malc-c

what are the EQMOD pulse guiding settings like. If you expand the EQMOD window using the spanner, 3rd column along is a panel that has ASCOM pulse Guide Settings. I think by default these set themselves to x0.10. Ensure they are checked and increase the sliders to x0.90 for both. If that becomes too aggressive then back them off an increment at a time.

There is a way to view the PHD2 logs which should show corrections being made and what pulses are being sent to the mount. https://adgsoftware.com/phd2utils/ I'm no expert, but if you can select a target via an planetarium application such as CdC and the mount slews to that position then the EQDIR cable and the mount is working fine. All guiding function would be PHD2. It doesn't know about stars etc, all it does is look at the incoming picture from the camera and compare the brightness of adjacent pixels around the target bright pixel's initial point. If the adjacent pixel are brighter then it sends a guide pulse or pulses to counteract that movement based on its calibration. Now if it sees a large movement due to noise, or some other factor then it will mistake that for a sudden jump and all goes haywire - same as when the clouds roll pass the guide star and the tracking is lost. If you can, do you have the means to set up a guide scope rather than use the OAG. It would simply be a way to rule out the OAG as the factor. I've not used one so don't know if the signal to noise ratio for a given star is affected by the mirror is some way (straw clutching). The only other possibility is that PHD2 has lost communication with the mount. This could be software related, in that ASCOM has failed and dropped the PHD2 or EQMOD so that neither can share the communications. Or it might be USB related (power savings on the laptop turning off USB after a set amount of time? - again straw clutching)

There are no physical encoders in the HEQ5 so the positioning is all mathematical in code. Either delete the previous EQMOD configuration settings using the EQASCOM Toolbox, or (presuming the location settings are correct) simply release the clutches on both axis, set EQMOD to the correct coordinates for the default home position (either manually using the NSEW buttons - or the default park to home button) and then position the mount in the weight down default home position and lock off the clutches.

Steve, I'm beginning to question being a member of this forum. Seems these days I seem to unintentionally end up sticking my foot in it and upset people. My comment was based on what Terrac posted. Naturally there are two sides to any story, and that is why I included the IF statement in my post. By that it could have been a case that the last one of these mounts had been sold that morning, and now you were awaiting new stock which naturally will be at the new price. IF on the other hand the item was in stock, and had been purchased from OVL at the pre-increase price then it would seem as I suggested, which given FLO's reputation would be most out of character, and hence why I suggested Terrac made contact with you. None of us know what's transpired before... I don't monitor your prices on a daily basis just so I can correct what appears to be a false statement by Terrac. It's a public forum, where people make opinions and posts replies based on what's been posted by others. His post didn't seem like they were having a pop at UK retailers pushing up the prices, it seems as if he was looking for the sort of response I gave him, by that it would seem a different supplier is advertising the same product at a lower price and claim to have stock. You have accused them of joining SGL just to slagg FLO off... and have called them out over the pricing claims... which I can understand if that is indeed the case (as I said, I don't monitor your prices so can't really comment on that). As for all those excellent companies you list... again, I have no information on what influenced them to close and stop trading. There are no doubt old stories floating around where they may have served in injustice and made money off the back of one or two customers, but again, that's hearsay and is now water a long way under a bridge, but if true that poor reputation could have been the deciding factor.... Anyway... time for me to just lurke and browse the forum, rather than try and contribute or voice an opinion

Their website is showing stock. - Naturally I've not telephoned them as it's nothing to do with me.

I would contact FLO in that case. The price increase should only affect new stock arriving. If this is stock that FLO have in their showroom / warehouse form their last order then IMO that's just a rip off as they (along with other retailers) are profiteering form the new pricing announcement.

Seems everyone has applied the same increases - RVO have it listed for the same amount. However Harrisons are showing it as in stock and at £299 for the mount and tripod Here

Excellent clear picture and that 8-pin package does indeed look fried. I've no idea what it is, but given the type of package then unless you have a hot air solder station you are going to struggle trying to repair that chip. You might just have to purchase a new hand controller

Post a clear picture of the board and someone might be able to help. We also need to know the handset version as the PCBs are different

Well it looks to be a no go.... Having checked out the J-Link programmer and the QFN64 adaptor board to accept the processor for programming, the cost would be over £120 by the time you add in the cost of the chip. Regretfully I wouldn't be programming enough of these devices to warrant that investment

Damm.... I found an image on a cloudynights forum about changing the RTC battery and could make out it's a MK20DX256 - which is an ARM Cortex processor, which my PICKit2 doesn't support

Firmware file has been converted Just need to ID the chip (zooming in on the image above its just a blurr) and see if my PIC programmer supports the device, and then find a way of programming it !

