The Ranger and the Pronto Are No More

You wrote:

I've learned that it hurts to call your baby ugly, right? I didn't know the
guy, he was proud of his high priced purchase. I let him stay that way.


I have found this to be very good advice.

By the way, you can tout OA's all you like, as far as I am concerned, on
any thread you want. I think there is information transmitted when a
design or make of telescope consistently elicits great enthusiasm from
the users. I look for feeling tone when I reviews. Ar article by Carl
Zambuto on Astromart, on selecting a mirror, comes to a similar conclusion.

Bill Meyers

"Bill Meyers" wrote in message

I think there is information transmitted when a
design or make of telescope consistently elicits great enthusiasm from
the users. I look for feeling tone when I reviews. Ar article by Carl
Zambuto on Astromart, on selecting a mirror, comes to a similar
conclusion.

Problem is there are zealots for every scope design, and they are all
equally annoying.

Regards,
Ed

Make that "when I read reviews." (Of course I look for substance and
expertise as well.)
Bill Meyers

Bill Meyers wrote:



You wrote:


I've learned that it hurts to call your baby ugly, right? I didn't
know the
guy, he was proud of his high priced purchase. I let him stay that way.



I have found this to be very good advice.

By the way, you can tout OA's all you like, as far as I am concerned, on
any thread you want. I think there is information transmitted when a
design or make of telescope consistently elicits great enthusiasm from
the users. I look for feeling tone when I reviews. Ar article by Carl
Zambuto on Astromart, on selecting a mirror, comes to a similar
conclusion.

Bill Meyers

"Jan Owen" wrote in message news:AORSc.70741$sh.17814@fed1read06...

I'm a little worried about all this agreement here on SAA,

I agree!

Well, someone had to say it. ;-)


- Robert Cook

"Edward" wrote in message thlink.net...
"Stephen Paul" wrote in message

The way I see it, the TV102 surviving all the years of OA availibility is
sort of a mystery, considering the comparative performance, and radical
price difference. But, people swear by their apos, even though a much
larger
reflector can be had for far less money, and even though the vast majority
of them are fully aware that the larger reflector outperforms their apo on
just about everything.

I think the preference for apos is an aesthetic isssue. Even though I
collect less "data" through my refractor than I do through my larger newt, I
am charmed by the beauty of the subject matter and thats a great thing after
a hard day's work. I don't mean to imply that the views through the newt
are ugly, far from it. Maybe its that I have no illusions of contributing
to "science" and I spend time under the night sky in part to restore myself.
A 3-4" apo can do that for me. The natural views and the intuitive motion
(alt/az) tend to make the scope disappear as I am carried away by the
awesome context we live in.

Ed,

Yep, I agree. That's how I "see" it anyway!

Clyde

Maybe its that I have no illusions of contributing to "science" and I spend
time under the night sky in part to restore
myself.
A 3-4" apo can do that for me. The natural views and the intuitive motion
(alt/az) tend to make the scope
disappear as I am carried away by the
awesome context we live in.

Sounds to me like me on a good night viewing with one of my pet DOBs.

I especially like the part about "having no illusions of contributing to
science.." Thats my daytime gig that helps pay for the scope.

jon

"Stephen Paul" wrote in message ...
"Mike Fitterman" wrote in message
news:y11Sc.3858$BS3.5@trndny04...

but not from TEC

Not without a 100% guarantee against any defective components affecting its
performance. That 140 we looked through was a dog, but the benefit of the
doubt would dictate that it was collimation error; diagonal or otherwise.
Clearly others find the TEC140 to be a superb scope so that sample is
probably far from typical.

Too bad we didn't get enough time to work with it unfettered by the owner.
Being someone else's scope with whom we are not regularly associated, it's
kind of tough to tell them that there's something wrong with it. You'd
figure someone plunking down that kind of cash wouldn't have to be told.

