lost in alignment

Hi,

CeeBee was kind enough to answer my collimation question in great detail.
This helped me tremendously, for that I thank you!

Now, I am lost. I keep trying to set the polar alignment to watch the
moon/stars/planets/etc without getting lost.

From what I read it should go like this:

set the tube parallel with the mount (0 degrees)
leaving the tube centered R.A. use the bolts on the wedge to aim the tube
at Polaris. Then when scope is aimed elsewhere, it will track.

Does this seem right? I've tried it and it didn't seem to work. I had the
switch set to "lunar".

Thanks in advance!

Jon

Close enough for visual but not Photography 8*)

Many forget that Polaris the North star is actually roughly 1* off true
North. SO first align to Polaris with No clock drive running.

Then Slowly move the tube slightly until you see the stars start to spin
around the center of the eyepiece, even Polaris will rotate around the
center. This will be a very slow almost imperceptible movement. Once you
have that spin turn back your adjustment so that Polaris is very slightly
off center, yet still VERY slowly moving around the center of your eyepiece.

Now you are truly Polar aligned.

Another Possible problem may be your level position on the ground, for
causal viewing this again isn't as critical as it is in Astrophotography.

Invest 2 or 3 dollars US in a bubble level, then remove the head of you EQ
if you are using an EQ mount, lay the bubble level on the center of your
tripod and then level your tripod. If you are using a Schmidt-Cass then just
lay it on the top of the tripod on a flat spot just below your EQ wedge.

Then set your polar position as described.

Now engage your clock drive and test following a bright star. After a few
times of setting up you will find you can just about set Polar alignment
with very little adjusting needed as long as you set up in the same relative
location each set up.

Hope this helps. If anyone can suggest to him a more accurate way to set
polar alignment without having to worry about standard deviation
calculation, I would love to see how to do that as well.
--
Clear Skies!

========
Tim Longwell
Black River Astronomical Society
http://junior.apk.net/~arstar50/BlackRiver.index.html
Elyria, Ohio


=========

"Jon Hunter" wrote in message
news
Hi,

CeeBee was kind enough to answer my collimation question in great detail.
This helped me tremendously, for that I thank you!

Now, I am lost. I keep trying to set the polar alignment to watch the
moon/stars/planets/etc without getting lost.

From what I read it should go like this:

set the tube parallel with the mount (0 degrees)
leaving the tube centered R.A. use the bolts on the wedge to aim the tube
at Polaris. Then when scope is aimed elsewhere, it will track.

Does this seem right? I've tried it and it didn't seem to work. I had the
switch set to "lunar".

Thanks in advance!

Jon

Close enough for visual but not Photography 8*)

Many forget that Polaris the North star is actually roughly 1* off true
North. SO first align to Polaris with No clock drive running.

Then Slowly move the tube slightly until you see the stars start to spin
around the center of the eyepiece, even Polaris will rotate around the
center. This will be a very slow almost imperceptible movement. Once you
have that spin turn back your adjustment so that Polaris is very slightly
off center, yet still VERY slowly moving around the center of your eyepiece.

Now you are truly Polar aligned.

Another Possible problem may be your level position on the ground, for
causal viewing this again isn't as critical as it is in Astrophotography.

Invest 2 or 3 dollars US in a bubble level, then remove the head of you EQ
if you are using an EQ mount, lay the bubble level on the center of your
tripod and then level your tripod. If you are using a Schmidt-Cass then just
lay it on the top of the tripod on a flat spot just below your EQ wedge.

Then set your polar position as described.

Now engage your clock drive and test following a bright star. After a few
times of setting up you will find you can just about set Polar alignment
with very little adjusting needed as long as you set up in the same relative
location each set up.

Hope this helps. If anyone can suggest to him a more accurate way to set
polar alignment without having to worry about standard deviation
calculation, I would love to see how to do that as well.
--
Clear Skies!

========
Tim Longwell
Black River Astronomical Society
http://junior.apk.net/~arstar50/BlackRiver.index.html
Elyria, Ohio


=========

"Jon Hunter" wrote in message
news
Hi,

CeeBee was kind enough to answer my collimation question in great detail.
This helped me tremendously, for that I thank you!

Now, I am lost. I keep trying to set the polar alignment to watch the
moon/stars/planets/etc without getting lost.

From what I read it should go like this:

set the tube parallel with the mount (0 degrees)
leaving the tube centered R.A. use the bolts on the wedge to aim the tube
at Polaris. Then when scope is aimed elsewhere, it will track.

