Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

  • Announcements

    sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_lunar.thumb.jpg.ef4882eb5fb3610f8a68e5e6913de0e3.jpg

NGC 1502

Advanced Members
  • Content count

    2,746
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

686 Excellent

6 Followers

About NGC 1502

  • Rank
    Brown Dwarf
  • Birthday 13/06/48

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Essex U.K.
  1. Assuming we are talking about your 100mm and 200mm Dobs in your signature. As these are Newtonian reflectors, what many find is they are much less prone to dewing up than refractor objectives and SCT/Maksutov front correctors. If Newtonian dewing does occur, it’s usually the eyepiece and the secondary mirror that cops it. On rare occasions, I use a 12 volt dew gun to remove dew from the secondary, fired down the focuser, having first removed the eyepiece. This will remove light dewing. If the dew is bad enough to have formed droplets, then it’s time to pack up for the night. For me, it’s only ever got that bad if I’ve gone indoors for a cuppa and neglected to cap the front end of the tube. The dewgun should sort any eyepiece dewing. I keep eyepieces not in use in the inside pockets of my top outer garment. Dewed eyepieces are a rare occurrence, unless I go in for that cuppa, leaving an unprotected eyepiece in the focuser, then it’s completely my fault. On very damp nights, I extend the front end of the Dob tube with camping mat foam, this gives extra protection for the secondary. Open tube Newtonians are a different matter, there are secondary heaters for those, fitted directly to the back of the secondary. HTH, Ed.
  2. Best Silicone for secondary

    Hi Huw. Really hoping you don’t mind me mentioning, and not at all trying to be picky, but you did mention double sided tape. Best to use double sided sticky foam tape, it’s about 2mm thick, far less likely to cause any distortion of the secondary than the much thinner double sided sticky tape. Posted for clarification for any readers. I know you are using silicone, that’s my choice too. Cheers, Ed.
  3. Fed up.

    Congrats and sympathies too.... Your decision not to sell anything is good, and the stars aren’t going anywhere, down the line you’ll get opportunities under clear skies to enjoy, and you’ll be glad you didn’t give up ! Cheers from Ed.
  4. It’s so tough to answer your questions in a way that helps (not your fault of course). It’s a reasonable guess that your 60mm refractor had a wobbly mount, and a wobbly mount will lead to serious frustration, likely to put it’s user off astronomy for life. I’ve seen new folk at my club, bright intelligent people, get totally confused with a basic equatorial mount. I’d far sooner have a solid alt-azimuth mount with smooth manual movements, or good slow slow motion controls, with a 4 to 6 inch reflector, and a red dot finder or similar, plus a couple of not too cheap eyepieces, that will give good service for years and lead to many years of great astronomy. A good supplier is our sponsors, First Light Optics, and no, I don’t work for them ! A simple and fast set up is a good idea, less to frustrate, less to go wrong. Now, I’m not saying what I’ve suggested is the best advice you’ll get on this forum, others may disagree and be correct, but what I’ve outlined comes from what I’ve seen working for new people at my local club. All the best in your choices, Ed.
  5. Sigma Ori

    Hi Pat, well done. There is another Struve multiple star in both of your sketches, so two for the price of one ! I love double/multiple stars, the whole sky is stuffed with them and they can be well seen through heavy light pollution or when the moon is up. Regards, Ed.
  6. Barlow Lens.

    A very good option would be a used TeleVue barlow, hard to beat and will last a lifetime. If buying new, I'd avoid the cheapest, but your £50 - £75 budget should avoid that and maybe someone can come up with a suitable purchase. Regards, Ed.
  7. M42 First look with Nebula Filter

    I'm wondering what magnification your 30mm eyepiece gives ? Although a low power is often good, I find that with my 10" Dob a medium power gives the best view of M42 - 80 to 120x. During a recent observing session, 86x gave a great view, and going up to 150x revealed the E & F stars of the trapezium. Best to remove any filter to see these extra stars, as a nebula filter dims stars (as you mention), even if it helps with the nebula itself. Happy viewing, Ed.
  8. Hopefully someone on here will sort it for you. Another way to find out is to contact a local astronomy club and ask if you can turn up with your scope for advice. Nothing beats someone actually showing you what to do, hard to explain at a distance ! My own club regularly helps visitors, hopefully a club local to you will do the same. Hope you get the needed advice, Ed.
  9. Public stargazing this Saturday 21st Nov

    There are several clubs in Essex - Essex Cloud Dodgers, North Essex AS, Clacton & District AS, Thurrock AS, Loughton AS, East Essex AS, and my own club - Castle Point Astronomy Club http://www.cpac.org.uk/ - hope I've not missed any out. You would be most welcome on any Wednesday evening at Castle Point AC, just click on 'programme' on the home page to see what's going on, if it says 'observing if clear' then hopefully that's what will happen. No need to book, just turn up, and anyone else reading this, you're welcome too ! The public events for 2016 are yet to be decided. Hope you find a club / society not too far away that suits you. All the best, Ed.
  10. You have some great advice already given, especially post # 7. I do think it's best if you could see a 12" Dob in the flesh, at a dealers or star party, to see the size and feel the weight. Please check the weight of the tube assembly and also the base, the particle board Dob mounts are surprisingly large and heavy. Not so much an issue if you can store the scope very close to where it will be used. I think it's a myth that a large aperture is more affected by light pollution than a small one. All scopes work better away from LP, but good astronomy can be done from town as well. Regards, Ed.
  11. St80 or 102?

    Very important point mentioned in post #4 - the mount can very easily be harder to transport than the optical tube. The ST80 can manage with a lighter mount..... All the best with your choice, Ed.
  12. Mak 90 - how good?

    I have a 90 Mak, it's the optical tube from an ETX 90 with a busted mount. Very sharp and portable, great for double stars etc but very limited for low power wide field, just where the ST 80 shines. At a dark site I'd sooner have an ST 80, for me a small Mak is good in town for lunar / planets & doubles, all relatively good under light pollution. But we're all different, what works for me may not work for you...... Regards, Ed.
  13. An old discussion : 7x50 v 10x50

    Thanks all for the feedback, more food for thought......... Regards, Ed.
  14. Hi all. As many will know, years ago the "standard" astronomy binocular was 7x50. But for a number of years the 10x50 has been the most often recommended, especially for older observers when their dark adapted eye pupil may not open large enough to take advantage of the 7x50s exit pupil of around 7mm. "Wasted" light was said to be the result, so best buy 10x50s where all (or most) of the 5mm exit pupil will enter the eye. And that was what I fully accepted. However, this thread http://www.cloudynights.com/topic/522401-7x50-binoculars-forgotten-favorite/has got me reconsidering, especially the part that mentions that the outer portions of the exit pupil may not be fully illuminated. You need to read well down that thread to get a handle on the discussion. Not saying this is definitely correct, but worth a read I think. Regards, Ed.
  15. It's tough to know what's causing your problems. One issue, cooldown, has been mentioned. Another possible issue you have mentioned is collimation. How did you check this ? Simplest way is a defocused bright star at high power, do the diffraction rings look concentric or skewed ? Keep the defocused star in the centre of the field of view for this check. It's far from a complete collimation check, but should flag up a possible problem. But don't fiddle with collimation unless you are certain you need to. Another possible cause - you say that Jupiter had just emerged from behind a chimney, warm rising air from roof or chimney can play havoc with the view - unsteady air, or if the object is low down, you are looking through more atmosphere. Or maybe too high expectations ? Or too high a magnification ? Hope you don't mind me saying that........ Hope you sort it, Ed.
×