Alan64
-
Posts
2,398 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by Alan64
-
-
The "Heritage" 130P has a rather short focal-length: 650 mm. You can certainly make good use of a barlow. A barlow is practically mandatory if wanting to make full use of the telescope...
https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/antares-x2-achromat-fmc-barlow-lens-125.html
I have that one myself, and it's quite good, excellent even. Combining it with an 8mm eyepiece will give you a magnification of 163x, and for close-ups.
-
https://www.celestron.com/products/starsense-autoalign
It's sold with 6SE kits as well, so you know it's compatible. With the StarSense AutoAlign, you don't need to pick stars out of a daytime-like sky. Afterwards, the mount will be aligned with everything in the sky, including the planets.
-
I made the main RA-washer out of that last section of an old sheet...
The center-hole however, which fits over the RA-pipe, is not as snug as I would like, with this much of a discrepancy...
That's with the washer shoved over all the way to one side, therefore the washer would oscillate in so far as that gap would allow.
Then, the gap being about half the width of the innermost ring of the sealed bearing...
...which is the only part of the bearing that rotates.
The washer is at least "good enough", perhaps enough even for so-called "government work".
I got these pin-less scroll-saw blades, jewellers' blades for metalwork, in 2014, along with other blades for woodworking...
...in addition to the adaptor set which enables me to use pin-less blades with my scroll-saw. Said blades have very fine teeth...
...and breeze through the bronze sheet almost like butter, but not quite. I do have to make certain to hold the sheet down firmly whilst sawing, and to keep same from riding upward. The blades do make it quite easy to create these washers.
Once I receive the new sheets, I will then decide if I want to re-make the washer. After all, it is the main washer, and the largest, within the head.
-
To make the bronze washers accurately, I got out my old compass. I've had it for quite a few years...
It's nothing special, at all. Then, I got to looking round online and spotted this one at my local, discount, Chinese-hardware store...
It's of carbon-steel, readily locks into position, unlike the other, and the tip of one leg at least is noted on the packaging as being a scriber in its own right...
Ouch!
That's the 6" version. They also carry a 12".
-
Don't get a Celestron "AstroMaster" kit; nothing within that series. I have an "AstroMaster" kit, and I'm fully aware of the others within that series, intimately. The focussers of the refractors are nightmares. The "AstroMaster" 114mm is a "Bird Jones", and to be avoided based upon that fact alone. This is a far better choice over the "AstroMaster" 130mm f/5 Newtonian...
https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130p.html
The "Explorer" 130P Newtonian is fully collimatable, and with a centre-spotted parabolic primary-mirror. It's still a mystery as to whether the mirror of the "AstroMaster" 130mm is parabolic or not. Celestron has stated in the past(2011) that it's spherical...
Also, the primary-mirror of the "AstroMaster" 130mm is not centre-spotted as it arrives. A centre-spot is a great help when collimating a Newtonian.
The "StarQuest" 130P comes with a plastic, non-collimatable primary-mirror cell, yet, curiously, the mirror is centre-spotted...
The mount is of a new design, promising perhaps, refreshing to see nonetheless. A video-review of the kit...
With either the "StarQuest" or the "Explorer" mount, you'll want the legs of their tripods at their shortest, fully retracted, whilst observing or imaging, and to minimise the ill effects of the shakes.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Blakey said:
Many Thanks, Alan64 and AstroMuni
I have seen a motor drive with multi speed handset online and am considering buying one,subject to stock availability and waiting time.
My telescope is not yet a year old so hopefully I won't have any problems with the worm of the RA axis not moving freely,which to be honest I didn't have a clue about,so thanks for the heads up.
I would just like to say how grateful I am for all the help and advice I have had already on StargazersLounge,having joined only last week.At this rate my head will probably explode with information overload !!!
Once again, Many Thanks
My apologies, but both axes, both worms, the RA and the DEC, of my own, were bound up tighter than a Christmas cracker, brand-new, and upon its arrival. That very well may have been done for shipping purposes. Hence, why I had made merry mention of it.
