Tiny Clanger

Ha ! That was exciting, an unexpected 15 minutes break in the clouds allowed , and I saw two sunspots, my first ever ! The Baader solar film purchase has been worthwhile just for that 😎 Heather

I think there are no easy answers here, only conditional ones, all that can be offered is speculation. So here's mine ! The thermal mass of, say, an above ground, low height but relatively large area roof, thick walled concrete ammunition storage bunker would be worse from this point of view than a small roof surface area, thinner walled building with door/window apertures open to allow air circulation. But then there's the question of thermal conductivity of the material, would the heat energy be lost quickly and equilibrium soon restored , or would rising currents persist for many hours ? I'd think a competent architect or building engineer would be able to do a survey and make a report ... for a price. Insulation and passive heating for eco homes is a big thing at the moment. Then there are local environmental factors which come into play , such as sunshine received, wind exposure (a breeze will help disperse the hot air) altitude, shelter, aspect , vegetation and probably many other things .... The upshot of which is that the only practical way I can see to find out with any accuracy is to try it out, actually go and observe from there over a few nights. Predicting how much of an effect the structure will have with so many variables is like trying to predict the UK weather ,hopeless without specialist knowledge, precise measurements, and a supercomputer. And even with all that, microclimates still defeat the broad predictions.

Excellent news, great to hear the 'scope looks like it will live up to expectations , and that the Starsense proved easy to set up. Can you slide some card or folded paper under the front of the red dot finder (RDF) base to give it a little extra elevation ? I did that with a 'scope I inherited (also a Celestron !) , I had to loosen the pair of bolts the RDF was held on by to do it, but once done,and the bolts tightened it cured the problem. As for the tripod , make sure any fastenings are as tight as possible, and if you can use the 'scope without fully extending the tripod legs, perhaps observing from a seated position, that will help . There's an old photographers trick to steady any tripod : hang a weight off the centre to add some mass , a bottle of water suspended on a length of cord works . Fingers crossed for clear skies soon 😉 Heather

Well, I'd constructed two filters for the ST80 as planned, one a flat card sandwich to be taped in the small cap within the dust cap , the other a substantial 3D effort of photo mount board sandwich to the front, corrugated card collar (courtesy of FLO good packaging on the Baader film 🙂 ) attached by glue and gaffer tape, I'm going for a belt and braces setup ... Both filters have sat waiting patiently, and when the little solar finder I ordered off Amazn dropped through my letterbox on Saturday, I reckoned I had totally jinxed the weather for at least the next month . But today around elevenses time I saw actual shadows in the back garden, so sprinted out with ST80, very carefully put the small filter in place , peered at the solar finder (which is a simple pinhole camera type thing) and actually saw the Sun . Carefully swapped to the whole aperture filter, and looked for a few minutes more. Then the clouds crowded in, but I had managed sharp but apparently featureless views (apart from some limb darkening giving a 3D effect) which I suspect may be down to a lack of sunspots at the moment. I could see obvious CA on the whole aperture filter, but none on the reduced aperture one. If the sky ever clears again , I hoe to have a better look . Here area few photos taken before those clouds brought in showers : Yes,that bit of green is some gaffer tape holding the cap on .... you never know .... Heather

I think they may have changed the packaging , presumably to avoid this : I read the included instructions very carefully when I received mine from FLO last week, no mention of any transparent film to be removed . The mylar arrived sandwiched loosely (i.e not adhering) between an opaque white plastic sheet and a white tissue paper sheet, with instructions printed on another couple of glossy paper sheets within a poly bag.

🙂 I may not know much, but I do know where to find stuff out 🙂 That's a good site for nice clear explanations, which helped me a lot.

Check the advert : if the eyepieces it came with are plossls, it will announce the fact, they are a good selling point ! However, if Celestron 'scopes are equipped like skywatcher ones are, they probably bundled the cheapest possible eyepieces in with it, see if there is anything marked on the eyepiece : if it says 'MA' or 'long eye relief' (LER) or 'K' or 'R' it isn't a plossl . This is a good explanation : http://swindonstargazers.com/beginners/eyepieces.htm Plossl is a type rather than a trade name , they all have a field of view of 52 degrees, to get wider field of view than that means bigger glass, bigger heavier eyepiece, much bigger cost ! A handy tool is https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/ if your 'scope is not listed, just input the 400mm focal length, 70mm aperture, find any manufacturers' plossl in the eyepiece dropdown menu, choose a target, click on add to view, and the tool shows you a photo of that target with a circle around it showing the boundary that eyepiece will give you in that telescope. You can add various eyepieces' circles to the same image for comparison Heather

