bomberbaz

43 minutes ago, Ships and Stars said:

Ah right, excellent so you know the area. I've not been through there I can remember. I lived in the midlands for about 6 or 7 years before moving to Scotland, but mostly went to the Peak District.

I don't think 21.76 will be much difference from 21.71. They're both well within what I would look for at a minimum for quality sky darkness. Defo try and stay away from direct lighting, I know it's hard. There always seems to be that one place somewhere really dark that has an unshielded 1,000 gigawatt beacon outside their door!

 

Haha, yeah well the pub had 3 very bright lights, but get them out of direct sight and it should be fine. If not, I have found a couple of other lay byes further along the road where it should be. As I said, I shall recce this time.

43 minutes ago, Ships and Stars said:

I never asked what scope you were using?

 

Currently have a 10" F4.7 dob (1200 FL), however, currently considering buying a Taurus T350 14" F4.8  (FL 1700) with 96% reflection mirrors. I looked at this last week whilst I was browsing TE's website. I had been looking at the Orion 14"inteliscope truss but the weight put me off at 62KG, I am not getting any younger. Then found this T350 which has a total weight of just 23KG 😯, John found the manufacturer website for me 👍. I said, trying to convince myself that I was only "considering" buying it. I have been thinking about this scope since I found it a lot and so I am now 3/4 committed to buying. 

1 hour ago, Ships and Stars said:

Hi Steve,

Lots of good info above and good idea to think ahead for this one. The HH was a biggie for me so I spent a lot of time planning. Looking back at notes/reports, November 29th last year was the first time for me. It was something I had been really wanting to bag. I saw it a number of times between Nov and Feb, conditions permitting. Even once through binoviewers! There's a long-winded report here on that under deep-sky observing.

I used both a 12" and a 20" dob with either a 17.5mm Baader Morpheus or 27mm Orion flat edge EP and Astronomik Hb. With the 12" dob under 21.5-6 SQM I could just 'detect it' for fleeting glimpses until eye fatigue won and I stopped. I never saw it with direct vision. The 20" dob under 21.85+ SQM - bang, right there, but still a very, very dim scene, you have to let it soak in with excellent dark adaptation. 

 

- Dark skies, dark skies, dark skies. A somewhat educated guess, partially based on sites I have seen it from -  at least 21.5 SQM, preferably 21.6 or more.  I have tried numerous times under 20.3 SQM at home with a 20" dob and never felt like I was even close. Don't know your range, but pick the darkest place you can find within an hour or two of home unless you're really lucky on location!! Car parks for hillwalkers are a fav of mine. Make sure you can park there, perhaps visit in advance. Nothing worse that driving half the night and find it's rubbish or not accessible! Garsdale/Garsdale Head in the Yorkshire Dales shows 21.76 SQM and looks potentially the best spot nearest to Burnley. 

 

 

 

 

I actually went near there last time out just before the lockdown came into play. The weather was not playing ball though, there was a bitter, cold wind from the North and the skies were ok but not good enough for dim objects.

There was also a pub near to the ribblehead viaduct with outside lights on, roughly half a mile from me. I rather foolishly didn't think to travel just the  extra half mile to get it out of direct view and when it went dark, it was throwing a shadow the outside lights were that bright. 

Anyway I have checked out this spot on the LP map Ribblehead viewing spot and it has no direct site of the pub and seems to have a great south view. The extra travel moves the pub round to the west too. I intend checking this spot out before I commit to it this time, the SQm reading is 21.71.

Quick question to anyone, will an sqm of 21.76 be a huge improvement on the 21.71 ?

Steve

Thank you John, Gerry and Calvin.  Your input has been very helpful and much appreciated by myself.  Not wishing the summer away but looking forward to Orion's return.

Steve

3 hours ago, jetstream said:

Nope.

 

This does matter IMHO, as does using a low scatter eyepiece. Larger dobs can get away with scatter rich 20/21mm 100 deg eyepieces as the long FL narrows the view and the HH is bigger in the EP.My 24" shows the HH no filter with the 20 APM and 21E at .82 deg TFOV.

You are right about the 1 deg TFOV IMHO and even a bit less is better. You have a 25mm Vixen plossl- perfect!

My 25mm Super plossl shows it as does the 25mm TV plossl.

