Carbon Brush

I use Rigel + RA finder with my MN78. https://stargazerslounge.com/attachments/?page=4 The MN78 is in the obsy on a fixed pier with goto. If things go astray for any reason, the Rigel is great for a 'first find'. Ignore the ST102 in the image. That was part of some playing around/trials I was doing. On non-goto newt scopes I have always used an RA finder. But some won't go near them and insist on straight finders. Give it a try. Why not buy a used straight finder and see how you like it? Generally you can sell on 2nd hand kit for little or no loss. David.

I think that most of the eyepieces offered by the UK astro retailers are going to be OK. If you search the FLO site with 'cheshire' you will find a slightly lower cost one on offer. Have you checked the 'for sale' section on SGL. Or posted a wanted ad? I vaguely remember seeing a cheshire advertised on here not too long back. Sorry I did not take much notice as I already have one. If you choose ebay, be careful to check the seller location. Goods from China sometimes take weeks to arrive. If there is a problem they do refund - but often buyer pays return postage! Or there is the argument and delay for a paypal refund. Good luck searching. David.

Welcome back to the dark side! From your post, I reckon you will enjoy using a 200 dob. I wouldn't dismiss an alt-az mount just yet. Also consider goto. Quite small and quick to set up. Unlike EQ, no messing around with weights on long poles. For me, the lower cost goto mounts can be more faff than benefit. If you look at goto and are not stuck for budget look for one that has an internal battery for the clock. It really annoys me to have to enter the time/dae every time out with the 'cheapie' goto mounts. Yes you can pay a bundle of money for a GPS receiver that plugs into the mount to do this for you!. What I like about goto is that you swap eyepeices, filter, etc. Or even walk away from the scope. When you return, the object of interest is still there. Just few thoughts. David.

Just seen this..... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-48132532?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science_and_environment&link_location=live-reporting-story My thinking is that if somone spends money on bricks, mortar, fixtures, fittings, then there is better prospect of the sky remaining dark. a few odd people wandering into a field at ight not being justification for keeping the sky dark.

I have had the 10x50 variant for a few years. Excellent performance for the money. Yes I paid full price. Double todays offer.

Hello and welcome to SGL. Both are good scopes. But the better is determined by your circumstances. Tell us about your viewing plans. Out of the back door into the garden? Down 3 flights of stairs? 10 miles to a dark site? How do you feel about handling a potentially heavy and bulky assembly. They all look small on web sites! What sort of viewing expectations do you have? Just visual? Photos? Dim fuzzy galaxy type viewing? Moon & bright planets? The best scope is the one that gets used the most. Not the scope with the best specification. The comments and recommendations will come flooding in when we know a little more about you. David.

Almost on topic..... July 1969. The BIG headline in all of the newspaprers was of course the landing of Apollo 11. The Daily Express ran daily a small single image cartoon featuring a couple. I forget their names. But, on this day, the wife was looking out of the window to the moon. In big lettering across the disc was 'coca cola'. The caption showed her saying to her husband 'I think they have arrived my dear'.

The BBC news article is no longer on the main science page. However, a search for 'light pollution' brings it up. As does..https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47953005 David.

Thanks for posting. Good results from a poor day. David.

Demonperformer - I like it! Definitely one up on me shining a torch in a neighbours face! Pehaps invite the coucillors, and environmental health, and lighting dept (first time at least) at a more reasonable hour. If they don't attend, or have the courtesy to respond, then step up the time/fequency of calls. When my messages are ignored without good reason, I double up on the reminders - every time. 1, 2, 4, 8, 16 - the messages do get a response eventually!

Hello Sophie. Welcome again. You will find lots of good advice and help on SGL. It is (in my opinion) the best astronomy forum going! On the binos. If you can't return them for refund, then give them to child to play with. I did that with some rubbish binos I was asked to review for a (non astro) retailer a while back. They went down really well and I didn't care when they got broken. When you start to look for more binos, ask around on this forum, then buy from a specialist astronomy or nature retailer. Enjoy your visits to SGL, David.

The BBC have had 110 responses. Mostly lamenting the loss of the sky and pointing out the futility of 'security' lights. I recognised some of SGLers in there. A few ill informed posts supporting 24/7 daylight, as you would expect. The site is now closed for comments. However, as the BBC archive these sites, it can still be viewed for some time. Thank you to the SGL members who took time to comment. David.

Almost 24 hours since this was brought to the attention of SGL members. The BBC does not yet have 100 responses on the web site. So does this mean the vast majority of SGL members never visit this site? Do the vast majority of members not care a bout light pollution? Do the vast majority of members think that light pollution is not an issue worth challenging?

I don't think this link has been mentioned elsewhere. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science_and_environment Nothing particularly new or surprising. However, any publicity for this problem/scourge is welcome. There is the opportunity to comment on the article - if you log in. My comment has been posted. I have had a BBC login for a long time and nothing nasty has happened. So we can trust the BBC! David.

