Peter Drew

I'm free! 😀

Always please your wife as the first priority. 😀

I think the real data is there but being masked by the processing regime. 😀

I have used only one Quark, it was a good one and gave impressive views albeit rather dim which needed covering the head for best results. However, my current PST mod is equally impressive and has been reliably operational for a few years. 😀

At a first glance I thought the prom image was a screen shot from your new Quark!. Just in time, I realised it was Daystar's advert, nearly pressed the "buy" button. 😀

A larger blocking filter does increase the Actual field of view but not the sweet spot, a benefit for imagers who want a full disc image. The small blocking filter in combination with a Barlow increases the Apparent field of view whilst retaining the original sweet spot which now covers the whole field albeit a smaller Actual field. Horses for courses. 🙂

I have some very large binocular instruments. To be fair, they would be better described as binocular telescopes although the results are the same. The largest, self built, are 30x150, 50x200 and 50x300, the last two having reflecting optics. The 150 and 200 are just about portable, the 300 definitely not! As with most things there are compromises, the larger they are the higher the lowest magnification you can use which in turn affects the maximum field of view available, my 300's max out at just over 1.5 degrees. The views on a good night are awesome as you might expect. 😀

As they say, YMMV, but I've never noticed any overheating problems using Baader D-ERF filters internally or externally with no other filter additions.. Working at F10 as PST mods do, there is not so much focused heat concentration as with faster F ratios. Regarding the internal heat induced turbulence due to internal ERF's often cited as a big disadvantage, again I've not been aware of a problem and see this as no different between using a H Wedge in which the full solar heat enters the tube before any filtering. Users report the best views using this method including elusive features. 😀

Small telescopes generally give aesthetically better looking images than large ones for several reasons but mostly to do with seeing conditions. A long focus small reflector can give very nice star images, seldom seen in 8" or larger reflectors. I have a good 8.5" refractor, it takes a very good night of seeing to match the star image quality of a good 4" refractor. A 8" reflector should easily show the 4 stars of the Trapezium well on any occasion plus the 2 extra ones E & F on a decent night. Always an excuse for owning a small and large telescope. 😀

Although I made a flippant comment, a large part of the topic tends to invite it, as an engineer with eccentric tendencies I have to admire the expertise shown in the construction of a working rocket. I would also, not pass judgement on the integrity of SGL based on one contentious issue. 🙂

I have a 90mm Coronado etalon and 15mm blocking filter set, doesn't come even close to the performance of my 150mm PST mod. 😐

At least it will put off anyone else going for the "Award" this year, no competition. 😀

Does rather look like the erecting system tht usually attaches to the main telescope, I have a similar unit for my antique 3" Davis of Cheltenham refractor. I also have a Ross 5" F15 triplet objective based refractor. 😀

Yorkshire is around 54 degrees North, your axis looks around 35, there will be a dial on the mount to show you when the correct angle is set. No need for great accuracy at this stage but "about right" will make using the telescope easier. Have fun! 😀

Welcome to SGL. Nice telescope to start off with, polar axis angle looks a little low for Yorkshire! 😀

Nicely made but nothing new as a principle, 20 year old Meade LX200 mounts use this facility. 😀

So sorry to here this. I was fortunate to know Heather well personally and she was one of the early supporters of the Astronomy Centre. Condolences to Nigel and all those close to her.

Well, I'm reaching 79 this year and have been following this path for some time. Less and less time spent with large apertures and night time observing compared to every opportunity for solar viewing. No interest in imaging hence little interest in CaK but all the advantages of solar are very appealing. Ever changing detail (during active cycle), no loss of sleep, mostly warmer conditions, theoretically visible every day, no need for dark sky locations, smallish, albeit expensive equipment more than adequate. What's not to like? 😀

I don't see much new to get excited about here. The Coronado system offers similar options, any stand alone etalon and blocking filter set can be used or not on a suitable standard refractor for solar and night time viewing as can a PST type mod if designed to do so. The difference with the 60mm Lunt offering is that the original single lens objective has been replaced by a more versatile doublet. Not knocking Lunt at all, very impressed with their products. 🙂

Justifiable advertising I think. Bespoke solar telescopes have often been written off as "one trick ponies". 🙂

Eeeek! My 150mm F10 Istar PST Mod with triband ERF cost me less than 2K..

Not as ghastly as the price tag of large bespoke Ha telescopes!. 🙂

Results could vary on a given day, each telescope is potentially good. A good 80mm is very adequate for white light observation and a HW is accepted as giving the best performance. As you have both options, the comparison is there for you to choose. 😀

I always used straight fluted machine taps. The tool post was removed and replaced by a matching item that had a vertical spigot. The gear blanks were then fitted to the spigot with spacers to get the correct cutting height. A thin PTFE washer above and below the blank allowed it to be held firmly against tipping but free enough to be advanced by the tap. A very light first cut was used to confirm that the teeth were not going to chew themselves up after turn one. No pictures I'm afraid, images of me doing anything useful are rare. 😀

@Rusted. Yes, I must have made hundreds of worm and wheel gear sets during my career. They were all hobbed on a 4.5" lathe. I always took great care to make sure gear blanks were turned with all details perfectly concentric, not difficult just needs care. How big players such as Meade can often get this wrong escapes me! My worms were turned from solid in one operation which ensured complete concentricity of bearing journals, drive shafts and worm teeth. I still wince when I see composite designs. Getting the correct number of teeth was a mixture of always using the same tap, same blank diameter, a few tricks of the trade plus a bit of luck. On expensive large diameters it was prudent to pre gash the blank with a dividing head to guarantee the correct number of teeth. I've no idea how good my gear sets were but I never had any complaints, users got good imaging results and some owners brought their mounts back for minimal adjustment after "donkey's years" of reliable use. 🙂