John

21 minutes ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Great stuff a man of your age staying up so late John. Inspirational!

 

If only my other half saw it that way .....

18 minutes ago, Paul M said:

Pics or it didn't happen!

5 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

What is it?

Olly

Edit: ... apart from being the only TeleVue product I've ever seen which left my wallet fingers undisturbed!

Jeremy has it:

https://televue.com/televueopticstalk/2017/02/27/tele-vue-whats-in-a-name/#.YPhZgKrTXIU

You put it next to your music centre I guess:

7 hours ago, Whistlin Bob said:

Hi @John- yes, that, and also the trend to needing to have achieved something and 'improved', rather than just be. 

One social media trend that I really hope we don't inherit is the seemingly constant need to post pics to prove people are "having a life" and "moving onwards and upwards". I've even seen that dreadful moronic phrase "pics or it didn't happen" used on another forum 

Interesting to read the breadth of folks opinions though

11 minutes ago, Space Hopper said:

Yes Mark, its on order and i'm expecting it to arrive in another month or so hopefully.

I will post my first impressions, but i'm afraid i'm no Bill Paolini in the eyepiece department.

Regardless of scope perception, i'm very much a beginner. Only '2 or 3 rungs up from the bottom of the ladder'

 

When I was testing eyepieces for the forum I used to try and cover a number of sessions, using different scopes, before reporting back and also have something suitable to compare with. Not necessarily a zoom but fixed focal length eyepieces within the range that the zoom covers.

The fastest scope you have will provide the sternest test of correction across the field of view.

A range of targets and target types provide a sound basis for assessing the peformance so bright things to test for light scatter, ghosting etc and faint things for light transmission, contrast etc.

I was very lucky that FLO would loan me eyepieces for comparison / review purposes so I didn't have a personal stake in them, as it were. I'd like to think that APM do the same with a few examples of the zoom but I've not seen any mention of this as yet.

This was what Tele Vue produced in 1977, which might explain the company name:

41 minutes ago, Paul M said:

I agree with this. It is a great hobby for technophiles......

That is true today, I agree.

Trouble is that, despite a career in IT delivery and support, I'm now more of a technophobe

Fortunately, the hobby and the forum still caters for "my type"

23 minutes ago, Whistlin Bob said:

..... I think that imaging is far more aligned with the spirit of the age....

That is an interesting comment. Do you mean more aligned with todays social media culture, immediacy of sharing, identity and that sort of thing ?

Nice images and good memories. I was 9 years old when that happened - I remember following the missions avidly.

Probably largely responsible for me being in this hobby, on this forum and typing this now as it happens !

When I bought my first astronomy magazine, back 1981, it was the American publication "Astronomy". I was mesmerized by the glossy adverts for Celestron, Meade, Coulter Optical, Unitron etc but did also notice a small advert in the back  pages for a company called "Tele Vue" selling their plossl eyepieces. What a naff name for an astro equipment company thought I, nobody's going to want stuff with that branding on it !

Little did I know ........

21 minutes ago, Barry Fitz-Gerald said:

John,

The David Trang paper concluded that concentric craters were probably formed as a result of igneous intrusions into the crater floors, which is plausible. There is very little evidence however for volcanism associated with any of these craters which you might expect, with the exception of one, Firmicus C, where there is a small deposit of pyroclastic material on the ring, but then again pyroclastic vents are not uncommon over much of the lunar surface. An argument can be made for the less glamorous origin as a simultaneous rim collapse as the crater experienced extensional forces such as during uplift - and Hesiodus A has been distorted by uplift. A collapse origin for the ring explains why these rings are compositionally identical to the crater rims.  Lavoisier and Humboldt have concentric craters very similar to Hesiodus A on their floors, and these are cut by fractures that formed as the floors of the larger craters were uplifted. Younger simple craters very nearby are not cut by these fractures, showing that the concentric craters pre-date the uplift and would have been affected by the deformation, but the younger craters simple craters post-date the uplift so would not have been subject to deformation. The picture of the concentric crater at the start of the Trang article shows how the original ring was deformed by later collapses off the rim which correspond to scars on the crater wall - these 'landslips' and the original ring are indistinguishable as far as spectrum and morphology go, and there is no hint of volcanic products either in or around the crater.

Interesting topic, but I suspect volcanism is not the answer they claim.

Thanks Barry.

Very interesting

1 minute ago, Nik271 said:

.... But then it's nice to have some picture to share of a special or famous object and sometimes I want to image things just to make sure they are really there  Last autumn I wanted to confirm for myself that the Andromeda galaxy is more than just a blob and so one night I imaged it to see if can get the spiral arms....

I can see the temptation there.

This is a bit of a confession but recently I have occasionally been tempted by these ultra-simple clockwork driven camera mounts to try and stick my DSLR on and try to get something. I think they are branded Omegon ?

So far I've resisted or missed getting a cheap one but maybe I'll try one at some point.

Or are these the devices of the devil that will inevitably lead me down a dark and expensive path ?

