DaveS

I am thinking that a dome has the advantage that the shutter can be closed even if the 'scope isn't parked, which could be important in an automated obsy, if it rains and you need to close the shutter quickly but the mount hasn't parked. However, I'm seeing threads here that have ben giving me second thoughts about Pulsar, due to their woeful customer (Non) service, plus issues with water ingress and fibreglass quality. Won't be able to put any concrete plans in motion until I have the house and am on site to do a proper survey. @laser_jock99 I'll probably put the DDM 60 and Rigel pier on one of the patio areas, as it will be a fairly quick installation and will carry my dual narrow / wide rig. Only problem will be the view, mainly to the west unfortunately.

More thoughts and cold feet. Seriously doubting my DIY (Non)-skills so I'm thinking I could probably make an octagon about 1.5m high that a Pulsar short-wall dome could fit on. The base would still be 2.5mx4m with a 2.4m? octagonal obsy. I'll keep my current Rigel pier and Telegizmos cover for the DDM60 which will go on the patio, possibly with a good foundation block to carry my current dual rig, and put a taller pier, possibly one of these: http://astrograph.net/epages/www_astrograph_net.sf/en_GB/?ObjectPath=/Shops/www_astrograph_net/Products/AGEMCP20014M in the dome to take a DDM85 Basic (On Rupert's recommendation) to carry a 12" RC, either the GSO version, or if I'm feeling flush a CFF one. Having a larger base than the dome will mean there would be room for the door to open, and for a bit of eyeball observing at a higher level. Thoughts? Hell, I've only just started the legal stuff to buy the house, so it could still go belly-up. Won't relax till I've got the keys in my hot little hand .

Thanks, I'll do that though I like to have a book open in front of me. Also useful for bashing my head against.

FWIW I've pushed the button on "Sketchup for Dummies" and "3D Printing with Sketchup" from that long river thing. Should be with me on Monday.

Thanks Dave, yes that makes sense. Possibly conventional wood-framed and clad walls up to the rails, then the welded steel roof. Hopefully there should be steel fabricators in a rural area, after all farmers need barns repairing?

Thanks James. I have a couple of books in my Amazon basket, just got to buy them now. This is a *very* rough first go at putting some thoughts down. No real structure as such, just a rough outline. The roof runs east-west-ish, and opens to the west, furthest from viewpoint. The base is 2.5x4 metres by 0.5 metre high. The obsy is roughly 2.2 by 3 metres with walls 1.5 metre high. The nearside wall will be fixed up to the pitch of the roof. I will make something more detailed as I learn Sketchup.

Have now installed Sketchup Make and trying ideas. Learning curve? More like a mountain! I wonder if @RayD and @souls33k3r have any ideas? .

Those are interesting, but at some point I am thinking of automating roof opening and closing so having a fold-down flap anywhere would multiply the complexity. The pitched roof can also be higher without needing specific planning permission.

Good point Dave, thanks. This is why I've posted my first thoughts so early. Don't want to run at this like a bull at a gate only to come a cropper. I'm thinking of a steeper pitch, something like 60 deg internal angle, so perhaps the bracing can be further up the roof? If I only had a single pier / mount then a dome from Pulsar would be a possibility, but more expensive and not as much fun!

Just yo make it clear, this is the 'scope in the default park position The roof would roll off along the dec axis.

Adding to this. Perhaps, instead of a single big concrete slab, I can cast two tall concrete blocks, maybe 1 metre into the ground and 0.5 metre above, then build the obsy with a 0.5 metre stand-off to raise the floor level to the height of the blocks. This would reduce the cost and would act as less of a heat-store. Downsides would be the increased complexity of the woodwork (I'm notoriously cack-handed), as well as providing a lair for animals, esp foxes unless I provide *very* secure sides. It would be easier to run the power and network cables under an open build, but again the animals might be a problem. Another reason for the pitched roof is that ASA mounts default park with the dec axis horizontal and the 'scope on the east side pointing at the zenith. For my DDM60 parking this way would make the initial homefind simpler. However I hope to install a long FL 'frac so need the height above the pier, so having a pitched roof roll off along its axis makes sense (At least to me). Sorry for not posting diagrams, got to install and learn sketchup first, and not much room on my boot drive.