Stephen

The sample was typical, Stephen. Otherwise owner would contact us,..
here what is written in the end of manuals for that particular scope
model:
"If you find any problems, or have any comments - please call us for
assistance. Telescope Engineering Company is serving customers after
sale for unlimited time.
Yuri Petrunin, TEC President. "
So I am behind the product that we are making.
Are you Mike Fitterman, and you Stephen Paul behind your words or
whatever stuff came from you mouths?
What makes your judgment: "That 140 we looked through was a dog" after
short look through it?
You wrote "Too bad we didn't get enough time to work with it
unfettered by the owner. Being someone else's scope with whom we are
not regularly associated, it's kind of tough to tell them that there's
something wrong with it."
- Sounds like you do not remember neither the name, or scope's serial
number (could be not easy to see in the darkness), are you sure that
it was not the other brand that you are ass-ociating more frequently
or the scope was not long enough? BTW, who was the third person, are
his initials DMS? I do not know if you both + one are aware, but the
"dog vision" is common among idiots and usually caused not by
telescope, but your faces reflections (dog-like) from one of the
eyepiece curved surface?

I know that you Mike Fitterman can not afford high-tech scope, but if
you have $30-$40 - buy the Suiter's book and read it, here is a bit
info in case if you can not afford it too:
Page 273 of the Suiter's book , chapter: Testing other telescopes
"... Keep the test results to yourself, though. Considerations of
courtesy aside such opinions could be wrong. You generally know
nothing of the history of the instrument. You do not know if it is
cool or warm. You have not had a chance to align it first, so you need
to mentally subtract a significant alignment error from the pattern.
Furthermore, one-shot tests are anecdotic and do not allow for
follow-up testing..."

I would just add that APO140 has no any collimating screws, and being
so it has no ability to be miscollimate... you have to brake it to
make it miscolimated.

Back to Mike F...man, you wrote:
"You guys get so touchy up here it's amazing. But hey, you don't want
a great scope at a decent price that's not my problem. You can afford
an 8" refractor, I cannot. Would I own an 8" refractor if I could?
Definitely, but not from TEC though ;-) "
What I am reading between lines is, you love the brand(!), but your
love is hidden being not affordable and as we all know hidden love may
cause opposite feelings - hate.
Same with you Stephen Paul, you have joined the Tec-scope group about
an year ago, was this right after short introduction with APO140? It
is also a bit strange, but you did registration under two names, one,
if I am not mistaken was "conushead14" or similar. So, question to
you: being disappointed with view through the scope, what made you to
join and be on the group? Sorry to say, both of your names were banned
from the group yesterday, but you still can enjoy reading posts since
we are an open group.

For Bill:
Not as a rule, but counting the nature of the human, you should
remember, that not all people will share with you your excitement of
the scope that you have not received yet, there will be enough
F...man, Coneheads or others around that will have opposite reaction
for understandable reasons. Ignoring this may cause nervous strain and
long threads here on saa.

Best regards to all of you.
Yuri

Yuri wrote:
"Stephen Paul" wrote in message ...

"Mike Fitterman" wrote in message
news:y11Sc.3858$BS3.5@trndny04...


but not from TEC

Not without a 100% guarantee against any defective components affecting its
performance. That 140 we looked through was a dog, but the benefit of the
doubt would dictate that it was collimation error; diagonal or otherwise.
Clearly others find the TEC140 to be a superb scope so that sample is
probably far from typical.

Too bad we didn't get enough time to work with it unfettered by the owner.
Being someone else's scope with whom we are not regularly associated, it's
kind of tough to tell them that there's something wrong with it. You'd
figure someone plunking down that kind of cash wouldn't have to be told.

Stephen


The sample was typical, Stephen. Otherwise owner would contact us,..
here what is written in the end of manuals for that particular scope
model:
"If you find any problems, or have any comments - please call us for
assistance. Telescope Engineering Company is serving customers after
sale for unlimited time.
Yuri Petrunin, TEC President. "
So I am behind the product that we are making.
Are you Mike Fitterman, and you Stephen Paul behind your words or
whatever stuff came from you mouths?
What makes your judgment: "That 140 we looked through was a dog" after
short look through it?
You wrote "Too bad we didn't get enough time to work with it
unfettered by the owner. Being someone else's scope with whom we are
not regularly associated, it's kind of tough to tell them that there's
something wrong with it."
- Sounds like you do not remember neither the name, or scope's serial
number (could be not easy to see in the darkness), are you sure that
it was not the other brand that you are ass-ociating more frequently
or the scope was not long enough? BTW, who was the third person, are
his initials DMS? I do not know if you both + one are aware, but the
"dog vision" is common among idiots and usually caused not by
telescope, but your faces reflections (dog-like) from one of the
eyepiece curved surface?