Question Steve- what filter do you have?

Kudos for your planning btw- you will see it no question and yes seeing the Flame, no filter is a pre requisite.

Its an astronomik HB Gerry. I pondered a long time before shelling out the cash for this. Was a lot of money for an item that is little used and to date has only one confirmed capture, I bought it 3 years since.

Already got the link but thanks anyway John.

But I totally agree, It's amazing when you try to process in your mind that what you are viewing occurred before the dinosaurs were here on earth and while earth was like Venus is now.

Try these for the focuser

https://www.highpointscientific.com/william-optics-motorized-device-for-focusers-f-md

Try making your own mask. I made two yesterday, cost around £1.50 each 

33 minutes ago, John said:

 

".....it's like trying to see a little bit of nothing with a little bit of less than nothing resting over it...."

Good luck with the Horsey

 

 

hahaha, that last bit made me laugh a little more than I should have.

And your post has summed up nicely in a few sentences what It took me to say in a far more long winded effort. Thanks, I think 😄 

Seriously though, as well as the HH my list is compiled of some quasars too when the opportunity is given again. I guess they are a massive amount of not a lot too when considered along the same lines as the HH.

Thanks

Steve

I have tried on a few occasions for the horsey but never managed to see either it or the flame for that matter.

For some the horsey is something of a holy grail. To be honest of the many reports I have read, it doesn't sound as though it is that spectacular, more of a, "I have seen it" kind of object rather than it was something of beauty. 

I realise we are some time of Orion being available again but time is something I have plenty of at the moment so I am building up a file of things I  want to knock off so to speak.

Anyway, in the reports or references I have been reading, I have been able to gather and/or confirm a lot of information, much of which is perfectly obvious, some not so. 

The darkest sky you can get yourself under, pretty much a given tbh. The seeing also needs to be spot on  and settled.

No moon. You will get away with a small smiley but as above the darker the better.

HB filter is the best filter you can use on this object, preferably one of the high end variety. However a good quality UHC filter will work if you have those pitch black skies and good seeing. 

A exit pupil of no less than 4mm up to 7mm depending on your age and your eyes own dark adjusted pupil. Remember, lost light here means you lower the chance of bagging this object. I had my own eyes exit pupil checked by an opticiian. They said 6mm. My max exit pupil is 55.mm. The optimum exit pupil for this object and also the HB filter seems to be between 5 - 5.5 mm

Aperture. The bigger the better really, and a faster DOB appears to be the preferred weapon. I have read a couple of reports of people seeing it in a 6" frac but this is exceptional and not the norm. A 10" dob has been suggested as preferred minimum.

The object is situated very close to the bright star Alnitak, you need to get this star out of the FOV. It will affect your viewing and reduce your chance of seeing it.  From what I can find it won't particularly kill your night vision, but it will draw your vision and make it harder to spot the object. This is not the same response in all reports, just seems there are a lot of report saying the same or similar. I think from my own experience it "may" cause retinal memory ghosting akin to a flashbulb going off.

Before you have a bash at the object, try spotting the flame nebula first. If you can't see that, forget the horsey.

FOV is the last one that to be honest I am stuck on, can't find a reference anywhere. The horsey itself is small, but the nebula behind it (IC 434)  which forms the backdrop to allow you to see it is quite a large object. I am given to understand that 1 degree is a desirable TFOV here but according to the attached it could be up to 1.25 or maybe even more.

Problem is I have no observer reference I can find. The above is an image. As we all know our own capabilities fall far short of electronic ones. 

So to get to my planning ahead question, (yeah, yeah I know I took long enough 😄 ) what does anyone else know about this fov query. I have two EP's that will do well at the supposed desired exit pupil size. Ones FOV gives me a little over 1 degree, the other comes in at 1.75 degrees. However the bigger FOV one pushes the horsey away from the centre of the EP in an effort to remove the glare of Alnitak. The one degree glass seems the ideal answer but just looking for other opinions. 

TIA 

Steve

I use a SW127 mak on the AZ GTI Wifi mount. I love it for doubles and globulars.

Not had a chance on planetary yet as the usual culprits are too early in the morning. Really need to get it onto Venus while the time is right though. 

I did own a 8" SCT a good while since, enjoyed using it but I wanted more aperture and less faff in the end.

