Question about alignment & pointing north, level

"Rick Wagoner" wrote in message
...
Mike: Sounds like you were an early adopter! I was too. Now the darn
thing
knows where it is
without me telling it. If it could level itself my setup time would be cut
in
half !!


Hi Rick,

Do you have a classic LX200 or the LX200GPS? Your comment about the
telescope knowing "where it is without me telling it" implies to me that you
have the LX200GPS...or are you saying that you've already added GPS to a
classic LX200?

I agree about the leveling being the most time consuming part...especially
when the tripod is mounted on top of "wheely bars".

So far, yours is the only response I've received. I'm really curious as to
how the LX200GPS software compensates for the lack of levelness...understand
that I'm a complete novice with this hobby, so I really don't have a clue.
My main hobby (and occupation, for that matter) is computers, and so I've
just got this tinkering curiosity of finding out how the LX200GPS works, and
if its possible to retrofit the classic LX200 with the same functionality.
(The position and time with GPS is the easy part, its the levelness that I
don't understand.)

Regards,

Mike


I'll be interested in any data you get on this.

Cheers!


Rick

Mike wrote:

Hello,

I was reading about the LX200GPS on Meade's web site, and from what I
understand, you do not need to level the scope or make sure it is
pointing
north. The built-in GPS gets the latitude/longitude + current time, and
I
believe an electronic compass gets the direction the scope is pointing.
Presumably another device (magnetometer?) gets the orientation, i.e.
"levelness" of the scope.

My question is this - can any of the various telescope control programs
(The
Sky, etc.) allow for a user-entered direction and orientation
(levelness)?
My interest is in the possibility of retrofitting a "classic" LX200 with
GPS, electronic compass, and magnetometer to provide the same
functionality
as an LX200GPS. Nothing serious, just sort of a tinkering curiosity.
Anyway, I figured that the software on the LX200GPS must "know" how to
handle arbitrary orientations, whereas the classic LX200 requires a
well-known orientation (level and pointing north.) So, can third-party
applications (like The Sky) handle a scope that is oriented arbitrarily?

I may not even be asking the right question. Maybe orientation is only
important in helping to find the alignment stars? In which case,
orientation doesn't matter after alignment?

One other question, can any third-party application _completely_ replace
the
hand controller, including initial alignment, etc.? Any application
that
has built-in GPS support?

Sorry if these are stupid or trivial questions!

Thanks,

Mike

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:40:18 -0400, "Mike" wrote:

So far, yours is the only response I've received. I'm really curious as to
how the LX200GPS software compensates for the lack of levelness...

The LX200 (Classic or GPS) does not care at all about being level- it has no
influence on either pointing or tracking accuracy. The only reason to level the
scope is so that it can get closer to the two alignment stars on its own. Once
the two-star alignment is done, though, it doesn't matter.

AFAIK the GPS uses an electronic tiltmeter to measure its deviation from level,
and uses that to compensate for the position of the initial reference stars.
Also, it has an internal electronic compass, since it can't get its azimuthal
orientation from the GPS.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:40:18 -0400, "Mike" wrote:

So far, yours is the only response I've received. I'm really curious as to
how the LX200GPS software compensates for the lack of levelness...

The LX200 (Classic or GPS) does not care at all about being level- it has no
influence on either pointing or tracking accuracy. The only reason to level the
scope is so that it can get closer to the two alignment stars on its own. Once
the two-star alignment is done, though, it doesn't matter.

AFAIK the GPS uses an electronic tiltmeter to measure its deviation from level,
and uses that to compensate for the position of the initial reference stars.
Also, it has an internal electronic compass, since it can't get its azimuthal
orientation from the GPS.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Hi Chris, thanks for the reply. Just a couple of follow-up questions,
though:

"Chris L Peterson" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:40:18 -0400, "Mike" wrote:

So far, yours is the only response I've received. I'm really curious as
to
how the LX200GPS software compensates for the lack of levelness...

The LX200 (Classic or GPS) does not care at all about being level- it has
no
influence on either pointing or tracking accuracy. The only reason to
level the
scope is so that it can get closer to the two alignment stars on its own.
Once
the two-star alignment is done, though, it doesn't matter.

I was kind of thinking that it might not matter after two-star alignment.
But then:

1. Why is there a separate polar alignment vs. alt-az aligment? If you put
the scope on an equatorial mount, could you do a 2-star alignment in alt-az
mode, and would it still point and track correctly? From what you're
saying, I gather that this would work, and that having the two alignment
modes is just a convenience to make it easier to find the alignment stars.

2. Levelness would still be important if you just do a one-star alignment,
right?

3. Every time I 'sync' the telescope to an object in the eypiece, does that
add to the accuracy of the alignment? I.e., if I do an initial one-star
alignment, then view a few objects, making manual corrections, then sync on
something later - will my pointing and tracking accuracy now be equivalent
to a two-star alignment? (By the way, I plan to use The Sky pocket pc
edition...it has a 'sync' button...I'm trying to figure out if this is just
a one-time correction, or if it will improve pointing and tracking from
there on?)