-
I have this Meade "Polaris" 114mm f/8 kit, with an EQ2-class mount, and just as your own...
I also have this Celestron 9V-battery motor-drive...
It comes with two brackets, for attaching the unit to either a CG2(EQ-1) or a CG3(EQ-2). This Sky-Watcher unit is specifically for an EQ-2...
https://www.firstlightoptics.com/all-mounts-motors/ra-single-speed-motor-drive-for-eq-2.html
There's another for the EQ-1, which looks just like that one, but you don't need it.
Before you use any motor-drive for the RA-axis of your EQ-2 mount, you must ensure that you can twist the worm of the RA-axis with just your thumb and forefinger, easily and smoothly. If you cannot, then you will need to adjust the worm-assembly until you can, and before attaching any motor-drive...
Else, you will risk damaging the motor-drive.
If, after adjusting, some improvement is noted, yet could be better, then the entire mount-head may need disassembling, cleaning, re-greasing, and adjusting.
If you go with either one of those 9V-battery motor-drives, you can use lithium-ion batteries, expendable or rechargeable, or you might cobble something together for use with the mains.
-
I found my last bit of 0.008" phosphor-bronze sheet...
As I marched towards where the worm-gear was being kept, I thought, "It probably won't be large enough"...
Quite enough, and with a bit to spare, but not for any other washers; although one, but only one, for the needle-thrust bearing perhaps.
-
2
-
-
Now that I think about it, it is rather barbaric in enclosing steel within steel, and then bearing and rubbing the assemblage against aluminum...
Those shrouds enclosing the ball-bearings are only barely magnetic, like some stainless-steels, but they don't gleam like stainless. But in that they're magnetic nonetheless, that means that they contain iron, and you don't want iron rubbing against aluminum. You want something relatively soft between them, as a buffer, like plastic as it comes from the factory, or copper and its alloys; bronze in this instance.
There is aluminum-bronze, but it is said to be nigh as hard as steel. Then, there is silicon-bronze, which sounds most interesting, but both of those types are sold on websites with "Request a Quote" buttons, and all that that entails. There is also zinc-"bronze"(220), which is actually closer to brass; for jewellry and other arts & crafts. You don't really want to use that, as it might deform over time.
This mount-head is practically all aluminum, even the RA and DEC pipes...
Yea, this is, after all, a pipe-mount. Incidentally, the pipes of the CG-4/EQ-3 are of steel...
In any event, you can't get away from the pipes, I'm afraid, with these.
In other news, have a look at this...
I suppose, there in the factory overseas, they bumped heads together one day...
"They won't notice. You can't see it from the top."
There's nothing to retain that washer. It oscillates, albeit very slowly. The enclosure and pipe will keep the washer from coming completely out, but really.
That will be getting a full-span, bronze washer, from the outside edge of the worm-gear to the outside edge of the pipe...
-
I finally got everything ordered to enhance the mount-head. I ordered two 6" x 12" sheets of 0.008" phosphor-bronze(510), two 5" x 7" sheets of 0.006" phosphor-bronze(sometimes you need a somewhat thinner piece for something or other), two 3" x 6" sheets of 18-gauge(0.040") aluminum(for the latitude-axis), and one of these for the DEC axis...
https://www.vxb.com/AXK3047-Thrust-Needle-Roller-Bearing-p/kit8683.htm
-
The RA-axis is de-greased...
I still haven't touched the worms, but there's no hurry.
-
The components of the DEC-axis have been de-greased and carefully set aside...
At present, the components of the RA-axis are being de-greased...
I got that 64-ounce jug of charcoal-lighter fluid just the other day. It breezes through all types of telescopic grease, melting it all away like hot butter. It's cheaper than paint-thinner, let alone more-costly mineral-spirits.
-
The DEC-axis' saddle-head and worm were removed...
It was quite the journey in reaching the DEC-nut...
Unlike the RA-axis, the DEC-axis is full of glue-grease. Yucks!
