Alfian

Thanks Paul (and merry Xmas), here's hoping for a god and safe launch. The James Webb looks like its going to be a truly exciting  venture.

Decided to give it another shot and watched latest on black holes. Some of it interesting and thought provoking. Given the restrictions of filming during current covid crisis the use of UK locations is great. The analogy with a waterfall using High Force in Teesdale I got  but although it was lovely to see Malham Cove, Goredale Scar and Brimham Rocks I could not see the connection. Reaching out to people using beautiful locations and clever CGI as eye candy to maintain the interest whilst shoe horning facts, theories and difficult to imagine propositions is kind of understandable, for me its just that the balance is out of kilter. That said I'm asking myself if it could have been "shoe horned" into half an hour. Maybe so but then again half an hour isn't really Prof' Cox's style so maybe it is a case of a new take on reality - heck I don't know.

On 28/10/2021 at 20:17, Stephenstargazer said:

Well at least they gave the last word to Sandy Denny........................so that's OK by me🙂

Any Sandy Denny is great by me - her voice is just magical but yes, and it pains me to say it as a bit of fan of Prof. Cox, it was by far the best thing about the program. Very disappointing.

5 hours ago, Helical said:

Ian hope you're able get back to the eyepiece in some capacity soon! You've got some nice toys to play with👍.

Have you thought about a solar filter so you can get out and observe in the warmer daytime air?

Cheers 

(Another) Ian

 

Hi Ian, thanks for the idea. I had actively considered solar observstions a while back but if I'm honest, with health worries,  my heart had gone of it. Feeling more like it now so yes its something worth a second look. Thanks.

Here's how I fitted a "standard" finder to my 100r. Drilling and tapping two new holes in a a slightly better position is pretty easy.

Now that just goes to show! The Tal100r clearly varied or evolved.

Thanks Roy, not sure whether the OP will go Tal100 or not but it satisfies my curiosity!🙂

53 minutes ago, Roy Challen said:

Agree re diagonal for the R. Any 1.25" or 2" can be used in the RS.

Is the diagonal attachment to the focuser in the RS different to the R, that is can you swap out/in any other chosen  diagonal?

Thanks guys. Initial diagnosis was a bit scary but now I'm not so much expecting to get back to "normal" as more getting things as good as I can and living with it. In many respects life goes on as was. It could definitely be worse!🙂

I really hope I can get back into some useful sessions at the eyepiece, would love to get back to cruisin' craters on Luna!

A still yet to be fully diagnosed respiratory condition has laid me somewhat low, astro' wise, for some time now. Venturing out in to cooler evening/night air tended to result in coughing spasms and in the end I gave up trying.  I'm still having tests but current treatment is helping. This morning I dug my Tal 100r out of its box and bubble wrap, to check something out to do with another thread and on seeing that nice white tube for the first time in ages, my heart heart gave a little excited jump. The mojo is still there, Wow!!   Looking to darker autumn skies, squirting the inhalers, and giving it a go.

I have the 100r and optically its a very good 'scope, no quibble. However as John and Roy have pointed out the RS with the 2" focuser opens up the options.  Related to this, the 100r  diagonal is connected to the focuser in an unusual way rendering the use of alternative diagonals impossible without some expert re-engineering.  I don't think the RS is the same,  someone might want to clarify that, so its worth being aware of that. The 100r diagonal is OK but if there is an issue with it at some point then it will be a problem. All that said if you can get a 100r in nice condition at the right (low?) price and you accept for what it is, a vintage scope with great optics,  then I doubt if it will disappoint. 

12 hours ago, O4 clearnights said:

a finder scope bracket that fits on the focuser of a tal 100 r / rs

On my Tal100r the finder is not mounted on the focuser but on the main tube and I think its the same for the RS.  If  you are wanting to mount a finder on the Tal100r and not bothered about keeping it original it is very simple to  unscrew the focuser from the tube and with a bit of simple DIY affix a standard finder mount. Even though the Tal 8x30 is very good, with a different finder mount you can then use a 9x50 or similar.  Found picture of 100 RS (courtesy AstroBaby) showing finder on the tube.

Well done Jules. Getting back into the groove is good.

At one point I had both Mak127 and a SW 100ED. Foolishly I never tried them side by side. So much depends on seeing that I cannot clinically say that one was better than the other in terms of revealing a particular lunar feature. However my overall impression was that there was little to choose other than the fact that I found the ED100 gave an image that was more pleasing and involving to the eye (not necessarily any more revealing) even though the 127 had more aperture.  Interestingly my Tal100r (F10) even though it shows some CA is a wonderful lunar scope and my Vixen 80mm (11.4) is a cracker. Pre lockdown I came very close  to buying an OO 150 f8 reflector (several events conspired against this) and I was really intrigued to find out how different (better?) this would work out as larger aperture should in theory yield better resolution. It still might happen one day. Getting back to the Mak 127 though, given how easy they are to mount and use, and cool down isn't so bad, they are a very good scope for the money and to get something significantly better would involve a sizeable layout of cash.

