I'm nearly finished with an RFT refractor built around a (as sold and stated in their literature) Jaegers 110mm f/4.5 doublet. Using an original Jaegers lens cell, the clear aperture turns out to be nearly 107mm and the actual focal ratio is closer to f/4.4. It uses an Antares (same as GSO) single-speed 2" Crayford-style focuser. Aluminum tube and dewcap, Orion tube rings. All that remains to be done is to paint the tube exterior and line the inside with flocked paper. I may add a glare stop if needed, but based on my experience with flocking, it won't be. It should be completely finished in the next week or so. I'm using automotive paint (catalyzed) for all exterior finishes. Stainless-steel allen-head cap screw hardware & washers. I turned the focuser/tube adapter on my mini-lathe. The scope will be used in either alt-az mode on my "Weightless" mount, or on my CGEM on a short Losmandy-style dovetail plate. I'm adding an upper bridge plate of 1/4" thick aluminum on top of the rings for both traditional finderscope and a red-dot sight. It sports one of my molded-fiberglass dust covers. The dew cap is flocked and felt-lined and slips on and off. A Baader solar filter is also in the works, as is a foam-lined wooden case if I can't find an inexpensive military surplus case on-line. Daytime optical tests have been encouraging. Spurious color is surprisingly slight for such a fast cemented doublet, about the same as a well-made large binocular objective. It won't be noticeable at all on deep-sky objects. Jaegers certainly made some great achromats in their heyday. This scope is the "proof of concept" for my 5" f/5 and 6" f/5 Jaegers objectives, which I hope to build scopes around later this year. The 6" is air-spaced. Pictures: http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor001_zpsb... http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor002_zps4... http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor003_zpse... You can actually just click on the first one and then scroll through the album, the second and third links are the next two album photos. Note the little 50mm f/20 refractor in the foreground of the first shot. This is the one I plan to re-observe the Messier catalog with this year. It is actually a 49.5mm clear aperture, f/20.5 achromatic doublet. I'll be using it on a small GEM with electric RA drive and manual DEC, from the back yard as well as dark sites. The "50mm Project" is a personal challenge project, to test my observing skills under compromised skies and with minimal aperture. I've observed the moon, Jupiter, and a few bright double stars with that little objective before with great results. The DS challenge will be interesting.
Whoops, looks like I didn't enable the album link. Just click on them individually. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote:
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor001_zpsb...
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor002_zps4...
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor003_zpse...
You can actually just click on the first one and then scroll through the album, the second and third links are the next two album photos.
Chunk that looks like lots of fun. You do beautiful work. Sent from my iPhone On Feb 12, 2013, at 12:54 PM, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote:
Whoops, looks like I didn't enable the album link. Just click on them individually.
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote:
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor001_zpsb...
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor002_zps4...
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor003_zpse...
You can actually just click on the first one and then scroll through the album, the second and third links are the next two album photos.
_______________________________________________ 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".
Chuck, That 106mm f/4.4 scope looks like sooooooooooo much fun. Beautiful! Tyler -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+tyler=allred-astro.com@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+tyler=allred-astro.com@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hards Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 12:54 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project Whoops, looks like I didn't enable the album link. Just click on them individually. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Chuck Hards <chuck.hards@gmail.com> wrote:
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor00 1_zpsb0267471.jpg
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor00 2_zps458599f6.jpg
http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor00 3_zpse52d03fa.jpg
You can actually just click on the first one and then scroll through the album, the second and third links are the next two album photos.
_______________________________________________ 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".
One year at Riverside I met a person with bino's made with 2 jeagers 6" f5, as I recall he asked the supplier to make sure the eyepieces they sold him matched in focal length.
Thanks Tyler!
I just posted the same photos over on CN, with a short write-up.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Tyler Allred <tyler@allred-astro.com>wrote:
Chuck, That 106mm f/4.4 scope looks like sooooooooooo much fun. Beautiful! Tyler
_______________________________________________ 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".
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
One year at Riverside I met a person with bino's made with 2 jeagers 6" f5, as I recall he asked the supplier to make sure the eyepieces they sold him matched in focal length.
