NGC 1502

Firstly I want to sincerely apologise for my very clumsy comment. I should not have said the Deep Sky Observer has drifted. What I was clumsily alluding to was this- I joined the Webb Society because I expected zero imaging in DSO. I’m not against imaging and respect the hard work and dedication involved and the images that appear in DSO. But imaging is not the way I do my astronomy. The DSO remains a good way visual astronomers can share what they do. I realise that the work of an editor is to edit the input Webb members submit. Many visual observers have drifted into imaging over the years, therefore that’s what they submit. My observing includes solar system and I rely solely from online sources for information. Very obviously I would not expect DSO magazine to include that. I’m hoping this explains my ill thought out comment. Ed.

Ok, you’ve said you don’t like a barlow, and I do understand your objections. However, everything is a compromise in one way or another. I do have an original Vixen LV 2.5mm with 45 deg apparent field, the modern replacement SLV has a slightly wider 50 deg field. If it were me I’d accept a compromise, use a barlow or live with a narrow field. Long shot- a used 2.5mm Nagler. But that’s a compromise too with 12mm eye relief, or a used 2-4mm Nagler zoom, or…whatever… Ed.

Thanks, not seen that before……looks good👍

Indeed the Webb Deep-Sky Society has its roots in visual observing, but has drifted somewhat in its main focus. I’m a member of the WDSS and the last issue included an article by myself- How to star hop to G1 (Mayall 2). G1 is the brightest (or least dim!) globular cluster on the outskirts of M31 galaxy. Ed.

Thanks Rob for the mention of the Actual Astronomy Podcast👍 Agreed that a visual only magazine would likely not be financially viable. For me the very best magazine ever was the early copies of Sky & Telescope. I keep some of them from the 60s, 70s and 80s, just so nostalgic to read how it once was! Not saying that S&T is bad now, but it is VERY different. For everyone- please enjoy your magazine(s) of choice😊 Ed.

I’ve just read through the thread that discusses what astronomy magazine is best. As a visual only astronomer I’ve given up on magazines. I get all the information that I need from- in-the-sky.org I fully appreciate that many of you get great enjoyment and value from magazines, if so that’s great👍 Anyone have their thoughts on this? Edit- I’ve looked at in-the-sky.org and was “horrified” to see the “horoscope” 😡😡 info. Apologies just ignore that bit!!

I am totally gutted it’s not. Given time I hope to get over it😁

Could you shorten that bolt by cutting and then filing the inner end? Or is there some purpose in it protruding so much?

Elegant, sophisticated, refined. For a moment I thought you were referring to me😁

Thank you Carole. You may not remember but we have met at Kelling in years past, I bought a dew band from you and it’s still fine👍 I’m sure that the majority of imagers are aware of shielding laptops etc like yourself. But as in all areas of life it’s the minority who break the rules and are a pain in the proverbial. There will be a minority of visual observers who are a pain, lots of ways to be a problem!! With very best regards, Ed.

My sympathies…… Last time I was at the better of my local clubs 2 dark sites, exactly the same thing happened. Well almost the same thing, there was more than one BRIGHTLY lit tractor at times just 50 yards away, sweeping the whole area with FLOODLIGHTS🤬🤬 One consolation- after about an hour they packed up and departed👍👍 Getting away from lights is difficult. Even at Kelling Heath star party there’s been bright laptops unshielded. I’m definitely not against imagers (thanks for those wonderful pics) but PLEASE spare a thought for others who have planned ahead, travelled a long way, then finally a clear night…….. Ed.

Just read the above with interest. For some of us eyepiece choice is a never ending journey, sometimes buying eyepieces we once sold, or deeply regretting selling something we cannot find again. I think it’s a bit like cars. I’m completely happy with my 2008 Fiesta, someone else might not be. I definitely think it’s worth upgrading the stock eyepieces that come with lots of new scopes. Something like the BST Starguiders is a big improvement that could fully meet many folks needs. My all time favourite eyepiece is my Vixen 22mm LVW. Sorry, it’s not for sale, just works so well in all my scopes. Ed.

Indeed, I’ve heard that from reliable sources that the specialist coating process forms the fine figuring of some Vixen mirrors. If that can be confirmed then regular stripping and recoating by the 3 UK companies I know of would destroy the figure. But if the coating looks good, including shining a bright at the mirror surface and viewing from the back, it’s all ok👍 Best guess- Vixen mirror coatings will be top notch, therefore very long lasting. If it ain’t broke….😊 Ed.