If I counld only own one scope, it would be a difficult choice between a catadioptric or a dob mounted reflector. However thankfully the swmbo is very forgiving and other than the odd grumble, lets me own both plus a couple of fracs. 👍😊

Steve

I have a mate who has one of these tripods, very sturdy. The difference would be immense.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth/sky-watcher-38-stainless-steel-tripod.html

47 minutes ago, Oldfort said:

I was told by my opthalmologist that there is no guarantee of success.  My experience is that the floaters come and then fade away.  If they are a new thing, its worth getting it checked out.

Just had a eyetest 2 months since but thanks anyway. BTW I have no intention of getting my eyes done. Managed with glasses for best part of 50 years, think I can manage for whatever years god has given me to play with.

Steve

12 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Thank you very much, I knew it was something simple 👍😁

Hello everyone. 

Been playing around with some images from the other night. They were out of focus as you can see which I know I cannot change but just trying a bit of processing to try and improve the end result.

After doing the wavelets on the right hand panel are various options as you know. See below a little tweak I did with the gamma option to try and reduce noise. I was really happy with this but how do I change it from just applying it to the panel to applying it to a full screen.

I am probably missing something very simple but what that is I can't figure.

TIA

Steve

5 minutes ago, Paul M said:

I have terrible floaters that get in the way at the eyepiece.

I find them worse after sudden eye movement, particularly looking up/down rapidly. If I have the eyepiece at a convenient viewing position so that my head is in a forward looking/horizontal position as though I'm looking towards the horizon the worst floaters tend to settle. Not always easy to get the head/eye viewing position right but it does make difference when I can. Avoiding rapid eye movement is equally difficult!

If you feel so inclined, I believe there is a surgical procedure where the vitreous humor is removed and replaced with nice floater free synthetic gel 😬 

This also cures your astigmatism but costs around £4K 😳 (per eye)

9 minutes ago, Stu said:

The only two options really are larger aperture or binoviewers. Larger aperture increases the exit pupil at a given magnification but obviously there are limits, and I find around 100 to 120mm optimum for solar white light so at high power you are always looking at small exit pupils.

The solution for me is binoviewers. They took me a long time to get used to, but I now use them all the time for both white light and Ha. They don’t get rid of the floaters completely, but do reduce their impact so that they are not a major distraction.

As for finding the focus point, @Littleguy80 and I had a bit of a discussion on this recently as it can be tricky if your eye just won’t pick up the correct point. I find that either tweaking the focus in and out, or better still panning the scope across the surface can be enough for you to suddenly pick it up and for the granulation to snap into view.

Thanks Stu, much appreciated.

Sadly the only paired eyepieces I have for my binoviewers are SW basic plossls.  Even with barlow I am not hitting enough magnification. Although I think my neighbour has a 2x barlow so could borrow his and stack to see how that pans out. Mag 145 ish with two.

Also a good idea to pan the surface as this may also help with losing the floaters distraction and at the same time pull out the surface detail. 👍

Steve

So I am using a frac and lunt solar wedge. I am finding focus fine, getting some lovely crisp and sharp results but my issue is as per the title eye floaters right in the central view of my eyepiece. Obviously the higher the magnitude, the more this becomes an issue.

I am trying to pick up granulation but always my eye focus keeps picking up the floaters and so eye focus is way out for picking up surface detail. I have never had a problem with any other viewing so this is really being a pain. I am using a F10/90mm frac btw. Cranked up to x180 to try to get the surface detail. I have tried viewing the solar edge but obviously the detail is much harder to pick out at the edge.

So what does anyone do to get around floaters, any suggestions greatly appreciated.

Steve

Just checked their website and the place is fully booked out so looks like I will pass over on this people. Hope you all enjoy.

2 hours ago, Littleguy80 said:

Have a read of this. You may be surprised at what you can see with a 10” dob  

 

 

Thanks for that Neil, great report there and I am certainly going to give a bash as soon as opportunities allow.

I think 3c273 will be my first to have a go at. It's the relatively easy mag 13 in virgo I mentioned above. I have printed off a number of charts in increasing magnification to allow me to home in on it. They work on the same star hopping basis as yours.

Cheers, Steve

1 hour ago, michael.h.f.wilkinson said:

I have spotted it a few years ago when it was about mag 13.8. Most distant object I have ever spotted at an estimated 3.5 billion light years away.

