Re: [Utah-astronomy] Utah-Astronomy Digest, Vol 200, Issue 9
I'll never forget my first RTMC with Brent Watson when we demonstrated Digistar back in the mid 1980's. As I recall, we got a standing ovation. Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> ________________________________ From: Utah-Astronomy <utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com> on behalf of utah-astronomy-request@mailman.xmission.com <utah-astronomy-request@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2019 8:00:04 PM To: utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Subject: Utah-Astronomy Digest, Vol 200, Issue 9 Send Utah-Astronomy mailing list submissions to utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to utah-astronomy-request@mailman.xmission.com You can reach the person managing the list at utah-astronomy-owner@mailman.xmission.com When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Utah-Astronomy digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: RTMC is no more (Brent Watson) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2019 15:36:11 +0000 (UTC) From: Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] RTMC is no more Message-ID: <496440634.10528072.1571499371701@mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I agree with Chuck.? Home built scopes truly do outperform the mass produced scopes of today.? The big apo refractors available today are a possible exception.? There is great satisfaction to be had by "rolling your own" so to speak. The mass produced scopes are usually more sophisticated with go to mounts, but I feel like many folks who have them really don't have an appreciation for visual astronomy.? That includes knowing constellations and individual stars as well as feel for where things are in the sky.? Not all, but many fit this category.? There is a great appreciation that comes with the meaning of the rising of Capella or seeing the first of the winter hexagon appear. I will continue to bring my home made scopes to star parties that I attend.? That's all I have.? I have never owned a commercial scope for more than a couple of weeks. BTW, I just finished a new telescope.? It employs a 13.1?inch f6?mirror made and signed by John Dobson at a workshop at my house almost 30 years ago, and is on a Dobson mount.? I call it John's Dobson.? Its going to Phoenix with me and I expect to engage in a bit of sidewalk astronomy with it through the winter months. On Thursday, October 17, 2019, 01:09:06 PM MDT, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote: I don't doubt what you are saying, Joan, I just don't see ATMing suffering at all today.? Dobson did breathe new life into it, but his death didn't diminish it.? Still going very strong today. On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:45 PM Joan Carman <jcarman6@q.com> wrote:
It's not that I disagree with you Chuck, it's just that we have different focuses for our interest in astronomy.? There is a vast need, particularly now, for science education in America and astronomy is the oldest science and perhaps the easiest to share with the masses.? There is a great thirst for such information even in Utah.? Dobson started the Sidewalk Astronomers and continued to do it almost to the day he died.? He very much wanted to share the night sky with everyone.? Reconnect to the universe, if you will.? How an individual explores his interest in astronomy is up to the individual.? If you want to do if for your own pleasure or the challenge of building something, you're not wrong, just different.? And different is the spice of life.? :)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Hards" <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 11:19:52 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] RTMC is no more
Joan, I was an ATM before I heard of John Dobson.? To me, what he proved is that a large alt-az mounted Newtonian could be a useful telescope. Everything else about his design was crude and minimalist.? They worked, but not optimally.? It doesn't diminish what he did, but establishing a new paradigm was his true contribution- not showing how to build a budget telescope from whatever is on-hand.? That tradition predated Dobson by decades.
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 10:17 AM Joan Carman <jcarman6@q.com> wrote:
John Dobson, RIP, made telescopes and the night sky available to everyone by creating a low cost telescope (port hole glass for mirrors). Engineers and scientists using 3D printers do not support that vision.? You're probably right in that ATM is alive and well, it's just way out there in right field and has lost touch with the common person (trying not to be gender specific :))
----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Hards" <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 1:02:04 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] RTMC is no more
When was the last time you saw *me* at a star party?? ;)
Home-made scopes are all I use when actually "observing", even though I have collected quite a few commercial scopes over the years.? They rarely see action because my home-made scopes have much better optics.
ATMing is now a bit of an industry all it's own.? Many of it's practitioners are professional engineers or scientists, and are using digital advances to aid in their work.? Technology moves on, the tools of the ATM have changed, but they are still out there in large numbers.
John Dobson wasn't really in the mainstream ATM tradition, but his ideas live-on today.? He wasn't interested in making the design better because his interest was only in seeing.? The scope was merely a means to an end, whereas most ATMs enjoy the activity of telescope design and construction as much or more than observing.
The Salt Lake club started out heavy with ATM people, I remember the 70's. Today it has become more of a social event, an excuse for people to get together.? The activity of astronomy is very much second these days. Back in the old days, we came up with events for members only, today it's largely focused on outreach.? The more technically savvy ATMer of today is typically a lone wolf, not a socializer.
