fifeskies

Sky still bright and at a very wobbly 6 degrees above the horizon so very poor seeing, but they are visible just.

Didn't have time to confirm focus was as good as it could be before they set behind the hill 

If all you are powering is dew bands the supply can happily live indoors and use a long 2 core cable from the 12v outlets to the dew bands. There will be a small voltage drop over a long cable but this will not significantly affect the dew bands. I would use as a minimum 2 x 0.75mm cables unless you have a very long distance to go (over 50m).

0.75mm is about 1.5 ohms for the return loop if all 50m is used

So with a 25m cable (0.75 ohms loop) and  with say 2 dew bands at 1 amp each (about 4 inch OTA size) the voltage drop at full power is around 1.5 volts , which will only drop the heating by a small amount and is likely to be around the usual setting in any case

(dew heaters rarely get used at full output , normally dialled down a bit with a controller)

With a 13.8 style power supply , you actually hit around 12v at the scope end with this type of load so its a perfect match.

There is enough spare capacity for powering a handy red led lamp as well.

You can easily make a small splitter box in a hobby case for multiple 12 v outlets.

A reel of 2 x 0.75mm cable is relatively cheap purchased online , 50m PVC is about £13 , or the better option of rubber cable is £25 for 50m.

NOTE   If you are using this for powering your mount , this will not work as well , the high current draw when slewing will drop the voltage too far , you could overcome this by using far thicker cable  (eg 1.5mm2) , but the cost rises significantly

For a good tutorial on using GIMP after stacking with DSS try here

GIMP Astrophotography Editing Tutorial - YouTube

I do use "Clear Outside" but it is best taken with a pinch of salt and always look at the real conditions.

Currently my forecast is RED

Actually , the sky is all clear apart from some cloud out low in the West , has been this way all afternoon when the app had it red with 40 to 67% cloud cover.

Always take the effort to confirm predictions.

You cannot really get all of those in the one telescope unfortunately.

In particular planets and DSO require very different performance.

It would help if you can indicate what price range you had in mind.

Many people start out with a small to medium dobsonian as a first telescope, easy to use for beginners and lets you see most objects .

Sky-Watcher Heritage-150P Flextube Dobsonian Telescope | First Light Optics    is a good starter telescope and being a flextube can fold down small for transporting.

A review of it here    Sky-watcher Heritage 150p Flex Tube Dobsonian Telescope - New for 2020 - YouTube

Looks like OP has switch mode type, for the first smaller unit , other one is hard to tell but could be linear given the big case.

Personally I have (and prefer) the heavy linear type and if sourcing new would probably advocate a linear.

However a great many on this site use and recommend the switch mode style.

A linear is particularly the choice if you want to locate the unit indoors and run a long cable out to your mount (10s of metres).

The high frequency ripple on a switch mode would generate a bit of RF interference using a long output cable as an antenna, though should be supressed with a decent quality switch mode anyway.

Both types seem to give good service.

These should be fine, I use 13.8v for all my gear.

I would however recommend some inline fuse protection or build a splitter box with some fuse protected outlets. I use a small ABS box near the mount for my fuses.

If you need to drop the voltage (dew heaters) you can get some small circuit boards that do that for you that can fit in a small box, these work fine on 13.8v in with a regulated 12v out.

It was a low apex roof originally but I removed all of it as timbers were rotten , so started from a flat box essentially.

What remained were 4 concrete walls to build from.

48 minutes ago, Witcherking10 said:

 Eventually will try out DSO. The HC on the SE alone has sky tours, solar system, DSO, and then the sky portal allows you to find what you are interested in. I know I would have a hard time if I had to do it manually especially sitting out in 30 degree weather looking for planets haha 

Stellarium , a free download programme is very handy for sitting in the warm looking at what will be in view from your location so you can plan out your session before you go out in the cold.

Jupiter and Saturn Declinations over next few years

Both are on their way back North  😎

You do better than me for latitude (assume you are around 38 North , I am 57) but even so Jupiter and Saturn are a long way south this year.

They will be moving North over the next few years so views will improve.  (Jupiter faster than Saturn)

You should manage to see the banding on Jupiter easily with your 8se, just needs a better night , and in a couple of years you will see it much nearer the zenith where the air is better.

A velcro strap might be easier

1 minute ago, MylesGibson said:

that may work temporarily, but I'd need a new one each night otherwise I wouldn't get it back in its case!

No , the releasable ones simply remove when you press the trigger , so you take it off for re-use.

Releasing the trigger is actually easier when 2 are joined together though I don't really see why that is the case.

I am assuming the issue is that the dew shield slides back down at higher elevations without the lock screw

Perhaps you could use a releasable nylon cable tie to prevent that (wound round OTA just below the shield), they are available in very long lengths, hardly ideal and a bit of a faff to use , but maybe as a short term solution until you decide something more permanent

I use them for cable management

You can use 2 joined together if need be.

2 hours ago, Pixies said:

Isn't Santa going to have to test it first?

He tried to test it but wasn't able to because of all the rain dear.

I am not sure exactly how this screw fits and where (a photo would help)

If the screw hole is clear of any obstructions (ie lens cell) you can use a "tap" to rethread the hole to the next size up, just make sure the small amount of metal swarf does not fall into the scope.

