NGC 1502

Well done for bagging M7. I’ve seen it from my club’s dark site on the Essex coast, excellent horizons there. It was mainly a rotten night with large areas of the sky cloudy, but there was a strip of sky in the south that stayed clear so with my trusty TV Pronto I took the opportunity to observe M7 & M6 nearby. Other M objects eluded me however. Much more recently on 28th June 2019 I was at a different site in Essex also with good horizons but there was so much thin cloud in that bit of sky that thwarted my hoped for observations of lots of southerly Messiers I’ve never seen. Astronomy, great hobby but frustrating at times 😬 Ed.

There is one on “365 astronomy” website. There may be cheaper options but this is better than those. Ed.

Minor dewing can be removed with a 12v dew gun, or even fanning with a hand may work. Next step can be wrapping the eyepiece with a heated dew band, a smaller version of that used for a refractor objective. Eyepieces not in use are best not kept in the open, like those eyepiece racks fixed to scope mounts. I keep eyepieces in an inside pocket, being a touch warmer they don’t dew up as quickly when placed in the focuser. A gently heated eyepiece case may be good. At the end of a session all kit should be allowed to thoroughly dry before being put into storage. Ed.

How about a DIY version Stu ?

Hi Alan, of course that’s me........ There’s one thing that bothers me however. If you take a look at the pics shown earlier, you may agree with me that the mount is too narrow for its height. When I first tried my OO 8” F6 it was a breezy night and I was bothered the whole scope could be blown over. When I went indoors for a break and hot drink I lashed the mount to my shed door. I didn’t want to hear an expensive sounding thud whilst I was indoors..... I’ve since extended the aluminium ground plate on the three feet to make the base much wider. That makes it feel more stable when gently trying to pull it over. I’m planning to lower the base when I have time. The mirror end of the F6 tube clears the base when pointed at the zenith by several inches, this will allow it to work ok with a shortened base. Lower and wider = more stable. I can recall a more extreme example when OO made a 6” F11. That really was tall and skinny..........and scary on a breezy night I’d guess. The owner - moonshane ? - added weights to the base, another way to help stability. Ed.

Thanks to all for the valued advice, read with interest. 👍

I’ve two questions and I’d be grateful for advice please. Some time ago I tried a friend’s Mark 1 Baader Hyperion zoom 8-24mm with my 10” F4.8 Dob. Whilst I greatly enjoyed the convenience I was disappointed with the edge of field correction, obviously made worse by the coma inherent with an F4.8 mirror and no coma corrector. So, two questions - 1. Do the later versions of this eyepiece have better off axis performance ? 2. When adding the dedicated Baader 2.25x barlow, are off axis corrections improved ? I do have a TeleVue 2x barlow, and using that with regular fixed focal length EPs can improve off axis performance, but I’d prefer the much more compact dedicated 2.25x barlow. Thanks in advance, Ed 👍

Hi Geoff, enjoyed your careful comparison of the two eyepieces, and envious of the high elevation of Jupiter and Saturn compared to what we have in the UK right now. What I’ve found, especially with planetary viewing, is that the state of the atmosphere is the main restriction with seeing a crisp view. Poor seeing ( turbulence ) makes it a rubbish view even with top EPs, a steady atmosphere brings out the detail and cheaper EPs can perform surprisingly well especially in the centre of field of view. Off axis of course can be a lot worse. Best regards from the northern hemisphere, Ed.

PM’d...

Your enthusiastic post is definitely not pointless........I enjoyed reading it and also it will encourage others as to how much visual observing can give a great big buzz...........more please..........😁 Ed.

+1 for adding a counterweight. You could temporarily tape substitutes to the tube to see how well this works. Your kitchen will have all sorts of various temporary weights to try. Best to fix a counterweight under the back end of the tube so that it’s balanced longitudinally as well as radially. If you just balance longitudinally that will be fine for low elevations but not for overhead. Balance radially as well and overhead will be ok too. This is not obvious until you try it....... Ed.

A more expensive option is a Dob from Orion Optics UK. Their 10” Dob is noticeably lighter than a Skywatcher equivalent. I own an 8” and a 10” Dob from OO UK, the difference in the views is not that much. An 8” OO is considerably lighter than a 10” SW. About 12 years ago I owned a 10” SW Dob, I had to carry it down a flight of stairs to use it, so I’m aware of the problem. Ed.

50x50............yikes is that the actual spec or a mistake in manufacture..............👎

Hi Andy. You could ask Telescope House, they sell lots of Bresser scopes. Ed.