Eyepiece focal lengths are typically close enough if done in the same production batch. Small lenses are typically ground and polished in groups on a common mandrel. Lenses have spherical surfaces so figuring is not usually necessary (there are exceptions, such as certain camera lenses). Remember the 2% Mil spec for final magnification. You know, if you had slightly mis-matched eyepieces, you could arrange them so as to compensate for a slight mis-match between objectives. It could actually work to your advantage.
of course the question is how accurately you make your tube assemblies and how good your eye is at determining magnification differences. He also had 4 star diagonals that could also be a source of error. It took a long time to set them up for observing.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
One year at Riverside I met a person with bino's made with 2 jeagers 6" f5, as I recall he asked the supplier to make sure the eyepieces they sold him matched in focal length.
Eyepiece focal lengths are typically close enough if done in the same production batch. Small lenses are typically ground and polished in groups on a common mandrel. Lenses have spherical surfaces so figuring is not usually necessary (there are exceptions, such as certain camera lenses). Remember the 2% Mil spec for final magnification.
You know, if you had slightly mis-matched eyepieces, you could arrange them so as to compensate for a slight mis-match between objectives. It could actually work to your advantage. _______________________________________________ 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".
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:58 AM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
of course the question is how accurately you make your tube assemblies and how good your eye is at determining magnification differences. He also had 4 star diagonals that could also be a source of error. It took a long time to set them up for observing.
A four-star-diagonal system is a kluge and I'm ROFLMAO on that one. Let's assume I build a tight, well-made prism chain with no inherent slop. I'm duplicating a regular binocular arrangement, only using much larger prisms (I already have them). So I'm taking the craftsmanship and design question off the table. We're assuming the Mil spec of 2% maximum magnification difference is good enough since that's what the commercial makers go by. All we are really now talking about is how to make two objectives with focal lengths that are different enough to result in a 2% or greater difference in magnification (the industrial standard). By employing mismatched eyepieces or Barlows, I think we can easily accomplish it. And it just might turn out that my objectives have focal lengths close enough to each other that it's simply not an issue. We'll know more after the focal lengths get measured precisely on Saturday.
The 4 diagonals made for easy adjustment of inter pupillary distance. The scope worked very well and was very popular during the night.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:58 AM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
of course the question is how accurately you make your tube assemblies and how good your eye is at determining magnification differences. He also had 4 star diagonals that could also be a source of error. It took a long time to set them up for observing.
A four-star-diagonal system is a kluge and I'm ROFLMAO on that one. Let's assume I build a tight, well-made prism chain with no inherent slop. I'm duplicating a regular binocular arrangement, only using much larger prisms (I already have them). So I'm taking the craftsmanship and design question off the table.
We're assuming the Mil spec of 2% maximum magnification difference is good enough since that's what the commercial makers go by.
All we are really now talking about is how to make two objectives with focal lengths that are different enough to result in a 2% or greater difference in magnification (the industrial standard). By employing mismatched eyepieces or Barlows, I think we can easily accomplish it.
And it just might turn out that my objectives have focal lengths close enough to each other that it's simply not an issue.
We'll know more after the focal lengths get measured precisely on Saturday. _______________________________________________ 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".
Oh I'm sure. But it was a work-around using off-the-shelf, commercial parts. And as you said, it took a while for the owner to set it up. My goal is an integrated, well-engineered binocular that you don't have to fiddle with excessively. It probably won't even look like what you are envisioning. Erik, you've seen my work. It won't be plywood and hardware from Sutherlands. On Feb 19, 2013 1:42 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
The 4 diagonals made for easy adjustment of inter pupillary distance. The scope worked very well and was very popular during the night.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:58 AM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
of course the question is how accurately you make your tube assemblies and how good your eye is at determining magnification differences. He also had 4 star diagonals that could also be a source of error. It took a long time to set them up for observing.
A four-star-diagonal system is a kluge and I'm ROFLMAO on that one.
