JOC

Which when you think about it the word 'main' by itself is entirely misleading if you don't know better. It would be better put as something like:"the seven main stars inside the winter constellation Orion outline are visible to the naked eye".

That is highly useful @Mr Spock I couldn't see how it meant the 7 main stars of the outline, but for anyone not instantly aware that there was a group of 7 other stars elsewhere in the matrix means the statement sounded a bit weird to anyone knowing there was 7 stars in the OUTLINE!! LOL! It obviously means 7 stars withIN Orion!!! I shall take a look the next time its a clear night 😄 Much happier now with the statement 🙂

That was one of the criteria I read about on Kelling Heath's website that apparently is used to say that an area is decently dark enough for good astronomy. I must admit I know our skies are passably decent for being dark, but I didn't think we were anywhere particularly special. I just take seeing 7 stars in Orion (3 in the belt, 2 shoulders and 2 feet) with no assisted vision for granted and just assumed it looked like to most of those living in the UK. Have read now that it is a sign of dark skies does that mean that some of you who you couldn't seecan't see 7 stars in Orion 😞 I wouldn't have thought that it was even slightly difficult to do so)

Could it be the OP is viewing Sirius - the monster raving party star! Which appears to move and fluctuate and appear larger that it is as it is viewed through a lot of atmosphere?

FWIW I was having problems with plenty of mould growing on a white painted board ceiling that I'd installed in woodlined, but otherwise unheated gym in an external shed - an environment that I should imagine is very similar to an outdoor observatory. It's cold, but I can shut the doors and it's reasonably draft proof once they are shut. I purchased a product like this: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/283765025309?_trkparms=ispr%3D1&hash=item4211b6aa1d:g:M5cAAOSwQlZeNDb9&amdata=enc%3AAQAGAAACoPYe5NmHp%2B2JMhMi7yxGiTJkPrKr5t53CooMSQt2orsSwcmzw5CLtzTE60FqHcnq2JTNgftGbT4p%2Bi%2BtPChYH0ec9oukp%2FwqtIt4GuoFwVl9ED9PbQad8pL9eohI1RbXDnQyqeIUC3ycDxa92eiecDJ6TFJoHhvAJljGaistJB4wv%2BKAk%2BeqYYnFvzgxu0xoCbEfeXlSCFgWKVQgVIMxtDkyVuvUxBKACMo9sH%2Fhh4tSWtiXFCn%2BoQUPE8HXs9GU04jFuIDZGi80Rr11jCzJdl5zXYaeHr6LMZ%2FERTRKljqBZUo01BGS%2FwXfZyoOfeguyPoqCMrbGOGXiredG6uNK92mVrbe4dLMoHQz%2BKlxY3%2B%2B2o2LVja3uR0gIaPfwlIdNc9D9ppvINsBJ37PMVp6c%2FvE0qXlitZqkyRMyajk85fRpxC3H1BaxDkDGeVaZwq31losOmjjO%2FuP4M%2FNJW0FBTxnrVQ5cWt2mHmH5To%2BBCn%2B2I8%2BTDPWL6auCahiPaBp8IgPEKBUFDlX8PunmC6ciCUHkxQB9LTsWyPzwBwnlJ5sQgNTw6Lh1F7x9BWJe5dK6zzHbOy1m8gf5SVODfOFcFLesHzeIK2Y2NvysF2QFFypILTlBcU1M4%2B0%2FPMb8dnF19i5cvmFk4lDM%2FqZAeT9K58YsTEwIQ8wkmPV1JjG%2BoqOVyW326nLZ2N3cruphJXYCVG3RSgbSi4Qc2iEYEE4WEwP40LP5PaSs7xjm30BWsglbg6iybqyq4xbnu%2FxCb8pG1c0%2F%2FZ7zeI9PMxhqwymAl%2B5JokQF96lGvhcKoqS79IruDD65xOQ6yNeXWOojSWjdY4rHurtyg0RuKJijKfSt%2FpUx90RBmwnJbpkc9iJHPqwpolBY4QoHoMr1KA1JadzFw%3D%3D|clp%3A2334524|tkp%3ABFBMtNjL9tVf Sorry for long link - that's how it fell out of ebay! I know you can do link shortening, but sometimes people don't like clicking tinyurl links. With some scepticism, but for a quid a pop they were worth trying. You pull off the plastic coating and the silver layer under the lid and it leaves a white fibre coating over the granules and then you pop the lid with the plastic holes back on. I just sit one on the floor. Initially I thought they weren't doing anything, but after a couple of weeks there starts to get water in the base and the chemical gradually disappears over time and the base fills with 500ml of water. Unfortunately they are disposable (I'm on the look out for a re-chargeable one that all I need to buy is the chemical to refill it) which isn't very 'green', but I have been a) impressed with the fact that they work at all in terms of catching the water, but they do and I am now on my 4th one, and b) that I no longer have a problem with the mould growing on the ceiling. I just keep a supply in the gym and open a new one with the old one is nearly full. I think they might worth well in otherwise damp observatories.

