Spaced Out

Hi All

Can anyone recommend a good book, for a total beginner, interested in looking at the night sky from their garden please. Just naked eye stuff at the moment.

Thanks

On 24/11/2021 at 10:44, Pitch Black Skies said:

Congratulations on your EQ6R! 💪

I have the same setup, albeit riding on an uncertain EQ5. I have opted for the ZWO ASI533 MC-PRO after some digging around.

If you can live with the square fov, the 533 has lower read noise (1.0e), higher QE (80% peak), and suffers zero amp glow. Paired with the 130P-DS under OK seeing conditions, it gives an ideal resolution of 1.19"/pixel.

https://astronomy.tools/calculators/ccd_suitability

 

Clear Skies 👍

Thanks for this, trouble is, I'm not sure I like the square fov, this is why I am thinking prolly the 294.

That's great thanks. New bolt ordered !

Hi All

I'm just working out how to mount an EQ6-R onto my existing concrete/brake disk pier. I had hoped that the main mounting bolt (the one that goes through the centre of the tripod underneath and up into the base of the mount) would be the same as my old HEQ5 but it seems a bit larger. Can anyone tell me the thread size of this bolt and the pitch so I can order one to fit ?

Thanks

Set mine up last night with USB connection. These 2 vids were helpful.

11 hours ago, Turbocoo said:

Good luck buddy, enjoy. Yeah I bought your old 130pds, though our weather has been shocking this year. 

Well done paying off debts. 

I can see how easy it would be to get in debt in this hobby.. Jez😅

Any scope in mind? 

Thanks. I'm thinking another 130PDS to start with.

130PDS, TS-Optics GPU Corrector and ZWO ASI 294MC Pro is the plan, gonna take me quite a while to save up enough for each item + guiding + all the other little extras and mods. I'd like to be up and running by next autumn. Just got a new brake disk for my pier top, going to get drilling and painting that this weekend, then mount the EQ6R ! I may use my DSLR and lenses for a while until I can afford a telescope. 

I'm hoping the EQ6-R will offer a little more flexibility for upgrading in the future, my old HEQ5 was great with the 130PDS, but anything much heavier and it started to struggle a bit.

Delighted to have this beauty arrive from FLO today.

I sold off all of my astrophotography kit back in the spring to pay off debt, so it’s nice to be back and building a new set up. Telescope next !  

1 hour ago, JSeaman said:

I used a VAG 118 (Audi), it has a 232m diameter and a 39.3mm depth with a 65mm centre diameter
 

Brilliant ! Thanks, I'll get on ebay. 🙂

2 hours ago, fifeskies said:

 "can anyone tell me the EQ6-R base diameter that I need to look out for ?"

 

NEQ6 / EQ6_R  base info

 

 

That's great ! Thanks.

Hi All

I am just looking to buy an EQ6-R at the moment. I plan on using it with a concrete/brake disk pier I made in our garden. Currently the top disk is the correct diameter for my old HEQ5.

Just wondering if anyone is using their EQ6-R on a similar brake disk set up, and if so, what sort of disk you used to make it fit ? Failing that can anyone tell me the EQ6-R base diameter that I need to look out for ?

Thanks.

I'm far from expert at this but I do stretch Ha data in photoshop no problem. I always do small stretches tho and repeat, if I do a large stretch it starts to look quite blocky/blotchy straight away. Same with adjusting the levels, so I use small steps. No idea why this happens tho ?

Great image, the star adventurer does it again ! You can see the flame and horsehead coming through there too.

I hope you don't mind, I chucked your image through Lightroom to try and remove the purple halos a bit, it's not perfect but there is less purple.

Hmmmm........ No responses yet, so I'm guessing no-one knows the answer to this one ?

Hi all

Last night I learned how to create a mosaic in CDC using finder circles then import that list of finder circles from CDC to APT to image a mosaic area. I had to use go to++ to plate solve each panel, then manually start a simple imaging plan for each panel.

For me this was an achievement !  👍

I am wondering if there is a way to create an imaging plan that could automate the whole process ? It would rely on PHD2 selecting a new guide star when the mount moved to a new panel, then start guiding again too. Is this possible ?

Thanks

I use a Lacerta Flatfield box, it's not the cheapest but I think the build quality is good, it's dimmable and it has worked OK for me so far !

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p8241_Lacerta-LED-Flatfield-Box-with-240-mm-usable-Diameter.html

4 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

Could I also suggest that you contact Richard Darn. Richard was a key advocate for instigating the Northumberland Dark Sky Park status and was also a co founder for organising Kielder Star Camp. He also posts on here, but I cannot remember his user name. 

https://darkskiesuk.org/about/

That's great thanks, I'll get in touch with him 👍

44 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

This is an interesting article that you could bring to the attention of the parish council. Concerning nocturnal impacts on Entomology. Those of us who seek dark sky environs are sensitive to the negative impact and ecological harm that local light intrusion and the relentless creep of light pollution creates.

https://www.ncl.ac.uk/press/articles/archive/2019/01/streetlighting/

 

Thanks. I am an ecologist. I am just trying to get the local nature reserve recognised for its dark sky quality, so I'll be flagging up the many ecological benefits (alongside others) of protecting the area from LP. Plenty of research/evidence showing negative ecological impact caused by LP, yet, as you say, the LP creep is just relentless.

