wulfrun

An amazing coincidence, totally at odds with the laws of the universe and telescopes. Yesterday postie dropped off a UHC filter to join the variable polariser I've had for a while but yet-unused. Looked out early evening and saw about 50% clouds, so no holding of breath. After dinner though - wow! Clear skies AND two filters to try, this can't be possible? Oh and a new Telrad too. The clear skies have come as a bit of a surprise so I have no set plan, I'll make it up as I go along and most things are new to me, in a scope, anyway! I pulled the 150PL out of the shed and set up, despite the plumetting temperatures. Popped the unaligned Telrad on (base was already there) and aimed at the Moon, nope not in eyepiece - no surprise really - but I can tell it's not far away in the ES20mm. Manage to get the Moon centred and quickly adjust the Telrad fairly close so now I can actually use it. I don't have anything distant enough for daytime adjustment so I have to go the faffy route. Quick swing over to Rigel to see if it's good and yes, not too bad for now. Back to the Moon and jeez it's bright - filter test for the polariser then. Yep, well worth the money since I can dial it down nicely now. Spent some time wandering around the Moon, swapped out for the Hyperfelx and zoomed in for a good look around the terminator. Fascinating to see some peaks lit up brightly, just into the darkness beyond the terminator. This is my first lunar "exploration" so I'm very chuffed and suitably wowed! I can appreciate the "reach out and touch it" idea. After this I decided to try out the UHC so I aimed at the Orion nebula (M42) with the ES20mm back in and noticed the Telrad's starting to mist up. Hmm, this will need a solution but wasn't unexpected based on reading. First view with no filter and the nebulosity is obvious but underwhelming, I can see all 4 of the Trapezium's stars, so on goes the UHC. Worth it? Oh yes! Ok, it makes the stars look a bit funny colour and the faintest of the Trapeziums has almost vanished but the improvement is noticeable and worth £20. I can also see some nebulosity around l-Ori (?), which is just near the upper edge of my FOV. I spent ages just oggling the nebula and getting damned cold! Just as I've read, the more you look the more you see - so sage advice there. Finally decided that I'd spent enough time on M42 so I pointed up to the Pleiades, knowing I'm too high on magnification to see it in one go. Ah, the Telrad has become useless so that took some guesswork to find the right place. Just had a wander around generally in the area, gawping at just how many unknown-to-me stars there are around there. Now I'm starting to get a bit too cold in the digits but I couldn't resist a go at Rigel. The Telrad by now having been returned to house-warmth, I found it by sighting along the OTA plus guesswork. Swapped in the Hyperflex and had a go - er no dice there I can't split it, it's either my technique/EP or the conditions. Worth a quick try but no box ticked. My fingers are telling me to retire to the warmth of central heating so nothing else attempted. All in all, a lot of fun and now I need to find an un-powered Telrad anti-dew measure. I can see why so many folk rave over this finder but I don't want to hang a battery-powered solution off it if I can possibly avoid it.

At the moment I have about 50% clouds and 50% clear skies. Moon and Mars on view in the twilight. Don't think I'll get too excited yet, still plenty of time for the balance to tip the wrong way. I'm not a "glass half empty" person but the weather of late has led me to be more than a bit cynical! EDIT: hard to believe there's a thread like this, just shows what a poor run we've had.

There's a review of the Celestron here: https://telescopicwatch.com/celestron-starsense-explorer-dx-102-130-reviewed/ Just one opinion of course and I have no connection to the reviewer.

You are not the first to make that mistake and I'm certain you won't be the last! Enjoy and keep us posted on your progress.

I may not be undertanding correctly but doesn't a ring-laser gyro depend on 'c' being isotropic? If it were anisotropic you couldn't null the gyro when it's non-rotating. Since it sends lasers both ways around a fixed path it surely demonstates the isotropic nature. Or have I overlooked something?

I would suggest it's always worth it. I'm very much a newbie too so your mistakes can help my learning by not doing the same. You also encourage other learners to go out and try things. In addition, more experienced members can comment constructively and suggest ways to improve.

The main thing is you got out and gave it a go. In the process, you learned. Both are things to be proud of 🙂

An easy mistake if you're a complete beginner and think all telescopes have a clear lens at the end. Your photo shows the bottom of the telescope, not making fun of you here but did you know you've pointed the wrong end up? I do realise you needed to do that to take the picture.

Indulge in non weather-restricted hobbies? I can see a blurred crescent-moon showing but looks like that's all I'm getting. Doesn't look promising (again). Last night I looked out later on and saw most of Orion in a big gap in the fast-moving clouds. Soon gone though.