Very late indeed to the party………just noticed your Vixen 80/910. Exactly the same as mine, not many of those early models with the larger diameter lens cell that have 3 pairs of collimation screws. Best guess is that Vixen quickly realised that user collimation was not needed once the scope had been properly assembled during production. However it does show that Vixen put lots of thought into the humble 80mm achromat. Same as they always do… Off topic comment- Their current range of excellent eyepieces are missing top end models like LVW and the short lived 83degree SSW. Ed.

Welcome to SGL, as you’ve just found out, lots of folks on here willing to help. Your 8” Dob should very easily show the GRS. Best not to use too high a magnification, smaller and sharper beats bigger and fuzzier. I often use 150x, just a suggestion of course. Great views of Jupiter can be had, even well after opposition, as long its not too low in elevation. Ed.

As Robertl has mentioned, PA (position angle) is one way to confirm seeing the secondary star. Lots of sources to find PA, I most often consult my Cambridge Double Star Atlas, but not until AFTER a visual attempt or “confirmation bias” may creep in……. Zeta Herc- my OOUK 10” Dob will often give a definite visual split, as will my Hinds 6” Dob if the seeing is not too bad. By a definite split I mean two independent dots of light. Doubles will usually take very high power much better than other types of objects. So I’m not afraid to use “silly high power”. Ed.

Yes I was out too, nice and clear at Southend in Essex. At 23.06 BST Io’s shadow was a notch out of Jupiter’s limb, after a few minutes the shadow was an inky black dot fully on Jupiter’s disc. I watched as Io itself crept ever closer to Jupiter. At 23.29 Io appeared as a “pimple” attached to Jupiter’s limb😊. By 23.34 the bright dot of Io was fully on Jupiter’s disc. As the minutes ticked by Io became progressively harder to see as it moved further from the limb darkening. By 23.50 I could no longer discern Io, but the shadow remained easy to see. Instrument- Hinds 6” Dob, 6mm Radian = 150x. A lovely clear night at this sad time. Ed.

Tough call. First consideration is the condition of the mirror coatings. Second question, how far away from you is the scope? If it’s nearby and I could inspect and it’s all good and agree a price then take it home right away I’d pay £350-£450 for the optical tube only. As it’s unlikely to be nearby then I’d proceed with more caution. Do you trust the seller’s description? How much hassle to obtain it? Hard to say, it could be a bargain but take care.

Hi iapa, I’m thinking you must have intended to quote the OP rather than myself? No worries at all😊

The Ultrablock I used to own and the Lumicon I now own both look mirror like. The only way to find out if it’s good is to use it. As already mentioned it will likely take several sessions to find out what you need to know. Every type of similar filter, even the bargain basement ones I’ve owned have been worth having, all showed better views that with no filter at all. It’s a better, a bit better, a lot better story.

Looking at the images that scope has the better quality ventilated primary mirror cell. The OO 12” f4 optical tube fits across the back seat of most cars. If I were buying that scope much would depend on how good the mirror coatings are, the pics look good….

Skywatcher ED80 is a great choice but above your budget at £599 at FLO, but they’re often available second hand. Or there’s the ED72 version at under your budget. The ED80 has been around for many years, tried and tested and a favourite with many without breaking the bank. All the best with your choice, Ed.

I’m not nit picking here- When you say you’re trying to remove the mirror do you mean the mirror cell complete with mirror as a single unit? To remove the mirror cell complete with mirror you need to take out all of the screws that attach the mirror cell to the tube. The screws on the back surface of the cell are collimation screws and lock screws, leave those in place. When the cell finally pulls away from the tube it may come free suddenly, so be prepared for that. As mentioned above it’s possible that tube rings have distorted the tube enough to hinder what you’re trying to achieve. Hope you sort it, Ed.

I’ve had a 2” Orion Ultrablock for years and found it excellent, mainly used with my 10” Dob under typical town skies and better country skies. I always found it excellent as long as used appropriately on suitable objects. A few weeks ago I had the chance to purchase a used 2” Lumicon UHC from a friend. I had several sessions comparing the Lumicon and Ultrablock. On objects like M27, M76, the Veil east and west sections, I could not detect a difference in the views. The only difference I found was the thread issue mentioned above. The Ultrablock was not completely compatible with some eyepieces but the Lumicon has no issues like that. I think it’s likely that my Ultrablock was one of the better ones, it’s now found a home with a local friend. Ed.

By ‘tracking’ I’m presuming you mean a motor driven mount. Essentially as long as the mount is properly set up and the correct tracking option selected then whatever magnification you’re using the object you’re viewing should remain within the field of view. Does that answer your question? Ed.