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.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_lunar_landings.thumb.jpg.b50378d0845690d8a03305a49923eb40.jpg

Bukko

Members
  • Content Count

    433
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Bukko last won the day on July 18

Bukko had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

313 Excellent

2 Followers

About Bukko

  • Rank
    Star Forming

Profile Information

  • Location
    SW France
  1. This is for imaging of course. I do have an 8" Dob and a Frac on a HEQ5 for visual. When I get time, I am gonig to fit some paving slabs into the gravel area for placing a tripod and for the Dob... Gordon
  2. All jobs are easier when you have a helper !! Good luck with the pier. Gordon.
  3. Without the motors, I could open the shutter by hand and rotate the dome with a single finger.. So with a 1m apeture, every 30 minutes or so, I would just need to push the dome round a bit so it would be possible to use this without the automation. But also I could not disappear in the warmth and work from there... To be honest, I didn't even consider this option for a single second... Gordon.
  4. Agree on the automation. I really struggle to understand why it is all so expensive; the one bit that got me with the Scopedome was the price of the pre-made wiring looms. I did think about doing my own, but having bit the bullet and shelled out for them, there is a LOT of interconnections and I was pleased not to have skipped them. Specialist fitting contractors are also expensive but apart from me taking a lot longer to build and comission, I saved thousands. And I did look at the Baader clamshell (other clamshell manufacturers are available) and searched hard to find a price without making an official enquiry. There was one posted and it is seriously expensive. But I have no doubt is is really good. If I lived in the artic, or the top of a mountain in Switzerland, it would probably be the one to go for. But I don't. If you have a decent base already, if/when more funds become available, you can always "upgrade" later. (oh.. ROR owners, please don't hate me for that... I did put it in " " afterall.. Gordon
  5. Haha. Not sure of the obby name yet, I am expected to form an astronomy club and need to be careful not to upset my neighbours... When ordered, the difference between the Pulsar and Scopedome was around a thousand pounds, but it all depends on the exchange rate. Plus, being in Europe already, carriage costs were better - it really hurts costs to cover the channel crossing so my advantage would become a disadvantage in the UK... I also get torrential rain here and not a single drop of water gets into the dome, so happy with the weather proofing. I have no axe to grind with the Pulsar, it was actually a close call between the two but the shutter width was the winning feature for me. Having purchased the Scopedomes, for sure, they are very well engineered and pre-assembly in the factory before shipping makes sure they will fit together quickly and easily on site. The only thing to be aware of is the flat and level base requirement. Less than 1mm on flatness and 0.5 degrees on level. The brick construction was done slowly and levelled carefully as we go and the occasional use of a grinder to take out any high spots made assembly easy. I am sure the same care and attention applied to a Pulsar would also pay dividends. (Please don't hate me, Pulsar owners !!) Gordon.
  6. Thanks, Dave. agree on thecost of the 16803, even though the ODK could light the chip, the costs of 2" square filters also hammers the overall cost. It might not seem like it, but I really do have a limited budget which does set a ceiling on what I can do. And there are compromises everywhere. The 16" ODK is a bit of a monster. It does demand a substantial mount, not just the weight but the focal length too. The 12" is an impressive scope too and you are probably right, for price/performance, it is most likely the sweet spot. For the domes, I am on top of a bit of an exposed hill, so protection from the weather was key. The weather station has displayed force 7 winds and I did not fancy risking a home-made ROR enclosure. The choice was between the 2.7m Pulsar and the Scopedome. The Pulsar would have been fine for the 12", but I thought for the 16", the aperature was a little tight. The cost difference was not that big, but the Scopedome just seemed to be better thought out, although pretty demanding of the base.... Gordon.
  7. Looks like I might have a name for the observatory now... Mind if I use the name?
  8. You are very welcome to come back anytime, just remember to bring your work clothes too !!! (haha) But a serious thank you for coming over to help. Marvin brought his petrol driven auger to cut the holes for the fence posts.. Didn't touch the hard clay and stones that counts for "soil" here. Luckily he also brought his big concrete breaker and every hole was dug out the hard way. Should have only needed one day, but took two. Since then, I have filled in the perimeter with more gravel, around a tonne down and still a lot more to do.... My two sons are visiting next week and if all goes well, hoping for first light if the clouds (and moon) don't mess everything up... Gordon.
  9. Errr... It's not me that wants/needs clothes... (it's NEVER me haha !!) Gordon.
  10. Not from France, the UK... Having said that, I got my 2018 tax statement from the French authorities and they want Zero Euros for the time I was here in 2018. I am sure it wil lbe a different story for 2019 though... According to my calculations, for 2018/9 I have put too much money into the account so should be entitled to some of it back. If so, then I will have some money for more toys (assuming Mrs. Bukko does not claim it for some frivolous stuff like food or clothes.. Gordon.
  11. Nope. Full price for the domes, only a bit of a reduction for the transport. Even threatened to purchase something else, they were prepared to let me go so I guess that's the price. Probably not much margin to be had.
  12. Thanks for the compliment. I hope it's being entertaining. The need for a motorised focuser will be tested hopefully soon. I have a focusing mask for the 12" but not the big ODK. But I stilll have a lot of the computer stuff to complete, including how to port forward through a 4g internet connection, not supported by the telecoms companies nor VPN suppliers. Being able to remote control this is part of the design basis but I did not appreciate how a phone connection is managed very differently from a wired one. Use of Teamviewer is not even close to being a preferred option. But the motor drive is pretty high on my list of improvements so likely to be done sooner than later. Hopefully Mrs Bukko will agree to the spend without making me go back to work and pay for it... Maybe a tax rebate will be forthcoming... haha Gordon.
  13. Great week this week, the counterdeight shaft extension arrived and when added, the 3kg shaft pretty much balanced one of the 5kg weights I had added. Moving them around has given me the balance with loads of movement left. So only three were needed. Now I have the Skywatcher C/W that I had cut in half to dispose of, so I am thinking of putting it on ebay and mark it as "slightly used". Gordon.
  14. Good thinking Adam. Yes, it is ASCOM compatible and FLO offers a USB cable for pc control. I know initially it will be controlled from the handset and so it is not a deal breaker, but good to know there is flexibility. Gordon.
  15. Thanks Shaun and Adam for the inputs. My gut feeling was of the two, the 35 would have been the better choice. But weight (size) is an issue as my son lives in a shoebox* in central Reading so rules out the HEQ5. As I said, I already have one and agree it would be a better choice again if it was a contender. Since I opened the thread, my son and I have been talking further and now include the iOptron CEM25P. Lightweight and better engineered although more expensive. All the cabling is internal and it also hase very good reviews. It's been out for a few years now so we will not be buying something still in development. The plan will be to pull the trigger around the middle of September and at the moment, we both agree the stiff axis on the SW range is a problem, so unless we uncover something seriously wrong with the iOptron, I think that will be the choice now... *Of course, not really a shoebox, but not exactly spacious.... Thanks for all inputs and hopefully you agree the iOptron is a good choice (If you have thoughts to the contrary, then please let me know as they are new to us..) Gordon.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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