JOC

6 minutes ago, alacant said:

Thanks so much everyone.

Oh, how I hate home wifi!

Unfortunately, as per the original post, the only thing I can change is the interim box. @Elp do you know if your netgear alternative will be any better than the existing box? The latter is a mi-home.

Cheers and clear skies.

FWIW I have one of these https://www.netgear.com/uk/home/wifi/range-extenders/eax80/ as close to the shed (<25m away) as I could place it within the house duplicating the WiFi and flinging it forwards and it still couldn't cover the necessary distance (and I think that's a fairly top of the range gizmo) .  I left it in place as it covers a fair bit of the garden, but it won't cover the distance you are looking at as it wouldn't get to my shed.  IMO you can't do what you want to do without a bit more hardwiring.  

50m is at the end of 'easy to solve' IME.  I wanted internet into a shed only about 25m away and couldn't solve it with WiFi bridging (nowhere to plug them in half way along the external route) or electronic through the cables connectors.  Whilst it sounded more than I wanted to do, the solution wasn't actually that difficult to deploy - or really hugely expensive.  You might need to provide a little shed (larger waterproof plastic storage box might do) to house equipment in and maybe run a bit of electric cable to get power as well, but for me the solution was a length of external quality cat 5 cable. run into the house (I went through an air brick) and connected into one of the outputs on the home router - a cheap connecting kit from the online auction company put the cat 5 ends onto the cables - which can be checked with a cheap tester from the same source.  Then you can plug it into a wifi flinging unit (router) at whatever cost you fancy at the far end and a new one will probably clone itself to your existing logon details very easily.  Get the power to the same location - maybe get a electrician in to give you a suitable external power source and Bob's your uncle.  I was lucky, I had the weatherproof shed that already had power, but essentially I did was described above and get a brilliant connection, with the possibility of hard wired connectivity at the far end if I need it and WiFi connectivity.  My experience with these plug in systems is a lot of cash spent and they never really seem to do the job, especially if they are not on the same ring main.  A bit of hard wiring and the encouragement of a few SGL members to try it solved my connundrum and you won't beat the connectivity offered by a bit of cabling - far better than all these plug in gizmos IMO. 

I wonder how they decided what to look at first!

Hi Harry, I note in your new listing is a Bresser sun filter for the 70/700.  Looking at that telescope online it appears that said filter might have come supplied with that telescope.  We do have a forum on SGL dedicated to solar https://stargazerslounge.com/forum/207-observing-solar/ and there is a sticky on their that might be worth a read and maybe post and ask for advice regarding the safety of using that filter before you decide to go ahead and use it as I know that some solar observing filters etc. are not recommended by solar fans on the forum and there will be loads of advice around about staying safe that might be worth taking a look at before your first foray into solar.

14 hours ago, ONIKKINEN said:

I think the reason why they are banned or heavily regulated in many places is because they are unfortunately also very easy to use unsafely, whether by accident or intentionally.

Let's face it lasers aren't the only things where that applies and look what happens with those some other things when they are not regulated.

On 05/06/2022 at 12:37, Mike Q said:

Why on earth would I want zero mag on a finder

I'm tempted to ask, why would you necessary need more than zero mag on a finder when you've got a telescope for the magnification?  On my telescope I've got a 25mm EP to use and a RACI finder and a cheap and cheerful RDF that cost about a tenner to find things.  I key the RACI image fairly well into the telescope view, but don't usually bother too much with the RDF view.  In Sub 30 seconds I reckon I can have the telescope roughly pointing at the right bit of sky using the RDF - this is certainly close enough to find exactly the right main star closest to the site of interest (if not that star) in the RACI finder, then the telescope is right on that star and if I put in a lower mag. EP I can see all I need to find anything I'm chasing.  Given this ease and speed of use I see no earthly reason to have to deploy a laser and risk a chance of causing a mishap when the risk can be eliminated entirely by not using one.  It seems a no-brainer to me, if you don't need to use one to accomplish the task (and I see no reason why anyone needs to) then I can't see any need to take the risk, however small, of using one.