I don't have any experience of that specific model of 'scope, or the accessories which come with it, but if the supplied diagonal is a 45 degree one, it will be awkward for viewing objects high in the sky, so would probably be best replaced. I have an Orion ST80 , a similar little 'scope with an 80mm aperture, and have a few small light (and cheap !) eyepieces I keep with it to make a compact portable kit : a skywatcher 25mm (not a plossl) which came with one of my other 'scopes, a 17mm skywatcher plossl , and a 12.5mm skywatcher plossl . They work pretty well. As a low cost upgrade a plossl or two of a reputable make would be hard to beat. I've not added a 32mm plossl ( the lowest magnification eyepiece for visual use on a 1.25" focuser ) because in my 400mm focal length ST80, a 32mm eyepiece would give me just 12.5x magnification, a range very close to the one my binoculars already cover very well. I'm happy with the 25mm, which gives a magnification of 16x The very small straight through , optical viewfinders are fairly useless , so if that is what you are struggling with, a simple red dot finder might suit you better : again, I use one on my ST80 which came bundled with another 'scope , so it was essentially free to me. Quite often I don't even switch it on, just line the 'scope up though, so if I were you, I'd experiment and see if you really need a finder at all ... this sort of small refractor sometimes gets used itself as a finder on a far bigger telescope ! You might find this thread useful: Heather

I confess to knowing nothing about Celestron telescopes, and the OP did not give detail of what model / type , so I just did an online search for "6" Celestron weight", and that was what came up . I suspect from their message that they will be thinking of buying buying a whole ready-made package I know that a person with medical challenges might even struggle to carry, for example, my 127mm mak on an AZ5 mount, which (without a sturdy tripod, which obviously needs to be added) weighs over 6.5kg (14lbs + ) which is not particularly heavy for a fit young person to shift, but may be for the OP. Apparently a skywatcher 150 mak OTA alone comes in at 6.3kg . Perhaps a 100mm ish mak , which would be lighter, require a lighter mount, a lighter tripod ,and be far easier to move around would be an alternative to a refractor, especially as it would be compact, but for all round, general purpose 'see a bit of everything' I think a refractor would be more forgiving Heather

OK, unlike (the no longer aptly named )Basementboy, I've never observed from my rooftop (I'd fall off, it slopes !) , and I'm lucky enough to be right out on the edge of a small city, where light pollution is not as awful as it could be , but still Bortle 6 skies , far from ideal. You will absolutely be able to study the Moon, it is bright enough to even be visible in the daytime, so light pollution at night won't be a problem. Most of the planets will be visible, when their, and the Earth's orbits have them well placed . I had major difficulty at first seeing Uranus, and have not managed to see Neptune yet (but I shall ... ) both are comparatively faint , distant , and challenging in polluted skies., but the other planets are bright enough to be seen easily, even without a telescope . There are bright star clusters and double stars you will be able to see , but many nebulae and galaxies are simply too faint to distinguish from the bright light polluted city sky. Should you buy a telescope ? That's a choice only you can make . If you are interested, and sustain your interest, and can live with the limitations of your location, it may be worthwhile for you. I'd suggest if you haven't done so already, you should spend some evenings up on the roof looking with just the naked eye, or possibly some binoculars if you have some . After half an hour or so your eyes adapt to the relative darkness and you may see more than you expected. If that whets your appetite, maybe a telescope would be a good investment. A star map , either printed , or a planisphere, or a 'phone app will help you find your way around the sky. If you decide you would like to buy a telescope, consider how easy it will be to get to the roof : a 10" dobsonian or a 6" SCT is a heavy thing to carry around, I just checked and a 6" Celestron SCT is reputedly about 30lbs , and I know (because I have discounted being able to carry one myself , even in two pieces) that a 10" dobsdonian is over double that , e,g, https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-10-dobsonian-telescope.html If your health issues make carrying large awkward objects a challenge, a 'scope like either of those may not get used often, and unless you have plenty of storage space I'd say no full sized dob. would work for you. I'll agree with several of the previous posters , a refractor on a simple alt az mount would be easy to store, convenient to carry to the roof and quick to set up, and would give you great views of the Moon, the easier planets, and some brighter other objects. Heather

Takitis would be an inflamed Tak, which sounds quite nasty , I reckon this condition would be better described as Takophilia , which means affection and affinity for your Tak . 🙂 (Not to be confused with tacophilia, a love of Mexican food ) Heather

Wow, I'd not have anything to do with such a company ever again . Everything new I've bought in the UK from specialist astro and photo retailers has been exactly as advertised, and even the second hand items I've had from members of this forum have all been in far better condition than your purchase was ! Good luck getting it sorted, and finding a suitable replacement . Heather

Balance ? before mine, 2 posts suggesting individual focal length eps, 4 suggesting a zoom.

