1. Topics
  2. FrankenScope Stage I Step 3

FrankenScope Stage I Step 3

Howard Ritter
 

I love it when a plan comes together!

I wanted to see how a completed FrankenScope would look, so here’s a version with body parts from 3 different lines from 2 different mfrs. that were never meant to go together: Meade tripod, Astro-Physics 155 EDF, and between them a highly under-utilized A-P 1600GTO mount that’s way above the pay grade of the OTA (and mine, for that matter). Inspection is being carried out by the First Deputy to the Plant Manager, who’s out shopping today.

Stage I Step 4 will be the Meade 16” OTA instead of the refractor. I paused the project here primarily for the purpose of becoming familiar with the mount in the comfort of my living room, since the 16” OTA is waaaay too heavy to be swapping it on & off the mount. It’ll go on once Mr Muscles has helped me get the mount & tripod relocated to the patio.

Stage II would be the fully realized FrankenScope, a PW 17 replacing the Meade 16 – highly notional at this point! 

—howard
ap@CaptivePhotons.com
 

The main problem I see is that the sled dog you have ready to tow the mount into position may be a little outsized by the load.  :) 

Incidentally, and a bit more seriously, why extend the legs when you get out in the field, isn't lower more stable, less wind, easier to lift stuff up to it, etc.?  I keep my planet all the way down (with an 1100) and proportionally it looks about the same height, maybe a bit taller.

But that is one beefy tripod, that's for sure. 

Linwood
Howard Ritter
 

I’ve been thinking about the height because I’d like to, as you suggest, preserve the stability of the tripod and have a lower lift to deal with when assembling and disassembling. Though I plan to do this cycle only twice a year, once here and once in FL, it might be that I’d want to put this 155 back on from time to time for imaging purposes, and I’m sure both my back and my son would appreciate the lower height when we’re wrangling the Meade 16” OTA, which is the whole purpose of this project. 

The more I think about it, especially with the 16” in place, I think this height should be workable. It might require using a chair for observing objects high in the sky, but for imaging it’s irrelevant.

Speaking of the 155, if inflation ever deflates and the stock market zooms up again (!), I’d like to put it on an 1100. It now sits on its original 600E mount on a (replacement) Planet, and I was wondering whether that tripod would handle the mount. I guess you’ve answered my question. What do you have on your 1100/Planet?

—howard

On Jun 7, 2022, at 3:31 PM, ap@... <ap@...> wrote:

The main problem I see is that the sled dog you have ready to tow the mount into position may be a little outsized by the load.  :) 

Incidentally, and a bit more seriously, why extend the legs when you get out in the field, isn't lower more stable, less wind, easier to lift stuff up to it, etc.?  I keep my planet all the way down (with an 1100) and proportionally it looks about the same height, maybe a bit taller.

But that is one beefy tripod, that's for sure. 

Linwood

ap@CaptivePhotons.com
 

On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 06:11 PM, Howard Ritter wrote:
What do you have on your 1100/Planet?
The biggest at present is an AP1100 with a C11.  With it sitting flat it is very stable, the actual worst part is when it is empty, just the mount, as the mount's weight is a bit off center, so if I am loading the tripod + mount onto a handtruck (which I do every morning) I need to make sure I do not tip it too far when raising the light leg.  Or more precisely, I try to always have the mount's heavy side highest, so I lift it first, and lower it last. 

But imaging it's great, fairly low (the top of the C11's dew shield is probably still almost 6.5 to 7' up so hardly low). I wouldn't like to use an eyepiece with with the ota aimed high, but the camera doesn't mind being near the ground.  

I'm a big fan of that planet, very light and portable but still dead to vibrations and strong. 

Linwood
Harley Davidson
 

That's a beast of a setup Howard.

tony

On 6/7/2022 3:27 PM, Howard Ritter via groups.io wrote:

I love it when a plan comes together!

I wanted to see how a completed FrankenScope would look, so here’s a version with body parts from 3 different lines from 2 different mfrs. that were never meant to go together: Meade tripod, Astro-Physics 155 EDF, and between them a highly under-utilized A-P 1600GTO mount that’s way above the pay grade of the OTA (and mine, for that matter). Inspection is being carried out by the First Deputy to the Plant Manager, who’s out shopping today.

Stage I Step 4 will be the Meade 16” OTA instead of the refractor. I paused the project here primarily for the purpose of becoming familiar with the mount in the comfort of my living room, since the 16” OTA is waaaay too heavy to be swapping it on & off the mount. It’ll go on once Mr Muscles has helped me get the mount & tripod relocated to the patio.

Stage II would be the fully realized FrankenScope, a PW 17 replacing the Meade 16 – highly notional at this point! 

—howard
Benoit Schillings
 

the dog name is mr muscles ?

- -benoit

On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 4:04 PM Harley Davidson <astrocnc@...> wrote:
That's a beast of a setup Howard.

tony

On 6/7/2022 3:27 PM, Howard Ritter via groups.io wrote:
I love it when a plan comes together!

I wanted to see how a completed FrankenScope would look, so here’s a version with body parts from 3 different lines from 2 different mfrs. that were never meant to go together: Meade tripod, Astro-Physics 155 EDF, and between them a highly under-utilized A-P 1600GTO mount that’s way above the pay grade of the OTA (and mine, for that matter). Inspection is being carried out by the First Deputy to the Plant Manager, who’s out shopping today.

Stage I Step 4 will be the Meade 16” OTA instead of the refractor. I paused the project here primarily for the purpose of becoming familiar with the mount in the comfort of my living room, since the 16” OTA is waaaay too heavy to be swapping it on & off the mount. It’ll go on once Mr Muscles has helped me get the mount & tripod relocated to the patio.

Stage II would be the fully realized FrankenScope, a PW 17 replacing the Meade 16 – highly notional at this point! 

—howard
Howard Ritter
 

Ha, no, although I do sometimes call her “Little Miss Muscles“, because as a French bulldog, she really is a little bundle of muscles in her legs. The “Mr. Muscles“ I was talking about is my burly son, whom I can always count on when my no longer youthful strength won’t get the job done.

— howard 

On Jun 7, 2022, at 21:25, Benoit Schillings <benoit.schillings@...> wrote:


the dog name is mr muscles ?

- -benoit

On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 4:04 PM Harley Davidson <astrocnc@...> wrote:
That's a beast of a setup Howard.

tony

On 6/7/2022 3:27 PM, Howard Ritter via groups.io wrote:
I love it when a plan comes together!

I wanted to see how a completed FrankenScope would look, so here’s a version with body parts from 3 different lines from 2 different mfrs. that were never meant to go together: Meade tripod, Astro-Physics 155 EDF, and between them a highly under-utilized A-P 1600GTO mount that’s way above the pay grade of the OTA (and mine, for that matter). Inspection is being carried out by the First Deputy to the Plant Manager, who’s out shopping today.

Stage I Step 4 will be the Meade 16” OTA instead of the refractor. I paused the project here primarily for the purpose of becoming familiar with the mount in the comfort of my living room, since the 16” OTA is waaaay too heavy to be swapping it on & off the mount. It’ll go on once Mr Muscles has helped me get the mount & tripod relocated to the patio.

Stage II would be the fully realized FrankenScope, a PW 17 replacing the Meade 16 – highly notional at this point! 

—howard
1 - 7 of 7