that the NiteCrawler focuser shows the exact same tilt pattern that the AP 130 GTX focuser shows. In both cases it is extremely minor and most imagers would not even know it was there.

That is an incredibly heavy imaging system and the GTX focuser was all the part that the NiteCrawler was. So, if you have a GTX, dont bother replacing your focuser. 🙂 

More data to come, as I have a model going, but so far I am impressed. My 1100 with encoders does not perform as well as this Mach 2. Maybe I should send it in? 😳 

-Bill



Bill Long
 

Model running now and imaging unguided and frames are just as good as the guided ones. No change, because there really isnt anything to correct reactively. The 16803 chip is at home on this GTX with the field flattener! 


From: main@ap-gto.groups.io <main@ap-gto.groups.io> on behalf of Bill Long <bill@...>
Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2021 10:47 PM
To: AP-GTO Groups.io <ap-gto@groups.io>
Subject: [ap-gto] Mach 2 First Impressions (Quick Post)
 
I have more work to do, but here is a PHD2 graph in its entirety from the Mach 2, 5 min Lum sub. No model, just PHD2 calibration. 

Sub here:


Note that there is a little tilt in this, not much, but was part of the test. I was testing whether or not the AP130GTX focuser was causing any sag in the train with the following gear:

FLI PL16803
FLI CFW5-7
7 x Chroma LRGB + SHO 3nm
Optec Sagitta OAG
Astro-Physics 133FF for GTX

My findings here show that the NiteCrawler focuser shows the exact same tilt pattern that the AP 130 GTX focuser shows. In both cases it is extremely minor and most imagers would not even know it was there.

That is an incredibly heavy imaging system and the GTX focuser was all the part that the NiteCrawler was. So, if you have a GTX, dont bother replacing your focuser. 🙂 

More data to come, as I have a model going, but so far I am impressed. My 1100 with encoders does not perform as well as this Mach 2. Maybe I should send it in? 😳 

-Bill



Bill Long
 

Bill Long has shared a OneDrive file with you. To view it, click the link below.
I have more work to do, but here is a PHD2 graph in its entirety from the Mach 2, 5 min Lum sub. No model, just PHD2 calibration. 

Sub here:


Note that there is a little tilt in this, not much, but was part of the test. I was testing whether or not the AP130GTX focuser was causing any sag in the train with the following gear:

FLI PL16803
FLI CFW5-7
7 x Chroma LRGB + SHO 3nm
Optec Sagitta OAG
Astro-Physics 133FF for GTX

My findings here show that the NiteCrawler focuser shows the exact same tilt pattern that the AP 130 GTX focuser shows. In both cases it is extremely minor and most imagers would not even know it was there.

That is an incredibly heavy imaging system and the GTX focuser was all the part that the NiteCrawler was. So, if you have a GTX, dont bother replacing your focuser. 🙂 

More data to come, as I have a model going, but so far I am impressed. My 1100 with encoders does not perform as well as this Mach 2. Maybe I should send it in? 😳 

-Bill