On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:53:25 +0000, Guy Macon wrote:



I am considering purchasing a 16" Meade LightBridge in a
few months after they work out any bugs in the new model.
See http://www.meade.com/lightbridge/index.html

What's the general consensus on this model?

In general terms, meade is a marketing company that outsources their
newtonians. Of concern to the end user is what the advertising doesn't
tell you. (and in some cases with meade, what the advertising DOES tell
you--i.e.: Ritchey-Cretien? LOL). There are, as I am sure you are aware,
struggles between the bean-counters and the engineers in any company. I
don't think meade is any different in this respect. The bean-counters set
the limits.

You get what you pay for, more or less, in optics. A really good 16"
mirror will cost about 2900.00 US. It will come with interferometer data
and strehl ratio .94-.96, rms error of .034 or so.

So if that's the case for good mirrors, what kind of telescope do you
think you'll get for $2000 in that same aperture? Don't expect to be
perfectly happy with the LightBridge.

I am primarily a dob guy, myself. I'm an engineer, too. I ended up buying
a used 18" dob with an incredible mirror and a horrible structure for
$3000. It was old and beat up, but the glass doesn't wear out. A new
structure, resembling an Obsession telescope cost me 600.00 US and about
40 hrs work. Four years later, I'm still ecstatic about this scope. I
practically get wood every time I see the Veil Nebula in OIII and Hbeta.
Spiral structure in M51 and others. I keep looking for the *shadow* of the
Apollo landers, when lighting is favorable. Of course, I will never see
the shadow, but it's fun looking for it.

Tell me if I'm wrong: Engineers are technically discriminating people.
We're practically techno-snobs. The lightbridge scopes are not for
techo-snobs, but they will delight the hell out of the average user.
And the bean counters know that.

Clear Skies,
Uncle Bob
Fairfax, CA