Does this seem right? I've tried it and it didn't seem to work. I had the
switch set to "lunar".

Thanks in advance!

Jon

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 07:11:02 -0700, Tim Longwell wrote:

Close enough for visual but not Photography 8*)

Many forget that Polaris the North star is actually roughly 1* off true
North. SO first align to Polaris with No clock drive running.

Then Slowly move the tube slightly until you see the stars start to spin
around the center of the eyepiece, even Polaris will rotate around the
center. This will be a very slow almost imperceptible movement. Once you
have that spin turn back your adjustment so that Polaris is very
slightly off center, yet still VERY slowly moving around the center of
your eyepiece.


snip

So then was I doing the right thing, for the most part? I'm not doing any
photography yet, I just wanted to track the moon and some stars. I tried
this last time and it didn't work, everything was still moving out of
view.

I'm so confused! I thought I was following it correctly, and its the same
as you describe here, so am I off somewhere?

Thanks for the help..


Jon

On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 07:11:02 -0700, Tim Longwell wrote:

Close enough for visual but not Photography 8*)

Many forget that Polaris the North star is actually roughly 1* off true
North. SO first align to Polaris with No clock drive running.

Then Slowly move the tube slightly until you see the stars start to spin
around the center of the eyepiece, even Polaris will rotate around the
center. This will be a very slow almost imperceptible movement. Once you
have that spin turn back your adjustment so that Polaris is very
slightly off center, yet still VERY slowly moving around the center of
your eyepiece.


snip

So then was I doing the right thing, for the most part? I'm not doing any
photography yet, I just wanted to track the moon and some stars. I tried
this last time and it didn't work, everything was still moving out of
view.

I'm so confused! I thought I was following it correctly, and its the same
as you describe here, so am I off somewhere?

Thanks for the help..


Jon

That is why I suggested checking your level of your tri-pod.

Also, make sure your declination is set correctly, to get that make sure
that Polaris is in the center of the eyepiece Not spinning.

Another thing I forgot to suggest you check, make sure that your tracking is
set to Sidereal so that it tracks to the speed the sky does across our area.

HTH

--
Clear Skies!

========
Tim Longwell
Black River Astronomical Society
http://junior.apk.net/~arstar50/BlackRiver.index.html
Elyria, Ohio



=========

"Jon Hunter" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 07:11:02 -0700, Tim Longwell wrote:

Close enough for visual but not Photography 8*)

Many forget that Polaris the North star is actually roughly 1* off true
North. SO first align to Polaris with No clock drive running.

Then Slowly move the tube slightly until you see the stars start to spin
around the center of the eyepiece, even Polaris will rotate around the
center. This will be a very slow almost imperceptible movement. Once you
have that spin turn back your adjustment so that Polaris is very
slightly off center, yet still VERY slowly moving around the center of
your eyepiece.


snip

So then was I doing the right thing, for the most part? I'm not doing any
photography yet, I just wanted to track the moon and some stars. I tried
this last time and it didn't work, everything was still moving out of
view.

I'm so confused! I thought I was following it correctly, and its the same
as you describe here, so am I off somewhere?

Thanks for the help..


Jon

That is why I suggested checking your level of your tri-pod.

Also, make sure your declination is set correctly, to get that make sure
that Polaris is in the center of the eyepiece Not spinning.

Another thing I forgot to suggest you check, make sure that your tracking is
set to Sidereal so that it tracks to the speed the sky does across our area.

HTH

--
Clear Skies!

========
Tim Longwell
Black River Astronomical Society
http://junior.apk.net/~arstar50/BlackRiver.index.html
Elyria, Ohio



=========

"Jon Hunter" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 07:11:02 -0700, Tim Longwell wrote:

Close enough for visual but not Photography 8*)

Many forget that Polaris the North star is actually roughly 1* off true
North. SO first align to Polaris with No clock drive running.

Then Slowly move the tube slightly until you see the stars start to spin
around the center of the eyepiece, even Polaris will rotate around the
center. This will be a very slow almost imperceptible movement. Once you
have that spin turn back your adjustment so that Polaris is very
slightly off center, yet still VERY slowly moving around the center of
your eyepiece.


snip

So then was I doing the right thing, for the most part? I'm not doing any
photography yet, I just wanted to track the moon and some stars. I tried
this last time and it didn't work, everything was still moving out of
view.

I'm so confused! I thought I was following it correctly, and its the same
as you describe here, so am I off somewhere?

Thanks for the help..


Jon