Well , how about buying a cheaper zoom (as I did ) to try the concept out ?

Is "a word of caution " 'issuing a "warning" '? That is rather emotive language, and precisely illustrates my point.

sey 🙂

The ecnad nair !

I'm sorry, I can't stop laughing .... must have watched too many carry on films in childhood ... not sure if this line would work best for Kenneth Williams, Charles Hawtrey or Sid James (with a yuk yuk yuk laugh added )

A word of caution : not everyone gets on with zoom eyepieces, they have their fans. but it is a personal thing, beware of jumping in and spending all of your budget too soon. Don Pensack really knows his stuff, he is a retailer of eyepieces etc in the US.

I'm not Philip, but I can tell you I could not look at the Moon comfortably with my 150mm aperture telescope, it was dazzlingly bright, so I bought a simple Moon filter. However, I now have a smaller aperture 127mm telescope and an 80mm one , and I do not need to use any filter to view the Moon in either of them. Your telescope is a smaller aperture than any of them at 50mm, so it will collect less light, and I'm sure you will not need a filter for comfortable viewing. So, I suggest not spending money on a filter unless you find you really need one. If it turns out you do, a short term solution while you wait for a filter to be delivered is to wear sunglasses - you look a bit crazy in them at night though ! The full Moon is not the best time to observe the Moon, the areas of interest are along the terminator, the curved line between the lit and dark parts of the surface. There the slanting light and shadows show the surface features really well, and you get a changing area to view from night to night https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/advice/skills/how-to-observe-the-moon/ Do remember before buying any eyepieces or filters, you need to establish that your eyepieces are 1.25" diameter barrels or they will not fit your telescope. Heather

OK, sensible answer now, there's an oldish thread on here that might help https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/204477-heavy-duty-diy-parallelogram-mount/ or http://binocrane.com/construction introduction.html or http://www.iceinspace.com.au/index.php?id=63,376,0,0,1,0 or scroll down to the bottom of this page for some more links https://binocularsky.com/binoc_mount.php

Zaphod, , I know you are a hoopy frood who always knows where his towel is , but ... won't you be needing two pairs of those binos , what with the extra head and all ? 🙂 Heather

Thanks Zermelo, You are probably right,, that is very likely what I was recalling https://www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/baader-t-thread-to-125-helical-focuser.html I'm not thinking of getting one myself, as I find the heritage 150's native plumbing fitting has a certain rustic charm 🙂 and gives me no trouble or annoyance. Anyone thinking of trying this might find that further ironmongery would be needed for focus tube to T thread , and I bet the whole thing could shift eyepieces too far out, and require the 'scope not be properly, fully extended (which is the case when a DSLR is used on it ) Heather

My first go at using PFTE tape on the heritage 150 did not work well, shreds started to detach , not good . I tried again, used fewer winds of tape , and made sure they were pulled very tight as I wound them on, and smoothed the tape into the thread with my hand before replacing the focus tube in the 'scope. That second attempt has now lasted me 10 months , with no problem. It's never going to be a wonderful focuser, but it works, and as one of the cost cutting ploys which let us buy a 150mm aperture 'scope for such a bargain price, I'm happy to put up with it. I've a vague idea I saw mention somewhere of some Baader adaptor which has an inbuilt micro focus ability , but I cannot recall where, and Baader have a dizzying list of such things. No idea if it would help, or even if I just imagined it ! Heather

The planets are relatively bright, compared with galaxies and other deep sky objects so, like the Moon, they are ideal targets for urban skywatchers. There is plenty of free general information on the internet to help you get started, for instance here are a few, very different samples: https://themcdonalds.net/how-to-select-beginner-astronomy-targets/ https://www.astroshop.eu/advice/telescope/telescope-knowledge/ebook-download/c,9154 https://web.archive.org/web/20190525224540/http://www.wwnorton.com/college/astronomy/astro21/sandt/startright.html Do be aware that a lot of information about what you can see this week or month on webpages or blogs is made by, and therefore specific to, Europe and the USA. This site though lets you set a location and gives you advance notice of what will be visible where you are https://in-the-sky.org/newsindex.php Hope that helps Heather