1 hour ago, Jiggy 67 said:

... I don’t think observing is becoming less popular, it’s just the more sedate side of the hobby 😀

 

It certainly can be - I dropped off to sleep in a deckchair on the patio last night waiting for Jupiter and Saturn to rise above the rooftops 

7 minutes ago, Andy R said:

.... a technical challenge with computers, wires and fancy acronyms...

 

I think that is what has always put me off imaging to be honest.

When I was working I spent all day working with computers so for my hobby I wanted something with as little tech as possible. Probably also why I use manual alt-az mounts as well. I like to keep it as simple as it can possibly be.

Good to hear what motivates others though - all are welcome in the Stargazers Lounge

Excellent flight - they must be thrilled to bits with that one !

I'll never get the chance of either but I think I would prefer the Blue Origin flight to the Virgin one (sorry Richard !).

That's got to be the best £zero that you have ever invested !

This is not in anyway intended to be a controversial topic I hasten to add - I'm full of admiration for those who try and capture images of the heavens and often the results are really worthwhile

I've just noticed over the past, say, 18 months how many folks are seeking to acquire images now in one way or another, through dedicated astro cameras, mobile phones DSLR's etc.

The urge to capture seems to be stronger than ever.

I've dabbled when the comet was around last year and with the occasional crude "mobile to eyepiece" snapshots of the moon, sun etc but I'm not yet tempted to get any deeper into imaging despite rather a long time "at the eyepiece" as an observer

Is the trend towards imaging growing or am I imagining it ?

Blue Origin is set to launch today at 14:00 BST (hope that's correct):

Live stream here:

57 minutes ago, Pixies said:

Festoons and barges? Any good Jupiter observing guides that someone can recommend? After the weekend's observing, I think I'm going to be spending a bit of time on this later in the year!

Here is a little info on the main features of Jupiter:

I also use the Virtual Planet Atlas (freeware), Stellarium and Cartes du Ciel for moon and GRS positions.

6 minutes ago, Connorbrad98 said:

Could it also be a combination with the diagonal aswell could I also be using a poor diagonal?

Possibly, but the most common cause of astigmatism is a low cost wide field eyepiece used in a fast (eg: F/6, F/5 etc) scope.

1 hour ago, Pixies said:

Had a quick look tonight in the ST80. Definitely brighter than last time.  Same as HD220057, I'd say. So mag 6.9

Ooops ! - I forgot to look at the nova this evening

Glad someone gave it a visit

I've been using my ED120 refractor tonight to observe double stars and the Moon.

Saturn and Jupiter come into view rather late here due to surrounding houses but I've stayed out a bit later than intended to get a view of both.

The seeing conditions were decent but not exceptional. 180x (Pentax XW 5mm) seemed to give the sharpest views of both planets.

Saturn showed it's disk banding rather well with a couple of equatorial belts visible plus the dark northern polar cap. The cassini division and the A & B ring brightness differences stood out well as did the ring shadow on the planet and the planets shadow on the rings. The C or Crepe Ring popped in and out of visiblilty as the seeing fluctuated. 6 Saturnian moons were showing which is a decent tally for the 4.7 inch aperture. Enceladus was pretty challenging being close the the planetary disk and relatively faint. I found that higher magnifications (257x) helped to tease that little world out of the glare of it's host planet.

Jupiter was a little higher in the sky. Quite intricate planetary belt detail was showing with 7 belts detected plus the north and south polar "hoods". The Great Red Spot was nestled into the southern edge of the south equatorial belt and I agree with other recent observations that it looks rather faded in tone this year. It also seemed quite elongated - rather like an eye shape, compared to the more oval form that it has had in the past. The north equatorial belt seemed darker than the other belts and somewhat clumpy. There was what seemed to be a continuous belt running through the equatorial zone although this could have been an impression caused by a number of festoons running into each other - I've seen that before on Jupiter.

3 of the Galilean moons were showing at the time of viewing. The differences in their apparent diameters was fairly easy to see at 180x. It's fun to try and work out which is which from this and then check Stellarium or similar tools to see if you have it right !

An enjoyable 30 minutes or so with these giant worlds. Hopefully longer sessions when they rise a little earlier  

28 minutes ago, Connorbrad98 said:

On me skywatcher startravel 120mm defocused stars at the edges are appearing slight rugby ball shaped when I focus them they appear to be seagull shaped anyone know what this is ?

Sounds like astigmatism. May well be the eyepiece rather than the scope. What eyepiece were you using ?

Just found this interesting piece on how concentric craters might have been formed. I've not read it fully yet (observing mostly tonight !) but I will later:

http://www.psrd.hawaii.edu/Aug16/Lunar-concentric-craters.html

Actually tried with the ED120 tonight. May have been hints of something in the right position in the steadier moments - like something stuck on the side of the primary star airy disk. Probably "averted imagination" though. Trouble is, once you have seen simulations of what it might look like, it's difficult to un-see them !

Nice night though - quite a steady image even at 450x with the 4.7 inch frac.

The easy ones like Iota Cass are looking gorgeous