Luckily I live in a small rural community, I'm hopeful that if we can get the community engaged with this we might be able to make a difference at a local level and encourage neighbouring parish councils to do the same.

6 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

21.00 Mag / NELM 6.00 is considered entry level for good quality dark skies.

Do you have any sort of reference for this statement, it would be really helpful if possible. I'm trying to convince the parish council that our 21.2 skies are dark enough to really push awareness and protection within the local community.

7 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

Northumberland Dark Sky Park status and dark sky tourist industry does promote, within the park boundaries, awareness for regionally appropriate lighting, reducing unnecessary light intrusion.

Pretty much the same approach I am asking our parish council and hopefully neighbouring parish councils to adopt.

14 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

 My own readings are also typically 21.2 - 21.4,

Thanks for the reply. I think there may be a little more LP down here on the coast compared to some of those inland/upland sites.

I have been doing an average of 4 readings between midnight - 1ish. I suspect that with perfect conditions 21.40 will be as good as it gets here. This did happen just once on a very clear calm night a little while back. The other 3 nights I've taken measurements they've generally always been between 21.18 and 21.25, so this has made me question whether the 21.40 was accurate or not, sounds like readings might vary a little bit due to conditions tho.   

Yep, that dome of skyglow from down Ashington/Newcastle way does my head in tbh !

36 minutes ago, pete_l said:

Locations never have one, fixed, SQM value. They change with all sorts of factors. Mine varies by over 0.5 magnitudes, depending on transparency (i.e. how much light is reflected compared with how much passes through and out of the atmosphere), sunspot cycle and probably lots of other things apart from the Moon.

So I wouldn't get too tied up with what other websites say it should be. I suspect that all they do is look at the population of towns and villages and make a guess based on nothing more than their distance away.
What is interesting from your all-sky image is that the brightest LP to the south isn't as bad as the effect the dimmer LP from the east has.

Thanks, that's good to know that readings can vary that much, most of my readings are around 21.2 but I have had 21.4 once.

In the field the LP to the south is a pain, it is from Newcastle upon Tyne and surrounding towns (maybe 25-30 miles away), it washes out everything low in the southern sky.

To the east is straight out over the North Sea, no obvious artificial light sources in that direction, it is the darkest horizon here but I see airglow that way fairly regularly.

To the north is a small dome of LP from a couple of small(ish) villages (about 5 miles away), and to the north-west and south-west is some local LP from our village.

9 minutes ago, Waddensky said:

Crumey (2014) suggests grey (SQM 20.25-21.24), black (SQM 21.25-21.74) and pristine (SQM 21.75-22.00) as a dark sky classification.

That's useful, thanks.

Thanks vlaiv, I've seen these pages before. 

Using the Bortle Scale I have assessed as Bortle 4 but not far off 3 tbh, 3.5+ if there was such a thing !

I don't really like the Bortle scale, I can see how it may be useful but to me it seems subjective and perhaps broad in places. I prefer the SQM-L it is more objective and there’s less risk of user bias creeping in. Not sure how the websites calculate things but 21.6 does seem quite a bit higher than my usual 21.2 readings (I did get a high of 21.4 once). I'm guessing they are estimates.

The wiki page suggests the sky here is bortle 4 and therefore rural/suburban transition. It is actually very rural here, I wouldn't class it as suburban transition, but again it is all down to how you interpret things I guess.

Thanks

Hi all

Is there an official scale/text showing the lowest SQM-L reading that might be considered a ‘dark sky’ ?

I am writing a short report for our Parish Council to highlight our rural sky quality and the impact of local light pollution in some places. I consider the skies here reasonably dark (not dark sky park quality tho). A light pollution website suggest local readings should be around 21.6 but my readings hover around 21.2.

Thanks

Gary

Here is my first ever image created using data from multiple nights. I imaged over 3 nights to get as much as I could on this target but some high thin cloud saw me ditching a lot of subs in the end. Found it a bit complicated stacking 3 different filters from different nights with accompanying calibration frames in DSS. In the end I just did one night at a time then stacked the resulting images together for each filter.

Tadpole Nebula IC410

71x 300s Ha

47x 300s Oiii

50x 300s Sii

+ 50x Darks, 20x Flats and 20x Dark Flats for each filter.

Like Steve I also use -20, works well and I've never had any problems cooling in the warmer spring/autumn weather.