In the absence of any postive answers (sorry!) - you could find out easily enough. Assuming there's an on/off switch (not just buttons but an actual switch), make sure it's "off" before the test. Remove any batteries. Connect a multimeter from the battery negative terminal to the outer terminal of the power socket. Set the meter to ohms/continuity and see if it shows zero ohms or close to it. If not, swap to battery-positive in the holder and centre-post of the socket. Between the two tests, you should get a definitive answer*. Chances are it's centre-positive but you're wise not to assume. One terminal of the battery holder will be permanently connected to one socket terminal. EDIT1: *If neither test above gives a zero/close, swap the tests to the opposite battery holder terminals and same socket ones - and then it's negative-centre - I almost forgot! EDIT2: when you've established which and set your adapter, tape up/glue the switch or whatever to prevent accidental swaps from small fingers. EDIT3: I've re-read it and realised it's written confusingly. The last sentence of the first paragraph is the important bit. One terminal of the socket will be permanently connected to one of the battery holder terminals and finding which will give you your answer. Not sure why I made it so compicated! Easier to do that to describe is my excuse.

As said, the scope isn't basic but the eyepieces are considered "starters" and won't be the best. Sounds like you got the collimation spot on and having to get your eye in the right spot is normal.

Or even, something is a-feet?

I bought a scope off a fellow member at the beginning of November and had another for Christmas. Since the first one appeared they've been out twice each and I admit to crying off one night that I could have used. So at the moment, I'd say you're about par for the course. We do seem to have been unduly cursed for unduly long.

If you want to be highly portable, go for not higher than 10x50. Even at 10x it's hard to hand-hold still enough to see detail on things. If there's a handy wall to lean against or a post to brace the binoculars against, make use of it. Or get a monopod but that's an extra "carry". For purely hand-held, probably less than 10x is better. Yes, most modern binoculars have provision for tripod or monopod mounting but it's worth checking. Have a good read on this site, where you'll find a lot of stuff explained and there are recommendations in price-brackets: http://www.binocularsky.com/?awc=11005_1599756095_2dd405fa6dca11102a441acfe1e04829&dcmp=afc-489797-na-na-longtail&dclid=CKHEmO-D3-sCFQrmuwgdSdYD6A

Once you have your finder aligned correctly, it's just a case of aiming the dot at a star you want to see, then adjust the focus knob(s) until the star appears as a small, bright dot - as small as you can get it is the correct point. As a rough starting point, if you look at the second picture you posted, you can see a silver tube poking into the main tube as you look into the end. It's called a drawtube and most of it will probably have disappeared into the focuser when you've focused correctly. Remember stars are so far away that they are always a point, you cannot magnify to give any detail on a single star. If you cannot focus to a tiny dot you have found a planet or made a mistake. Usually best to start with the 25mm and move to the 10mm if/when you need to. Enjoy!

Postie brought me a Telrad for my 150PL, which already has a base on it by a previous owner. I say brought me, s/he lobbed it over my gate since I was out. Fortunately, it appears to have survived but I'm unimpressed with such action. Crikey I knew they were big but it's even bigger than I expected. At first I though it was faulty or damaged until I realised you need to be fairly close-up to see it properly - not from an OTA's-length away then!

That one was a good result then, nice to hear some councils care. Maybe it's time for a name-and-shame/name-and-praise our councils thread?

Jar-openers, rubber bands or rubber gloves to get enough grip. Never had one *that* stuck (I've used a lot in photography) but I have had them be tight. Last resort, heat and penetrating oil but one part or the other could end up being sacrificed - choose the cheaper part! +1 for pressing on a rubber mat.

Is this any good? You can set it to show various things, sunrise/set, twightlight etc for many English places and by month https://www.sunrisesunset.com/England/

Not sure nail polish is actually a good idea, on plastic components the solvents may well dissolve things. Glad to hear I'm not the only one who finds the RDFs too bright. I have (probably) the same one and I'll be tinkering with the electronics for sure. I also have a Celestron one that projects circles and that's also too bright.

I noticed it too. Just there for decoration at a guess, a prop to fill up the space. I have other hobbies and often notice hobby-related things on TV, out of place or just plain wrong - usually to the annoyance of anyone watching with me.

Yes, thanks, it's a thing I'm well aware of but have not yet practiced much being so new to telescope use. Something to hone in the future. I did try it on the Orion nebula but maybe the conditions or maybe my inexperience, it didn't seem to help a lot. There will be other chances no doubt. There are several pesky "security" lights around but I know where they are and I'm accustomed to avoiding their worst effects. I'll have to try the towel trick, that should amuse anyone that notices! Extra warmth as a bonus though 🙂

FL=focal length, you're not dense it's my fault for assuming too much. EDIT: actually, my mistake, I see it comes with a 25mm fixed FL, so you're probably covered and can ignore the suggestion.

The only problem you have there that's worth pointing out is the Hyperflex. Zooms have a narrower field of view at the longer end of their range (21.5mm end). I'd suggest a longish fixed-FL to get around that, maybe not immediately but you may find the zoom's limitation annoying. A planisphere is useful too and a red torch, neither is expensive but not sure if you can stretch the budget?

Is that the bundled 10mm EP or a better one? The bundled one doesn't have a good reputation - I have the same one and haven't bothered to use it based on opinions I saw. As you say, check again to see if you can get better results another time, that would confirm the conditions having been poor.