Cloud cover forecasts are so frustrating, as this thread confirms. Like most of us I do look at them, usually 3 for my location, and do my best to form an opinion, especially as the forecasts often conflict, and are not even correct for the current hour..... If two or more forecasts agree and are correct for the current hour, I start to take notice. As I’m the person for my local club who arranges dark site visits this is particularly important for me because I give the go / no go decision on my clubs email group. If confirming a visit I usually add something like “best guess is for clear skies” or “50/50 call” or “please check the forecasts yourself to decide if its worth coming” and of course leave it as late as possible before confirming or cancelling. So far this year most confirmed visits have been worthwhile, but even so it’s tough to get many to turn up, usually just the hard core observers, even when I make it obvious that members can do imaging too, as they know I’m confirmed visual and low tech...... Just do your best and hope.......and I plead forgiveness if I cancel and it turns out crystal clear all night......😫 Ed.

One option is to join a local astronomy club, many (like mine) have equipment for members to borrow free of charge. This can save you many times the cost of membership and prevent buying unsuitable kit. If the club’s website doesn’t say if kit is available, all will have a simple method to ask. My own club has done this many times and saved folk a fortune in expensive mistakes. They can borrow lightweight kit, low tech or high tech etc etc. Ed.

Most astronomy equipment if carefully used will last for very many years. The damp night air tends to condense onto equipment in use, so don’t pack it away until it has fully dried out. Avoid salty air close to the sea, protect the kit from direct sunlight when stored. No need to baby it either, just considerate use is fine. Ed.

Indeed, double / multiple stars are great to observe, fascinating in their variety, show up well with a light polluted or not quite dark sky, involve a lot of interesting astronomy, the whole sky is stuffed with them........ BTW, when you observed the Ophiuchus doubles, you were close to Barnard’s star, the nearest naked eye star being 66 Oph. Ed.

Agree it’s a Crayford focuser. The dual focuser knob on the upper end ( as in the image ) indicates it’s a two speed. Also agreed the comment about rack and pinion focusers - well engineered R & P focusers are tough to beat, but with a bit of fettling a Crayford can be made acceptable. Ed.

Good that your scope now reaches focus. For collimation you don’t really need expensive tools like lasers or cheshire collimator. Do a search for “Gary Seronic Newtonian collimation” for the best guide I’ve seen that cuts through all the confusing advice that’s out there. Ed.

Yes, I would also be concerned about the scope being blown over in a gale. Perhaps if you kept an eye on forecasts the scope could be stored in a shed etc on those occasions, so most of the time it would be ok outside. The issue of damp affecting the chipboard base is valid. Perhaps the joints could be sealed with white mastic, or better would be to dismantle the base and seal the raw edges with PVA or similar, then the mastic after reassembly. A shower cap each end of the optical tube, plus the dustcap would be good. So with care, outside storage with a good quality cover could work ok. Ed.

A 60mm refractor can show a great deal. The moon bright planets and double stars will be good targets. As mentioned already, perhaps try the eyepieces you already have and see how you get on. The eyepieces you have will not exhaust the capabilities of your scope, up to 100-120x should be ok. 3 eyepieces, low medium and high power should suffice. Of the 60mm refractors I’ve used the main restriction has been the mount rather than the optics. What will you be using as a mount ? A wobbly mount that makes it difficult to find and track objects will be a pain, a better mount would give a nice portable hassle free scope. Good luck, Ed.

Thanks all. Earlier in the evening the split was not seen, had to wait until the Hercules keystone was almost overhead, then the 8” revealed the secondary occasionally and then for long moments.......two pinpoints imbedded in the diffraction rings. I also appreciated the two speed focuser making exact focus easier to achieve. Never had a two speed before, and used to wonder if it was necessary. Mind you the focuser needed several previous tries to adjust it to make it work ok, at first it was way too tight, then it slipped, but eventually got a reasonable compromise. I just love the Cambridge double star atlas ( second edition ) full of targets to entertain at all seasons. Ed.

Last night was clear in SE Essex, but I nearly didn’t go out, not long past full moon and the lingering twilight. However I’m so glad I did because it superb for double stars. The highlight for me was Zeta Herculis ( Struve 2084 ) the SW star in the keystone. I had two scopes in use, my OO 10” Dob designated 1/4 wave, and a new to me OO 8” VX8L, designated 1/10 wave. I’ve had many unsuccessful tries at splitting Zeta with the 10” and last night was no exception. Last night the seeing was so good that I tried magnifications that are usually pointless. With the 8” at 300x and then 400x I got a lovely clear pin point split. Bit of a challenge hand tracking at those mags with the 50 degree apparent field zoom, but definitely worth it 👍 I wont go into what 1/4 wave and 1/10 wave actually mean, different interpretations about that.......... Both scopes fully cooled and collimated, chuffed with the 8” previously owned by a local club member sadly no longer with us. Ed.

Hello Steve. This may not be relevant, however a few years ago I read that some of the Lunt blocking filters had suffered a coating failure. I don’t recall it was a safety issue, more of concern about the quality of the view/image. I cannot remember where I saw that, but I’m certain I did. I’m wondering if contacting Lunt with an enquiry may help ? It’s possible that coating failure could lead to changes to the coating process. Please disregard this if it’s irrelevant. Ed. EDIT - Please accept my apologies, only just realised the coating failure has already been mentioned.