Thank you Lars for going to the trouble to post the information. I have not been to Rhodes for many years. Perhaps there is a reason now to return? I think you were very brave taking the bus from Rhodes down the coast. I did it once. The driver had curtains, family photos, tomato plants and more obscuring the view from the cab. Then he kept turning around (on bends by cliff drops) to chat to passengers he knew. David.

I don't usually consider this journ al to be a source of reliable information, but here goes: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3471447/Can-t-sleep-Blame-road-s-street-lamps-Light-pollution-outside-bedrooms-linked-sleepless-nights.html An interesting take from a Scottish council https://www.westlothian.gov.uk/article/2218/Light-Pollution-and-Light-Nuisance They specifically state: What sources of potential light nuisance are covered under Statutory Nuisance Law? Artificial light from sources such as street lighting, Yes street lighting is first on the list to qualify as a statuory nuisance! Keep at 'em. David.

Yesterday I met (socially) an employee of a county council. A professional and (in my opinion) competent person. But qualified and competent in a completely different area to street lighting. I asked the question about light intrusion. A quick search of the GOV.UK website gave advice about intrusion from non-street lighting sources. It was obviously incomplete but implied (not stated) council street lighting immunity. However, this site is often a coucil employees first port of call for central government advice/policies. That is matters not governed by local or county council policies. Rather like some of us asking Mr Google for information and taking the first hit as factual and complete. It was not appropriate to continue the discussion by challenging the 'first web hit' response. It does though in part explain the response you have suffered. Obviously a look further down the 'hit list' is called for. I would be interested to hear the repsone you eventually get from CFDS. At the Kettering show I met very enthusiastic and forthright proponents of the cause. Quite unlike my past experiences with them. I bought some raffle tickets to help their fund, and considered further contributions. But if they can't be bothered to respond to you, that will certainly influence my future support. Keep us updated. David.

I am still hoping for someone on SGL to come up with some more recent rulings that you can quote. Surely there has to be someone. You have encountered both ignorance and incompetence in the council employees. Sadly this is, in my experience, not exceptional. It is interesting to note that in all of my council dealings, I have found that incorrect action by a council can lead to remedial actions being required. However, incompetence is not grounds for action. For example a Local Governement Ombudsman report. It would seem that incompetence is expected. May I make a practical suggestion while the pen pushers are busy? It will pass some time while you are waiting for someone knowledgeable on SGL to help with rules and regulations. Draw a sketch plan to show your property boundary, observing site, house location, etc. Include on the plan the position and height of the offending light fitting, and location of your bedroom window(s). From this information, it is possible to determine, using nothing more advanced than secondary school trigonometery, a size and location for an effective light shield. You can present this to the ignorants (councillors and lighting department employees). This will demonstrate how and why their biscuit tin lid is ineffective, and they have demonstrated their incompetence. Off topic perhaps. But it may trigger someone on SGL who knows the details that may be of use to you. I remember seeing a few years back a row of street lights with light shields to prevent glare into multiple houses. I think was on a main road, north side of Cambridge. An area of new 'squash 'em in) housing, many buy to rent and multiple occupancy homes. Near to the Science Park, etc. Figment of my imagination or does someone know about this? David.

Don't forget the difference between an councillor, and a council employee. A councillor is someone elected to represent people. It is an unpaid activity. The people who do this range from those with a genuine concern for the quality of life in their area and work tirelessly, to those with a political agenda who don't care about the people who elected them. Enough on politics. To become a councillor you need to get voted in. No skills, knowledge, experience, or comptenece are required. In fact once in the 'job' you can essentially do nothing and get away with it. For example ignoring letters from a member of the public. Unless a councillor does blatantly illegal things like fiddling expense claims or promoting planning applications for friends and family, it is difficult to get thrown out before election time. A council employee is a worker, like a worker in any other company or organisation. The employee must therefore be qualified for the job (whether litter picker or chief exec) and carry out the duties defined for the job. If you write to the lighting dept to complain about light intrusion, there is probably a rule that says they must respond within a given time. The reply cannot contain lies. But it does not have to be helpful. For example, if you write about a nuisance street light and inadvertently try to invoke laws that govern lighting in or on premises, they will probably respond by saying the complaint is not valid. From the sound of things, this is what they have done to you. They will not say anything along the lines of... If you had said it disturbs the mating frogs in your garden we could do something. In other words, if you ask the wrong question, they will not do anything to point you in the right direction. Think of asking someone for directions. Is this the right road to the sports centre? Reply No. Helpful reply. No but if you turn around and go left at the road junction...... I have yet to experience a helpful reply from a council employee. In fact I have had them (on lighting matters) deliberately try to bamboozle me. Things like. This road a class nn feeder to a trunk road and therefore requires (under law xxx of 1999) lighting to BS12345 part 678. But no explanation of what it means. This was their response to me telling them they were daft for installing light fittings in tree canopies instead of over the road. Unhelpful? Obstructive? But not ignoring me and not lying to me. Definitely trying to draw attention away from their stupidity. My past experiences on lighting issues with CFDS and CPRE have not impressed me. If anyone knows different - shout now. Wookie1965 really needs your help. David.

