DaveS

I don't know, but your best bet would be an email to ASA technical support.

I certainly wasn't expecting a "how to" astrophotography tutorial, but would have like a bit more on how to get started, and showing what amateurs can do.

Next month's is their 1 hour Q&A session, so hopefully not quite so dire.

12 hours ago, Steve Ward said:

Thoroughly disappointing episode to be perfectly honest ... 🙄

4 hours ago, skybadger said:

I thought that too. A waste of time  watching presenters watch old clips on their laptops on the program. Could have been much better and covered the basics better. Turned it off. 

Regretfully I have to concur. I just watched it on iPlayer and found it very thin, as though they didn't have enough material and were trying to eke it out.

Could have been much better. 

Possibly there was less light pollution then, so the stars were more obvious.

Oh dear. Actually I missed it as I was watching the NASA Spaceflight livestream of SpaceX testing Booster 7.

Will pick it up on iPlayer.

Well, while the main telescope is capturing it's 10 or 15 min subs I grab a pair of bins for a bit of eyeball+ astronomy. It helps that I have Bortle 3 skies.

Best place for the HDD is in the office on the network. For my main rig(s) I save directly to the big NAS via ethernet.

Although all my mini PCs have their own 500 GB internal SSDs for local storage. In the case of the MeLe Quieter 2 that's a M2 SSD, and it's fast.

AstroArt 8, very fast and good stacking, plus seriously underrated processing, with tools that get better with each version.

Trouble is, it's been around a while so tends to get overlooked in favour of the latest "flavour-of-the-month" package.

It's also much more intuitive than PixInsight which had me  .

I'm amazed at the amount of colour you've managed to bring out, especially in the spiral arms.

My versions end up with a dull grey-blue.

I would have said Chroma a year or so ago but they've become as stupidly expensive as Astrodon.

Perhaps Antlia? Though I only know them by rep, I don't have any direct experience.

23 hours ago, DaveS said:

Well, OK if you twist my arm, then a new camera for the ODK 12 might be attractive.

One of These perhaps though I prefer the QHY Version. But would need new filters and wheel.

It would give me a wider FoV plus the ability to crop anywhere.

20 hours ago, Sunshine said:

I like to keep my wishes within the realm of the obtainable to avoid a lifetime of disappointment.

A TSA-120 would be just fine, a new one I can unbox myself!

*sigh* I could, just about, afford it, but that would scupper plans for some serious, and much needed, home improvements.

So I will merely have to dream.

BBC 4 at 10 o/c.

An Astrophotography special.

I can already hear the howl of rage from those who merely *look* through their telescopes.

That sounds logical.

Can you do a Test Solve in Sequence? The log will show the camera orientation.

He's still not happy.

Well, OK if you twist my arm, then a new camera for the ODK 12 might be attractive.

One of These perhaps though I prefer the QHY Version. But would need new filters and wheel.

It would give me a wider FoV plus the ability to crop anywhere.

I don't have anything on my wish list beyond more clear, moonless, nights.

4 minutes ago, Mike Q said:

Just launch the thing.  If it goes boom.... write it off as a bad idea and start over 

Don't bother trying to launch the damn thing.

It *is* a bad idea.

Start over. Or give the job to SpaceX

Scrubbed.

Why an I not surprised?

He's even less happy, it that's possible

He's not happy

Not voodoo, but a bit of a stretch / speculation

A prime example of Voodoo Physics, but it's not really his fault, he's just reporting other researchers' voodoo. gotta love Jordan, but he does have a tendency to go off piste occasionally.

16 hours ago, wulfrun said:

Well founded scepticism, I suspect. One problem would appear to be generating enough electrical power, which got no mention. I'm not convinced it'll work in space on "virtual particles" either. The video seemed very fanciful with too much dreamy music and too many cgi, futuristic-looking ships and no demonstrations of any working reality.

Yep, I find the deemy music / CGI one of the more irritating features of the AstronX channel. I would rather see a rough mobile phone video of a real working prototype any day.

I suspect this would only work with a flight-certified micro nuclear power plant to provide the electricity. The energy requirements are fundamental, 7.8 km/s for LEO, and 1/2 MV^2. kinetic energy. And no getting around it with voodoo physics.

Ionised air up to a few km, then an on board working fluid. Argon perhaps?

I should have been clearer. My mild scepticism was about the practicality rather than the principle of MHD.