Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by AndyWB

  1. Is this a Heritage 130p? Just it matches those numbers too, and if so, the weight of a lot of zooms might be a bit much for the plastic focusser thing. It'd be up to the likes of the Lunt 7-21 zoom eyepiece I've got (though never tried in the Heritage) - but the Hyperion Zoom is a much bigger (and better) beastie.

    If it's not a Heritage 130p, please ignore this post!

  2. If you've a bad back, you'll probably want a table or something to set the Heritage 130p on. I use mine sitting on the ground, and then sit next to it on a camping seat, but it does involve an amount of leaning over. Alternatively, if you have something like an AZ4 mount, it fits nicely on that. The Heritage 130p doesn't take a Telrad / Rigel / RACI though - no space to fit one - but the red dot finder is okay to use, and with a 30mm eyepiece you'll get a 2 degree field of view, so it's only about being roughly accurate...

    That said, I think if funds allowed it, I'd be thinking of small refractor with a diagonal on an alt-az, though.

  3. As everyone has said, its a great scope. Apart from a slightly stiff focuser, i have had no issues with mine. A good range of eyepieces that work very well with it are Vixen NPL's which sell for between £30-40 each. 

    I agree with Paul, a couple of cheaper-end eypieces won't go amiss, and the NPL recommendation is good. I reckon the Vixen NPL 30mm is my most used eyepiece with my 130p. I'd also recommend something like a 5mm BST Starguider. This will give you a nice 'low power/high power' range. I don't think 'buy another scope' is necessarily the only valid route to upgrade, and having bought a much bigger scope, it's worth noting that there are things the 130p can do that it can't. In particular, the field of view on the 130p can be fairly wide. The Pleiades and the Andromeda galaxy can look better in this than my 10" scope, which simply can't fit them in the field of view.

    The weakness of this scope (and they all have at least one!) is the focusser. Some are a bit stiff, others a bit sloppy. It's made of formed plastic, so it's all about how well they really fit. However, a bit of teflon based plumbers tape on the focusser thread seems to help them greatly (if it's a problem. Mine wasn't, but a friend's was a bit sloppy)

    As to the scope's capability? Well, under dark skies you should be able to see all the items on the Messier catalog; I've clocked up 70-odd objects on it with mine. Yes, bigger scopes will show you more. Yes, better eyepieces will show you more. Don't worry about that - it's an excellent scope for the price, and a good way of seeing where your astronomy interests lie. They are quite a popular scope round here.

    My 130p still sees more nights out than my 250px, just 'cos of it's portability. 

  4. How high up was Jupiter?

    If it had just cleared the horizon then that may be adding to to problem. Lincolnshire tends to be flat.

    +1 for this. I looked at Jupiter at about 10 degrees up last week, and couldn't make out any bands. Normally, when it's high, I can see bands, etc. with my 5" scope.

    +1 for Olly's point about seeing too - sometimes when the jetstream is overhead I can't make out any detail either.

  5. Um, yeah, pretty much that it's dewing up sometimes. Dewed up after about 2.5 hours a few weeks ago. It's not always by any means, but sometimes. And I've recently found that the travel hairdryer approach means starting my car before it supplies power to it - and starting the car generates a lot of light.

    If it's a lot of hassle, well, I might not do it, but I wanted to investigate.

  6. Hi,

    I'm thinking about trying to lay my mitts on a Kendrick split secondary heater for my 10" dob. However, I'm stuggling to figure out what size! Looking at this page - http://www.kendrickastro.com/newtonian.html#Split - it seems that none of these split secondary heaters are small enough to my secondary (though my measurements are a bit rough - I didn't take the mirror off, and the measurements were 'tricky' with it mounted). Even the smallest seems  a fair bit longer than my secondary mirror.

    I'm figuring this must be muppetry on my part. Has anyone ever tried fitting a kendrick split heater to a 10" f4.8 skywatcher? Which heater did you use?

    Or does anyone happen to have the exact dimensions of such a secondary mirror?

    Thanks for any help,


  7. Well, I use a 6mm Vixen SLV as my primary planetary eyepiece in my 250px, which is the same focal length as the 200p, so I reckon having a 6mm available is good - a nice x200. In good conditions Jupiter looks lovely. So I'm going to plump for the 12mm BST. It's my favourite of the BSTs (followed by the 5mm), whereas my 8mm feels a little soft, though I know others who really rate it. And like you say, 12mm and a x2 barlow is a useful power.

  8. You're going to be needing some pretty good conditions to catch these moon occultings.

    No kidding. I'd have been happy last night with " 2 dots - 1 dot - 2 dots ", but Jupiter was low, and I was looking over Reading, so the seeing was rubbish. Bad enough, in fact, that I didn't stick around the hour or so I reckon it'd be before I'd spot a difference.

    The good news is, plenty more opportunities, and Jupiter is getting higher!

    • Like 1

  9. I used to kayak with a chap who worked for the RAF in the north of Scotland who, as he put it, "identified clouds as 'friendly'" as his day job. He told me that there were things that appeared to exist on radar, and had unusual performance characteristics - but he didn't feel the need to invoke little green men. Mostly, he was suspicious of our American friends.

    And I don't mind being like bacteria to our alien overlords, so long as it's "minute, invisible, bacteria"...

    • Like 1

  10. Perhaps the question of storage and observing location should be considered plus if there are any physical limitations to moving heavy objects.

    If there are stairs involved this might mean not bothering too often if it is difficult/heavy to get the gear outside.

    That's a fair point, but for a 8" or a 10" Skywatcher, I don't think there's a lot in it. I believe they use the same base (which is the heavy bit), and the optical tubes are the same length. The 10" is a bit more bulky, but not that much.

    But the point generally is a good one - either could be a pain if stairs/disability/etc. are involved.

  11. Yeah, I can't see all 6 clips with my cheshire on my 250px. I have to use  a little collimation cap - it seems to give a wider view.

    I'm going to go with option 3 - it's all fine, everything's probably central as the clips are all on the edge of what you can see, and the secondary is (I hope) central and round, and the Cheshire hopefully has everything aligned.

    Mine are like that - just on the edge of the field of view, but I can't get all 6 at once.

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.