This part, I do not understand..... Street lighting does not come under nuisance laws as the know it all man shouted me down with. Sorry but I am not familiar with all the latest laws. But I do not understand how shining lights into property without restriction or consideration for the occupants is beyond the law. Is there someone on SGL familiar with the laws in this area who can help out Wookie1965? All it needs is a pointer to 'The nasty intrusions law 1999' or whatever it is. There are laws about hanging around in groups (under street lights), dropping litter, dog fouling, drinking in public places, loud music, revving engines and many more. It just does not make sense that shining nuisance lights is outside the law. The good news is that when you get the pointers to the relevant laws, you have ammunition. Go straight above the 'know it all' to his head of department. Point out the incompetence of his staff. If he says his staff are incompetent then apologise for your error and say you now realise he lied to you. Yes a tack I have used more than once. If you are given incorrect information then the person providing the information either does not know his subject, or he lied. either way you have the upper hand. Go to your local councillors with a strong letter about their ignorance and ask which of will open a complaint on your behalf to the local government ombudsman. The grounds for the complaint being that the council acted incorrectly. I did this once on a planning matter and there was a LOT of egg on faces. I like to think that the chief planning officer deciding to move on before the ombudsman report was published was related to the matter. Councils in general and 'high up' employees do not like having ombudsman reports in their history. Keep at it. I am sure there has to be someone on SGL who can point you in the right direction to quote a particular law. In my noise issue, the starting point was a pointer to a law. The Control Of Pollution Act 1974. Quoting a line or two from this demonstrated the council had a legal duty to control any pollution reported to them. Following it up caused the noise maker to be shut down. It caused the planning department to receive a rebuke from the local government ombudsman. It caused a lot of embarrassment to the 'high ups' on the payroll. Maybe you could use this law as a starting point. Light is recognised as pollution. If you start here, then the 'know it all's boss has to demonstrate how a later law makes your case invalid. Grab a copy of the law. Take the extract and send it to the council environmental health officer. That is the department that has to deal with pollution. I am not saying that my approach is best. But you do not have any other suggestions yet from other SGL members. Don't give up. When you get your victory it will not only help you. It can be used to add weight to complaints from anyone else suffering light intrusion anywhere in the UK. This is why I don't understand why you are not being inundated with useful and relevant advice from SGL members with more up to date and detailed knowledge than I have. David.

My observatory started life as a 10x8 shed with pent roof. The idea being to 'swing' a decent size scope on an EQ mount I needed an 8ft (2.4M) square shed. The pier was placed off centre - splitting the 10ft into 4ft + 6ft. The 2ft unused part of the shed would house a computer, charts, accessories, etc on a small bench. That was the theory and it seems to have worked out. Great for visual. Space for all the imaging kit - but I haven't really done a lot of imaging. Note no warm and not enough space for one. But I have a (junk filled) summerhouse adjacent. Don't tell the gaffer!

I have only ever used steel scopes. Mostly visual. However, looking at how the OTA might change size with temperature. Steel has an expansion coefficient of about 13 parts per million, per degree centigrade. This means a 1000mm optical path length (a long newt or frac) will drift by 0.013mm for a 10C temperature change. This temperature change is a chilly evening right through a cold night. I have seen data indicating carbon fibre is about 3x better. Is this worth worrying about? If your motor driven focusser has good enough resolution on the drive, you could compensate for this by measuring temperature through the night. Just my two pennorth..

On the theft side. The villains generally want something they can grab quickly and take. If something is bolted down, it takes time to remove and they will look for something else. As a general rule layers of protection, rather than a single big obvious item work best. This occupies the villains for longer and they don't like it. I won't post details of security measures I have on my 'shed'. Only general comments. Leave a couple of heavy bikes with flat tyres chained to a nearby fence. That would occupy them for a few minutes. Have you considered some of these awful motion triggered far too bright security lights? Disabled when you use the mount. Hope something here is useful.

Pete - Welcome back. Now you have views I'm sure you are going to be looking in the 'for sale' section for something sky related. Ron. Good luck and remember your are a PATIENT. You have to be PATIENT? I once took my wife to hospital for planned surgery. A 30 miles drive through snow. We got there on time. The surgery was cancelled. The (obviously angry) surgeon reported they had too few staff in that day to run the theatres. He completely agreed with my comment that the theatre staff should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. To everyone else. Fascinating reading. It is certainly making me wonder about my eyes. As catarcts are a gradual phenomenom usually, we don't notice. Carole's comment on colour reminds me of reading about the artist Monet. Apparently his work changed colour gradually as his cataracts progressed, then returned to bright colours after surgery. A high street opto probably looks at lens condition against age and adds in comments from the patient. Referrals only being made if the patient reports issues. Then not all high street optometrists speak English. I once had to translate for someone who was told they were suffering 'lenticular opacities'! The opto man even wrote it down when asked.

Call that a screen or shield? Looks to me more like a bit of leftover biscuit tin lid. The lighting folks need to attend some gcse physics classes. Simple sketches with ruler on a page will explain how ineffective their screen will be. Ask them to get their children to calculate or estimate how to do the job. Keep at 'em.