Let's
assume I build a tight, well-made prism chain with no inherent slop. I'm duplicating a regular binocular arrangement, only using much larger prisms (I already have them). So I'm taking the craftsmanship and design question off the table.
We're assuming the Mil spec of 2% maximum magnification difference is good enough since that's what the commercial makers go by.
All we are really now talking about is how to make two objectives with focal lengths that are different enough to result in a 2% or greater difference in magnification (the industrial standard). By employing mismatched eyepieces or Barlows, I think we can easily accomplish it.
And it just might turn out that my objectives have focal lengths close enough to each other that it's simply not an issue.
We'll know more after the focal lengths get measured precisely on Saturday. _______________________________________________ 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".
I'm sure your version will be exceptional. The main reason he took so long to set up is because it was on a goto equatorial mount with a fully machined double cradle. I am envisioning little other than 2 refractors side by side. I'm sure the mount will be the biggest problem.
Oh I'm sure. But it was a work-around using off-the-shelf, commercial
parts. And as you said, it took a while for the owner to set it up.
My goal is an integrated, well-engineered binocular that you don't have to fiddle with excessively. It probably won't even look like what you are envisioning.
Erik, you've seen my work. It won't be plywood and hardware from Sutherlands. On Feb 19, 2013 1:42 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
The 4 diagonals made for easy adjustment of inter pupillary distance. The scope worked very well and was very popular during the night.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 10:58 AM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
of course the question is how accurately you make your tube
assemblies
and how good your eye is at determining magnification differences. He also had 4 star diagonals that could also be a source of error. It took a long time to set them up for observing.
A four-star-diagonal system is a kluge and I'm ROFLMAO on that one. Let's assume I build a tight, well-made prism chain with no inherent slop. I'm duplicating a regular binocular arrangement, only using much larger prisms (I already have them). So I'm taking the craftsmanship and design question off the table.
We're assuming the Mil spec of 2% maximum magnification difference is good enough since that's what the commercial makers go by.
All we are really now talking about is how to make two objectives with focal lengths that are different enough to result in a 2% or greater difference in magnification (the industrial standard). By employing mismatched eyepieces or Barlows, I think we can easily accomplish it.
And it just might turn out that my objectives have focal lengths close enough to each other that it's simply not an issue.
We'll know more after the focal lengths get measured precisely on Saturday. _______________________________________________ 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".
Naw, the mount is just work, like everything else, not a problem. I'm thinking of just making a larger version of my "Weightless" mount. Dobsonian technology. No need for a GoTo with just a 5" binocular. The other way to go is a motorized observing chair. But it wouldn't be GoTo, maybe simple joystick control with full recline capability. First things first. Get the binocular designed and built, then design a practical mount around the optics. I may mold a single-piece housing for the optics from fiberglass. I think I remember the twin 6" bino you are referring to, wasn't there a picture in S&T? I recall a photo of two refractors side-by-side in a rotating ring assembly, a long time ago. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
I'm sure your version will be exceptional. The main reason he took so long to set up is because it was on a goto equatorial mount with a fully machined double cradle. I am envisioning little other than 2 refractors side by side. I'm sure the mount will be the biggest problem.
Yes, it was a rotating ring assembly, quite ingenious actually. It may have been in Sky&Tel , I think it was also in a RTMC publication. Seems like a lot of weight for a "weightless" mount. my current problem is blurred vision is one eye, no binocs for me, I would like to thank the person who damaged SLAS's H-alpha.
Naw, the mount is just work, like everything else, not a problem. I'm
thinking of just making a larger version of my "Weightless" mount. Dobsonian technology. No need for a GoTo with just a 5" binocular.
The other way to go is a motorized observing chair. But it wouldn't be GoTo, maybe simple joystick control with full recline capability.
First things first. Get the binocular designed and built, then design a practical mount around the optics. I may mold a single-piece housing for the optics from fiberglass.
I think I remember the twin 6" bino you are referring to, wasn't there a picture in S&T? I recall a photo of two refractors side-by-side in a rotating ring assembly, a long time ago.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
I'm sure your version will be exceptional. The main reason he took so long to set up is because it was on a goto equatorial mount with a fully machined double cradle. I am envisioning little other than 2 refractors side by side. I'm sure the mount will be the biggest problem.
