jambouk

You’d be better setting up on grass than slabs if possible.

Do make sure it is balanced and the clutches are tight. If you can’t solve this after reading the manual come back.

I’ve only just got around to reading the Feb edition of Astronomy Now, and in it is a review of the Staraid guider. Do any members have experience of it? The poor alignment routine sounds nice and simple (simpler than the Polemaster from reading the review) and the guiding process sounds simple enough. I know there are lots of people who say stay clear of stand alone guiders, but I’d be interested to hear views of people who are using this, and what sort of length subs they are getting and at what focal length imaging scopes. James

Can you take a picture of what you can see? James

Great news. Well done.

I think as you get slicker, and more used to the processes it all becomes much easier and probably more accurate. There is also the issue of "luck" - sometimes it just dones't work and other times it does, with no obvious differences. You may well find that the next time you do a 3 star alignment the GOTO is good. For me, redcing the amount of cone error I had allowed me to go back to a three star alignment with good pointing accuracy. The book says the three star routine is the best for compensarting for cone error, but maybe my cone error was too great even for that. But if you've found a process that works, stick with it. You must remember though, that when you undertake a two star alignment on one sid eof teh meridian, the subsequent GOTO accuracy on the other side of the meridian may be less than perfect. Pleased you have it sorted. James

You can rotate the reticule yourself inside the polar scope to get it where you want. I think it would be very time consuming for the manufacturer to align 0 at the top with the weights down as this would have to be undertaken after assembley of everything (namely the polar scope screwed into its mounting), and then it would need recentering... It may seem sloppy, but I suspect it wouldn't be perfectly accurate, time consuming, and it isn't necessary. But some people do rotate it themselves which is relatively easy to do; the centring again afterwards is what takes the time. On the whole when I used a polar scope, I never bothered rotating the RA to get 0 at the top; if Polaris needed to be at 100 degrees, I would position Polaris on the circle in the polar scope just after the 3 o clock position, irrespective of where zero was. I suspect this degree of accuracy in polar alignment on an HEQ5 is unliekly to be the limiting factor when it comes to unguided (or maybe even guided) images. James

I would definately try using two stars on the same side of the meridian and see how that goes. Also make sure you end you alignment steps with the same two direction keys on the keypad, so up and right say, to the insides are always meshed in the same way. If you want to tighten things even more, once you've centred the star with the 12mm, put a 2x Barlow in and re-centre at 6mm before pressening enter. The other thing is to make sure the Polar Alignment is ball park OK before you start - this isn't normally an issue with star alignment errors, but if you are totally off (RA axis pointing south) it won't help. James

I don’t know the mount. How good is the Subsequent GOTO when you use it? Are you using a high power eyepiece to centre the alignment stars? I suspect this error is a calculated error in your PA, based on the relationship of the three stars in your star alignment, and is open to a number of errors itself when the handset calculates it. I would try just doing a two star alignment with both stars on the same side of the meridian and se what the reported error is then.

Or this: https://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=160098

Or just get something like this: https://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=160139

Simon, If you are busy today, fair enough, but if you have a spare hour or so, I would strongly urge you to do it during daylight, as it is so much easier to fiddle with things, it is warmer, and there is no time pressure to get it up and working if the sky is clear. Most of these kind of things can be rectified in day light with a cup of tea and go and wander off and do something else then come back to it, reduces the stress levels. You don't need arcminute accuracy for this kind of testing, ball-park is sufficient. Good luck and report back. James

I would consider getting a second hand HEQ5 or better. Vastly more sturdy than any of these mounts, MUCH quieter, much better tracking, and equatorial so makes doing short exposures much easier. Then getting a second hand scope too. Most of us have bought lots of stuff second hand. If you've not had hands on any of these mounts, I would also recommend that. You instantly feel the difference in stability. James