Just a couple of weeks ago, I met a gentleman from Ogden who is older than I am (I'm 61) and has been interested in astronomy for decades.? He owns a very large Dob and is currently building a large Newt for his weekend get-away home in a rural area.? Yet he has never joined a club and has no interest in joining a club.? I think there are a lot more "no club" types out there than there are regular club meeting types.
It may be that the traditional astronomy club is actually the living fossil.
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:43 PM Joan Carman <jcarman6@q.com> wrote:
I'll bend to your knowledge Chuck, but I doubt John Dobson would have appreciated 3D printers :)? or when was the last time you saw a home built telescope at a star party (Watson excepted) :)
ubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options". ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.slas.us/gallery2/main.php ------------------------------ End of Utah-Astronomy Digest, Vol 200, Issue 9 **********************************************
Brent, I suspect homemade setups can’t generally match mass-production models when it comes to precision tracking and astrophotography. Computing power and programs are required, and I doubt homemade gear systems are up to the task. Further, some who enjoy astronomy tremendously are, like me, directionally dyslexic. Without a go-to I would be lost. It’s elitist to claim the person who has memorized the stars and constellations is superior to someone who can’t manage it. To each his/her own, I say. Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 20, 2019, at 7:19 AM, WAYNE A SUMNER <wasum1@msn.com> wrote:
I'll never forget my first RTMC with Brent Watson when we demonstrated Digistar back in the mid 1980's. As I recall, we got a standing ovation.
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
________________________________ From: Utah-Astronomy <utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com> on behalf of utah-astronomy-request@mailman.xmission.com <utah-astronomy-request@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2019 8:00:04 PM To: utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Subject: Utah-Astronomy Digest, Vol 200, Issue 9
Send Utah-Astronomy mailing list submissions to utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to utah-astronomy-request@mailman.xmission.com
You can reach the person managing the list at utah-astronomy-owner@mailman.xmission.com
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Utah-Astronomy digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: RTMC is no more (Brent Watson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1 Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2019 15:36:11 +0000 (UTC) From: Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] RTMC is no more Message-ID: <496440634.10528072.1571499371701@mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I agree with Chuck.? Home built scopes truly do outperform the mass produced scopes of today.? The big apo refractors available today are a possible exception.? There is great satisfaction to be had by "rolling your own" so to speak. The mass produced scopes are usually more sophisticated with go to mounts, but I feel like many folks who have them really don't have an appreciation for visual astronomy.? That includes knowing constellations and individual stars as well as feel for where things are in the sky.? Not all, but many fit this category.? There is a great appreciation that comes with the meaning of the rising of Capella or seeing the first of the winter hexagon appear. I will continue to bring my home made scopes to star parties that I attend.? That's all I have.? I have never owned a commercial scope for more than a couple of weeks. BTW, I just finished a new telescope.? It employs a 13.1?inch f6?mirror made and signed by John Dobson at a workshop at my house almost 30 years ago, and is on a Dobson mount.? I call it John's Dobson.? Its going to Phoenix with me and I expect to engage in a bit of sidewalk astronomy with it through the winter months. On Thursday, October 17, 2019, 01:09:06 PM MDT, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't doubt what you are saying, Joan, I just don't see ATMing suffering at all today.? Dobson did breathe new life into it, but his death didn't diminish it.? Still going very strong today.
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:45 PM Joan Carman <jcarman6@q.com> wrote:
It's not that I disagree with you Chuck, it's just that we have different focuses for our interest in astronomy.? There is a vast need, particularly now, for science education in America and astronomy is the oldest science and perhaps the easiest to share with the masses.? There is a great thirst for such information even in Utah.? Dobson started the Sidewalk Astronomers and continued to do it almost to the day he died.? He very much wanted to share the night sky with everyone.? Reconnect to the universe, if you will.? How an individual explores his interest in astronomy is up to the individual.? If you want to do if for your own pleasure or the challenge of building something, you're not wrong, just different.? And different is the spice of life.? :)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Hards" <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 11:19:52 AM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] RTMC is no more
Joan, I was an ATM before I heard of John Dobson.? To me, what he proved is that a large alt-az mounted Newtonian could be a useful telescope. Everything else about his design was crude and minimalist.? They worked, but not optimally.? It doesn't diminish what he did, but establishing a new paradigm was his true contribution- not showing how to build a budget telescope from whatever is on-hand.? That tradition predated Dobson by decades.