_______________________________________________ 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".
Ouch! I hope the blurred vision is only temporary, Erik- you have vision among the best of the observers I've met. Was it the Daystar, or the PST that was damaged? Seems like the club needs to have returned loaners audited, to avoid situations like this. The neat thing about the Weightless mount is that the front bearing can be a wheel instead of a pad- and that wheel can easily be driven by a motor. In fact all three bearings can be wheels. Ball-bearing wheels. Scaling it up for a larger payload won't be a problem. I'll elevate the arms and bring them closer to the azimuth pivot if needed. This probably won't be my next project. I'm just going to measure the objective focal lengths at the ATM session on Saturday. Knowing those will help direct other project details. BTW, I bounced my twin zoom eyepiece idea, as well as the weak Barlows for equalizing objectives of different focal lengths, off of Dave Trott in Denver. He said that he actually came to the same conclusion when researching and building his own large binocular a while ago. He went on to say that the objectives need not even be close in focal length, as long as you compensate with the eyepieces. Final magnification equalization is all that counts. On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:02 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
Yes, it was a rotating ring assembly, quite ingenious actually. It may have been in Sky&Tel , I think it was also in a RTMC publication. Seems like a lot of weight for a "weightless" mount. my current problem is blurred vision is one eye, no binocs for me, I would like to thank the person who damaged SLAS's H-alpha.
It was the Daystar. We sent it in for routine service when they discovered the damage. They said it was typical damage they see when used on a C-8 or similar unfiltered. They said it could occur very quickly if the rejection filter was not present. Doubt it is temporary, left eye vision still sharp. Probably a case of should have not been used on scopes not designed for it.
SLAS should audit all telescopes used for our solar parties. Ouch! I hope the blurred vision is only temporary, Erik- you have vision
among the best of the observers I've met. Was it the Daystar, or the PST that was damaged? Seems like the club needs to have returned loaners audited, to avoid situations like this.
The neat thing about the Weightless mount is that the front bearing can be a wheel instead of a pad- and that wheel can easily be driven by a motor. In fact all three bearings can be wheels. Ball-bearing wheels. Scaling it up for a larger payload won't be a problem. I'll elevate the arms and bring them closer to the azimuth pivot if needed.
This probably won't be my next project. I'm just going to measure the objective focal lengths at the ATM session on Saturday. Knowing those will help direct other project details.
BTW, I bounced my twin zoom eyepiece idea, as well as the weak Barlows for equalizing objectives of different focal lengths, off of Dave Trott in Denver. He said that he actually came to the same conclusion when researching and building his own large binocular a while ago. He went on to say that the objectives need not even be close in focal length, as long as you compensate with the eyepieces. Final magnification equalization is all that counts.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:02 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
Yes, it was a rotating ring assembly, quite ingenious actually. It may have been in Sky&Tel , I think it was also in a RTMC publication. Seems like a lot of weight for a "weightless" mount. my current problem is blurred vision is one eye, no binocs for me, I would like to thank the person who damaged SLAS's H-alpha.
_______________________________________________ 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".
This is awful! When did it happen? ________________________________ From: "erikhansen@thebluezone.net" <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 5:52 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project
It was the Daystar. We sent it in for routine service when they discovered the damage. They said it was typical damage they see when used on a C-8 or similar unfiltered. They said it could occur very quickly if the rejection filter was not present. Doubt it is temporary, left eye vision still sharp. Probably a case of should have not been used on scopes not designed for it.
SLAS should audit all telescopes used for our solar parties. Ouch! I hope the blurred vision is only temporary, Erik- you have vision
among the best of the observers I've met. Was it the Daystar, or the PST that was damaged? Seems like the club needs to have returned loaners audited, to avoid situations like this.
The neat thing about the Weightless mount is that the front bearing can be a wheel instead of a pad- and that wheel can easily be driven by a motor. In fact all three bearings can be wheels. Ball-bearing wheels. Scaling it up for a larger payload won't be a problem. I'll elevate the arms and bring them closer to the azimuth pivot if needed.
