wxsatuser

Yes thats a nice one.

Sound depends on if it's a ping or burst and how long. Pings can range from a click to a wheeeee with doppler, bursts are similar but longer may be with doppler and a warbling type of sound. They are mostly unmistakable, when you hear them you will know.

You may have wave files, have a look in the directories to see if there are any. I know my SL did wave files.

Are you recording the sound, if so it should be easy to tell.

Direct signal and a local sprog at 2000hz Direct signal plus a burst. Several pings on the trot plus a direct signal, sprog at just over 2000hz Satellite with direct signal plus aircraft running off the main direct signal.

When I used to do meteorscatter on 2metres it was always exciting waiting and then receiving the pings and bursts. Sometimes one burst would complete a contact other times it would take a whole hour off pings, you just never knew what would happen.

You most likey want to see speckling on the waterfall as this is noise. You would expect the receiver to pick up various noises, so don't have a black water fall.

Get the ant outside and lower the elevation.

Considering how low the spots have been I still pick up some nice contacts. No yagi, HF ones are to big for my garden, one 7 band vertical and a 5band cobweb seem to work ok. The antenna farm and the obsy.

I have several interests to keep me happy. I'm now back at my original one which keeps me busy in my spare time. The weather does'nt have any bearing on it apart from a few more sunspots might help.

Taper rollers should spin freely with no play

Your camera has a back focus of 6.5mm if I'm correct. If the Borg reducer has a distance of 55mm you need spacers of 48.5mm https://www.sciencecenter.net/hutech/borg/techdocs/7704.pdf

Could be, may be the image is to bright, the peak could be pulled more left as long as no data is to the left as we don't want to clip anything that may be there. There is a huge difference between the camera jpg and RAW histogram. If we look at both we can see why the exposure should be at least 20>25% on a Canon. RAW histogram of Californian Nebula You can see it is just clear of the left, linear data. This image is what the camera jpg will look like, histogram on 20%. A tone curve is applied in camera and by most software so we can see roughly what we are going to get. Remember RAW images are dark, very dark for astro, also lack contrast and colour.

Yes, it really wants to be well clear of the left hand side, the back of the camera image is a jpg and it has been tone curved. The RAW image will still be over hard to the left, this is why it's best to expose to at least 25% on a Canon camera histogram. This way the RAW should just be detached from the left. It is a trade off, if you go any further right the bright stars all lose colour and over expose.

You will most likely need to stop down both so no real advantage. The f/1.4 is as close to a red ring as there is possible to get but at a much better price. The f/1.4 is a very nice lens for general photography, I have one but never used it for astro as I have better alternatives.

Use 10x liveview to focus. Pick a high ISO3200 should do it, and use 10x liveview. As you focus on a brightish star it should pop in and out of focus, some where between you should see the star as a nice point, that's the focus. With a bit of practice you will crack it quite easily.

It might be one. The radiant is well off you image below Polaris which is near the bottom centre.

Personally I have stacked out 5 plane trails on one image and 4 satellite trails on one image with no problem. Also have done a few sessions where not one satellite has hit a sub, plane trails hit nearly every session. Being located on Gatwick inbound with sometimes a plane every two minutes at peak. We also have to remember the satellites are often eclipsed so are not visible all the time.

Don't know what that is, seems to be multiple trails. One stops dead on Vega.

Don't bother me. Never had a problem removing satellites and planes from images, just use the correct stacking method and plenty of subs.

Satellite passing in front of the Moon

The Starlink ones are re-entering all the time. One re-entering might appear to be going a lot faster and of course be very bright. Starlink 53 and 27 came in on the 26th, 1311 on the 25th. 21 on the 22nd 57 and 39 on the 18th 50 on the 17th 42, 69, 37, 78 and 35 on the 16th 36 and 54 on 15th to name a few.

Which, one, a Starlink and time if you have it.

I have never caught any part of a plane but get many trails as we are on inbound and outbound Gatwick. Someone could most likely work it out from the speed, height and your sensor size/scope. The strobes are most likely flashing at 1persec but this is not set in stone, it can go as low as 40/min I believe. You won't see other planes or their parts on images as their strobes will not light any part of the fuselage or wings. Most airliners rear strobes are well back on the tail, more than likely will not light the tailplane. The aircraft in your image has the usual nav lights on the wing tips plus a belly beacon. It also has the wing mounted landing lights on, these are on the wing leading edge just out from the fuselage. BTW This aircraft was travelling around 450>475mph at approx 21000feet over Surrey