Back on topic from someone with no expertise or many years standing who bought a scope based on recommendations from SGL, but I do wear glasses - astigmatism in both eyes and much shorter sighted in the left than the right.  

FWIW I have owned EP's with very short eye-relief and didn't get on with them.  I find I can view through a telescope and find focus both with and without my glasses on, but I tend to view whilst wearing them as it saves keep taking them off.  I find I don't get on well with the EP's that have rubber eye cups (I'm the same with binoculars) and find that I never press my eye or glasses up to an EP instead preferring to sort of hover just above the contactable surface of the EP itself - thus I find I get on better with an EP with a decent amount of eye-relief to accommodate my 'hovering' action.  

I purchased most of my EP's secondhand.  The only one I sold through short eye relief was a 10mm televue which I def. didn't get on with.  I've still got a load of my 2nd hand ones in the box, but the ones I tend to use on the rare occasions I get out to use the telescope, because I'm rather pleased with them is my Bader Morpheus set, but I just use them plain without any of their rubber eye cups that they come with.

Having got quite a few from different manufacturers I tend to subscribe to the notion that most EP's from a half decent maker will do the job.  As a novice I think there is a lot of hocus pocus written, all with good intent, about EP's.  I still find I am just excited to be able to see something in focus and that I can't see with the naked eye.  I suspect that it is only when you decide that astronomy is your real passion and feint DSO's require absolute focus and darkness inside the EP to pick-up, that you want that perfect focus across the whole viewing area, and you have spent countless hundreds (possibly thousands) on a superb scope that you might need EP's of similar finite standard.  For the standard novice like myself I doubt many people will go wrong with a selection of BST's or their equivalents.  If I were you I'd buy a selection of 2nd hand ones, keep what you like and sell and change out what you don't until you get a fair selection that you get on with.  Personally although I've got a x2 Barlow I never really used it - prefering instead to have a specific EP at each magnification interval, and FWIW the 25mm and 10mm that came with my scope gave me more than adequate views and I still go back to them if I'm trouble shooting focus and balance issues on the telescope.

That's lovely.  You've got the focus spot on too - I've taken some shots of stars with my camera and know how difficult it can be to get the stars as sharp as that.  The foreground trees and slight pinkness in the sky all make it quite atmospheric.

7 hours ago, Paul_Sussex said:

@JOCI like the idea of a Y mount - do you have a source for that? Already have the offer of a free Telrad...

I've never played with a telrad so don't know how they mount, but my Y mount came from someone in Poland on ebay who was printing them - I paid about £15 like the ones on this page from someone in Belgium https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2380057.m570.l1313&_nkw=telescope+finder+mount&_sacat=0 , what you do need is a baby red dot finder with a wedge shaped foot on it to fit though.  Like this one https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/384053571749?hash=item596b6070a5:g:~yUAAOSw0nhgWdWO

On 20/04/2022 at 23:26, Dark Vader said:

have used a water butt stand for a Dob

I tried one for my 8" Dob and found that my plastic water butt stand was way too flexible.  It needed filling with cement, but then I would never have shifted it.  

27 minutes ago, Paul_Sussex said:

I found the straight through finder almost unusable - not an equipment fault, due to age and fitness (or lack of). I'd have been lost if someone hadn't lent me a 9x50 90 degree finder.

Get a Y mounted dual finder mount (I found someone 3D printing them very reasonably on a popular auction site) and mount a 90 degree optical RACI next to a cheap as chips (often <£10) 2nd hand very basic red dot finder and you will find targets in < 15 seconds that you couldn't find in 20 minutes using an optical finder alone. 

If I get a chance to stick the DSLR on an unguided stationary tripod to try and photo the milky way roughly what settings and exposures should I try please?