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 10:17 AM Joan Carman <jcarman6@q.com> wrote:
John Dobson, RIP, made telescopes and the night sky available to everyone by creating a low cost telescope (port hole glass for mirrors). Engineers and scientists using 3D printers do not support that vision.? You're probably right in that ATM is alive and well, it's just way out there in right field and has lost touch with the common person (trying not to be gender specific :))
----- Original Message ----- From: "Chuck Hards" <chuck.hards@gmail.com> To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2019 1:02:04 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] RTMC is no more
When was the last time you saw *me* at a star party?? ;)
Home-made scopes are all I use when actually "observing", even though I have collected quite a few commercial scopes over the years.? They rarely see action because my home-made scopes have much better optics.
ATMing is now a bit of an industry all it's own.? Many of it's practitioners are professional engineers or scientists, and are using digital advances to aid in their work.? Technology moves on, the tools of the ATM have changed, but they are still out there in large numbers.
John Dobson wasn't really in the mainstream ATM tradition, but his ideas live-on today.? He wasn't interested in making the design better because his interest was only in seeing.? The scope was merely a means to an end, whereas most ATMs enjoy the activity of telescope design and construction as much or more than observing.
The Salt Lake club started out heavy with ATM people, I remember the 70's. Today it has become more of a social event, an excuse for people to get together.? The activity of astronomy is very much second these days. Back in the old days, we came up with events for members only, today it's largely focused on outreach.? The more technically savvy ATMer of today is typically a lone wolf, not a socializer.
Just a couple of weeks ago, I met a gentleman from Ogden who is older than I am (I'm 61) and has been interested in astronomy for decades.? He owns a very large Dob and is currently building a large Newt for his weekend get-away home in a rural area.? Yet he has never joined a club and has no interest in joining a club.? I think there are a lot more "no club" types out there than there are regular club meeting types.
It may be that the traditional astronomy club is actually the living fossil.
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:43 PM Joan Carman <jcarman6@q.com> wrote:
I'll bend to your knowledge Chuck, but I doubt John Dobson would have appreciated 3D printers :)? or when was the last time you saw a home built telescope at a star party (Watson excepted) :)
ubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com https://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.slas.us/gallery2/main.php
------------------------------
End of Utah-Astronomy Digest, Vol 200, Issue 9 ********************************************** _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
Actually, that's not really true. If you are talking about someone just starting out in ATMing, they are probably going to build something simple. But there is a core of ATM's today who design and build very sophisticated systems, easily on-par with, or superior to commercial telescopes in terms of precision, tracking, etc. In fact many of the designs, circuits, etc., that are commercial products today were invented or introduced by amateurs who commercialized their design. The high-end ATM scope of today is easily superior to the mass-produced Meade, Celestron, etc., scopes that permeate the market. If you want to talk about precision instruments, don't mention Celestron and Meade. Let's talk about Astro Physics, Edward Byers and the small-volume custom houses. All started by amateur astronomers yet are today considered "aerospace grade" optics and mechanics. Your Meade Go-To may seem like NASA engineering, but it's not. I've tested innumerable commercial telescopes and found almost all of them to be lacking. I have never found a commercial SCT scope that was much better than 1/4 wave for the system. Amateurs do much better than that, on the whole. They can keep working their optics until essentially perfect, the commercial producer has to say "good enough" at some point, and it's never as good as most consumers think it is. So Joe, I respectfully disagree with you. If commercial scopes are a person's only option, that's fine, but know that unless you spend five figures, it's not going to blow the better ATM efforts out of the water. I think many people are mis-informed over the current state of ATMing simply because it's not presented in the magazines and websites like it used to be. It's not required in the hobby anymore. What is being presented is the simple stuff that anyone can build, not the ones who are making stuff that is better than the commercial run-of-the-mill. Only rarely will they publish cutting edge amateur stuff anymore, sadly. Remember who pays for the advertisements, it's the manufacturers of consumer-grade scopes. They obviously don't want the press telling people that you can build a better product, yourself. The magazines editorial content is tempered by those paying the bills- the advertizers. On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 4:50 PM Joe Bauman via Utah-Astronomy < utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> wrote:
Brent, I suspect homemade setups can’t generally match mass-production models when it comes to precision tracking and astrophotography. Computing power and programs are required, and I doubt homemade gear systems are up to the task. Further, some who enjoy astronomy tremendously are, like me, directionally dyslexic. Without a go-to I would be lost. It’s elitist to claim the person who has memorized the stars and constellations is superior to someone who can’t manage it. To each his/her own, I say.
