Guy65

18 hours ago, DeanCJ said:

£180.00 does seem rather expensive. If you have a smartphone or tablet, have you considered a Synscan wifi adapter? FLO currently have them in stock at £75.00. Obviously you could also purchase a used one. I have both adapter and handset and like them both. The Synscan app is probably quicker to align the mount, and the only thing I personally find awkward is when my fingers are cold there are no chunky buttons on my tablet.
The other benefit with the adapter is the ability to use Sky Safari which I find fantastic.

Thanks - I hadn't realised that the wifi adapter could replace all the functionality in the handset. Will certainly take a look!

Thanks @Geoff Lister & @malc-c  - I'll open it up and see what happens!

Signed!

Hi folks. I have a V4 Synscan handset on my EQ3-2 mount purchased in about 2018. Recently the display has stopped working properly and I can only see the first line of the display, the second has the odd blip or line in it but nothing readable. 

Any suggestions for how I might approach troubleshooting this and fixing the problem?

Replacement handsets are about £180 on Ebay and I'm reluctant to spend that much. If that's my only option then I may upgrade to a better mount instead.

12 minutes ago, Knighty2112 said:

Could be these two;

 

Ah yes - thanks very much!! 

Just nipped outside in the freezing cold to take a quick look at Venus and Jupiter in the West using my SkyMax 127.

Venus is so bright it is hard to see a disk even at higher magnifications but I did see a double star system directly above it - perhaps 20 - 30 arc minutes above. The pair were separated by a couple of arc mins I'd guess, the brighter being whiter and the companion more yellow. 

Any ideas which double this would be?

15 hours ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

I observe in light polluted Bottle 7/8 skies. Starting with a 130mm newtonian to a 127mm refractor, 150mm & 204mm newtonians and 102mm refractor with a couple of small Maksutovs thrown in.

I found the 8" dob didn't help me observe significantly more objects however extra details were observed in the objects I can see. Globular clusters for instance resolved more peripheral stars. Open clusters looked brighter and more dense due to resolving some of the fainter stars & and the extra aperture gathering more light overall.

In the end I decided to downsize to a 102mm refractor as my main scope because I discovered I prefer observing with an easily managed mounted telescope while also managing my own expectations!

Aperture is king but personal preference and circumstances trump the generic ideal.

Hopefully that makes sense. I'm slightly distracted watching Liverpool stuff Manchester Utd.🥳🤣

 

Thanks - very helpful and totally makes sense. The consensus I'm getting here is that aperture isn't going to be that helpful for me.

17 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

If it's the Messier objects you're hoping to see, you might find that shielding your peripheral vision from even slight light intrusion, will help you get maximum dark adaption for your site. Doing this and patiently studying the object will give you the chance to reveal detail you'd otherwise miss. If you can't see the object but you know you're looking at the correct area of sky, maintaining your dark adaption using a dark blanket or hood over your head and eyepiece, then moving the scope just a little while using averted vision, can help you to eventually detect it. You may not need nebula filters at all for the Messiers as they are quite bright in the main, and your 127mm Mak should handle them all.

Thanks - that's really helpful!
There's certainly a lot of local light sources from streetlights down the hill and next door's security light...
I am probably being too optimistic about being able to spot objects immediately and just need to take my time under a hood to maximise my chances.

17 hours ago, RobertI said:

Good advice above. My only addition is that a zoom eyepiece can often help with finding the best magnification to make a DSO stand out - there’s usually a point at which you get maximum contrast between the object and the sky background, sometimes it’s a higher magnification than you’d expect. The downside of zooms is the limited FOV at the longer end of the focal length range (typically 40-50 degrees at 24mm). 

Thanks - sounds like something else to add to the Wishlist!

Ash

I use a remote site based in the canaries (and also in Chile). IF it's the same one as you then they have loads of quests that you can participate in that will give you an idea of the sort of objects to observe.

As others said you can use Stellarium or similar and change the location to that of Tenerife. 

Conveniently the Canary Islands are in the same time zone as the UK so a lot of suggestions of objects to view in the UK will work for there too (especially those that are quite low down in the south in the UK). 

16 minutes ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

In Bortle 7/8, visual observation of DSO's other than brighter gaseous nebulae will be rather a waste of time.  I suggest developing an interest in small bright things (double stars, planetary nebulae) or trying EVAA, which can be remarkably effective in showing up galaxies, even from an urban site. For the latter, you'll ideally want a small fast refractor rather than a big Dob.

Thanks. Small bright things might be the way to go. 
I hadn't thought about EVAA - a whole new area to explore!

14 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

There's no substitute for dark skies. I have a 12" Dob in Bortle 6-7 skies and deep sky stuff is difficult at best. Filters are of no use as they just make things ever darker.

Travelling a short distance I can get Bortle 4 (a narrow band between the light domes of Sheffield and Manchester) and an 80mm scope shows more deep sky objects than the 12" at home 

Thanks - certainly gives me food for thought. I have pretty dark skies within say 45 mins - it's just the hassle of packing everything in to the car, finding a good site, setting up etc.  

33 minutes ago, KP82 said:

In your case larger apertures alone would offer limited improvement for visual observation of DSOs. You will need some visual narrowband filters (UHC or better OIII). Your current mak makes getting larger exit pupil difficult but you need a decent size exit pupil for the filters to work at their best. So a fast 10" f/5 dob will be a good option. However these filters can only help you with certain type of targets mainly nebulae. Galaxies will be difficult to see.

Star hopping with a dob should be no different from your Skymax 127 assuming it's also mounted on an Alt-AZ.

Thanks. I should've said in my post that the Skymax is on an equatorial mount. 
I hadn't thought about exit pupil size before. Did some calculations and realised that even with my 32mm eyepiece my exit pupil is only 2.7mm which presumably will limit any value I can get from a filter?

Hi folks

I have fairly bad light pollution to the South (Bortle 7 or 8 I would guess) and struggle to see anything other than the brightest DSOs with my Skywatcher Skymax 127 (I know that's not an ideal scope for DSOs) which I've had for several years.  I would just like to be able to see more of the Messier catalogue (to start with). 

Would a bigger aperture help with visual observation of DSOs? I was thinking of an 8 or 10 inch Dob. Or would I just be getting a brighter view of the sky fog?

If I went down the Dob route how do people find star hopping with it? I know that if I move my scope on 1 axis it's always E - W and N - S on the other axis. Doesn't Alt - Az get confusing when you are starhopping by reference to a chart, or Stellarium say, where the orientation changes all the time?