I also had a try, but it's much more difficult than I thought it would be to get it in focus: Cannon Rebel T3 (1100D) Afocally on the telescope - auto exposure

Exciting - yes, with them pointed out I've found all those @Stu 😄 Missed the picture of my life too - about 5 mins ago I tried to take a photo and the camera ran out battery so I ran it in and its on charge, but as I was looking at those new sun spots an airplane flew right across the middle of the face of the sun as I watched - woosh!! and left a huge trail behind across the face of the sun - if only I'd have had the camera still attached - mind you it went so quickly I reckon I'd have missed it! NB. Thanks also for turning the photo upside down it made finding them a lot easier!

I've setup and we've all seen it. In my obviously upside down view of the sun it's appearing in the sort of 6-7 O'Clock position in from the edge - like a shaking of ink in an untidy pattern. In my view I am also getting a single dot in the 11 O'clock position close the edge. Interesting - the first time the disc has ever been more than plain yellow when I've looked at it. First time the Scope's been out in over a year too! I get just about the whole sun in with the Baader 14mm - and can get a good close look up to around Baader 6.5mm, but it's nice around 9mm and 12mm. Now I know why I prefer looking at sun, it's still damn cold out there, but warmer than watching the stars!! Though as I've got the scope out now I might have a peek at the stars later too.

@stu & @paulastro Thanks both, yes, I've viewed the sun safely with the filter previously, but it never hurts to repeat the advice for novice users. My solar filter covers the whole apperture, and I have a shadow finder. I also have a series of holes around my filter that I pass short bungee cords through to stop it blowing off and I always check the filter prior to use. It's just that I know a lot of stuff you can't see with this sort of film and thus I never know what it's worth trying to take a look at.

Don't you just love auto text. I'm sure you meant 'can't fall off'!! 🙂

Could I see the sun spot with a filter made from standard Baader Solar film and a home-made filter on my telescope? I never know what you can and can't see with a home-made filter.

IIRC from my A level biology class, the rods are responsible for black and white and the cones are for colour vision. At low light levels we were told that because rods are more sensitive to light levels than cones our vision would become progressively more black and white as light levels deminished. I can vividly! remember being set homework to just go outside as the sun went down and then to report what we became aware of. Without exception none of the class spotted it, but the answer was supposed to have been that what we saw went to gray scale as the darkness came. Whether that explains some of what is discussed above I don't know, but I obviously learned what we were intended to learn as I can still recall the fact and the homework to this day.

Yes, I can confirm that the 50mm gap exists on mine too, but if you are going to make a cover you might just as well go the whole hog and do the entire scope width.