There is a quasar that is also 2.5 biilion light years away in virgo I think, however with the current situation of lockdown, the likely hood of me getting to see it are fast disappearing. I think it is the designation 3C 273 for the quasar. Mag 13

There are others and 1 is 4.5 billion light years away. Don't think my 10" dob would get it at 14 mag but always worth a try. 

bump

39 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

Assuming you don't wear glasses.  I just went back to a 22mm Nagler after 10 years with a 21mm Ethos because my astigmatism has gotten bad enough I needed the eye relief.

Have you not tried the Televue DIOPTRIX Don. I use one now and I love it. Very easy to use too. 

3 minutes ago, AngryDonkey said:

Hi Steve,

I have the 12 inch f5 son and absolutely love it. This thing is so small that I can easily take it in camping trips with a family of 4 and the dog. It's up and running in 10min tops and provides amazing views. Build quality is good but of course the portable design makes it lighter and I guess less stable as a result. I never found this a problem though unless it was windy where it needs a while to settle.

I bought mine from Telescope Express but it would have been better to order it directly. If you go direct you can specify exactly what you want and it's not any more expensive. I ordered the push to system from Taurus directly as an add on but it would have been much easier if it already had been factory fitted. They were really good an made me a special bracket so it was easier to mount.

So all in all I'm really happy!

Thanks Mike, good to hear they deal with you direct. How good were they to deal with direct. Were there any language barrier issues or misunderstandings

19 minutes ago, Ships and Stars said:

They certainly look nicely crafted but don't know anything about them. If you go for one, I'd see if you can get the 1/8pv 96% reflectivity supremax 'professional' mirror option listed on their website, a 413EUR option, that would set it apart from the mass-produced 14" dobs, otherwise it just seems a slightly expensive dob for that aperture. In the mass-produced world, the SW non-GOTO flextube is £675 cheaper and the 350p GOTO is £105 cheaper, though the light weight of the Taurus might make all the difference in being able to use it more and the high-end optics option is quite appealing. The build quality looks a step up form your average mass-produced scope. I'd definitely check reviews, but I'm intrigued myself. Let us know what you find out?

PS I see they make a 24" T600! Hmmmm...

A review here S&S. https://www.taurustelescopes.com/test_EN.pdf

TBH it might be a sponsored type review but never the less it is a very positive one. 

The pricing seems a little unclear. According to the specifications on the TS website where I initially found it, the one they are selling comes with reflectivity of 96% (IE professional specification) at a cost of $2250 where as on the manufacturer website same spec costs $2911. This would need clarifying.

Steve

11 minutes ago, John said:

I guess you will have seen the Taurus website Steve ?:

https://www.taurustelescopes.com/en/home/

There is a review of the 16 inch T400 in English linked to from there.

I don't know anything about them personally but I have to say that they look rather nice and 23kg for a 14 inch is very light.

 

Hadn't even thought to look to be honest John, silly me really.

Looking at the specs and especially the mirrors, they look very impressive indeed. It appears from the TS website they are advertising the supremax mirrors. I would have that confirmed though.

Thanks for the link John, much appreciated.

Steve

Hello all.

I have been pondering getting a larger dob for a while. Although the current situation means any plans are on hold, however it hasn't stopped me looking around at options from time to time. Damned itch.

I was considering the Orion pushto 14", I like the pushto idea but what puts me off to some extent was the 60kg total weight. Price wise when available around £2000

Anyway, I came accross this at teleskop express: https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p11432_Taurus-T350-14--f-4-8-Classic-Dobsonian-Teleskop.html This is the one I am interested in finding more about.

Taurus 14" Truss dob, F4.8 giving a focal length of 1700mm and this means my existing glass collection can be retained, something I really do not want to change. Most impressive of all is the 23KG total weight, very impressive but also a slight concern Re: possible loss of integral strength. Again price wise around £2000 but no push to. The lack of pushto no longer concerns me, help locating used to be a serious consideration. Times change.

Anyway, other than the obvious differences which are massive weight disparity and no pushto on the Taurus, what else does anyone know about the Taurus.

I am thinking along the lines of it's structural integrity, quality of the optics & focuser and overall build. I guess that kinda means everything 🤣

TIA folks

Steve