malc-c

I started this post five years ago (almost to the day) and pleased to say that my annual maintenance this year, like the last, consisted of a coat of preserve and the addition of a couple of galvanised nails to provide a better attachment of one small section of shiplap on the roof where the constant movement over the years and the expansion / contraction due to heat and cold had made a small gap between it and the frame. That was it for another year ! It's pleasing to find that something I've built has withstood temperatures from -12c to 35c (in the shade), 18" of snow, gallons of rain and hail the size of baked beans, and winds up to 62mph yet still looks as good as the day it was completed

Martin, thanks for the comments. Looking forward to seeing your build.

Fantastic construction... really solid. Keep the updates coming...

These days with cat6 cabling it's less of a problem.

Well the FTDI 232r -5v cable supplied to a UK address is the same price as a Hi-tec Astro cable from Rothervalley Optics. When these first came out they were upwards of £50 so it was worth making your own, but now there's hardly much point in a DIY option if obtaining the genuine FTDI cable.

There is also a large blob of solder on the pins of the chip itself, which looks like it's shorting a couple of pins, so you may of been stuffed before you even unpacked the thing from the jiffy bag !

The PL2303HX chipset has 3.3v TTL level I/O, not 5v. Some pins are pulled high to the 5v USB lines via internal pull-ups, which might explain why you are getting different voltage levels on different pins, although if it is connecte dto the mount, you will get nearly 5v on RX line as the mount will be sending TTL signals at 5v levels. The EQMOD site recommends using FTDI chipset at 5v TTL levels, and whilst these may well be 10x the price of the e-bay listing direct from FTDI, they work well and are well supported by FTDI if you ever experience an issue. Spending £15 on a decent cable is nothing when you have a mount costing £700 or more, and I personally wouldn't risk damage to the motor board by using something from HK at less than a quid.

I was a "traditionalist" when I built my observatory, and went with the concrete filled pipe set into a large concrete block foundation. That's not to say that bolting several cinder blocks together to is less suited, or under-enginered for the job. But, IMO the foundation to which they attach should be of suitable depth and size to give the blocks a good standing. It's interesting to see two extremes to pier construction on the forum. From concrete slab and a couple of cinder blocks bolted together, to a rather substantial installation in this thread http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/247778-windy-knoll-observatory-my-build-thread/ These cinder block piers seem to have the advantage of being cheap to construct, but in reality (based on my costs when constructing my own) the costs compared to the traditional pipe and concrete block, the costs come out about the same. You could argue that the traditional way is more labour intesive, but that depends if you mix the concrete by hand or use a mixer. For me apearance plays a major factor in the things I make, and for me I would need to dress the blocks in some way, which is additional costs. The plastic pipe I used was simply sparyed mat black as the orange wasn't that appealing.

Can't agree more !! WOW... makes a change to see the traditional cubic meter foundation above ground than below !! One thing for sure, that mount ain't gonna have any stability issues !

Nice find.. I personally prefer not to rely on a mechanical connection, but for those who want a quick way of making an EQDirect cable, that's a great suggestion

Yes the EQDirect cable that suits the HEQ5 will work with the EQ5

I think it's in relation to what that part is. Buying a cheap eyepiece will still give you a view of a target same as an expensive one. OK the expensive one will give you a better view, but neither will pose the risk of damage to the scope. However the price difference has a factor into what item you get. A genuine FTDI cable can be had for £10, whilst the cheap far eastern cloans are just a few quid. For the sake of the few quid difference it's well worth getting a geniune part. It's nice to see that HitecAstro have reduced their prices on such cables. They used to be £40 - £60, now they are a more realistic £28, but then again they use the prolific chip and not an FTDI, which has been know in the past to have issues with driver compatibility. Astronomiser uses FTDI, and have products competivley priced http://www.astronomiser.co.uk/eqdir.htm and state If you really want to save money, but use a genine part that you know won't brick the mount - yes, using cheap cloans can result in the product it is used with becoming a non functional door stop ! - then purchase a cable direct from FTDI for £16 and an RJ45 plug (or network cable) and you'll have an EQDirect cable for less than £20.