This probably won't be my next project. I'm just going to measure the objective focal lengths at the ATM session on Saturday. Knowing those will help direct other project details.
BTW, I bounced my twin zoom eyepiece idea, as well as the weak Barlows for equalizing objectives of different focal lengths, off of Dave Trott in Denver. He said that he actually came to the same conclusion when researching and building his own large binocular a while ago. He went on to say that the objectives need not even be close in focal length, as long as you compensate with the eyepieces. Final magnification equalization is all that counts.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:02 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
Yes, it was a rotating ring assembly, quite ingenious actually. It may have been in Sky&Tel , I think it was also in a RTMC publication. Seems like a lot of weight for a "weightless" mount. my current problem is blurred vision is one eye, no binocs for me, I would like to thank the person who damaged SLAS's H-alpha.
_______________________________________________ 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".
Joe, The exposure would have been 5 years ago, if that is the cause I probably won't be the only one. It is likely the filter was used damaged for many years. Rodger Butz probably had similar exposure. I will update after I visit with the Doctor.
This is awful! When did it happen?
________________________________ From: "erikhansen@thebluezone.net" <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2013 5:52 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project
It was the Daystar. We sent it in for routine service when they discovered the damage. They said it was typical damage they see when used on a C-8 or similar unfiltered. They said it could occur very quickly if the rejection filter was not present. Doubt it is temporary, left eye vision still sharp. Probably a case of should have not been used on scopes not designed for it.
SLAS should audit all telescopes used for our solar parties.
Ouch! I hope the blurred vision is only temporary, Erik- you have vision
among the best of the observers I've met. Was it the Daystar, or the PST that was damaged? Seems like the club needs to have returned loaners audited, to avoid situations like this.
The neat thing about the Weightless mount is that the front bearing can be a wheel instead of a pad- and that wheel can easily be driven by a motor. In fact all three bearings can be wheels. Ball-bearing wheels. Scaling it up for a larger payload won't be a problem. I'll elevate the arms and bring them closer to the azimuth pivot if needed.
This probably won't be my next project. I'm just going to measure the objective focal lengths at the ATM session on Saturday. Knowing those will help direct other project details.
BTW, I bounced my twin zoom eyepiece idea, as well as the weak Barlows for equalizing objectives of different focal lengths, off of Dave Trott in Denver. He said that he actually came to the same conclusion when researching and building his own large binocular a while ago. He went on to say that the objectives need not even be close in focal length, as long as you compensate with the eyepieces. Final magnification equalization is all that counts.
On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 4:02 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
Yes, it was a rotating ring assembly, quite ingenious actually. It may have been in Sky&Tel , I think it was also in a RTMC publication. Seems like a lot of weight for a "weightless" mount. my current problem is blurred vision is one eye, no binocs for me, I would like to thank the person who damaged SLAS's H-alpha.
_______________________________________________ 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".
"One call, that's all." On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 5:52 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
Doubt it is temporary, left eye vision still sharp. Probably a case of should have not been used on scopes not designed for it.
SLAS should audit all telescopes used for our solar parties.