The DEC-nut has only two set-screws to loosen and back off. However, I had to make another tool to unscrew it...
The DEC-axis, exploded...
Its two large washers are the same thickness as those of the RA-axis. It appears that the worm-gears of both axes are the same. All of the DEC-axis washers will be replaced with those of bronze as well; or, needle-thrust bearings. I'll have to research the latter to see if it's possible.
I may have to do some polishing of the surfaces within this axis.
I haven't cleaned the factory-grease out of either axis yet, at the time of this posting.
-
The anatomies; the RA-worm was removed...
I haven't taken it apart yet. I will need to find or make a tool for its nut as well.
The RA-axis, exploded...
The two large plastic washers, which will be replaced with those of phosphor-bronze(510), are 0.020"/0.51mm thick. However, the bronze sheet will be only 0.008"/0.20mm thick. The total discrepancy, the loss, will be only 0.024"/0.61mm, and of no consequence...
Why, I'm suspecting that the worm will mate with the gear more accurately as a result. In any event, this is not an ultra-precision mount-head.
The rear ball-bearing assembly, with its two covers...
The forward ball-bearing assembly; a sealed, radial ball-bearing...
It's a JESA W2, 6007 RZ...
JESA is a Swiss company, with factories in Switzerland(of course), and China; manufactured in the latter, no doubt.
The bearing is well set into the housing. I will not be removing it.
I was pleased to discover not a single glob of the proverbial glue-grease within the RA-axis. The grease used was quite like, dare I say, Super Lube. In addition, and most importantly, I did not find any real need to de-burr or polish any bearing surfaces within the axis.
I have two 6" x 12" sheets of the bronze ordered. With the USPS's performance of late, I might receive it in a year, if I'm lucky.
I had gone out yesterday and got a 10mm lock-nut for the latitude-axis, along with two thinner washers to compensate for the increased thickness.
I also got a rattle-can of gloss-orange paint, but not for the mount-head per se.
-
The aluminum RA-axis nut...
That's what holds the RA-axis together, and must be removed to access the components within the axis. Note the two small holes of the nut, which correspond with the tool that I made. But before the nut can be unscrewed, there are three set-screws to loosen, and with a 1.5mm hex-key...
Those three set-screws prevent the nut from unscrewing, therefore they must be backed off before attempting to use the home-made tool. Each set-screw is accessed through this hole...
The axis is rotated to access all three, one at a time. After that was done, I removed the nut. I'm happy to report that cyanoacrylate adhesive was not used by the factory to "secure" the nut. With my CG-4(EQ-3), however, "super glue" was used...
With the set-screws backed off, it was then safe to use the home-made tool to unscrew and remove the nut. After removal, I was presented with this...
Then, when I removed that, I happily beheld a ring of ball-bearings...
After seeing the ring of ball-bearings, I covered the ring, and screwed the RA-nut back on, to keep the axis together, but I didn't re-secure the nut with the set-screws.
-
Next, I removed this plastic cover for the RA-worm assembly. It's awfully large for just that...
To make it easier to work on the axes, it's best to separate the two, which is very easy to do, and in using a 5mm hex-key...
There were no washers to be found in that instance; just a simple bolting-on.
Now that the two axes are separated, that will make it much easier to work on each. But before beginning, a tool needs to be made...
That's two galvanised 4d nails into a piece of oak, and spaced 1-5/8", or 41mm, apart. I pre-driiled the holes for the nails with my small drill-press, and to ensure that the nails are driven in straight and true. I used a drill-bit somewhat smaller in diameter than the nails themselves, and for a tight fit.
-
From this point on, the renovation of this mount-head will take place.
Have you ever wondered what your Sky-Watcher EQ-5 looks like on the inside? Eventually, you'll wonder no more.
The RA-axis and the DEC-axis will be serviced. But first, the latitude-axis components were removed. Said axis, too, is stiff as a board. The adjustment-bolts will move it, but it shouldn't be that tight.
To remove the latitude-axis plastic caps, I used a small flat-bladed screwdriver and a small hammer, and popped them off, both sides...
