Celerondon

For some reason, I cannot see the image that pipnina posted anymore. However, I want to ask a question. It appears to me that this mount slewed itself into that position. Does anyone see how it could have tracked its way down there? Don

I see why you are confused because this story is as confusing as that picture. From your account, I can’t understand how the mount did anything after you parked it. It is also hard to figure out how a GEM in the northern hemisphere tracked itself into the position shown in this picture. is there any way that someone or something could have slewed your HEQ5 into this unnatural position? Doesn’t your mount park itself while pointed at the north celestial pole? A tracking mount should rotate in the other direction and I don’t get why your dec axis isn’t aimed at the pole. Kids, or cats, perhaps? Don

Oh right, these strain wave mounts are sometimes faithful copies of each other but other times there are significant differences. This particular design is remarkably similar to the ZWO mounts but there might not be many interchangeable parts, if any. Don

How so? The layout seems similar to the AM5, at first glance.

It took me a moment but I think that that the center left view is the mounting flange for the dual (Type V & D) dovetail. I have not pulled my mount out to confirm this theory but it seems to make sense. Counting clockwise from the top left diagram they appear to show an AM5 that is in AltAz mode and aimed at the zenith from the: south west below east above dovetail flange The north view which would have shown the back side of the wedge and the counterweight plug/toe saver is not shown. Don I think that ZWO provides the flange diagram to show that it is easily possible to rotate the dovetail mount 90°. (This rotation enables side by side telescope mounting) Compare the 38mm bolt spacings in position 1 and position 6 to see how this works.

The AM5 is a deceptively compact mount. If attaching the base of the mount directly to your pier isn’t practical or if the arrangement leaves things too cramped, you could always use a pier extension as a pier adapter and retain the convenience that the PE200 provides. Because the PE200 is a three part assembly with a standard ZWO adapter puck on its base, you could use the top of the pier extension or a combination of the three main components to create a custom pier adapter that fits your AM5 like a glove. Here is a diagram that shows the dimensions of the PE200. It is difficult (impossible?) to secure an AM5 directly to a platform without access from below. But one of the features of the PE200 is a lever actuated quick release system that is simple and secure. Here is a diagram that shows the dimensions of the PE200. If you compare these measurements with your pier platform you may see a way to simplify the process of securing the mount to the pier without needing access from below. Don

This piece is an 85mm aluminum puck that is similar to the kind that come with the TC40 and PE200. The difference is that this part includes the alignment post that Vixen family mounts use as an azimuth anchor. These pucks are designed to slide into the top of the tripod so that they can be secured. Mating the adapter to the mount is accomplished by slightly different methods depending upon whether you use the PE200 or not. When you use a plain TC40, the mount and puck assembly is secured by the tripod spreader bolt and a single locking lever. With the PE200 installed, you simply use a trio of locking levers to secure the mount and puck assembly. I am curious about the procedure for azimuth adjustments with the PE200. The Vixen mounts and their clones have a moderately fussy process for fine azimuth adjustments. Because the axial mounting bolt also supplies the clamping force that locks the azimuth, you must loosen it before the adjustment screws will function. Similarly, the bolt must be tightened after azimuth adjustment is done. However, the axial mounting bolt does not appear to be accessible when the mount and adapter assembly is clamped atop a PE200 pier adapter. Don

Could this adapter be your solution? It should be compatible with the PE200 pier extension as well. With both, your setup would become a quick affair with a trio of levers to flip instead of a screw to center and thread. I store and transport my TC40 with the PE200 attached. The assembled components are still compact and easy to handle. I noticed several similar adapters on the page that I linked. Please let us know if this part works for you. Don

My AM5 does visual duty sometimes because I am done with carrying counterweights if I can help it. Functionally, there should be hardly any difference between an AM3 and an AM5. I have been experimenting with different polar alignment systems and plate solve enhanced GoTo. So far, the Polar Scope Align Pro utility for Daytime Polar Alignment is the quickest way to get my setup close to polar aligned. This has been my experience for daytime and nighttime use. When rough polar alignment is adequate, it may be enough. Otherwise, I use my ASIAIR and guide scope/guide camera combination to get perfect centering, every time. Between software assisted polar alignment and plate solve refined GoTo targeting, it may be worth it to install the ASIAIR and camera for nighttime visual use. The images down below show the aiming screen for Polar Scope Align Pro and the 3D printed bracket that I use to attach my iPhone to my mount. Asides from holding the cell phone securely, the main purpose of the bracket is to get the sensitive compass away from the metal and magnetism of the mount. Don

