Second Time Around

This invaluable site does lab tests on a lot of camera tripods for stability and portability: https://thecentercolumn.com/ As a result of their tests I recently bought (from Sweden) a carbon fibre tripod from the Leofoto Ranger range, the LS-364C. These have no centre column and so are lighter and fold to a very compact size. However Leofoto make a lot of other ranges too, with and without centre columns. Go to https://www.leofoto.eu/ There's a lot of different combinations in the Ranger series. The first 2 numbers in the model refer to the diameter in millimetres of the thickest carbon tube; the last number refers to the number of sections. They're now imported into Europe as well as the US with 16 in the range in various weights and sizes, all but 3 having ball and socket heads in a package. Like you I have a Scopetech Mount Zero, and initially used it with my Leofoto Ranger tripod. Then I bought a Skywatcher Solarquest mount. I'm very pleased indeed with the Solarquest as it automatically finds and tracks the sun. This means of course I have to swap between the mounts whenever I change from day to night use or vice versa. I didn't think this would be a problem. However the Mount Zero wouldn't release from the tripod. It may be because I'm disabled and my hands don't work properly, but First Light Optics very kindly sorted this out for me free of charge. It happened again though, but this time with a help of a strap wrench I (eventually) got them apart. Thanks to a suggestion here on SGL I then bought a Berlebach Report 112 tripod. This has solved the problem as a lot of the Berlebach tripods have interchangeable heads. The one I chose has a spring-loaded bolt to fix a mount on top (see pic below), and this makes it very easy to swap mounts. As I said, it's probably just my disability, but I'm flagging it up in case it's peculiar to the Mount Zero. I love my Berlebach Report 112, and chose this model as it collapses to a small size and isn't overly heavy. Yes, it's a little shorter than the more popular 212 and 312 models; however I always sit to observe and so this isn't a problem for me at all. Additionally, not having the legs extended means that it's more stable. Plus I use mine with an accessory tray that makes it even steadier. I don't detach the tray from the legs for speed of set up, plus this means that the whole scope and tripod easily fits through a doorway. I'd add that my Berlebach is much steadier than my Leofoto, although of course the Leofoto is a lot lighter.

I think many of us in the UK have had the same problem in the last week or so. I record how accurate cloud forecasts are from 7 sites. For more details go to https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/376745-a-record-of-the-accuracy-of-my-local-cloud-forecasts/ However, none of them has been accurate this last week for exactly the reason that you mentioned. Then I use Zoom Earth that shows infrared satellite pictures for night time cloud. It doesn't make forecasts but shows the actual sky at 15 minute intervals and going back some time. This has been accurate all week. Go to https://zoom.earth/places/united-kingdom/

I have both 25 and 30mm NPLs and love them for solar work with my Quark. With this, eye position is particularly critical. The best position of the eyeguard for me is part way up. To get this I simply put a doubled up hairband in the correct position and it stays put. Voila! Hope that helps.

As a pair.

Yes, aluminium. They're available in a black or silver finish. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/adm-misc-mounting-accessories/adm-slow-motion-control-knobs.html One other thing I like with the Mount Zero is that, in addition to using the slow motions, you can push it around manually without having to disengage anything. FLO have a fully guaranteed reconditioned Mount Zero with almost 20% off. See https://www.firstlightoptics.com/offers/offer_scopetech-mount-zero_264069.html

I'm so thick that I kept getting the cables mixed up! I tried long cables but found the short ones easier on my back and neck.

Two of the things I like are that, firstly, there are many more positions (19 I think) that the angle can be set to compared with most other mounts. This means I don't need an extension to see up to the zenith. Secondly, scopes can be mounted on either side. As I'm left eye dominant, I like my finderscope on the right hand side so the scope doesn't get in the way. Additionally, this would allow me to swap the Starsense Explorer for my SLR and still get its flip screen to open. However, this means that even short flexible slow motions cross over each other. Therefore I kept just the altitude slow motion and replaced the azimuth one with a knob.

If mine were ever stolen I'd immediately buy another. That's how much I think of it.

Thanks for that I very much like the graphics on this site and have bookmarked it. One other site I didn't mention in my last post is http://www.wunderground.com Quite apart from all its other forecasts, this is my favourite for short term rainfall predictions. The reason is that, rather than just extrapolating the movement of rain and showers, it also takes into account that showers die out late in the day and overnight due to falling temperatures.