I know that you Mike Fitterman can not afford high-tech scope, but if
you have $30-$40 - buy the Suiter's book and read it, here is a bit
info in case if you can not afford it too:
Page 273 of the Suiter's book , chapter: Testing other telescopes
"... Keep the test results to yourself, though. Considerations of
courtesy aside such opinions could be wrong. You generally know
nothing of the history of the instrument. You do not know if it is
cool or warm. You have not had a chance to align it first, so you need
to mentally subtract a significant alignment error from the pattern.
Furthermore, one-shot tests are anecdotic and do not allow for
follow-up testing..."

I would just add that APO140 has no any collimating screws, and being
so it has no ability to be miscollimate... you have to brake it to
make it miscolimated.

Back to Mike F...man, you wrote:
"You guys get so touchy up here it's amazing. But hey, you don't want
a great scope at a decent price that's not my problem. You can afford
an 8" refractor, I cannot. Would I own an 8" refractor if I could?
Definitely, but not from TEC though ;-) "
What I am reading between lines is, you love the brand(!), but your
love is hidden being not affordable and as we all know hidden love may
cause opposite feelings - hate.
Same with you Stephen Paul, you have joined the Tec-scope group about
an year ago, was this right after short introduction with APO140? It
is also a bit strange, but you did registration under two names, one,
if I am not mistaken was "conushead14" or similar. So, question to
you: being disappointed with view through the scope, what made you to
join and be on the group? Sorry to say, both of your names were banned
from the group yesterday, but you still can enjoy reading posts since
we are an open group.

For Bill:
Not as a rule, but counting the nature of the human, you should
remember, that not all people will share with you your excitement of
the scope that you have not received yet, there will be enough
F...man, Coneheads or others around that will have opposite reaction
for understandable reasons. Ignoring this may cause nervous strain and
long threads here on saa.

Best regards to all of you.
Yuri
Hello, Yuri,
I feel your pain. There is no doubt that new and original designs can
pose a threat to TEC refractors.
For examples, there are telescopes I have designed. My Vortexscope with
its 36 inch cooling fan (which cools the heck out of the 4 inch
mirror), will blow away a TEC scope.
My Nascarscope, I store in my garage, and wheel it out on a cart for
use. I have motorized the cart, and this scope will certainly run rings
around a TEC.
I am also working on a radical new design, the Dynamite, which will
leave competing scopes in the dust.
Borg scopes are also a competitive threat. Borg refractors are
exceptionally light weight, and their new Zeppelin model, is actually
lighter than air. It is expected to rise to heights that TEC can only
dream of.
clear skies to you,
Bill Meyers

"Yuri" wrote in message
m...

several paragraphs of "you're a dog faced baboon" invectives *snipped*

Not as a rule, but counting the nature of the human, you should
remember, that not all people will share with you your excitement of
the scope that you have not received yet, there will be enough
F...man, Coneheads or others around that will have opposite reaction
for understandable reasons. Ignoring this may cause nervous strain and
long threads here on saa.

Best regards to all of you.
Yuri

Wow... if these are your "best" regards, I'd hate to have your worst
ones. g

For Bill:
Not as a rule, but counting the nature of the human, you should
remember, that not all people will share with you your excitement of
the scope that you have not received yet, there will be enough
F...man, Coneheads or others around that will have opposite reaction
for understandable reasons. Ignoring this may cause nervous strain and
long threads here on saa.

Best regards to all of you.
Yuri

Yes Yuri, you are right, it is certainly a good deal my fault that it went as
far as it did, I will not allow this to happen (with myself involved) again.

Looking forward to the big scope,
rat
~( );

email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address