That is another difference between those two CF tripods. At first glance they seem similar but the TC40 is a single angle two section tripod with a leg spreader while the RT90C has three angles and four leg sections. Of course, just as a pier extension or extended center column will degrade stability those flatter leg angles should degrade carrying capacity. In particular, that 9° leg angle looks like it might be a good way to turn a fundamentally rigid tripod into a carbon fiber trampoline. Don

I also like to use my larger tripods fully collapsed. However, the TC40 and compact photo tripods like the RT90C have such short leg sections that the tripod footprint gets disturbingly small when you don’t extend the second section of the legs. Tripod stability is enhanced by footprint and mass and hampered by height. I generally use my weighted TC40 at its maximum height. Does it seem like a weighted TC40 would provide adequate support without extending that second leg section?

Grinding is an option if you only need to remove a small amount of material but there is another way. My Planet had a basic head with a flat profile so I decided to purchase the Berlebach head that was designed for the AM5. The Berlebach website has a menu system tha that allows customers to select heads, adapters, and other accessories for their various tripod lines. Now the PE200 seats firmly on my Planet and I am tempted to use this spare tripod head casting as the basis for a first-rate DIY tripod. Don

I agree that the two tripods are fairly similar but I think that the two section legs of the TC40 are both a bug and a feature in this case. Their disadvantage is that a TC40 will need a pier extension to reach a marginally usable height for visual use. The corresponding advantage is that the RT90C is definitely weaker when you extend those additional leg sections for more height. So, with a built in spreader, the TC40 is slightly more robust but the RT90C is certainly more versatile. Don

Did British Airways change their battery capacity specifications? This page states a 2 X 160Wh limitation. I am like you. My power connections are fairly simple. I use a circuit breaker/switch assembly, an online power meter, and a 100Wh LiFePO4 beast that was much less expensive than the Celestron Lithium Powertank Pro. Everything is connected with Powerpole connectors, and this setup could hardly be easier to manage. I am interested in building a box like Adam's, but I haven't yet decided which features it will have. USB and DC5521 ports are a given but inverters give me pause. Will the effort, expense, and bulk required to include one be worth the trouble? The vendors love selling inverter equipped power stations and solar generators to the public, but I am not a big user of wall warts. Don

I don't want to highjack this thread into a regulatory rabbit hole, but things will depend on which airline you fly with. The 160Wh limit is specified by CAA. But, depending on which airline you use you can either carry two 160Wh batteries, one 100Wh battery, or perhaps something in between. The relevant CAA regulations were linked earlier in this thread and the FAA regulations are easy to find but both authorities say that different airlines such as British Airways have final say so about batteries over the 100Wh capacity threshold. At first, I thought that British Airways might follow the lower limit but then I found this page. So, it seems as if most major carriers allow two 160Wh batteries and according to the British Airways guidance and other sources, you "do NOT need to contact the airline or inform staff at the airport that you are carrying this item." Don

This is interesting! The Canadian regulations actually seem pretty consistent with the FAA regulations and even use similar language. I am trying to understand why you follow the third section rather than this first one in the Canadian regulations that you linked. ”Spare batteries for portable electronic devices containing lithium ion batteries exceeding a Watt-hour rating of 100 Wh but not exceeding 160 Wh when carried for personal use. No more than two individually protected spare batteries per person may be carried.” This first section matches the FAA guidance that we follow in the USA. Here is Air Canada’s guidance on this topic. ”2 lithium ion batteries with a rating of 100 but not exceeding 160 Wh” I seldom hear the term “Lithium Metal” batteries used in but I Googled up this explanation for the difference between lithium metal batteries and lithium ion batteries. Don

An f7.5 80mm refractor is not a heavy load. A small or medium EQ mount will do fine with that telescope. I agree with rl. A GoTo AltAz mount would also be okay, but I would probably choose an EQ mount. I have two questions that might help us to be more specific with our advice. What budget range are you interested in? What is the largest telescope that you might use with this mount. (Is that 80ED your limit?) It might also be helpful to know if you plan to travel with your equipment. A pier mounted rig for your garden or observatory would be somewhat different than an airline or car portable setup. Don

