Jkulin

Hi, I'm not a specialist in Carbon fibre, but if you have a look at his website he does manufacture a number of different carbon tubes. http://www.klaushelmi.de/en/hardfoam-cored-tubes.html

I have just seen this and it is the epitome of everything I dislike about remote imaging using other peoples data: - https://www.astrobin.com/410459/?nc=iotd It is indeed a beautiful image, but it should never have been selected above other peoples images such as Barry Wilson and Steve Milne who work hard to obtain remote images. And to boot the images were taken 6 years ago 🤬 So lets recap with this: - 1. The submitter used someone else's data 2. From a remote site in Namibia 3. Using someone else's equipment at an Astrofarm 4. And they were taken 6 years ago! Indeed a beautiful image, but it should never have been selected for IOTD above far more worthy images! 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬

@Tubby Bear I've measured the inside of my VX10 and it varies from 271mm to 281mm, so when Klaus says 276mm I think he is bang on. I popped round to Peter Shah last week and he showed me how to remove the primary and there are plenty of adjustments to allow for the internal diameter, I don't think you will have any issues there. On my primary cell it could be locked in position in two different places about an inch apart, I think to allow for visual or astroimaging. Peter explained how much twist there was in the ally tube and advised getting a carbon one which would resolve the constant need for re-collimating and would resolve any issues you had with alignment as well. Once assembled I would need to pop back to Peters (always a pleasure) as he would need to check the measurements and alignment again. I looked at the curved vanes, but for me I love the diffraction spikes so it will need to be straight ones but thanks for the link. First thing is to obtain a new R&P focuser and then the vanes, then I can send Klaus the measurements.

Thanks for the pointers Gents, had a very detailed reply from Klaus as follows: - The quality and thickness looks superb and I will most definitely be ordering from him, I just need to obtain a new focuser so that I can give him the dimensions of the hole size, while I am at it I will also buy a new thicker Vane, I may go 15-20cm longer so that I have a built in dew shield. If the quality is as good as the image and his replies, then I will be a very happy man. http://www.klaushelmi.de/en/ Thanks once again everyone.

Cheers Lads, really useful info, busy contacting them all at the mo. I'm advised that the aluminium of the VX10 is fairly poor but as it has 1/10 wave mirrors it would be worth investing and perhaps get some new spider vanes as well? @Tubby Bear is spacken de deauche (SIC) anywhere near good enough ...lol

I want to upgrade from the aluminium tube to a carbon one on my VX10, but I have exhausted all the searches on here and elsewhere without any luck. Is it really that hard to source a Carbon Fibre Tube? I've not got the time or skills to make a tube, so really need to buy one. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks in Anticipation.

Hi, sorry to sidetrack, but did anyone ever find a company that made carbon tube, I'd rather like to transfer the gubbins from my VX10 into a Carbon tube?

OK playing devils advocate here and I know @carastro will chuckle, at what point does an image hosted, captured and processed by one self compete against one setup remotely hosted but captured and processed by another versus data purchased and downloaded then processed compare. So in theory three methods, the first two as I mentioned early require considerably skill and patience, the third well....? Should someone who spends days, weeks months or years even trying to capture sufficient quality data to produce an image compete for the accolade of "image of the day" for some one who buys their data and then processes it and enters into the same competition. Should there be different classifications?

Your suggestions are taking things to the extreme, so: - Racing a car in F1 doesn't count if you haven't made every part! Racing a bike in the Tour De France doesn't count if you haven't welded and made the bike yourself (although at one time you had to be your own mechanic)! Archery doesn't count if you have n't made the bow! And God forbid, flying to the moon doesn't count if you haven't made the rocket yourself! Olly quantifies this nicely, you draw your own line and one of which you are comfortable with. The OP asked for opinions and that is how I replied, I'm not going to string a noose around his neck and lynch him for using commercial facilities, it's just not for me. Like many others, I spend hours, nay days making up everything to connect faultlessly, even more time capturing the image with my own equipment and then processing the image myself. I have a number of friends who have processed my images to show me the error of my ways, including my mate Peter Shah, but I have never published or publicly shown these images as they are not mine, as once they leave my control they cease to be. I could show you some absolutely stunning images I took, but was struggling to get the processing right and which my mates sorted, but I would never dare to show as it goes against my own line in the sand.

If I went to Olly's (Which I would love to do, then I would take my own kit and use my own processing, but would listen and learn from Olly to make my own images better.

In answer to the above: - I work most nights until 3 or 4 in the morning and still managing to image, it depends how determined you are. Your home residence might not be conducive to imaging, but the likes of @souls33k3r and @carastro have really bad skies and manage to produce superb images through perseverance and travelling and even @thelestria24 manages from her balcony in Glasgow, so it depends how much you want you own work or someone else's. I have a chronic back condition and I'm classified as disabled, but I still manage. So it really depends on how much you want to achieve your own success or use someone else's skills. With regards to objects not in our hemisphere, then great, when I get time I shall visit countries with my travel kit and capture them then. Just to be honest, it rattles my cage when I see images on Astrobin when it is obvious people have captured them in Namibia or Mexico or even Chile but classify it as their own back yard, yet when you look at the kit there is over 100-200 grands worth. People need to be honest and if you have worked hard to establish your own kit remotely then you deserve the rewards, but to me someone who produces an excellently captured and processed image from a light polluted back garden deserves an even greater pat on the back.