OK I had to download the Celestron utility which then downloaded all the firmware packages to the installation folder... but there are two files CGXL_BOOT_3.1.9120.cfm and CGXL_APP_7.17.0031.cfm Now I'm wondering if the BOOT file is the bootloader, which if it is then that could be burnt to the micro and then the updater application used to squirt the firmware to the PIC (SW code is one file with the bootloader included in that one single file). I'll see if the binary can be converted, but then we would need to know the micro used before removing any config bits etc

Can't say I have experience with Celestron mounts, but have repaired around half a dozen Skywatcher mainboard for fellow SGL members by reprogramming the PIC micros with the SW firmware, and that was easy compared to this board as SW used 16F chips. The firmware files that SW use need converting to hex and some additional work done on the configuration bits. Not tried looking for the binary firmware file for this mount, but if its available then the same process should work to convert the file to HEX. Removing and replacing the chip is the easy part, as you say, just cut the legs as they enter the package and then desolder the legs from the board. However for me programming the replacement would be an issue as I don't have a board / adapter that accepts that package. I agree, if a micro gets hot it tends to be toast. If nothing has been plugged into the board incorrectly (as in the case of the previous SW board repairs) then it would suggest a failure in another component which lead to the micro failure, and I agree with the above post that voltage regulation, or possibly failed inductor may have caused an overvoltage. @seanpius2020 can you post up a close up of the processor, or post up the identity / part number and maybe we can see if this board can be repaired

But look at all the companies that used to make scopes, that are no longer around dues to inroads Chinese mass production had. All of the components would need to be made in the UK, otherwise it somewhat defeats the object as you would then have to inflate the RRP if half the parts cost you 30% more due to the issues described here. Back in the 80s you had manufacturers such as Superscopes in Bedford, Fullerscopes in London, and Astrosystems in Luton to name a few. Most used Optics made by David Hinds. But these were more or less made to order or in small batch runs, so you couldn't really visit and walk out with one like you can these days (well pre-covid !). They also lacked the refinement of the Vixens and Celestrons that were starting to become popular, at least not for the regular models, like the 6" from Astrosystems. I think that it would take considerable investment to set up a telescope manufacturing plant in the UK that didn't source the raw materials from overseas, and that could provide the output to meet current demand

If you look at the two boards, the e-bay listing is not the same as the one in the OP. - The part number on the suspected faulty board refers to a CGX-L range - the listing is for a CGE Pro series. I would check with the importers as to the availability and price of a replacement board before parting with £120 to a vendor on e-bay for a board that will most probably be totally incompatible, even if the connector blocks fit !

Stu... you need to go to specsavers --- that was Marvin... not me........ 😉🙂

Ok, lets see if we can help... seeing my OP was taken in the wrong context... In order to best advise we need to know a little more about your current set up and what you personally are looking at using either of the two mounts for. It would also be useful to know if you are looking for a portable set up or something that you may consider being permanently mounted in the garden. Both mounts you mention are quite capable in terms of load bearing and precision. The EQ6-R has a 9KG payload advantage over the HEQ5, but the HEQ5 has a weight advantage of 7Kg over the EQ6-R, and whilst both are portable, each will soon become heavy if you are considering carting them to a dark remote site some distance from where you park the car, the EQ6-R more so !!. If you are persuaded towards the HEQ5, then look at the belt drive variation - it's well worth the improvement. Cost wise, the EQ6-R is £350 more expensive over the HEQ5 with the Rowan belt modification. Anyway, that's something for you to consider.

John, I did ask the questions... asking them to come back with more info, rather than speculate and make the post look interrogating

Fair point... just my manor of "speaking"... part of the problem with text rather than "voice", was meant to be a humorous " how the hell" as in let me get my crystal ball out as we're not psychic rather than having a pop !

John... I never said it was a "silly" question..... I said it was "open ended" ....

LOL - do you think that would be upto handling a SW ST80 ???

The thing is we don't know for sure if its the importers who are making hay whilst the sun shines, or the manufacture, but there is some questionable ethics about the whole process given the huge increases.

We don't know... he may have the budget for an EQ8, an Avalon etc... and we don't know what it's going to be carrying, if he's also considering upgrading the OTA as well

What an open ended question... How the hell can we tell you what your options are..... We have no idea of your budget, your interests or what you intend to do (visual or imaging!). Both mounts you list are decent, and each have pros and cons, but none of us can advise which would suit a particular use or need as you've failed to mention what those are... Come back with some more detailed information and then other members can voice their opinions