Some of you will be aware that I've been recording the accuracy of originally 6, now 7, forecasts of cloud cover. See https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/376745-a-record-of-the-accuracy-of-my-local-cloud-forecasts/#comment-4189743 The results are so similar that I think it safe to say that there's no significant difference between the various forecasts. I made the following comments on this topic in December: Short term vs medium term forecasts What is interesting from my research is that there are 2 methods of deriving forecasts. The one most of us will be familiar with is the medium term forecasts that we see on the TV and websites. These are computer models looking perhaps up to 14 days ahead. They're "driven by powerful numerical weather prediction (NWP) systems. By solving physical equations, NWPs provide essential planet-scale predictions several days ahead. However, they struggle to generate high-resolution predictions for short lead times under two hours." (My bold italics.) The other type of forecast is a nowcast. "Nowcasting is a technique used for very short-range forecasting. The current weather is mapped and then an estimate of its speed and direction of movement is used to forecast the weather a short period ahead (assuming the weather will move without significant changes). It takes time to gather and map weather observations, so a short forecast is needed to outline what the weather is currently. Nowcasts can be used as a source of detailed guidance on the location, extent and timing of imminent, often high impact weather events." "The Met Office produce a routine delivered service for T+0 out to T+6 {hours}, for the United Kingdom, which blends our observations and UK Atmospheric Hi-Res model. At T+0 the blend is heavily weighted to observations and as time goes on the weighting of the UK Atmospheric Hi-Res model is increased, at T+6 the UK Atmospheric Hi-Res Model has the dominant weighting. The UK Atmospheric Hi-Res model is part of the Met Office flagship numerical weather prediction (NWP) model called the Unified Model. The resolution of the Nowcasting is comparable to radar data." Nowcasting is of course what we need to decide whether to get our scopes out. Unfortunately, nowcasting in its relative infancy. AI is now being used to enhance its accuracy, for instance in tests that the Met Office is doing with Google's Deep Mind. Hopefully, this will be of particular benefit to the likes of us. In the meantime I'll continue to use these 6 cloud forecasts (with Good to Stargaze being added from next month). However, as I've mentioned elsewhere, I also look at 2 other sites with satellite data. The first is Zoom Earth for current cloud photos. Unlike many sites it also shows cloud at night using infrared images, plus one can go back a long time. Bear in mind though that low cloud and fog doesn't always show up on infrared images. But it often correctly shows that the only cloud in Kent is over our area, and that it's clear just a few miles away! The other is Meteoradar as it extrapolates cloud satellite pictures to give nowcasts up to 3 hours ahead. Unfortunately it does so only for daytime hours. However, it's useful for soon after sunset, and also for solar observing. How accurate are the current forecasts? What will surprise many though is something I commented on in a topic where the OP was lamenting the accuracy of Clear Outside. Even now, the current forecasts are pretty accurate. Below are the figures for Clear Outside over the first 6 months of recording. However, as I said, all the other forecasts will be very similar. Correct 67% Partly correct/partly wrong 29% Totally wrong 4%

Here's the February data. As you can see Good to Stargaze and Meteoblue have come out ahead. Certainly this winter has been a lot better than the autumn.

Ditto.

I've tried the Clicklock and a couple of similar products, and found them all somewhat stiff. But then I have problems with my hands. Having bought a Glatter Paralliser as part of my collimation kit I found it very easy to use. So I now use it as an adapter as well. Its single slanted screw automatically puts the eyepiece parallel with the focuser tube. I'm fairly sure it's also threaded to accept 2 inch filters, although I haven't tried this.

Love it!

Just clip them onto a 12 volt battery. I use Yuasa ones, either the hand size 7Ah ones that fit burglar alarms or for my short sessions the tiny 1.2 Ah size. Either fit on the rocker box of my 8 and 10 inch OOUK Dobs. I suggest you buy 2 so that you always have a spare. I've got 3 of the 1.2Ah size and 1 of the 7Ah size. (I've just given 4 of the latter to a fellow club member). I rotate them, keeping 1 permanently on charge and use this one the next session.

This is exactly the same as the Svbony 7-21mm although higher priced. It's not bad at all at f/10, although well behind expensive zooms like the Baader. However, it's likely way ahead of the 4 element one you first asked about, both in quality and field of view. It's also very lightweight, that'll be a plus with your entry level mount.

When I first started at about age 11 I couldn't even afford a telescope for the first year, although I eventually made one with ex-Gov lenses from H.W.English. Then my parents bought me a 50mm single element non-achromatic refractor on a wobbly table tripod. As soon as I was able to start a holiday job I bought a Tasco 60mm refractor on an altazimuth mount. Eventually, when we started full-time work my brother and I shared a second-hand 6 inch Newtonian on an equatorial mount. Family and career got in the way soon after and I stopped observing until fairly recently. I was flabbergasted on my return to astronomy to find that gear was so much less expensive in real terms (and often better) than it was first time around! However, it's only now that I've sold my business and retired that I can afford anything but budget gear. Now I've got pretty much most of what I need or want, although much of it is still second-hand. It's a good thing I bought pre-Covid though as prices have certainly jumped up recently!

+3 on a zoom eyepiece. Many 2x Barlows can also be used at 1.5x. Look for those with a black section at the telescope end. If you screw this off and screw it into the filter thread of your eyepiece this will give you approx 1.5x.

I believe that OOUK will fit a Baader Steeltrack to their scopes if you send it to them.

Here's the January observations, including the first for Good to Stargaze. As you can see, taken over the whole of the month there was more or less nothing between all 7 forecasts for accuracy. January was a very good month for clear nights, and hugely better than the preceding two.

Ease of reacquiring an object is yet another advantage of zoom eye pieces.

Now you know why some of us rave about their Dob mount!

That's something that you're never going to forget. Many congratulations!

The Altair ones are, Steve. Here's a link to their website and a review: https://www.altairastro.com/altair-24mm-ultraflat-eyepiece---precision-barrel-stainless-steel-237-p.asp https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/reviews/eyepieces/altair-ultraflat-eyepieces-review/ Had I not had the now discontinued 22mm Vixen LVWs I'd been tempted myself.

I wanted a waterproof hard case but, like some others, very much prefer ones with padded dividers. The reason is that they're hugely more flexible than foam interiors when you want to change the contents, either temporarily or long term. Initially I was worried that dividers wouldn't be secure enough, but in practice I've found no problems whatsoever. That's probably why they're so popular with photographers. B&W 3000 case.html