|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
A full report tomorrow, but I thought I'd give some feedback on
information that people have given me: 1. Lens Flare and Dirty Optics - I decided to just use air and nothing else. It was the right move. Slight lens flare early but it went away after about half an hour. I had some great views of Jupiter (was able to count 9 separate bands and see decent detail in some of them) so I think the optics are OK. 2. Dewbuster - Tonight was the first night I've used it. It was one of those nights that you just know is going to be damp when you are setting up so... It worked great. I had the "automatic" probes on the finder and telescope and an "aux" port heating the telrad. Less than an hour after sunset, I noticed dampness forming and by the end of my 3.5 hour observins session, everything was soaked. Everything, that is, except my optics. Dew was JUST beginning to form on the corrector plate and the finder. No dew every formed on the Telrad. I kind of made a mistake here though. In my first dewy session (cut short after less than an hour of observing), I noticed that my Telrad dewed up first and that my finder and corrector plate started to dew up at about the same time. I should have put the second "automatic" heater on the Telrad rather than the finder figuring that if the Telrad didn't dew, no way was sht corrector going to dew. In case you are wondering, the night's targets we 1. The Moon. 2. Jupiter 3. Mizar 4. M81/82 5. M13 6. M92 7. The Moon again. A full report coming tomorrow. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
Hi, Mark,
What scope are you using?? Bill "Mark Smith" wrote in message ... A full report tomorrow, but I thought I'd give some feedback on information that people have given me: 1. Lens Flare and Dirty Optics - I decided to just use air and nothing else. It was the right move. Slight lens flare early but it went away after about half an hour. I had some great views of Jupiter (was able to count 9 separate bands and see decent detail in some of them) so I think the optics are OK. 2. Dewbuster - Tonight was the first night I've used it. It was one of those nights that you just know is going to be damp when you are setting up so... It worked great. I had the "automatic" probes on the finder and telescope and an "aux" port heating the telrad. Less than an hour after sunset, I noticed dampness forming and by the end of my 3.5 hour observins session, everything was soaked. Everything, that is, except my optics. Dew was JUST beginning to form on the corrector plate and the finder. No dew every formed on the Telrad. I kind of made a mistake here though. In my first dewy session (cut short after less than an hour of observing), I noticed that my Telrad dewed up first and that my finder and corrector plate started to dew up at about the same time. I should have put the second "automatic" heater on the Telrad rather than the finder figuring that if the Telrad didn't dew, no way was sht corrector going to dew. In case you are wondering, the night's targets we 1. The Moon. 2. Jupiter 3. Mizar 4. M81/82 5. M13 6. M92 7. The Moon again. A full report coming tomorrow. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
Hi, Mark,
What scope are you using?? Bill "Mark Smith" wrote in message ... A full report tomorrow, but I thought I'd give some feedback on information that people have given me: 1. Lens Flare and Dirty Optics - I decided to just use air and nothing else. It was the right move. Slight lens flare early but it went away after about half an hour. I had some great views of Jupiter (was able to count 9 separate bands and see decent detail in some of them) so I think the optics are OK. 2. Dewbuster - Tonight was the first night I've used it. It was one of those nights that you just know is going to be damp when you are setting up so... It worked great. I had the "automatic" probes on the finder and telescope and an "aux" port heating the telrad. Less than an hour after sunset, I noticed dampness forming and by the end of my 3.5 hour observins session, everything was soaked. Everything, that is, except my optics. Dew was JUST beginning to form on the corrector plate and the finder. No dew every formed on the Telrad. I kind of made a mistake here though. In my first dewy session (cut short after less than an hour of observing), I noticed that my Telrad dewed up first and that my finder and corrector plate started to dew up at about the same time. I should have put the second "automatic" heater on the Telrad rather than the finder figuring that if the Telrad didn't dew, no way was sht corrector going to dew. In case you are wondering, the night's targets we 1. The Moon. 2. Jupiter 3. Mizar 4. M81/82 5. M13 6. M92 7. The Moon again. A full report coming tomorrow. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
On Sun, 30 May 2004 15:30:10 GMT, "Rank Amateur"
wrote: Hi, Mark, What scope are you using?? Celestron C 9 1/4 SGT (except I don't really use the GT functions). |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
On Sun, 30 May 2004 15:30:10 GMT, "Rank Amateur"
wrote: Hi, Mark, What scope are you using?? Celestron C 9 1/4 SGT (except I don't really use the GT functions). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
Mark Smith proclaimed:
(except I don't really use the GT functions). And why not? You paid for them. Are you now starhopping in an effort to become more acquainted with the sky and plan to use them one day when the time is right? Do you never plan to use them and regret the extra expense of buying a scope equipped with the option? Also, I noticed you said you "don't really use the GT functions." Is this different than "I don't use the GT functions?" -- Martin "Photographs From the Universe of Amateur Astronomy" http://home.earthlink.net/~martinhowell |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
Mark Smith proclaimed:
(except I don't really use the GT functions). And why not? You paid for them. Are you now starhopping in an effort to become more acquainted with the sky and plan to use them one day when the time is right? Do you never plan to use them and regret the extra expense of buying a scope equipped with the option? Also, I noticed you said you "don't really use the GT functions." Is this different than "I don't use the GT functions?" -- Martin "Photographs From the Universe of Amateur Astronomy" http://home.earthlink.net/~martinhowell |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
On Sun, 30 May 2004 19:36:24 GMT, "Martin R. Howell"
