JOC

38 minutes ago, Paul M said:

SGL's social function, I feel, outweighs it's technical function for many and perhaps most members. 

I suspect many like me are drawn by a question (often - I feel I want to buy a scope, but which one?) and then we stay once we discover that 'community' aspect.  In fact there is a lot of discussion about meeting up for star parties which are difficult to organise, but I bet just as many would gather for a SGL summer BBQ just to meet up with all those online names.

3 minutes ago, peanutcol said:

Really? Oh my days. 👍

I can't see any reason why not I view through my telescope with my prescription glasses.

7 minutes ago, peanutcol said:

The moon was very bright last night though, could have hindered my views.

In the absence of any other filter, try a pair of sunglasses!

Well you could try the Barlow under the 25mm that would give you 12.5mm and x56 magnification.  Under the 10mm you would get x140 which if the scope would take it I imagine would give you a fair view of the nebula.  Try the Barlow under the EP's during the daytime and see how the scope performs with them.  If you can get it to perform during the day then the night time should be possible too.

11 minutes ago, peanutcol said:

Yes I read that the other day, very interesting. I set it up in the day and have had for 2 nights brilliant crisp images of the moon. Craters and such in detail. Managed a glimpse of Jupiter but only a slightly bigger dot than with the naked eye.  Looked at Betelgeuse last night and was trying for the Orion nebula but to no avail. I'll keep at it after all the advice on here.

If you've got the moon crisp then the Orion nebula ought to be achievable.  How much kit have you actually got - esp. what EP's do you have available?

1 hour ago, andrew s said:

This is in stark contrast to say the RSPB community which I recently joined.One where I had expected the same friendly behaviour as at their sites. However, some of the replies just make me wince and reluctant to post.

What is it about the anonymity of posting online that makes people feel they can say things to someone in an internet post that, you have to hope a lot of the time, they wouldn't dream of saying to someone in person?

The best thing is to first look at, if not read the text as well on just the first couple of pages here 

Then remember that the scope being used for the 'actual' view shots is still much bigger than what you have.   However, as noted above, it should still be possible to get a nice clear image of the moon and although, small, some of the planets.  Start off with your highest numbered the EP, i.e. use the one marked 25mm and not the one marked 10mm.  Also, put the thing that might be marked 'barlow' or x2 or x5 etc. to the back of the box for months.   Then get the scope out during the day (pointing well away from the sun) and make sure you can get a clear image of a distant tree or chimney during the day (don't worry  if its upside down - it just needs to be clear).  Once you can do that try the moon with the same EP.  Once you can get a similar clear image of the moon you will have learned loads and be in business.

I wonder if somewhere like this could be useful https://www.stowmaries.org.uk/  They'd have oodles of hard standing, under cover areas, could no doubt knock out some power supplies, it's a fairly light free area and at night there would be no flights and there is the added attraction of being somewhere interesting to look around during the day with tea shops and catering on site, also being a visitor attraction I'm sure you could get them to leave what would be adequate err...'facilities' open overnight.  I reckon you would do worse than call them to discuss the possibility.   They do partner with other groups and are interested in educational things.  Other mini airfields may also be worth a try as they do mostly not seem to be close to civilisation and therefore lights.  You might also try enquiries to stately homes and castles.  Just an out a limb thought train.

It's well reported, I wonder if they can triangulate the sightings to roughly guess a landfall location?

It is always worth remembering that for some people an online community can provide a similar level of support to having day to day friends in real life (well that is what I find).  I am lucky to now belong to a couple of clubs, but still don't have the level of personal friend that I can go out to coffee/shop/holiday with.   However, I like to think that I could enjoy a coffee and chat with many of my fellow SGL posters if I ever got the chance to meet them.

I like the fact that most people here are interested in science in some way and somehow I can engage in intelligent conversation online with many of you even if we are not talking about the night sky.  I also like the fact that the mods do a really good job in keeping us all on the straight and narrow subject wise and due to this threads don't deteriorate into 'mud slinging'.  I was raised to be polite and to try and not cause offence (you read some other forums and really wonder about the nurturing origins of some folks) and I like interacting with an online crowd of people that behave similarly and respect those others online.

Maybe go to the the 3 meetings, be the best potential member they have ever had then when they offer you membership turn them down and explain that you don't find their application process fair and who are they and what are their qualifications and what are their criteria to decide if you are 'suitable'?

I have long since dismissed the thoughts that (telescope) aperture is king unless you are in the business of chasing feint fuzzies where the light gathering ability of (telescope) aperture seems to trump all.  For viewing the heavens the key seems to be the apparent magnification from the EP.  In the UK they say that pushing x250 is probably not possible.  Telescope aperture undoubtedly let's you push the magnification up a bit, but if you are going to top out at x250 you don't need a huge scope unless you are chasing low light objects from what my own experience has shown.  I get almost as good a view of things like Saturn from my tiny grab and go as I do from an 8" Dob.   I think all more aperture in a telescope gives you is more hassle in setting up it up!!  I already don't bother to use my 8" Dob much for that reason.