I found that finding the sun was a lot harder than you might imagine. I ditched the optical (star/moon) finder on my telescope and made a shadow finder. Shadow based finders work really well (and you can easily and cheaply buy or make one and add it with an elastic band to the tube), but a trick I discovered with a 200P ONCE AND ONLY ONCE YOU HAVE THE MAIN SOLAR FILM FINDER IN PLACE was to take all the Eyepieces out of the EP tube and just peep down it to look at the reflected image of the main mirror that you get easily from looking directly at the secondary mirror down the EP tube. I discovered it was very easy to see the non-magnified image of the sun in the main mirror and in the 8" 200P it just about fills the mirror and with very little fiddling around I found a rough point at the sun using a shadow on the top on the scope as a guide (Get a vertical shadow to lie straight in line on the body of the scope and you are in line, then you only have to move it up and down vertically) and finding the sun was actually quite easily by watching the big orange image sweep across the mirror as I pivoted the 200p vertically. It's only the two axis movement that causes issues finding things - if you can fix one axis - and a shadow fixes the horizontal - left to right axis - then you only have to sweep the scope up and down until you see what you are after. Get the sun central and you are spot on. If you are using a tracking 200P IIRC there is a programme on the handset to track the sun.

This thread might be useful, FWIW I have a 200P and made a filter too and this is an image that I took using my homemade filter and 35mm camera afocally attached to the telescope - the film I use gets an orange sun!!:

Looks like another entry for the 'things animated in the sky SGL image competition'. This JWST has rather captured the imagination of some SGL members hasn't it? Quite a challenge to definitively prove you've you've really spotted it. I'm surprised at how quickly it appears to move. Once it gets to where it is going will the 'apparent' movement across the sky persist (i.e. will it track an orbit like the ISS) or will become a stationary point in the sky (subject to the earth's rotation 'apparent movement') like a star is?

There is a neat graphic that is often shown on a thread like this that might be helpful - I've fished around and this link below which should show the picture if you click it - it shows how Dobsonian telescopes go from table top to needing a step ladder - most folks start with a 8" Skywatcher 200P which will conveniently sit on the ground though you might find an adjustable stool useful:

About a third down from top left and about about 1/3rd in from the left - within that diagonal line of brighter stars - a tiny moving dot of light - yes? If so well done 🙂 Perhaps you could enter it here?:

Don't get me wrong, it's not that I don't appreciate the sheer wonder of what has been constructed and what is happening, but the patience involved in these endeavours must be huge. It's a bit like we'll launch satellite X and in 15 years we'll get photos of Y is everything goes according to plan. It must very frustrating to perhaps have been fully involved in the creation and launch of these items and perhaps have retired long before you see the fruits of your labour. I don't think I'd have the patience myself.

So is this something, esp. once the solar shield is unfurled, that we are going to be to 'see; with our own eyes with our 'back-yard' telescopes? If so, it might be worth taking a look at if skies clear. If so once where it needs to be will it as static in the sky in terms of apparent movement or will it appear to race across the sky like the ISS?

I don't know if I would want to work on something like this, you must need the patience of a saint to work at NASA/ESA considering the time it takes to do everything. Launching the rocket (which must be the fun bit) only takes moments, but when you are looking at days to do other other stuff and even longer to send communications to and from distant satellites and space craft it must all get rather tedious.

Interesting, thank you! They obviously didn't watch 'Gravity'!

I've just seen a bit on the beeb about unfolding the solar shield. A big object made of 5 thin sheets of 'foil' which sounds somewhat delicate. The first thing I wondered about was how such an object is protected from 'impacts' from meteors etc. ?

@JACK7 I have spotted another post you have made in a forum about SGL Imaging Day - you are still in the wrong place. There are a number of forums on imaging here: https://stargazerslounge.com/forum/8-imaging/ you might find the top one on that page is the one that might be useful to you: https://stargazerslounge.com/forum/54-imaging-discussion/

I think it's clear that the best place to ask about Laser finders might be an American based forum - I think the concensus in the UK is that they are accidents waiting to happen and I'm glad we don't seem to support their use.