That's not a lock-nut, but just a regular nut. I will be getting a lock-nut for it in time. After removing the nut, the bolt seemed to need unscrewing too, but not really as the hole is not threaded...
It was, no doubt, the paint trying to hold it in. The setting-circle assembly on the backside of the RA-axis, at left, was unscrewed and removed. A polar-scope will be inserted later.
It's off...
Note the four clear-plastic washers, two for each side. I may replace those with nylon washers, if possible. I don't feel that bronze is needed there, but who knows, I just might.
-
This will be of some help... http://www.astronomyboy.com/cg5/
The clutch assemblies, for the axes...
See those two black, plastic buttons? They will be replaced with those of brass.
The latitude adjustment-bolts of the CG-4 and the LX70...
Those of the CG-4 appear more traditional, old-school, therefore those will be used with the LX70.
Once I get this mount-head torn asunder, I might re-paint it; that is, I'd love to.
-
1
-
-
All of the parts were accounted for...
My old Celestron CG-4 and my new Meade LX70 compared...
What a difference.
A tower it is, a tower to the stars.
My 4" refractor, once again, has a suitable roost.
Now, I can't use this mount until I take it completely apart and go through it with a fine-toothed comb. I will use this to motorise the RA-axis...
I would like a single-axis drive with a hand-controller, for the RA-axis only, but I would have to order it from Europe. I may, in future.
Upon its arrival, both axes were and still are stiff as boards. When I get done with it, it will be as a well-oiled gyroscope. In addition, the CG-4 will be cannibalised for the sake of the LX70: the smaller, lighter counterweights, the adjustment-bolts for the latitude-scale, and whatever else I deem fit.
I don't think that this Vixen "Great Polaris" clone is the equivalent of my old GP-DX, but of a GP at least.
-
4
-
-
Manual equatorial mounts larger than an EQ3-class have all but vanished from the market here in the U.S. Indeed, throughout the world even, it seems. Across the way, in Europe, there is the Sky-Watcher EQ-5 and the Bresser EXOS 2, at least. But here in the U.S., there's only one...
https://www.telescope.com/Orion-SkyView-Pro-Equatorial-Telescope-Mount/p/9829.uts
It is an EQ5-class, manual equatorial, and manufactured by Synta.
I remember seeing manual EQ-6 mounts in the marketplace, but that was quite a long time ago. Perhaps I should've gotten one when I had the chance.
I know why they're going the way of the Dodo: light pollution, astrophotography, "Dobsonians" and the popularity of other types of alt-azimuth mounts.
Vixen; all Vixen offers these days are manual, EQ3-class equatorials. At least they're made in Japan.
The last manual, EQ5-class equatorial, other than Orion's, sold here in the U.S. was the Meade LX70. It is identical to, exactly the same as, the Sky-Watcher EQ-5, but with Meade-blue accents and a cheap sticker or two. Over a year ago, I was seeing them being sold for only US$199, then they were discontinued, never to be seen or sold again. Just this month, June still, Orion bought out Meade. I don't really know what to expect as a result. I'm not a big Meade fan, but I do have a few items bearing the marque.
A week ago, I ran across this...
...and offered by my old friend, Bill Vorce, of Telescope Warehouse in Arizona, a Meade liquidator. Mr. Vorce had already sold four of them before that second listing. I hesitated a full day, and because it doesn't come with a tripod. Then it dawned upon me: the tripod of the Celestron CG-4 is the exact same one that came with the Meade LX70 before they were discontinued. I then bought the first one of that second listing. When I woke up the following day, the other three vanished, sold; incredible.
-
From the early 1970s until 2002 or so, the only mounts with which I was familiar was an AZ-1 and an EQ-2...
That's a span of almost 30 years, with a small alt-azimuth and a small equatorial. But then, all I had were those two achromats, a 60mm, and an 80mm.
Then, I finally got a 4" refractor, which required a larger mount: a Vixen GP-DX...