Very early thoughts as yet. Looking at the house I'm in the process of buying, the garden has somewhat high horizons. If I cannot lower the hedges significantly, then perhaps I can raise the Obsy? Looking at planning regs, if I go for a double pent roof, then provided it's more than 2m from the boundary I can build up to 4m high, which means, I think that I'd have height to put the whole thing on a concrete platform 500-600mm high. For aesthetics I'd build (Have built, more like) a stone retaining wall rather than just use shuttering. As the house is in a conservation zone, and the obsy is likely to be more than 20m from the house I'll be limited to 10 sqm, so perhaps 2.5x4m with a 2.2x3m obsy with a border for access. I'm planning for 2 piers / mounts so I can image 2 targets at once, and there won't be a warm room as I plan semi-remote operation from the house. I'll leave off for now, as I haven't even thought to much about construction, beyond basic stud-and-cladding, and invite any thoughts / suggestions.

I meant to post another couple of pics from the other side to show the cabling on the scopes. From the rear, showing the power cable. And from the front showing the USB hub on the mount.

I thought I'd posted on this thread, but here goes Main scope is the 130 f/7 with ASI1600MM-C and filer wheel. The FW has Baader LRGB and Astrodon HII filters. This is set up for the Leo Triplet The piggy-back is the 80 f/4.4 with ASI183MM-C and filter wheel. The FW has ZWO LRGB filters and Baader HII. This is for Markarian's Chain, so the sensor is E-W. All the power and data connections run through the mount. The slightly odd arangement of cables etc help the balance around the telescope axes. This mount is *very* sensitive to balance.

Tell me about it. I reconfigured my scopes, one for the Leo Triplet, the other for Markarian's Chain, thinking that with the school easter holls I'd be able to get *some* data without having to be up at stupid o/c for work. Not a chance. I go back on Mon with nothing so far and little chance of anything until then. Forecast says it may improve next week. Typical . Mind you, it's the families with kids home from school I feel for. They must be going nuts.

I'll add that I regard imaging as a long game, being prepared to carry projects over more than one year. I have one I started last Oct that I'll pick up again when the targets come round again. It's when projects don't even start that's frustrating.

This spring has been dire with near constant cloud and rain. The few sunny days quickly clouded over come evening, just to rub it in. As an imager it's nearly impossible to grab the odd 5mins.

I would take what TS say with a pinch of salt and look at the spot diagrams. If the spots corrosponding to the corners of APS-C are OK for you then go with it, else crop. Myself, I'd rather go with a normal triplet apo and either a plain flattener or a reducer, as I did with the 130 I bought.

This is nearly the last of my images from the 80 f/4.4 and ASI1600 MM-C The Rosette in NHO, lost count of the number of hours I collected data, but is was several, some of it from last year. The corners don't bear too much inspection, and it's a crop as I had severe alignment issues in all data. But you know what? I don't care anymore. It is what it is, OK for "pretty pictures" provided you don't look too closely. I've now set it up with the ASI183MM-C for Markarian's chain. Whether I'll get any data is unknowable, given our rubbish weather lately. Edit: Looking at the TS site, it should give reasonable stars out to 6.5mm, and usable to 10mm. Beyond that they start to get bloated. So imaging circles of 13 and 20mm respectively. The ASI183 runs just under 16mm, and the ASI1600 runs 21mm.

I've been persisting with mine, but agree with Paul that the corners are hard (Impossible?) to get right. I've been sort-of bodging along with an ASI1600MM and now with a ASI183MM.

If you're lookjng for more FL for galaxies, then I think you'll find the 130 f/5 too short. Have a look at the various 130 f/7 apos, then add a suitable flattener.

The 130 Imaging Star is a triplet apo with a matched 3-element reducer. The spacing is very critical, I have the 80mm f/4.4 and it's a real pig, not helped by the picture on TS not being the same as the actual scope. Trying to get a meaningful figure for BF out of TS was like blood from a stone. When I was looking for something longer I went for the 130 f/7 with 2.5" flattener. At least I had a usable figure for BF. I also added an APM / Ricardi reducer.

@FLO Any chance of this becoming available in 1.25", or 31mm? With the proliferation of LED streetlights this could be a very good L filter within a LRGB set.

This weekend I'll probably be swapping cameras over. Getting the new ASI183 on the 80mm, and maybe putting the ASI1600 on the 130mm, though that will require a rebalance of the rig if I swap the Trius for the ASI.

Just turned up today Thanks to FLO. Website said 7-10 days for the filter wheel, turned up in 2 .