Hold the OTA tube so the hole is at the bottom and use the "tap" pointing upwards and make several small cuts of thread and remove each time , rather than cutting all at once.

I much prefer a waxing or waning Moon as I agree the need for a filter reduces away from full Moon

Another reason I prefer it is that either the early part of the night or the later part will be returned to darkness as the moon dips below the horizon (or is not up yet) so there is more freedom to look for the DSO objects that need the darker sky.

You get to enjoy the moon but also take in some of the other delights.

Its good for outreach type events too as there is the exciting wait for a moonrise, or the ability to show the fainter objects once it sets.

Younger audiences in particular will appreciate the bigger range of things you can show them over a session that way.

We need an app to allow us to scroll the moon back and forward across the sky on demand 🤡

11 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

It can, in fact, be shown that the surface brightness of an extended object cannot be increased by a telescope. This is a rather surprising bit of science but also a misleading one since, subjectively, we don't see it that way. While it's technically correct that the surface brightness can't be increased, I've always found this to be a rather 'dry' point since, in order to see fainter objects, we need a bigger telescope. What's really happening is that a smaller telescope, in increasing the object's image size, is spreading the light out too far and dimming it. More aperture allows for the object to be spread out over a larger area without being so badly dimmed. So telescopes do make faint objects bright enough to see but they do it by making them bigger rather than brighter.

Olly

 For large extended objects there is also the interplay between rods and cones that can distort the perception of what we "think" we see since the retina is not uniformly populated with them.

Our less sensitive spot centre vision can make a small object hard to see so dodging averted vision is needed.

Once the object spreads wider into the more off centre area the brain tends to fill in the centre detail in a much more natural way than having to scan around on a small object. A kind of persistence of vision effect kicks in, though it is "learned" which is why practised observers often see more.

It's all just smoke and mirrors after all.

(well for certain mirrors (diagonals are mirrors 🤪)

Yes as much as I love the moon I sometimes resent its presence on the few clear nights we seem to get as it rules out a lot of other targets

5 minutes ago, Peter Drew said:

It's very much to do with the sensitivity to brightness of the viewers eye.  I can look at the Moon with a 20" without needing any filter whereas my wife would need sunglasses to look at a full Moon with the naked eye!    🙂

Its the same with sound  🙄

What I consider quiet can be regarded as a cacophony by some others 

Makes creeping about in the middle of the night a challenge at times (for astronomical reasons I might add).

As aperture goes up I am fairly sure the exit pupil will increase wider than the eye will open to under a bright view of the moon.

So after a while there will not be any brighter a perceived image as much of the light is being lost, but there will be finer detail resolved in the bigger scope.

This will also vary with age. (older among us have a smaller maximum iris opening)

The use of a moon filter has another benefit if you are going to other objects after the moon as dark adaptation is not lost as badly.

8 minutes ago, Nyctimene said:

The  areal brightness of any extended sky object (galaxies; moon) remains the same, when viewed through a scope - it's just a much larger part of the retina covered by the enlarged image, creating the impression of higher brightness.

Stephan

which is why the "perceived" brightness gets uncomfortable and a moon filter can be an asset.

The energy falling on the retina is far larger.

The common understanding of brightness will be described as an image "too bright to look at" without a neutral density filter to reduce it (to 10%  typically)

A full moon in an 8se will be too bright for many viewers without a moon filter.

I personally find it helps to see the moon as well , for me the contrast change brings out more lunar detail.

57 minutes ago, Nyctimene said:

 (but not brighter than observed with naked eyes).

sorry but that is not the case for me

when my 10 inch scope gathers all the light from a 10 inch circle and pushes it through my tiny 5mm eye pupil circle I can assure you it is far brighter than looking direct at the moon without a telescope , especially if the magnification of the eyepiece is low.

It allows 2500 times as much light through so even at higher magnification it is still uncomfortably bright

Without my 10% moon filter I cannot bear to look through my big scope at the moon.

I get the large dark "sunspot" effect in my vision if I try it like a bright sun will do during the day, that never happens looking at the moon with a naked eye.

I don't feel I need the filter with my smaller refractors at high magnification however unless the moon is near to full.

Do you need any cupboard handles   😜

A big finder is unusual on a dob because of the balance issues , often a Telrad is a better option , though less accurate

A possible use for these is to put a losmandy plate onto your dob so it can be used with an EQ or Alt Az mount , the curve should match the OTA radius

(a bit unworkable with a 12 in flextube though , would need a plate on the inside at the very least , and full tube rings are better)

Anything left on astroturf for any length of time will leave a crush mark on it so I would avoid heavy slabs. (Even slabs on a shed floor will make the shed bearers mark the astroturf more)

Bolts rising through the turf from below would work , just use spacer nuts so any pier does not actually clamp down onto the turf.

Another option might be to make a nice bit of raised deck that could be left behind if you ever move. A 6 x 6 section is easy to make.

Once you have that to build onto it makes things a bit easier. 

I assume you know about the lightweight plastic skypods , these appear second hand now and then. They sit easily on a small bit of decking

There are good ideas in the DIY observatory thread for adapting lightweight plastic or wood sheds for this kind of use, take a look at those to be inspired