The most fun I've had with my telescope was when I got it out during a party and loads of guests decided that they wanted a peak of Saturn and Jupiter.  It was nice to be able to share what I could see and that made it well worth getting all the kit out.  Lugging all the kit outdoors to sit out in the cold, by myself has rapidly cooled my enthusiasm.   Yes, I'll do so if there is something out of ordinary to see though I must admit we comet-ed very successfully using binos in recent years as we needed to be beyond the garden.  I very much wanted to do the observing with someone else.  My son sprang to mind, I got the telescope for him when they couldn't get an astronomy club off the ground at school (a fact that never surprises me - there are very few months when it is suitably dark when kids are still at school to observe).  However, he had no enthusiasm for doing it at home - too boring/no company? I think.   I tried a club, but the club was more concerned with listening to talks, than it was actually setting up telescopes and looking at the night sky which is what I thought/hoped they would do.  So I sit here with kit that can be used, but it is rarely used.  Sometimes the family will come out and have a peek if we have a special event to see (I had a peak at some of the recent solar flares), but I just can't get into observing by myself esp. in the cold.  There seem far fewer opportunities for balmy warm evenings with good seeing when it might be OK to sit outside and have a look up for a while.   It would be so nice to have someone to do it with me.

So sometime in the future I hope to be wandering back from a few good nights out in Yarmouth, Isle of Wight at sort of midnight-ish.   From what I read the night sky out that a way might be pretty good, do you reckon it's worth packing my baby Vixen and a box of EP's or if I should just stick to seeing if I can get some shots of the milky way and maybe of Orion with all those extra stars in the middle which I assume should be visible in that location with my camera on a tripod - perhaps someone could just remind me what those ideal settings are F? Exposure - around 20s? film speed?  I could dig out my old Orion thread, but it will take me ages to find it.  Just how good could the Sky be do you think?

Looks like the shadows to me  https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/babylon5/images/4/4c/Shadow-battlecrab.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20080502211130

3 minutes ago, Budgie1 said:

As it's a flex tube, is the tube fully extended?

This is a good point, there are two stops on my flex tube, you pull it up, then you pull it up again until it is fully extended.

2 hours ago, Hillsdale said:

I'm brand new to stargazing. I've got a Skywatcher 14" GoTo Dobsonian. I was pretty sure I set everything up correctly, but clearly I haven't. I can see just fine through the finder scope. But when I look into the eyepiece, I don't see a thing. Just a solid blur. I'm pretty sure there must be something wrong with the mirror alignment, but I really don't know where to begin. Please help! Happy to send photos of anything that might help. 

When you grab hold of the knobs at the bottom of the focuser tube and turn them does the focusser move up and down?  It needs to - much more than you might think - your focus point should be somewhere between the travel top and bottom.  If twisting the knobs doesn't move the focus tube up and down there might be a screw in the unit somewhere in the middle between the two knobs that fixes the focus - try loosening the screw and that should drive the focus tube up and down.  You also want to start out with the highest numbered eyepiece in the focus tube (i.e. 20mm not 10mm), in the appropriate adapter if there is one.  Also mess around during the day - pointing away from the sun and focus on a distant land object before you try at night (said object may be upside down/back to front, but this is OK - it just needs to be in focus)

When I was looking at the sunspots last week I just happened to be looking and aircraft did that to me whilst I was at the EP - right through the middle!  Wow!  If only I'd had a camera setup at the time - it rather made me jump!  At that point I thought it was slim of chance of a) happening, and b) actually seeeing it happen, but @paulastro actually has a photo of such an event - double wow!

On 12/02/2022 at 09:31, Zermelo said:

are described: "the seven main stars in the winter constellation Orion are visible to the naked eye".

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".

7 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

It doesn't mean the main 7 stars. It means 7 stars in the area between the belt, Betelgeuse and Bellatrix!

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

14 minutes ago, Stu said:

Can you see the ones circles in this image?

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.