Please understand that you have asked for opinions, but it just isn’t for me as it goes against the grain of my personal feelings about remote imaging. For me there are a number of classifications: - 1. Those who hire time from downloading images using commercial equipment not owned by them, for me it doesn’t contain any merit. 2. Those that get a company to setup their equipment and maintain it, again to me that contains very little merit. 3. Those that install, setup, configure and maintain their own equipment remotely, this indeed is in my opinion a worthy capture method, although not for me. So although I appreciate you have still had to process the images it is rather like going fishing, that everything is done for you so that you can pose with the fish after it has been landed. No insult inferred, it just really isn’t for me

With respect Steve, I have heard from a number of sources that they are not too pleased with the star shapes, I can’t substantiate it so regard it as hearsay. Indeed, FLO acted correctly with the Esprit issues on first launch, and now they are cracking scopes. So maybe you will need to offer an ES Reid service for the Redcat until quality levels are guaranteed, but then will it price it out of it’s competitive pricing? I’d like to see a few other owners results with the RedCat before committing to buying one.

Hi Mark, I am not optically qualified to comment as to the cause of the odd shapes, all that I can say is if I bought an OTA brand new that produced stars like that then I would not accept it. It is fairly obvious that there is an issue along the line that is much more noticeable at the edges and on that basis I would not accept it, doesn't mean I know how to fix it or what is causing it. In my own images I know when I have a guiding problem or tilt and try to work a way around it, not always successfully. I really was seriously interested in the RedCat and nearly hit the button when I first saw it to buy from FLO, but it has since it's launch been plagued with reports of poor star shapes and even the highly respected Mr ES Reid has had a unit back for a second time to try and fix. If the problems are resolved then I am truly happy for everyone concerned, but it does need fixing. Indeed I totally agree. Looking at the quality of your images on Flickr you are far more likely to identify a resolution to the odd shapes than me. BTW some lovely images on there and perfect star shapes 🙂

Haven't seen it Dave as having major broadband problems, so when it picks up then I can browse properly Its not just the edges, the stars are horribly shaped. I have never experienced that with any of my stuff, guiding errors yes but not shapes like that,

This is the centre which should be perfect but isn't, I agree better, but I still think that WO needs to revisit the quality: - Sorry @melsky absolutely no reflection on you, just the scope.

Problem is that I would have bought the Redcat to use full frame with my Sony, but with stars like that I won't go near it.

Sorry but at 100% the stars are truly awful Bottom Left Bottom Right Top Left Top Right

Thanks Mike, Much appreciate your reply, hopefully will give it a test this week.

Thanks Mike, I've set it up on my laptop now and will give it a try, just a quick question I want to reduce down the refresh and captures to about 5-10s minimum, where can I do that in the settings and I want to make the camera more sensitive. I've not used a CMOS camera before so all new to me as I usually use a CCD. Thanks once again.

Hi, Downloaded and have spent the best part of the evening to try and get it to work, I have re-installed it 4 times and tried the 32bit and 64 bit. Your uninstall routine leaves comments all over the registry that really didn't please me. And I constantly get this error coming up out of the blue and no matter how hard I look I cannot find anywhere to restore all the settings to a default: - I've attached the log files if they help. Can I suggest two things, firstly always have a reset configuration option as that would have saved me keep re-installing and installing. Please make sure when you uninstall that it leaves absolutely nothing left in the registry or hidden anywhere. So my question is how do I reset the configuration? I am using an ZWO ASI 120MC Camera So far I have not been able to capture a test image whatsoever, but I have have checked the camera is fine by reunning it up in sharpcap. Thanks for your assistance. NB. Finally got it to work, it refused to use the Ascom drivers for the camera, insisting on using its own, I changed a few of the other settings as well and that removed the error, so now I will set it up on my laptop and see if it will work, I didn't wish to be ungrateful and if it works nicely then will make a donation to your cause., Thanks. AllSkEyeLogProcessing.txt AllSkEyeLogAcquisition.txt AllSkEyeLogGeneral.txt

Here's your CCD Inspector images: - Yep I think you are right Dave, especially after looking at the CCD Inspector images.

I just had a look and whilst the centres were reasonable this is from the Top left, horrendous star shapes: - Bottom Left: - Bottom Right Top Right Middle Sorry Scott, but I really think you have got a real problem with that OTA and I woudln't waste any more time with it. I will most definitely not be buying one until I see some consistency with the quality

I have Dave and there really is some weird stars shapes, I know R3tr0 has the correct back focus as I have had a chat with him on that and all seems good, but you are right the stars are bad all over the image, if it was tilt it would be in one corner predominately. Personally after reading so much about bad star shapes and not flat fields for this new OTA, I think WO needs to recall them all and get them checked before selling any more. Its looks a lovely OTA and is a good FL for travelling, but I would rather use my cameras 200mm F4 focal length than have stars like that.

I've had a good look and to be truthful, your stars are really out of shape, this was from the middle: - And this from the left hand bottom corner: - It looks like it is coma, but can't be 100%, I don't think it is guiding as the right hand side of the stars are flattened. Personally I would return it for a full refund as I would never accept that for a brand new OTA.