That looks awesome Chuck! Tyler -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hards Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 12:52 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project I'm nearly finished with an RFT refractor built around a (as sold and stated in their literature) Jaegers 110mm f/4.5 doublet. Using an original Jaegers lens cell, the clear aperture turns out to be nearly 107mm and the actual focal ratio is closer to f/4.4. It uses an Antares (same as GSO) single-speed 2" Crayford-style focuser. Aluminum tube and dewcap, Orion tube rings. All that remains to be done is to paint the tube exterior and line the inside with flocked paper. I may add a glare stop if needed, but based on my experience with flocking, it won't be. It should be completely finished in the next week or so. I'm using automotive paint (catalyzed) for all exterior finishes. Stainless-steel allen-head cap screw hardware & washers. I turned the focuser/tube adapter on my mini-lathe. The scope will be used in either alt-az mode on my "Weightless" mount, or on my CGEM on a short Losmandy-style dovetail plate. I'm adding an upper bridge plate of 1/4" thick aluminum on top of the rings for both traditional finderscope and a red-dot sight. It sports one of my molded-fiberglass dust covers. The dew cap is flocked and felt-lined and slips on and off. A Baader solar filter is also in the works, as is a foam-lined wooden case if I can't find an inexpensive military surplus case on-line. Daytime optical tests have been encouraging. Spurious color is surprisingly slight for such a fast cemented doublet, about the same as a well-made large binocular objective. It won't be noticeable at all on deep-sky objects. Jaegers certainly made some great achromats in their heyday. This scope is the "proof of concept" for my 5" f/5 and 6" f/5 Jaegers objectives, which I hope to build scopes around later this year. The 6" is air-spaced. Pictures: http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor001_zpsb 0267471.jpg http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor002_zps4 58599f6.jpg http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii24/JethroTull1958/ATM/refractor003_zpse 52d03fa.jpg You can actually just click on the first one and then scroll through the album, the second and third links are the next two album photos. Note the little 50mm f/20 refractor in the foreground of the first shot. This is the one I plan to re-observe the Messier catalog with this year. It is actually a 49.5mm clear aperture, f/20.5 achromatic doublet. I'll be using it on a small GEM with electric RA drive and manual DEC, from the back yard as well as dark sites. The "50mm Project" is a personal challenge project, to test my observing skills under compromised skies and with minimal aperture. I've observed the moon, Jupiter, and a few bright double stars with that little objective before with great results. The DS challenge will be interesting. _______________________________________________ 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".
Thanks Tyler! What do you think about using the RFT for imaging? I'm pretty sure I'll need to use my coma corrector, but I'm not sure about the uncorrected color of an achromat on a CMOS or CCD chip. It won't be an issue with narrowband imaging of course, but what about with a color camera? Would a V-block filter do any good? It would probably only be a problem with objects emitting a broad spectrum such as galaxies and star clusters. Emission nebulae won't pose any difficulties. I've used short-focus doublet refractors for astrophotography in the past, but that was emulsion photography, not digital imaging. That wide field is just begging me to try it. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Tyler Allred <tyler@allred-astro.com>wrote:
That looks awesome Chuck! Tyler
Sounds like a great project, Chuck. I wish I could take a look at the images you linked to, but the filter at my work e-mail flags it as porn and will not open the images. Must be quite the telescope! Mat -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hards Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 5:21 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project Thanks Tyler! What do you think about using the RFT for imaging? I'm pretty sure I'll need to use my coma corrector, but I'm not sure about the uncorrected color of an achromat on a CMOS or CCD chip. It won't be an issue with narrowband imaging of course, but what about with a color camera? Would a V-block filter do any good? It would probably only be a problem with objects emitting a broad spectrum such as galaxies and star clusters. Emission nebulae won't pose any difficulties. I've used short-focus doublet refractors for astrophotography in the past, but that was emulsion photography, not digital imaging. That wide field is just begging me to try it. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Tyler Allred <tyler@allred-astro.com>wrote:
That looks awesome Chuck! Tyler
_______________________________________________ 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". This message and any attachments are solely for the use of intended recipients. The information contained herein may include trade secrets, protected health or personal information, privileged or otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you received this email in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this email and any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your system. Thank you for your cooperation
LOL, to guys like you and I, Mat, pictures of telescopes just might fall into the porn category. I'll send them to you directly as attachments. C. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Hutchings, Mat <mat.hutchings@siemens.com>wrote:
Sounds like a great project, Chuck. I wish I could take a look at the images you linked to, but the filter at my work e-mail flags it as porn and will not open the images. Must be quite the telescope!