Although two years after the mount's receipt, it was destroyed. The astronomy-gods were most cruel in that. However, I did manage to salvage the wooden legs, and have since restored them.
Ten years later, in 2013, I purchased a Celestron CG-4, an EQ3-class mount...
I got the 16" pier for it even, but then later halved it to 8.5" or so...
I tried to like the mount, but when you have to try to like something, in reality you despise it. An EQ3-class mount is too large as a "grab 'n' go", and too small to support a wide range of telescopes, in aperture and physical length. Then, in my case, I had had said Vixen, which supported my 4" refractor ideally. The CG-4 couldn't even do that...
Then, yesterday, I received two boxes...
-
6
-
-
8 hours ago, Goldfinger said:
Does heat effect sky viewing at night? Right now we're having 90 to 100 F degree days and you can see the shimmering off the pavement, etc.
Just wondering.
Yes, indeed it does. It's best to observe on and over a grass-covered area. What happens during the day is that the Sun bombards the asphalt and concrete, then after the Sun sets the built-up heat is released from those surfaces. The effect should lessen as the night wears on, then to start all over again the next day.
-
6 hours ago, Spacecake2 said:
I’ve never actually tried an eyepiece with 3mm eye relief but is it actually worth it?
I have no trouble with tight eye-relief myself. These 4mm and 6mm eyepieces are awfully tight...
I don't care for the 4mm orthoscopic, but I do like that 6mm Plossl.
6 hours ago, Spacecake2 said:I also owned a Celestron 127 SLT and I think I got the maximum use out of it before upgrading to a 10 inch dobsonian but I actually preferred Barlow lenses instead of a 4mm.
I, too, use barlows, and will continue to use them. I love, yea, adore my barlows. Here's my 12mm 60° inserted into my 3x-barlow, and for an effective 4mm...
I've seen pretty things in the sky with that combination; glory, at that.
But then I got this 4mm 58°...
It has a barlow, built in. Why, it is the 12mm/3x's doppelgänger...
Both of those have ample eye-relief.
Incidentally, those planetary eyepieces are also available from AliExpress...
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/32889506872.html?spm=a2g0s.9042311.0.0.1e4d4c4doTHAxI
I also got the 6mm, and I think I'll stop there, although I wouldn't mind having the 7mm. There's even a 3.2mm, not to mention a 2.5mm.
Both of our 127mm reflectors are/were catadioptrics, however my own is a bit more barbaric in design, but I've tamed it.
Congratulations on getting a 10" Newtonian-Dobson, instead of an 8". A 10" is the sweet-spot; just a little fatter than an 8", but no longer really. It is a bit pickier as to the eyepieces introduced to it, but the extra light-gathering area will make it worth the while. Plossls will play well with it. I don't know if the planetary eyepieces will, but you can give one a whirl. I've only observed through the 4mm, and it was quite lovely...
That was taken through my 80mm f/6 fast-achromat...
Of course, the live view was even lovelier; sharper.
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Goldfinger said:
I found one on the Celestron website for the Nexstar 6 SE. I ordered one but it's on back order.
Thanks. I thought solar viewing was off limits.
I found one in stock...
The image may not be as sharp as that through a Baader filter, but then the Baader is twice the price, although perhaps not twice as nice.
Motor Drive
in Getting Started Equipment Help and Advice
Posted
It's a relatively simple pipe mount. You can find out more about it here...
https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/319273-meade-large-equatorialeq-2-hyper-tuning/
The current EQ-series mounts are Chinese clones of those that were once made in Japan, and all that that entails.
As a result, there are many who regard these as throw-away mounts, but they're quite good replications actually. They simply need a bit more attention and polish.
Telescopes and mounts, when they were made in Japan in decades past, were quite expensive. These days, they are much more reasonable in cost, but with the proviso that the user is "invited" to improve them.
If, in future, you intend to eventually upgrade to an EQ3- or EQ5-class mount, then you can throw the EQ-2 away as well. But an EQ-2, or an EQ-1 even, does make for an easy-to-manage equatorial-type mount, for "grab 'n' go".