Seriously, these mounts are upwards of £700, the EQ8 being a few grand. Purchese a genuine FTDI cable from the manufactures. I wouldn't (didn't) risk using what can only be cloan chips costing a couple of quid off e-bay. Drivers up to windows 10 are available http://www.ftdichip.com/FTDrivers.htm Alternatively, if in doubt, spend £40 - £60 and purchase one of the commercially made EQDirect cables that will have a warranty, and if things go pearshapped you can have some course of redress. It depends on your confidence. Personally using genuine FTDI chips I have no worries with the DIY cable I made and use with my HEQ5, which has been fine for the passed three years

Thanks for the reply. Having the scope permenatly mounted in the observatory makes it a tad awkward to het visual on land based targets, but I'll try it out once I've resolved the issue I'm getting with Python, but that will be after I fix the observatory PC which crashed on me this afternoon !

Gonzo has just referred me to this thread as I'm searching for a simple way to fine tune my polar alignment. It seems straight forward but I have a few questions. Can this be used with a DSLR conneted to a reflector, or do you need to attach the camera directly to the mount in place of the telescope.If it can be used through the scope, what orientation must the scoe be. I've seen an image which shows a DSLR camera parallel to the tube, but also horizontal, ie standing infront of the OTA the focusre is at the 9 O'clock position. Mine is at the 8 O'clock position due to getting the balance right - will this have an effect on the results when plate solving images ?Is there any documentation to suggest how much to turn the adjustments - seen the 20 down, 6 right type numbers, but what do they mean ?is there a link to the latest build and other software requirements ?

Matt, It's difficult to say when, basically because tasco were a group of companies, one of which was toys and hobbies. So there was an overlap between the toy scope with plastic lenses and push pull focusing, that would still give you an image of the moon, and then the general telescopes which whilst featuring glass lenses, came on the same flimsy table top mount and required a baffle behind the lens to reduce the aberration. I ended up being the Product manager (more in title than having any clout) and spent many an hour replying to letters where folk had purchased a toy scope and expected it to perform line an EDS80 ! When you moved up to the 3TR, 11TR and 9T these scopes performed optically very well, although they were let down by their eyepieces. I borrowed an 11TR from the showroom one weekend, and was loaned a decent 20mm eyepiece. The views I had of Saturn were fantastic, until you breathed near the tube and the mount would wobble ! One of the thing you need to take into consideration was back in the late 70's and early 80's there was no real alternative. You either purchased a celestron, vixen or had someone like superscopes make a scope to your own specification, all of which were outside the realms of a christmas pressy for the kids. I later purchased a Vixen 102 non fluorite and had the battery driven RA axis - cost in 1986 - £1200. In todays money that's like spending £4K on an LX10 or SW Esprit. At the time the 11TR retailed for around the £250 - £350 mark if I recall (given it was some time ago )

I worked for Tasco between 1981 and 1987 when it was a family run firm based in Welwyn, Hertfordshire, with the distribution centred in Newbury. The higher end scopes like the 11TR etc had reasonably good optics, but rather flimsy mounts. The clock drives for the 11TR were mains driven, which given the amount of dew that forms on equipment is quite scary !! The thing was that Tasco started to cater for all markets, including the toy market, and then got a reputation for making poor scopes with plastic lenses, or cheap glass lenses that required a baffle and thus effectively reduced the aperture by 50%. Where Tasco succeeded though was that these scopes introduced kids to telescopes and the basics of astronomy, and once they started looking up would move on to the 3TR or 11TR, both of which were good optically for a commercially mass produced scope However Tasco were producing expensive amateur scopes with apertures of 8" and above, and on suitable driven mounts, and I did try and persuade management to import a few of these scope for the serious astronomer, but it never happened. I have fond memories of my time working in the small offices in Welwyn, and was (and still am) proud of my association with Tasco. It's also nice to know that all these decades on, other SGL members recall good experiences with tasco scopes too.