-
Posts
2,143 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by SilverAstro
-
-
5 hours ago, FLO said:
so no eyeballs were harmed in the making of that video
I must admit to a little chuckle at the bit in the description "and irreversible damage to the eyes " shirly they mean eye -singular? one would still have a spare with which to investigate what went wrong the first time ? Or is there going to be a bino viewer in a bundle?
ok hat&coat
Now has been changed to the singular, but no "ho ho ho" here, oh well
- 1
-
6 hours ago, Gerd said:
Hi guys, I've fixed Niels' old website http://www.njnoordhoek.com and intend to maintain it until I keel over myself. There are too many cool things on it. Poke me if anything isn't where you think it should be or you have any questions.
Gerd.That is such really good news, it was so illuminating back then to read his blog, so sad when he departed.
Well done, thank you.
-
- 1
-
2 minutes ago, Redscouse said:
f coils and transformers etc. fitted to the bottom of my camera!
actually, you were not far off, peeps have been known to fit copper foil/shim 'fingers'/tabs into the back of the sensor and extend out to a cooler, , , but that is a whole other topic ! very clever peeps.
- 1
-
Sorry, I was being a bit careless/fancyfull , old time phrase - to pay a skilled journeyman to do a proper job, an expression from days of yore when pans had copper bottoms.
- 1
-
Juan says "Camera modification: £55", so I'd be inclined to spend that £60 you just saved on the Baader to pay a man to copper bottom it. ?
-
He nearly 'did for' one of his eyes so you know what to wear !
Some call it luck, some call it skill ! The number of fails I read about I think you need to be prepared to face the £loss of bricking your camera if it all goes horribly wrong.
-
11 minutes ago, Redscouse said:
Yeah, the only difference to the entire texts are the word 'astro' substituted for 'baader'.
To be honest, I've read this thread numerous times and the only thing I know for certain is I've saved £60Thanks for the confirmation, yes, that was my dilemma
I have been up and down his pages to make sure it was not my eyes (or dyslexica!) all very odd. Could there be two Baader mods / filters, cos someone posted earlier about it being a clear glass whereas I thought it (singular?) was for daylight colour balance, with a bit of residual/extra IR cut as well I wonder? If that latter were the case then for astro only use we would be better off without it ??
my head hurts !
-
15 hours ago, Redscouse said:
Thanks for the response. So what you're saying, looking at the picture below, I can save myself £60 and go for the £399 one and it will work ok?
Me muchly confussled as well ! Until this topic I thought I knew what I wanted, now I am not so sure, thanks y'all !
Ref the above pic, in that Juan is saying "ASTRO modified for astronomical use" on the top one, and on the lower he is saying "BAADER modified for astronomical use".
In his other ads for other models he says "BAADER modified for astronomical use and daylight photography " which made me think that the Baader mod used a colour correction glass 'filter' to thus not need a custom white balance -but otherwise not needed for your astro only requirement-
-
2 hours ago, Alien 13 said:
the ship needed a payload of some description...I know what I would choose.
True, but I am conflicted on this junk / novelty aspect.
Every satellite needs, now, to have an end of life plan. Usually to de-orbit and burn up. So by rights the final burn should have been to lower perigee to cause the no longer needed dummy load to return to Earth, not to raise its apogee to 'out there' ???
-
which precise computer control of simultaneous firings makes one's thoughts turn to conspiracy theory - did they really mean to shoot for the asteroid belt after all, hehee !
Time for another coffee
-
5 minutes ago, Stub Mandrel said:
computer control must be incredible.
Thanks.
Yep, needed a bit more than the ZX81 they used for the moon landings
and after all that they came back within seconds / inches of each other !
-
-
-
Just now, michaelmorris said:
Whilst the Earth's rotation will certainly help shorten the the return track, AFAIK it is a not the whole story. From what I understand, the boosters do actually partially retraces their path through space as well as retracing their ground track.
Yes, most of my thinking (above) is in error because it starts with the initial velocity of the earth (so it is 'flying' relative), but not sure about the turning round and flying back bit, it all must be more-or-less ballistic ?
Generally speaking it is more efficient fuel-wise to launch satellites into orbit with the rotation of the Earth than against it., so hmmm,,
There is more to this than meets the eye ! all very thought provoking !
-
xxed in post, yes thanks, I must go do some reading / googling ! Save tearing out the remains of my hair
-
oh ! ding !! I think :
but the Cape is not where it was, it has moved with the rotation of the Earth underneath it all, so ,
gosh that means that the timing of separation and the speed that they had achieved must be precisely matched to the rotation such that they fall back at exactly the right moment to "hit" the Cape at where it now is ?
but such a narrow window would set an exactly defined weight to the payload, if more weight then more boost, but they would then overshot the Cape ??
meanwhile the centre core has gained extra speed so needs a boat to catch it ?? clever !
my head hurts, too much scratching !
-
Watching EM during the press conference he came over as a man of great good humour (or humor over there ) and the conference was a world away from the stilted stuffed shirts of yesteryear !
One thing though that is puzzling me, the thing takes off at huge great speed, flies rapidly (<understatement!) down range, boosters peel off, , ,then, how did they fly back to the Cape to land ? I saw no wings and extra motor.
Scratches head ,,,,
- 1
-
He is going mining in the asteroid belt !
but he miss-spells apohelion = aphelion
-
2 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:
it recover core benefits them, bigger orbit benefits their customers.
EM said during the press conference that they were "not going to re-use the core anyway", so I guess this has saved them the cost of taking it to the Council Recycling Amenity (and the car too haha !)
They dont intend re-using the boosters either but he said that they did have some useful bits on them to recycle, so he was pleased that it was those that survived, not the other way round.
-
1 hour ago, johnfosteruk said:
Streamed here
Thanks for posting the conference link very interesting.- 1
-
Conference = "we were not going to re-use centre core anyway "
- 2
-
Updated ground track with revised inclination, still not enough to bring it over us
https://twitter.com/Marco_Langbroek/status/961026756449890304
- 1
-
you are clairvoyant, I just got it !
Live rocket launch
in The Astro Lounge
Posted · Edited by SilverAstro
replay https://youtu.be/TUcexxpArog