That 7.2Ah Powertank is a nice battery with good features. As you mentioned, it is also great for air travel. FLO also sell its big brother. The Celestron Lithium 13.2Ah Powertank Pro is the largest battery that meets the size limitations imposed by airline and government regulations. Don't do what I did during my power hunt. I was about to press the "Purchase" button on a Powertank Pro but then I got distracted and bought something so large that it will never fly. Now, if I need to fly my setup, I will have to use my 11Ah TalentCell or purchase another battery. 😉 Don

Right, that battery will power the mount and ASIAIR Mini just fine. Neither device draws more than 1.0 amp while working. With a regulated output, your voltage should remain constant over time. However, your equipment seems ideal for a portable astrophotography rig. Begin adding features like cameras, dew heaters, and autofocus and you may soon be juggling multiple batteries to meet your system’s current demands. Don

Curtis provided some great information in the blog post that Ags linked. My take on the power choices is that the 24/12/5V power supply that Ags likes will be acceptable because the 12V output is regulated. It wouldn’t be my first choice though, for two reasons. Unless I needed 24V that capability would be superfluous. The 2A limit on the 12V port is barely acceptable for a minimum setup. The 8.3Ah TalentCell that Elp linked is more attractive because of the robust 6A rating on the 12V port. In fact, my first Li-on battery was a similar 11Ah TalentCell. However, neither of these battery types is currently my favorite. If you carefully review the information posted by Curtis, you may see why I prefer LiFePO4 battery packs for my astronomical equipment. Our portable electrical power storage solutions are created by binding together a group or “battery” of cells to form a battery assembly. Because of the intrinsic cell voltage values of different battery chemistries, some types can produce 12V when grouped in threes (3S) but others with slightly lower cell voltages do better when combined in groups of four (4S). LiFePO4 cell nominal voltage – 3.2V LiFePO4 cell fully charged voltage – 3.65V LiFePO4 4S nominal voltage – 12.8V LiFePO4 4S fully charged voltage – 14.6V What these numbers mean is that a fully charged 4S LiFePO4 battery will start out in the mid-14V range, quickly dip into the mid-13V to mid-12V range and stay above 12V until it is down to near 5% capacity. The kicker is that a 4S LiFePO4 battery will do this while maintaining a flat voltage curve through about 80% of its rated capacity without requiring voltage regulation! So now, my TalentCell is a backup battery and a high capacity LiFePO4 battery is my main source. Like Elp suggested, I verify the voltage readings reported by my equipment with an inline power meter. Don Inline Power Meter LiFePO4 - Flat Discharge Voltage Curve DC5521 to Powerpole Adapter Cables

Did your mount work okay or do I need to plug my EQStarPro box into my computer to pull the numbers? Oops! I just noticed that I already have a data screen available. Ignore the other numbers because I was tuning my GP at the time. It is inadvisable to hot rod the mount before you get things working properly. Don

If my memory is correct, 576 sounds about right. I have an EQStarProEQ5 on a Vixen GP and that number seems familiar. Perhaps someone else can confirm these numbers with more certainty. Try it out. If the numbers seem wrong, I can check my mount tomorrow. Don

Yes, that longer DC5521 male/male cable will work. Like David said, the numbers need to be right but you aren’t doing anything extraordinary. That LiFePO4 battery pack will naturally produce voltage in the range that your mount requires with current to spare for other devices. As long as your cable runs don’t exceed two meters you should be fine. Don

No, the HEM15 is appealing for several reasons but I think that it comes up short of the ZWO mounts in some areas. Despite its tiny dimensions the HEM15 lacks the ergonomic elegance of the AM series mounts. The dual SWG design of the ZWO mounts is probably better than the hybrid SWG/worm design of the HEM15 even though it can be balanced in DEC. Fiddling with hex keys instead of knobs and levers is no fun in the field, especially when it is dark and your fingers are getting numb. You could try something new or super cheap from a vendor that is not established in western markets, but that approach carries its own obvious risks. The HEM15 has good features and it is the only alternative to the AM3 that I would consider at this time. Don

What brand and model is your power supply? Do you know the amp rating of this power source? Don