Mat
That's great. And just so you know, my wife is up for cooking L&O for the next ATM session, so make it to the session on 2/23, and you'll be happy! Mat -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hards Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 6:14 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project BTW, I plan on bringing this scope to the next L&O and ATM sessions. _______________________________________________ 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". This message and any attachments are solely for the use of intended recipients. The information contained herein may include trade secrets, protected health or personal information, privileged or otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you received this email in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this email and any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your system. Thank you for your cooperation
I am sooo there. Thanks to you and your wife! Though the L&O might scare off some of your regulars... I'll bring the Weightless mount too, so we can look at the sun with it (if I get a filter made by then) or at least the mountains, if the weather cooperates. The RFT just BARELY fits this mount. Oh, a thought- maybe my glass C-5 filter will fit it...I'll look into that. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Hutchings, Mat <mat.hutchings@siemens.com>wrote:
That's great. And just so you know, my wife is up for cooking L&O for the next ATM session, so make it to the session on 2/23, and you'll be happy!
We'll have pizza too for those who don't dare eat the L&O (I may be in that category). Mat -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hards Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 6:33 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project I am sooo there. Thanks to you and your wife! Though the L&O might scare off some of your regulars... I'll bring the Weightless mount too, so we can look at the sun with it (if I get a filter made by then) or at least the mountains, if the weather cooperates. The RFT just BARELY fits this mount. Oh, a thought- maybe my glass C-5 filter will fit it...I'll look into that. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Hutchings, Mat <mat.hutchings@siemens.com>wrote:
That's great. And just so you know, my wife is up for cooking L&O for the next ATM session, so make it to the session on 2/23, and you'll be happy!
_______________________________________________ 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". This message and any attachments are solely for the use of intended recipients. The information contained herein may include trade secrets, protected health or personal information, privileged or otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you received this email in error, and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this email and any attachment is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete the message and any attachment from your system. Thank you for your cooperation
Chuck, I would guess that you could do some nice imaging with that scope. I really enjoyed my Takahashi Sky 90 (F/5.6), which was a fast doublet, but not quite as fast as yours. I used it for some really nice images. The Tak had a little bit of blue halo on the bright stuff, but overall it was a very good performer for most objects. The coma corrector will almost certainly be needed with such a fast achromat, but that may depend on the size of your camera chip. I am guessing that the color correction may not be too big of an issue. You could always go with a monochrome camera and filters, which would also help a bit over a one-shot color chip. I am still struggling to get my new astrograph up and running perfectly. I have produced a few decent images, but I am having flexure issues and can only get 1 minute exposures right now. I disassembled the entire unit today, trying to troubleshoot. I may be coming to the next ATM session for a little guidance and advice, along with some liver and onions. :) Some of my favorite images are the wide field stuff. That scope could be a lot of fun. Cheers, Tyler -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hards Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 3:21 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project Thanks Tyler! What do you think about using the RFT for imaging? I'm pretty sure I'll need to use my coma corrector, but I'm not sure about the uncorrected color of an achromat on a CMOS or CCD chip. It won't be an issue with narrowband imaging of course, but what about with a color camera? Would a V-block filter do any good? It would probably only be a problem with objects emitting a broad spectrum such as galaxies and star clusters. Emission nebulae won't pose any difficulties. I've used short-focus doublet refractors for astrophotography in the past, but that was emulsion photography, not digital imaging. That wide field is just begging me to try it. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Tyler Allred <tyler@allred-astro.com>wrote:
That looks awesome Chuck! Tyler
_______________________________________________ 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".
Tyler wrote: "I am still struggling to get my new astrograph up and running perfectly. I have produced a few decent images, but I am having flexure issues and can only get 1 minute exposures right now. I disassembled the entire unit today, trying to troubleshoot. I may be coming to the next ATM session for a little guidance and advice, along with some liver and onions." I had the same problem at longer focal lengths 2,300 mm using a guide scope with my Mewlon. However with the new SBIG STT camera with built in off axis guider on the filter wheel in front of the filters all of the guiding problems disappeared. Using an off axis guider of some sort might be easier than fixing flexure issues. Clear Skies, Don -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Tyler Allred Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 5:31 PM To: 'Utah Astronomy' Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project Chuck, I would guess that you could do some nice imaging with that scope. I really enjoyed my Takahashi Sky 90 (F/5.6), which was a fast doublet, but not quite as fast as yours. I used it for some really nice images. The Tak had a little bit of blue halo on the bright stuff, but overall it was a very good performer for most objects. The coma corrector will almost certainly be needed with such a fast achromat, but that may depend on the size of your camera chip. I am guessing that the color correction may not be too big of an issue. You could always go with a monochrome camera and filters, which would also help a bit over a one-shot color chip. I am still struggling to get my new astrograph up and running perfectly. I have produced a few decent images, but I am having flexure issues and can only get 1 minute exposures right now. I disassembled the entire unit today, trying to troubleshoot. I may be coming to the next ATM session for a little guidance and advice, along with some liver and onions. :) Some of my favorite images are the wide field stuff. That scope could be a lot of fun. Cheers, Tyler -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hards Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 3:21 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Current ATM Project Thanks Tyler! What do you think about using the RFT for imaging? I'm pretty sure I'll need to use my coma corrector, but I'm not sure about the uncorrected color of an achromat on a CMOS or CCD chip. It won't be an issue with narrowband imaging of course, but what about with a color camera? Would a V-block filter do any good? It would probably only be a problem with objects emitting a broad spectrum such as galaxies and star clusters. Emission nebulae won't pose any difficulties. I've used short-focus doublet refractors for astrophotography in the past, but that was emulsion photography, not digital imaging. That wide field is just begging me to try it. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Tyler Allred <tyler@allred-astro.com>wrote:
That looks awesome Chuck! Tyler
_______________________________________________ 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".
What can I say Chuck? I stand in awe (but not for long, as I often need to sit)... 73 On 2/12/2013 12:51 PM, Chuck Hards wrote:
I'm nearly finished with an RFT refractor built around a (as sold and stated in their literature) Jaegers 110mm f/4.5 doublet. Using an original Jaegers lens cell, the clear aperture turns out to be nearly 107mm and the actual focal ratio is closer to f/4.4. It uses an Antares (same as GSO) single-speed 2" Crayford-style focuser. Aluminum tube and dewcap, Orion tube rings.
Thanks for all the kind words, guys. The last few years of my old marraige really put a damper on my ATM activities, but it's renewed and stronger than ever in my new life with Kelly. She really supports the hobby and is even somewhat interested in science (she's an RN). The SunSpotter project kind of kicked-off everything last year. And I'm finally in a position at work where I can actually get some more frequent time-off, and attend SLAS meetings on a regular basis. Mark, your comment means a lot to me especially because you are a master craftsman yourself. Larry, you may sit in awe, I fully understand. ;-) Tyler, I most certainly will be coming to you for imaging advice when the time comes, thanks again for the insights! I've got several projects lined-up for this year, and not all are refractors. I am trying to get the 17.5" Newtonian to see first light this year (I've had the optics and most parts since 1986) along with some mid-size Newts and the solar prominence spectroscope. But next will probably be retrofitting my 6" f/8 "Woodshop" Dob with a 2" Wyoroc focuser. Stay tuned.
I got the RFT main tube primed (etching primer for aluminum) & painted and am proceeding with final assembly. I installed the flocked tube liner last night. Man, it sure looks nice! The focuser went on perfectly centered, at least as close as I could tell using extension tubes and a laser collimator. Careful tube-end-squaring during fabrication pays off. One change I'm making, and it's a minor one but important. I had intended to use a short, 7" dovetail plate, but realized that with short tubes such as this, there isn't much room for balancing by sliding the tube in the tube clamp rings. Having a long dovetail plate allows you to balance the scope on the mount longitudinally using it, instead of the tube rings. I'm going with a 12" plate instead of the shorty. I have a couple of new spares on-hand so won't have to wait for one in the mail. Pictures to follow in the next few days. I'm working this weekend, so ATM time will be spotty. Paying the price for taking six days off, grumble...
participants (8)
-
Chuck Hards -
Don J. Colton -
erikhansen＠thebluezone.net -
Hutchings, Mat -
Joe Bauman -
Larry Holmes -
Mark Shelton -
Tyler Allred