Simon, GOTO can sometimes just be odd. What I would do, is set the mount up in day light (either inside the garage or outside where you were), and roughly get it polar aligned (literally point it north), mount the scope on its own and put the scope in the home position. Boot it up, input the data for date etc and put the time in as you entered the time last night and enter the same time you were setting up last night. Then do a three star alignment using the same stars you used last night. Set you planetarium software to the yesterdays date and the time you set up and confirm the stars you have picked would have been in the areas of the sky the scope is now pointuing to, you have to use your imagination to think that star should be rouhgly due east, about 45 degrees above the horizon etc. If the first star is out, then make an adjustment to roughly get the scope to point where you think the star should be. Then accept and move on to the net two stars each time checking those stars are where you think they should be. Once the alignment is done, and hopefully reported as sucessful, go to the pleiades and see what it does now. If it slews to below the horizon again, there is something wrong, and I suspect it is user-related, rather than equipment related (it usually is). In that instance, I would take a photo of everything to you on the handset up share it here or email it me and i'll check what you are doing. Also make sure the clutches are tight and that there is not a ton of backlash. James

No, you'll use the setup, but I suspect many people move on from it if they get aperture fever, or get frustrated with the stability of the mount, or just want to image or observe things which are more suited to another set up. It is very good value for money in my opinion, but I wonder how many people are still using this set up 2-5 years down the line? I suspect some get distracted by other things in life (work, family, other hobbies, financial hardship, ill health etc), and others want a bigger and "better" set up. If I had to guess, and this is purely a guess and not based on any fact whatsoever, I suspect 10% of those who bought this set up would be using it regularly 2-5 years after getting it. James

Yes there was, I’ve added the not, thank you.

It would only make a difference in the “accuracy” of the first star in the Three star alignment routine, where it would be 15 degrees off. Once you’d centred that star and clicked accept, the handset would then start to build the map of the sky above it and rotate it all by 15 degrees thinking that maybe the mount wasn’t level or whatever, so the second and third stars should have been closer. If the second and third stars were not closer to the suggested locations by the mount, then this isn’t due to the BST issue. The time, date, long and lay and altitude, are used to figure out what is in the sky above the mount, once your start to do a star alignment it then just relies on a fixed map of the stars in its memory and these bits of user-input data are no longer used, other than to help what is below the horizon. This is why putting the exact date, time, location, altitude is unimportant, especially if you know which are the alignment stars, and as long as you are not on a set up which you plan to park and come back to the next night. James

When you are starting out with polar alignment, I would ignore the telescope. Just think about polar alignment just being about the mount. It is common for an observer to not see Polaris through the main telescope when in the home position. This is even more likely if using a long focal length telescope like a C11, and/or using shorter focal length eyepieces. James

I like the synscan handset, I use it on my other mpunt too. There is a learning curve to get accustomed to it, but it is very powerful device. I would recommend reading the manual from cover to cover once you’ve had a bit of experience with it, as it reveals some of the finer detail about its use and functionality.

You’ll see the dumbbell and the ring nebula from a dark site if you’ve got well dark adapted eyes, but no hint of colour and rather faint, but still a great sight to behold.

I would list the targets you are thinking of, think if you want to start guiding, think if you want to use filters (how sensitive is the camera to Ha), how are you planning to focus, is this a semi-permenant set up or taken down each night. I think the potential targets is The first thing I’d think about. Then look on astrobin for these targets and see what scopes and integration times are used. That may help narrow things down. James

Yes it’s a nice scope and lots of stuff on here about them. Tripod is not stunningly stable but for the price I’m not sure there is anything better. The optics are good. For brighter, smaller, DSOs is ok, but this isn’t a scope for visual work on DSOs on the whole, it is for planets and the Moon and the Sun (with appropriate filters). Goto can be pretty accurate, but it is a basic end mount and a very long focal length, so can at times be hit and miss, depends how much patience and tinkering you want to do. Mine served me well, and I wouldn’t get rid of it, but it is unlikely the set up you'll use regularly if you seriously get into the hobby I suspect. James

The chap in the middle looks like Frank Dyson; this may help narrow down the date if you can confirm if it is. Dyson was president of the Birmingham and Midland Institute in 1929, he died in 1939. Martin Mobberley may know more, he wrote a wonderful article on Will Hay: http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/full/2009JBAA..119...67M

I think there is a word (or term) for the phenomenon where you are looking for something, like Venus in the twilight sky, but you just can’t see it, but then as soon as you do spot it, you see it all the time, despite the fact the brightness of the object nor of the sky is any different. I am sure I heard someone describe this with a word or a term during a talk in the past. Thanks for any help. James

vlaid - excellent. Greenmjg7, are you able to stack say 10 or so consecutive images with the alignment function turned off? If not, if you can upload them to Dropbox or the like, one of us can do this. James