wrote: Mark Smith proclaimed: (except I don't really use the GT functions). And why not? You paid for them. Are you now starhopping in an effort to become more acquainted with the sky and plan to use them one day when the time is right? Do you never plan to use them and regret the extra expense of buying a scope equipped with the option? Also, I noticed you said you "don't really use the GT functions." Is this different than "I don't use the GT functions?" I got the GT primarily because it was only about an extra $75 above what I would have paid to get the telescope with dual axis drive motors. It seemed silly not to get the GT functions. I don't use them primarily because I want to learn my way around the sky and I find that I like "discovering" the objects on my own. It just isn't as fun to just press a button and have the telescope "go" there for me. That's just me. Besides, I tend to find other interesting things in my searches. That being said, I do use the GT to: 1. Jumpt to bright stars that I know to start my star hopping. 2. Jump to bright objects in the sky that I can pick out with my naked eye (Jupiter, Venus, Saturn, M44, that kind of thing). 3. When Star Hopping, I will sometimes use the "identify" function to tell me if I'm at least in the right area. For example, last night was VERY bright here. After consulting both Planiscape and star charts, I THOUGHT I could pick out the square of Hercules, but I wasn't 100% positive. Because I wanted to see if I could find M13 in these conditions (I'd already found it easily under dark skies), I pointed the telescope to where I thought I should be, checked the spotter scope and the viewfinder. No M13 but I thought I was in the right area. To make sure (in order to keep from wasting my time if I was in the wrong area), I used the Identify Messier function. The telescope said I was 52' from M13 (gives distance but not direction). Knowing I was, indeed, in the right area, I consulted the Star Charts again, and started sweeping. I found it quickly. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
On Sun, 30 May 2004 19:36:24 GMT, "Martin R. Howell"
wrote: Mark Smith proclaimed: (except I don't really use the GT functions). And why not? You paid for them. Are you now starhopping in an effort to become more acquainted with the sky and plan to use them one day when the time is right? Do you never plan to use them and regret the extra expense of buying a scope equipped with the option? Also, I noticed you said you "don't really use the GT functions." Is this different than "I don't use the GT functions?" I got the GT primarily because it was only about an extra $75 above what I would have paid to get the telescope with dual axis drive motors. It seemed silly not to get the GT functions. I don't use them primarily because I want to learn my way around the sky and I find that I like "discovering" the objects on my own. It just isn't as fun to just press a button and have the telescope "go" there for me. That's just me. Besides, I tend to find other interesting things in my searches. That being said, I do use the GT to: 1. Jumpt to bright stars that I know to start my star hopping. 2. Jump to bright objects in the sky that I can pick out with my naked eye (Jupiter, Venus, Saturn, M44, that kind of thing). 3. When Star Hopping, I will sometimes use the "identify" function to tell me if I'm at least in the right area. For example, last night was VERY bright here. After consulting both Planiscape and star charts, I THOUGHT I could pick out the square of Hercules, but I wasn't 100% positive. Because I wanted to see if I could find M13 in these conditions (I'd already found it easily under dark skies), I pointed the telescope to where I thought I should be, checked the spotter scope and the viewfinder. No M13 but I thought I was in the right area. To make sure (in order to keep from wasting my time if I was in the wrong area), I used the Identify Messier function. The telescope said I was 52' from M13 (gives distance but not direction). Knowing I was, indeed, in the right area, I consulted the Star Charts again, and started sweeping. I found it quickly. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Observing - A quickie report on tonight.
-- To reply, remove the "z" if one appears in my address "Mark Smith" wrote in message ... On Sun, 30 May 2004 19:36:24 GMT, "Martin R. Howell" wrote: Mark Smith proclaimed: (except I don't really use the GT functions). And why not? You paid for them. Are you now starhopping in an effort to become more acquainted with the sky and plan to use them one day when the time is right? Do you never plan to use them and regret the extra expense of buying a scope equipped with the option? Also, I noticed you said you "don't really use the GT functions." Is this different than "I don't use the GT functions?" I got the GT primarily because it was only about an extra $75 above what I would have paid to get the telescope with dual axis drive motors. It seemed silly not to get the GT functions. I don't use them primarily because I want to learn my way around the sky and I find that I like "discovering" the objects on my own. It just isn't as fun to just press a button and have the telescope "go" there for me. That's just me. Besides, I tend to find other interesting things in my searches. That being said, I do use the GT to: 1. Jumpt to bright stars that I know to start my star hopping. 2. Jump to bright objects in the sky that I can pick out with my naked eye (Jupiter, Venus, Saturn, M44, that kind of thing). 3. When Star Hopping, I will sometimes use the "identify" function to tell me if I'm at least in the right area. For example, last night was VERY bright here. After consulting both Planiscape and star charts, I THOUGHT I could pick out the square of Hercules, but I wasn't 100% positive. Because I wanted to see if I could find M13 in these conditions (I'd already found it easily under dark skies), I pointed the telescope to where I thought I should be, checked the spotter scope and the viewfinder. No M13 but I thought I was in the right area. To make sure (in order to keep from wasting my time if I was in the wrong area), I used the Identify Messier function. The telescope said I was 52' from M13 (gives distance but not direction). Knowing I was, indeed, in the right area, I consulted the Star Charts again, and started sweeping. I found it quickly. You need not explain why you bought what you did. It's nobody's BUSINESS but yours why you made the choice you did. Enjoy!!! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Observing report 15-05-2004 - a satisfying night. | Jim | Amateur Astronomy | 25 | May 29th 04 01:49 PM |
observing report 20 feb | Craig Levine | Amateur Astronomy | 4 | February 22nd 04 07:16 PM |
CalStar Ver. 4.0 An observing report. ( Long ) | Rashad Al-Mansour | Amateur Astronomy | 0 | October 4th 03 01:53 AM |
DEATH DOES NOT EXIST -- Coal Mine Rescue Proves It | Ed Conrad | Space Shuttle | 4 | August 2nd 03 01:00 AM |