18 hours ago, Roy Challen said:

It's still a dream of mine to watch a rocket launch, Mrs.C is from Kazakhstan, so Baikonur is probably my best chance.

To see a launch at Baikonur, now that would be really something, a journey of a lifetime.  That would be one very impressive Steppe ......😉

2 hours ago, Grumpy Martian said:

At air shows I have seen the RAF Typhoon turn on a sixpence with full after burners active. It is the only aircraft where I covered my ears to protect from the thunderous noise.

I've seen a couple of typhoon displays and know what you mean but in terms of noise that you can feel I remember watching a Vulcan display at RAF Finningley back in the early 90's. The sound of those 4 engines on take off was like a deep crackle that hit you at gut level. Then comes the famous Vulcan howl.  So sad its not flying now.

On 19/02/2021 at 17:49, Mr Spock said:

The only reason to get a 2" diagonal is if you are going to use 2" wide field eyepieces. It won't make any difference to 1.25" eyepieces and will be considerably heavier than a 1.25" diagonal.

Yes, I agree. The added bulk and weight is very noticeable and this in turn affects the balance of the 'scope. If planetary is your main aim then I'd look to spend money on another EP.

On 18/02/2021 at 22:28, bomberbaz said:

Absolutely outstanding science, amazing landing.

I loved the technology of the landers data and accompanying graphics, felt like I was almost there watching it land in person. 

I filled up a little as the emotion was so powerful on touchdown, the release of emotion was palpable. 

Well done again all the teams involved, truly inspiring result for all your dedication. 

Couldn't agree more. Given the chequered history of Mars projects I've not held my breath quite as much since the Apollo days. Brilliant achievement.

On 11/02/2021 at 22:30, Peter Drew said:

A further thought was that due to its supposed diameter of 200,000 light years, light observed from its nearest edge reaches us 200,000 years sooner than light from its furthest edge.  Something to think about when you next observe it.      

That's an interesting one to let the mind play with. I've just been reading that M31 has an estimated rotational velocity of 225 km/s  at 1,300 light years from the core, so things are never quite where we think they are to say the least. A "snapshot in time" and the idea of what we mean by "now" gets very blurry ... err ...I think. 

From memory, I think standard plossls worked just fine in the 1.25" focuser. I used a Revelation (GSO) 32mm, Vixen NPL 15mm and I think the older SW 9mm 66 degree worked OK but unfortunately that was not such a good EP. My ES 20mm Maxvision wouldn't come to focus which was a shame as its a nice EP The Revelation 2.25x barlow also worked OK. The Tal1 is a very nice scope with very good optics. When I had mine I did some work on it to try to upgrade it to something like a more modern spec' scope. Looking back this was a mistake and I think it would have been better to accept it as it was using EPs that worked perfectly well with it. Its so easy, given what is available today to hanker for  wider field of view than what was the norm when the Tal was made.

18 hours ago, Merlin said:

I don’t really have a “favourite” binocular, just a selection from 10x25’s to 25x70’s  for different applications. In terms of quality, the very best bins I had  were 7x50’s, bought in a secondhand shop for £18.

The bins were of the Porro-type and in mint condition with independent eyepiece focussing. There was no maker’s name, just a serial number. I sent the number to Frank’s of Glasgow. They replied and told me I had  a German naval glass. They didn’t look like military binoculars and the optics were superb.

Some very decent binos can be picked up in S/H shops/charity shops. In the last couple of years or so I've  picked up  mint Japanese Greenkat 10x50s for £25 and Asahi Pentax 8x30s in v/g condition for £20. Both have really nice optics, are very sturdy well built binos in quality hard cases. The Pentax binos are really handy to have round my neck when out for a walk. Not much opportunity at the moment for browsing the shops but when the time comes its worth a look - sometimes we get lucky.

Wow indeed, that looks near mint. A capable 'scope.

Mesmerising, really draws you in. Well done.

Stunning Nigella, Wow! Great images. Like so many other people, the aurora is on the bucket list.

On 28/01/2021 at 11:21, old_eyes said:

The author is not good at humour, and the result is juvenile and detracts from the great story he has to tell.

I've occasionally come across books and articles where the author  feels compelled to jolly people along as if by not doing so the reader is going to lose concentration  when,  at least for me, it has the opposite effect. There is a place for humour and the light touch and maybe in fairness its difficult to get right. I'm not a writer/author so perhaps I shouldn't judge too harshly. 🤔