Fork mounted to GE mounted?

[ChrisEdu]

Is it possible to removed a scope on a fork mount, e.g. a NexStar 11, CPC11, or Meade equivalent and mount it on to something like a NEQ6? I'll assume that if possible the mount bar on the scope would need changing.

[Kai]

Easy peasy lemon squeezy

All you need to do is mount a dovetail (id suggest a "upgraded" one eg Adm etc) and away you go

[ChrisEdu]

Does it have any effect on things like the positioning of finder scopes, EPs, etc..?

I'm still really tempted towards going for a C11 / style scope but as they appear to have gone back up in price, I'm thinking that the second hand route might be best, whereby I could get a fork mounted scope and then change it to a GE mount as and when.

[ollypenrice]

You need either tube rings or a dovetail, ideally Losmandy style, that screws onto the SCT. The finder can stay where it is. I use a Vixen/Synta screwed onto our 10 inch. Fine for visual but I haven't tried it for DS imaging. Although many will disagree I'd consioder the FL to be on the long side for accurate autoguiding on an EQ6. It might deliver or it might not would be my guess. OAG greatly to be preferred.

Olly

[Merlin66]

Over the past few years I've deforked a 8" Lx (to an HEQ5pro), a 10"Lx (to an NEQ6pro) and now have a C9.25 and a C11 on NEQ6pro.

I guide at f10 (or f6.3) using a 8/92 beamsplitter (similar to a OAG) very well and can hold a target star on the 20 micron slit of a spectroscope indefinately.

HTH

[r3i]

Having gone down that route myself in the past (8" LX90) I pretty much concur with what's already been written. Both ADM & Farpoint Astro do nice offerings in the way of dovetails.

What will you want to use it for: visual or imaging?

A C11 on an NEQ6 may be OK for visual, but it's possibly a bit on the heavy side for imaging. Some folks claim to have had success but I think they've either used a pier or replaced the tripod with one made for a Losmandy G11 and you'd also have to ensure the balancing was spot on.

If imaging on an NEQ6 is what you're planning it may be more prudent consider an OTA like the C9.25 as workable upper limit. Imaging at the long focal lengths that an SCT will present is always going to be challenging, you just need to manage your expectations. Getting a focal reducer will mitigate things somewhat.

As a recent convert to OAG over piggyback autoguiding, I'd certainly recommend it. Takes a little bit of effort to set up initially, but once you've got it nailed it does seem to give improved results.

[Merlin66]

The C11 OTA weighs in at 12.6Kg only 2.5Kg more than the C9.25. My Meade 12"Lx OTA by comparison is 17.1Kg!

It seems to sit well on the NEQ6pro.

[ollypenrice]

As Ken says, the Meades are heavy, the 10 inch weighing more than the C11.

I suspect that Ken knows something about autoguiding that I don't, though! I have seen EQ sixes tick out values around 0.05 pixel average error with 400mm FL guidescopes and mine sometimes do so. But for no very obvious reason they certainly don't do it all the time and there are nights when they wouldn't have a snowflake in hell's chance of imaging at two metres. It isn't down to seeing but to something I have never identified. Ears wide open!!

Olly

[Merlin66]

Olly,

No majic....

remember spectroscopy is a different challenge.

I find the beamsplitter arrangement (using a microscope slide - 8% reflection) gives pretty good guide images to the ATik16ic -used with PHD and Al's reticule