Starliner Telescopes

On Wednesday, January 17, 2001 at 11:07:50 AM UTC-5, wrote:
StarLiner 'scopes had the best reputation in the late '70's. I wanted
one back then, but I didn't have the scratch. I got a Cave 8"
f/5.6 instead - also a fine telescope that I still use today. Actually,
the best telescope for a person depends upon what they are going to do
with it.

Long f/ratios (f/10 and greater) are great for planetary viewing, but
lousy for wide-field work or photography. Shmidt-Cass systems (like
Celestron) suffer from field curvature, but they are very portable.
Newtonians can be made faster (smaller f/ratio) but suffer from comatic
aberration & collimation errors. Refractors are expensive and suffer
from chromatic aberration, but an antique 6" f/15 W. D. Mogey refractor
at Penn State U. in the early '70's gave the best planetary views I've
ever seen.

In article ,
(Fr Chas) wrote:
I sold it back in 1977 via Brad Meyers in Seattle and purchased a new
Celestron
14 from him. I regret selling the Starliner in that it was
observatory
quality, rock steady, and worm error was extremely small. And I sold
it for
approx. $2,000. However, it was not portable. I have some pictures
to
remember it by.

I purchased a Mathis 12" drive base for the Celestron and am happy
with that.
But it does not have slewing capabilities or any of the new fancy
electronic
stuff. But, contrary to what I see on this site, that C-14 has
excellent
optics and has given me the best visual views of the planets I have
seen. And
I have had it set up alongside 18" reflectors @ f/5 and several 4" to
6" f/15
achromatic refractors and one 24" f/3.8 reflector. (Sorry for this
long thread
and I know folks can argue the advantages and disadvantages of short
versus
long focal lengths, types and general purposes of specific optics, and
so
forth.)



Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
I can only say my experiences with star-liner were negative from the start. When I finally received my 10" scope in the summer of 1970 the cradle was broken. Brisley promised me a new cradle shipped out by express the next week. It never came! I had to wait four-and-half months to use my telescope. I also wanted an F7..he sent me an badly defective F5 with the worst optics I've ever seen. Because I was so dissatisfied he took the 10" back and for a few more dollars more shipped me a 12&1/2 inch which had the second worst mirror I've ever seen. This guy Brisley told me "turned edges" were normal....Huh?! I knew an amateur in my area who made great mirrors..he refigured it and English & Watson who coated the mirror said it was one of the best they'd tested...Finally! I gave up on star-liner and made the best of what I had until I could unload it after modifying the clock drive. The Star-Liner 12 1/2 mount was a piece of junk. I had two of their turned-edged mirrors and after talking to amateurs in California they said Brisley, all of his religious crap, and crummy telescopes were notorious in that era from the late 60s until they went out of business in 1981.

On Thursday, February 4, 2016 at 5:50:57 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 17, 2001 at 11:07:50 AM UTC-5, wrote:
StarLiner 'scopes had the best reputation in the late '70's. I wanted
one back then, but I didn't have the scratch. I got a Cave 8"
f/5.6 instead - also a fine telescope that I still use today. Actually,
the best telescope for a person depends upon what they are going to do
with it.

Long f/ratios (f/10 and greater) are great for planetary viewing, but
lousy for wide-field work or photography. Shmidt-Cass systems (like
Celestron) suffer from field curvature, but they are very portable.
Newtonians can be made faster (smaller f/ratio) but suffer from comatic
aberration & collimation errors. Refractors are expensive and suffer
from chromatic aberration, but an antique 6" f/15 W. D. Mogey refractor
at Penn State U. in the early '70's gave the best planetary views I've
ever seen.

In article ,
(Fr Chas) wrote:
I sold it back in 1977 via Brad Meyers in Seattle and purchased a new
Celestron
14 from him. I regret selling the Starliner in that it was
observatory
quality, rock steady, and worm error was extremely small. And I sold
it for
approx. $2,000. However, it was not portable. I have some pictures
to
remember it by.

I purchased a Mathis 12" drive base for the Celestron and am happy
with that.
But it does not have slewing capabilities or any of the new fancy
electronic
stuff. But, contrary to what I see on this site, that C-14 has
excellent
optics and has given me the best visual views of the planets I have
seen. And
I have had it set up alongside 18" reflectors @ f/5 and several 4" to
6" f/15
achromatic refractors and one 24" f/3.8 reflector. (Sorry for this
long thread
and I know folks can argue the advantages and disadvantages of short
versus
long focal lengths, types and general purposes of specific optics, and
so
forth.)



Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
I can only say my experiences with star-liner were negative from the start. When I finally received my 10" scope in the summer of 1970 the cradle was broken. Brisley promised me a new cradle shipped out by express the next week. It never came! I had to wait four-and-half months to use my telescope. I also wanted an F7..he sent me an badly defective F5 with the worst optics I've ever seen. Because I was so dissatisfied he took the 10" back and for a few more dollars more shipped me a 12&1/2 inch which had the second worst mirror I've ever seen. This guy Brisley told me "turned edges" were normal....Huh?! I knew an amateur in my area who made great mirrors..he refigured it and English & Watson who coated the mirror said it was one of the best they'd tested...Finally! I gave up on star-liner and made the best of what I had until I could unload it after modifying the clock drive. The Star-Liner 12 1/2 mount was a piece of junk. I had two of their turned-edged mirrors and after talking to amateurs in California they said Brisley, all of his religious crap, and crummy telescopes were notorious in that era from the late 60s until they went out of business in 1981. Jim Lawrence