Sorry for these newbie-type questions. My main thrust here is that, last
time I tried to take the scope out with my 5 year old son, it was kind of a
disaster...he got bored with it before I could get everything set up. With
Mars so close, I'd like to attempt another outing...and this time be better
prepared. I figured the The Sky pocket edition will help me plan my viewing
and find interesting objects, and I wanted to make sure I get the scope
aligned quickly. And, if I can figure out how to hook a few gadgets up to
the scope (GPS, electronic compass, etc.) then that would just be an
interesting side-project to toy around with.

Thanks for your help,

Mike


Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Hi Chris, thanks for the reply. Just a couple of follow-up questions,
though:

"Chris L Peterson" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 11:40:18 -0400, "Mike" wrote:

So far, yours is the only response I've received. I'm really curious as
to
how the LX200GPS software compensates for the lack of levelness...

The LX200 (Classic or GPS) does not care at all about being level- it has
no
influence on either pointing or tracking accuracy. The only reason to
level the
scope is so that it can get closer to the two alignment stars on its own.
Once
the two-star alignment is done, though, it doesn't matter.

I was kind of thinking that it might not matter after two-star alignment.
But then:

1. Why is there a separate polar alignment vs. alt-az aligment? If you put
the scope on an equatorial mount, could you do a 2-star alignment in alt-az
mode, and would it still point and track correctly? From what you're
saying, I gather that this would work, and that having the two alignment
modes is just a convenience to make it easier to find the alignment stars.

2. Levelness would still be important if you just do a one-star alignment,
right?

3. Every time I 'sync' the telescope to an object in the eypiece, does that
add to the accuracy of the alignment? I.e., if I do an initial one-star
alignment, then view a few objects, making manual corrections, then sync on
something later - will my pointing and tracking accuracy now be equivalent
to a two-star alignment? (By the way, I plan to use The Sky pocket pc
edition...it has a 'sync' button...I'm trying to figure out if this is just
a one-time correction, or if it will improve pointing and tracking from
there on?)

Sorry for these newbie-type questions. My main thrust here is that, last
time I tried to take the scope out with my 5 year old son, it was kind of a
disaster...he got bored with it before I could get everything set up. With
Mars so close, I'd like to attempt another outing...and this time be better
prepared. I figured the The Sky pocket edition will help me plan my viewing
and find interesting objects, and I wanted to make sure I get the scope
aligned quickly. And, if I can figure out how to hook a few gadgets up to
the scope (GPS, electronic compass, etc.) then that would just be an
interesting side-project to toy around with.

Thanks for your help,

Mike


Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:06:47 -0400, "Mike" wrote:

Hi Chris, thanks for the reply. Just a couple of follow-up questions,
though:

1. Why is there a separate polar alignment vs. alt-az aligment? If you put
the scope on an equatorial mount, could you do a 2-star alignment in alt-az
mode, and would it still point and track correctly? From what you're
saying, I gather that this would work, and that having the two alignment
modes is just a convenience to make it easier to find the alignment stars.

Yes, I've done exactly this, operating in altaz mode while on a wedge. The only
problem with being way out of level is the scope gets confused about where the
horizons are, and might stop tracking too high, or track below the horizon.


2. Levelness would still be important if you just do a one-star alignment,
right?

Definitely. The system needs to reference points to transform between the scope
coordinate system and the equatorial coordinates. If you only do a one-star
alignment, you are depending on the accuracy of the leveling for the other
reference. IMO, there is absolutely no reason to do a one-star alignment,
however, since two-star is a almost as easy and gives you much better results.


3. Every time I 'sync' the telescope to an object in the eypiece, does that
add to the accuracy of the alignment?

Generally not. I notice that Meade is introducing a software upgrade for the
Autostar scopes that will do this however. Presumably, some type of simple
pointing model system like TPoint.


Sorry for these newbie-type questions. My main thrust here is that, last
time I tried to take the scope out with my 5 year old son, it was kind of a
disaster...he got bored with it before I could get everything set up. With
Mars so close, I'd like to attempt another outing...and this time be better
prepared. I figured the The Sky pocket edition will help me plan my viewing
and find interesting objects, and I wanted to make sure I get the scope
aligned quickly. And, if I can figure out how to hook a few gadgets up to
the scope (GPS, electronic compass, etc.) then that would just be an
interesting side-project to toy around with.