I wasn't hugely enamoured with the astronomy club that I went along to for a couple of meetings.  The first one I went to in order to see what it was all about they didn't even have a telescope at and weren't that interested in the fact that I had taken my brand new scope and wanted to find out how to use it.  Then I went for a evening when they were supposed to be actively viewing and that turned out to be a couple of people with scopes in someone's back garden and I had to lug all my equipment down a narrow path into a back garden and still no-one was interested in helping me out with my kit and how to set it up and wanting to chat about what I was seeing and helping a newcomer get interested so I gave up on the notion that astronomy clubs were a good thing.  Their loss IMO considering the land I could have offered them away from the town they were in for overnight viewing possibilities.   I prefer membership of SGL - far more enthusiasm and advice than ever got in front of 'real astronomy club members'.  If I were the OP I don't think I'd bother with that attitude to club membership.  

I'm sure on one occasion (or more!) I fogot to pull the truss Dob out to its full length and only went to one cick and not both - that also plays havoc with your ability to gain focus.

25 minutes ago, doublevodka said:

That looks like a lovely little Vixen frac by the way, although I definitely have a bit of a bias toward more retro-looking kit.

Thank you, I picked it up some years ago through SGL classifieds.  It's a Vixen 80S I think from the 1970's ish, but that's all I know about it.  I don't know if it's anything 'special' or filled with any sort of special gases, but I do know, as I wrote above, that I was amazed that it almost gave me a better view of the planets than the bigger dob. did - it was so very clear and sharp!  I got the little revelation prism (which it finally dawned on me that I'd need over and above what you need for a Dob LOL!) and it needs a size converter to make that fit and added the little red dot finder (I get on better with red dot finders better than plain optical ones as it came with), but I can still fit the whole lot in a medium sized cheap plastic tool case (with its baby folding tripod) with some suitable bits of foam and I have actually taken it on holiday when I've been somewhere dark - it's been to the Isle of Cumbrae and also to a darker spot in Kent near Romney Marshes.  

Edit - Just been reading up online - there seems more info. out there now than when I got it.  The general concensus seems to be that it sold in 1970/80's for 700USD (now - £550 ish) that seems a lot for such a small scope so long ago,  It must have been reasonable quality??

Even I have a refractor - just a tiny one with it's own fold into itself mini tripod.  I tried it once with a larger tripod and pointed it at Saturn and must admit was blown away by how good a view I got of the planet with such a small telescope.  It was then that it dawned on me that the apparent size of what you see through the EP is more governed by the EP size you are using than it is by the aperture of the scope (hence the question I asked mentioned above).  OK I do 'get' that you can push a bit more magnification through a larger aperture, but it isn't excessively more and after my experience with the mini scope and saturn I gave up on the notion that aperture fever was important.  There seems to be a maximum magnification that is useful in the UK anyway and unless you are chasing distant grey 'fuzzies' - which I wasn't I soon determined that I'd never need more than the 8" Dob, and really could probably have a lot of fun if I just used the baby Vixen a bit more often on a tripod that meant I could comfortably stand at it to view (which I got for it - see pics). 

9 hours ago, CCD-Freak said:

SIX TEC 180  (^8

Is that just so they can take more frames per minute or so they can 'see' more of the sky.  I asked a question once if a wider aperture 'typically a Dob' 'sees' more of the sky than a smaller aperture refractor does and IIRC feelings were divided.

10 hours ago, Saganite said:

A  shame I couldn't put a dome round Andromeda 5" f15.......😍

It almost seems a shame to have such a nice scope in such an obviously built up area!

I just had to go and see what you were all talking about.  That's a whopping great big telescope!!

I still think I got hit by a meteorite when I was driving home one day.  A small brown/red stone came flying down from the sky and hit and damaged my windscreen, then it rebounded flying off somewhere to the side of the road as I drove along.   I do not know where it else it could have come from and often wondered if it was a meteorite.

Do they get to keep them?

From the description alone I guessed the orion nebula lol!

I once lugged my 8"dob, it''s heavy powered miunt, EP's and my home-made perfectly serviceable solar filter and shadow finder all the way to a street science fair to do outreach and let people experience seeing the sun.  We spent the entire day dawn to dusk under 100% clouds and the most exciting thing the kids viewed through the scope was a TV aerial!!!

I agree with @JTEC we certainly don't want to see them.  Though I guess they are trying to provide a service that people have decided that they might like as well as making someone richer.  Whilst I guess that physical obstacles in the sky might always upset some observations these starlink satellites are very visible, presumably it is the reflections from their solar panels that is being seen?  I get the impression that satellites are not within view for many minutes,  It does make me wonder that with some forethought couldn't their panels be dimmed/turned away from earth automatically when it could be computed that they would be visible.  Such an adaptation on newer satellites, might make them less obtrusive and promote less public outcry allowing the companies their profits and the night sky it's uninterrupted darkness.  Just a thought.