Yes, Chuck, most folks don't have the capability to build tracking nor goto mounts. There are some who do though. My reference was to the optical performance of the scopes, as I believe your original post was also. As to direction, that is learned and after a while becomes second nature. I hope I didn't claim that it was elitist to be a person who recognizes the stars and constellations. I merely stated that something was lost in the not having the ability ability to do so. That ability can also be learned but isn't as necessary with the computerized mounts. That doesn't make you better, just able to enjoy different aspects of astronomy. On Tuesday, October 22, 2019, 07:34:09 AM MDT, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote: Actually, that's not really true. If you are talking about someone just starting out in ATMing, they are probably going to build something simple. But there is a core of ATM's today who design and build very sophisticated systems, easily on-par with, or superior to commercial telescopes in terms of precision, tracking, etc. In fact many of the designs, circuits, etc., that are commercial products today were invented or introduced by amateurs who commercialized their design. The high-end ATM scope of today is easily superior to the mass-produced Meade, Celestron, etc., scopes that permeate the market. If you want to talk about precision instruments, don't mention Celestron and Meade. Let's talk about Astro Physics, Edward Byers and the small-volume custom houses. All started by amateur astronomers yet are today considered "aerospace grade" optics and mechanics. Your Meade Go-To may seem like NASA engineering, but it's not. I've tested innumerable commercial telescopes and found almost all of them to be lacking. I have never found a commercial SCT scope that was much better than 1/4 wave for the system. Amateurs do much better than that, on the whole. They can keep working their optics until essentially perfect, the commercial producer has to say "good enough" at some point, and it's never as good as most consumers think it is. So Joe, I respectfully disagree with you. If commercial scopes are a person's only option, that's fine, but know that unless you spend five figures, it's not going to blow the better ATM efforts out of the water. I think many people are mis-informed over the current state of ATMing simply because it's not presented in the magazines and websites like it used to be. It's not required in the hobby anymore. What is being presented is the simple stuff that anyone can build, not the ones who are making stuff that is better than the commercial run-of-the-mill. Only rarely will they publish cutting edge amateur stuff anymore, sadly. Remember who pays for the advertisements, it's the manufacturers of consumer-grade scopes. They obviously don't want the press telling people that you can build a better product, yourself. The magazines editorial content is tempered by those paying the bills- the advertizers. On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 4:50 PM Joe Bauman via Utah-Astronomy < utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> wrote:
Brent, I suspect homemade setups can’t generally match mass-production models when it comes to precision tracking and astrophotography. Computing power and programs are required, and I doubt homemade gear systems are up to the task. Further, some who enjoy astronomy tremendously are, like me, directionally dyslexic. Without a go-to I would be lost. It’s elitist to claim the person who has memorized the stars and constellations is superior to someone who can’t manage it. To each his/her own, I say.
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
Brent, I think Joe's impression of ATMing dying-off is because it's not visible in the clubs these days. But he forgets about the side groups, such as your mirror-making classes, and more recently the meetings at Matt's garage on Saturday mornings. ATMing is still going on, but when a club becomes focused on outreach, to the exclusion of all else, the ATMing finds it's own sanctuaries. Even back in the old days, I would ride my bike up to John Baldwin's house and help him on his own telescope builds. I learned from a master who was also an engineer. You and Bruce also taught me a lot, as did Vaughn- and Vaughn is only a couple of years older than I. I learned the sky as a kid. I have owned a few Go-to mounts, still have one- but never use it. Takes too long to set up and finding objects is easy without it. I can beat it most of the time, lol. Glad I learned as a kid, I would hate to try and learn the sky as an adult. I can see where it would be a boon to those who can't recognize patterns, however. It has it's place. On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 8:54 AM Brent Watson via Utah-Astronomy < utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> wrote:
Yes, Chuck, most folks don't have the capability to build tracking nor goto mounts. There are some who do though. My reference was to the optical performance of the scopes, as I believe your original post was also. As to direction, that is learned and after a while becomes second nature. I hope I didn't claim that it was elitist to be a person who recognizes the stars and constellations. I merely stated that something was lost in the not having the ability ability to do so. That ability can also be learned but isn't as necessary with the computerized mounts. That doesn't make you better, just able to enjoy different aspects of astronomy. On Tuesday, October 22, 2019, 07:34:09 AM MDT, Chuck Hards < chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote:
participants (4)
-
Brent Watson -
Chuck Hards -
Joe Bauman -
WAYNE A SUMNER