I use TheSky PE sometimes with my scopes. It's a very nice program.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:06:47 -0400, "Mike" wrote:

Hi Chris, thanks for the reply. Just a couple of follow-up questions,
though:

1. Why is there a separate polar alignment vs. alt-az aligment? If you put
the scope on an equatorial mount, could you do a 2-star alignment in alt-az
mode, and would it still point and track correctly? From what you're
saying, I gather that this would work, and that having the two alignment
modes is just a convenience to make it easier to find the alignment stars.

Yes, I've done exactly this, operating in altaz mode while on a wedge. The only
problem with being way out of level is the scope gets confused about where the
horizons are, and might stop tracking too high, or track below the horizon.


2. Levelness would still be important if you just do a one-star alignment,
right?

Definitely. The system needs to reference points to transform between the scope
coordinate system and the equatorial coordinates. If you only do a one-star
alignment, you are depending on the accuracy of the leveling for the other
reference. IMO, there is absolutely no reason to do a one-star alignment,
however, since two-star is a almost as easy and gives you much better results.


3. Every time I 'sync' the telescope to an object in the eypiece, does that
add to the accuracy of the alignment?

Generally not. I notice that Meade is introducing a software upgrade for the
Autostar scopes that will do this however. Presumably, some type of simple
pointing model system like TPoint.


Sorry for these newbie-type questions. My main thrust here is that, last
time I tried to take the scope out with my 5 year old son, it was kind of a
disaster...he got bored with it before I could get everything set up. With
Mars so close, I'd like to attempt another outing...and this time be better
prepared. I figured the The Sky pocket edition will help me plan my viewing
and find interesting objects, and I wanted to make sure I get the scope
aligned quickly. And, if I can figure out how to hook a few gadgets up to
the scope (GPS, electronic compass, etc.) then that would just be an
interesting side-project to toy around with.

I use TheSky PE sometimes with my scopes. It's a very nice program.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Sorry for miing up.
I have an LX 200 (no GPS). Do you know,that in two star aligment ,in fact
you just have to know the position of the first star you select ? When you
have centered the first star and entered position the scopa asks for a
second star. _Then you choose one that is above the horizon . When telescope
commands you to "center" then you just press "go to" -the scope already
"knows" the position of the stars (remember it already knows it in one-star
aligment)!
clear skies
henrik
"Chris L Peterson" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 14:06:47 -0400, "Mike" wrote:

Hi Chris, thanks for the reply. Just a couple of follow-up questions,
though:

1. Why is there a separate polar alignment vs. alt-az aligment? If you
put
the scope on an equatorial mount, could you do a 2-star alignment in
alt-az
mode, and would it still point and track correctly? From what you're
saying, I gather that this would work, and that having the two alignment
modes is just a convenience to make it easier to find the alignment
stars.

Yes, I've done exactly this, operating in altaz mode while on a wedge. The
only
problem with being way out of level is the scope gets confused about where
the
horizons are, and might stop tracking too high, or track below the
horizon.


2. Levelness would still be important if you just do a one-star
alignment,
right?

Definitely. The system needs to reference points to transform between the
scope
coordinate system and the equatorial coordinates. If you only do a
one-star
alignment, you are depending on the accuracy of the leveling for the other
reference. IMO, there is absolutely no reason to do a one-star alignment,
however, since two-star is a almost as easy and gives you much better
results.


3. Every time I 'sync' the telescope to an object in the eypiece, does
that
add to the accuracy of the alignment?

Generally not. I notice that Meade is introducing a software upgrade for
the
Autostar scopes that will do this however. Presumably, some type of simple
pointing model system like TPoint.


Sorry for these newbie-type questions. My main thrust here is that, last
time I tried to take the scope out with my 5 year old son, it was kind of
a
disaster...he got bored with it before I could get everything set up.
With
Mars so close, I'd like to attempt another outing...and this time be
better
prepared. I figured the The Sky pocket edition will help me plan my
viewing
and find interesting objects, and I wanted to make sure I get the scope
aligned quickly. And, if I can figure out how to hook a few gadgets up
to
the scope (GPS, electronic compass, etc.) then that would just be an
interesting side-project to toy around with.

I use TheSky PE sometimes with my scopes. It's a very nice program.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Sun, 7 Sep 2003 00:55:49 +0200, "Henrik Nielsen"
wrote:

Sorry for miing up.
I have an LX 200 (no GPS). Do you know,that in two star aligment ,in fact
you just have to know the position of the first star you select ? When you
have centered the first star and entered position the scopa asks for a
second star. _Then you choose one that is above the horizon . When telescope
commands you to "center" then you just press "go to" -the scope already
"knows" the position of the stars (remember it already knows it in one-star
aligment)!

Right, I have the same scope, although I now operate only in polar mode. Of
course, the more out of level the scope is the more error there will be in its
automatic location of the second alignment star. But the alignment stars are so
bright there is little chance of mistaking one for another, so even a large
error of a few degrees is easy to overcome. When I used the scope altaz, I never
bothered to do more than a rough leveling operation.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com