Orange Smartie

I don't unfortunately.

It's very frustrating. I don't want to be limited to syn scan as the list of objects is so meagre.

Thanks, yes I was aware of that. I've been using Sky Safari Pro for ages, and prefer that, but I've also got Stellarium +. I'm having the same issue with both apps.

I'm seeing the IP address as 192.168.4.2 - I was using that.

Ah, now I can see "server started" under the "connection to this app" section of synscan, but still can't get on there from Sky Safari. I've just tried Stellarium and that doesn't work either.

Thanks Zermelo. However that isn't working. I can connect to the SynScan ok, and I can drive it to do an imaginary alignment (no scope on at the moment). On SynScan, I'm seeing under Connection Settings, the message Server start failed under the heading "connection to this app".

I'm getting the message "connection refused". Not sure what host and port settings I should be using, or whether I should connect via SynScan app first or not (it doesn't seem to work either way though).

Hi. Pretty self-explanatory really - I can't. I can connect to the AZ GTi wifi no problem, but it has limited functionality, so I'd like to drive my mount through either Sky Safari Pro or Stellarium plus. But for the life of me, I can't work out how to connect. Any one have any experience of doing this successfully? Pete

Biggest regret was buying a small (114mm) Konus reflector on a heavy equatorial mount. I never got it properly collimated and it's still languishing in a shed somewhere, 25-odd years after I originally bought it. Honestly I'm not sure what purpose it would be a good choice for. I'm glad I revisited the hobby recently, with a far more sensible choice - a Heritage 150p.

Doesn't sound like it will be too rough then. Perhaps the opposite is the case - if the aluminium is too smooth, it might be quite slippery. My edges are evenly filed down, but are quite grippy because of all the scratches from the file.

That's annoying. How good are your ellipse profiles? One could imagine that if you hadn't filed them smooth enough, any notch or bump might cause the platform to stop tracking. Not meaning to cast aspersions on your craftsmanship, just trying to rule that out as a possibility.

I have joined the club! I had to go slightly off-piste with my top board, as the feet on my Stella Lyra 10" must be a bit wider apart than those on the plan. So my top board is a little wider than the base board, but it still feels very stable. I need to do a few little mods; I'll probably chop the ends off the ellipses as they serve no useful purpose as far as I can see - on my wedge, one side hits the stop way before the thin end is reached. It also needs to be painted or varnished. I managed to get a quick test on Jupiter this evening, before clouds set in. This design really works! Thanks to the OP for sharing, I think it will revolutionise my viewing. Please ignore Mrs Smartie's foot, which has phot-bombed my pic.

It's the other way round. Ever since I've had a spider in my dob, it has been totally conker-free.

I'm sure you're right about the 80ED, but that will require upwards of about £300 from Smartie household funds and as such, will not get past the accountant.

It really will be "use it or lose it", so as long as I can stay reasonably close to the budget, I'd be a bit daft not to take advantage of it. If I went down the 102 refractor route, would that be a slower f ratio to give the best views (I'd have to go achromat, as anything else would be prohibitively expensive)? And what sort of mount is advised?

Thanks all for taking the time to reply. Re DSOs - I appreciate that the Mak will suffer greatly in terms of light grasp. I guess I'm seeing it as something to complement my current setups. Re goto - I think I was thinking as much of tracking ability as of finding stuff. I'm fairly good at the navigation, although of course, with a smaller FOV it will be trickier. I hadn't appreciated that the aperture is not a true 127mm....does this mean that the difference between 102 and 127 is not particularly marked? 102 is more comfortably close to my budget, if I'm honest.

This is a bit of a complicated one, but I might be given up to about £400 to spend on a telescope. I can probably supplement that slightly, but I think my absolute top budget would be around £550. I've been thinking about a compact go-to system to complement my existing equipment (10" and 6" dobs) and I was thinking about possibly getting a Skywatcher 102 or 127 Mak with go-to function for doubles, planets and lunar. So: 102 vs 127? Az-Go2 vs AZ Gti (I understand the latter has Freedom Find, but the former doesn't - is this a problem?)? Would I be massively disappointed by the Mak after using a 10" dob? Before anyone suggests the second hand route, that is not an option - the equipment must be purchased new from a proper dealer!

As Louis says above, tricky to get lined up on its own. I have a Rigel + the StellaLyra on my 10" Dob, and for me, it's a great combo.

+1 for Jupiter. You should also be able to see four of its moons (and an app like Moons of Jupiter will let you know which is which at any given time).

Noticed a few cobwebs (Dobwebs?) inside my Dob while I was checking the secondary. It's going to be open to the elements in use, so I guess that sort of thing is unavoidable, but is there any particular way of dealing with this (other than very carefully removing them)? I think the little spiders can probably get in through the bottom of my dob, so I doubt it's possible to prevent them in the first place.

I had another quick session last night, focussing principally on Gemini, which was nicely positioned. Planetary nebulae - first up was NGC 2371/2372, which appeared to me as an off-circular fuzzy disc, with little in the way of detail. Then NGC 2392 ("eskimo" nebula), appearing as a nicely diffuse disc with a brighter central region. Clusters - M35 and the dimmer NGC 2158. Multiple stars - 55-delta geminorum (Wasat) - looking a bit like Polaris with a bright primary and very faint secondary. 66-alpha (Castor). Then to Orion to take a quick look at the Trapezium. I could only clearly discern 5 of the 6 again. Others - quick look at Jupiter and and swing over to Uranus again, since I now know how to find it! That added up to about an hour, so not a marathon session, but already this year I'm doing better than last year, where I only managed a total of 2 proper sessions over the whole year. I think my collimation is ok, but perhaps the seeing wasn't great as the doubles were tricky to split properly.

Jupiter was fab. Also had a nice long look at the moon with my new Stella Lyra zoom eyepiece - not really trying to identify any particular features, just enjoying its mooniness. Also managed to see the triangulum galaxy M33, in spite of moonlight, but not NGC 772 in Aries, which is supposed to be fairly bright.

I have the Stella Lyra 10". If lifting and carrying might be an issue, I'd see if you can look at one before committing. Edited to say that that Bresser looks like fantastic value.

The DPD man brought me this rather nifty observing chair from Rother Valley Optics. Despite initially thinking I might need to order one for each buttock, it is in fact, rather comfortable. I'm approximately 15 stone and it didn't snap when I sat on it, so that is a good start.

For various reasons, I've not done much observing since last January, so there was no way I was going to squander the opportunity to get out this evening, even if it is rather cool with the windchill. I just about caught Io separating from Jupiter. Its shadow was nice and clear (when the wind wasn't playing havoc with the Dob). Took a look at Uranus, which was really easy to find, being about half way between Pleiades and Jupiter. Spent quite a while trying to track down NGC 1535 in Eridanus, but got there in the end. Did a few of my easier favourites as well. I'm so glad I bothered to get out. It was freezing, but very satisfying.