Jon Culshaw to join the Sky at Night team

[alan potts]

Well I like the program and will continue to watch it but how many do you need to do a once a month 30 minute program it won't be long will it be before we have a band on the program, say Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass for starter there were 7 of them.

Alan

[cotterless45]

Cringeworthy, why in an attempt to make serious subjects more appealing do they drag on "comic interest" ?

I'm expecting Bruce Forsyth next with "higher or lower ?"

I accept that Jon Colshaw is a jovial chap , no doubt talented in his own field but not in this one,

Nick.

[fredster]

As some others have said, i'm okay with him being involved providing the impersonations are kept to a minimum. He has an obvious enthusiasm for the subject, just like Tony Robinson does on Time Team. Providing he uses Tony as a template he'll be okay. Actually Time Team is a good example of why you need someone like that to ground the experts and lighten things a touch. If not, you just end up with a dreadful Open University production.

[Paul Laws]

Maybe it's me but I believe Chris, Pete and Paul could cope on their own. S@N doesn't need jazzing up.

Coxy is getting on my wick now but everyone else, it seems, can't get enough of him so it IS probably me.

OK It's definitely me because I've just stopped following Amy Mainzer on Twitter.

NONE of the above help me with this continual cloud cover *shakes fist skywards*

Regards.

[ether823]

I thought the show focused too much on the Moore winter marathon and not enough of whats happening in the night sky this month.

[Scott]

Just because he's an impressionist doesn't mean he can't add another string to his bow. if this was the case we'd not have the "wonders of" series by that musician bloke or springwatch by that goodie, and how many people started watching time team because of Tony Robins? Jon Culshaw has a definate passion for astronomy and from what I've seen of him on S@N if people don't ask him to do impressions then he's quite happy not too. Give him a go I say.

[cgarry]

I would argue that he has had "a go" and it really did not work out.

[Macavity]

...we'd not have the "wonders of" series by that musician bloke...

Aye, it's that bloomin' musician bloke, I blame... [teasing]

[Miranda]

Perhaps John is trying to use s@n to step away from his impression/comic background like dara did in stargazing and bbc science club. I can see why John needs to move on tv-wise, and he does love astronomy.

Worth a shot I'd say.

[fredster]

I would argue that he has had "a go" and it really did not work out.

I don't think he's a had a fair crack yet and he showed genuine interest and excitement in the last S@N. And the chances are he is fed up of doing the SPM bit. It's all still settling down at the moment, trying to find its feet. I bet they change it all around again within the year.

[Double Kick Drum]

No problem at all with Jon Culshaw.

Being intersting to see what happens with the Sky at Night. I don't have a problem with a few changes in the programme so long as it sticks to the original essence of the show.

[estwing]

i wouldn't care if Kermitt the frog was presenting..who cares who's doing it as long as someone is..as for keepin it a serious programme, hmm...open it up to more people,gets more popular..gets more people aware of LP,get more lights turned off..what do you want? keep the hobbie a small, select club,or open it to the masses make more interested? snowboarding was banned in most resorts because of a simlar attitude..now there's only 2 resorts in the world where its still banned....and there in financial trouble..i wish everyone in the world had a telescope......rant over

[foundaplanet]

All the astronomers I have ever met so far have been good people and in whatever way it is that they enjoy the hobby, they enjoy the hobby. I don't care who they have on The Sky at Night as long as they are active within astronomy and are genuinely interested and or enthusiastic about it. I am not bothered about the range of their knowledge as we all have different levels of that, it is what it is to each individual and we do it for whatever reason we choose as we all have different lives. Since when has astronomy been selective of 'a type of' character.

Sir Patrick is obviously irreplacable and it would be nothing short of stupidity for the beeb to even attempt. Lets not forget that Sir Patrick himself was also and did many other things. Astronomy, I find is all the more interesting and fun when there are others around and is this not what Sir Patrick spent an awful lot of time encouraging himself?

Yes astronomy is a science if that is what you want it to be, it can and is an awful lot more to people who share the same interest and curiosity.

John Culshaw is an astronomer...

''Ive been fascinated by astronomy for as long as I can remember. And like most who've been inspired to look up at the night sky, it was of course Patrick Moore who got me started. Aged 6, I read Patrick's book 'The Observers book of Astronomy' from cover to cover and vividly remember watching my first Sky at Night where Patrick spoke with his fabulous enthusiasm about Lunar Eclipses and Pulsars''.....and therefore that should make him one of the same no matter how it is that he has earn't a living.

[M4lcs67]

Yes. He has more than a passing interest in astronomy and I like his style. It should put a slightly different and more lighthearted slant on things if this it confirmed. He could be the amateurs voice on all things astronomical. I for one would welcome it.

[LukeSkywatcher]

I cant see why he should be a regular on the show. The only thing he has to offer is a pretty damn good impression of SPM. Even if he has a passing interest in the hobby, why make him a regular?. That like adding Brian May or Jonathan Ross (or countless other annoying people) to the show.

Its fine as it is. I personally would find it insultingto the memory of SPM , if Culshaw was added to the show simply because he does a damn good SPM impression. Although SPM did really like Culshaw's impression of him.

Patrick is gone. We really dont need an impressionist on the show every month to keep Patrick's memory alive.

What scientific value would Culshaw bring to the show?

Just my 2 cents.

[Demo johnny]

Cut out the impressions andI think it he can be used to ask the basic questions that need to be asked of the rest of the team and some of the common features.

I agree with how many do you need for a 30 minute show.

Chris is the main presenter he can carry the show easily as the host. Last night was one of the having everyone together shows but when they do their we individual features then you will see a rotation of them all.

The show has an obvious mission to attract more people into astronomy so while John knows what he is doing I expect him to look like he knows a lot less and is learning. At the end of the day with Phd's floating around the team need an everyman to bounce off.

I think they need an extra 15 mins to add on a what to see this month and I still wish they would show some more realistic eyeball images of what you will see through an entry level scope.

[Mondlicht13]

Get over yourselves all of you "more pompous than thou" lot.

Sir Patrick Moore will be laughing at you all. John Culshaw was involved in S@N programmes WITH Sir Patrick in the past. Insulting to his memory ? Whats your problem ?

The other members of the team clearly he is going to be an asset to the programme.

Good Luck to John and the Sky at Night team for the future.

[JamesF]

My heart sank when I read the subject line. I haven't seen him do a single S@N that I've enjoyed. I don't want people doing impersonations in the middle of something I'm trying to concentrate on and learn from. If he can just be "the man in the street" or even "the enthusiastic amateur astronomer" then fair enough, but for me his doing impersonations really detracts from my enjoyment of the programme and the first time he does one I shall be turning it off for good.

James

[Gweedo]

I think that we need to understand that Chris L, Chris N, Pete, Paul, Lucie and Jon probably have families and professional careers and that they get precious little income from the BBC for their appearances on the Sky at Night. As such, I don't think that any of them could (or should) drop their other commitments solely for the programme. Sir Patrick was a special case in many ways as he was an author and single man and therefore probably able to devote most of his time for the programme.

Having a range of presenters will reduce the burden on any single one to carry the show by themselves and will allow us, as viewers, to have some variety.

I think that a collective breath and pause should be taken for a while. It's only been 2 episodes without Patrick and the team needs to find their feet and ease into their roles, whatever they may be. The programme does need to move on and build upon the format so wonderfully captained by Patrick, but as other posters have said, he is no longer with us and the programme would be worse for trying to be the same when he was at the helm.

I, for one, am reassured and pleased that the BBC seems to be committed to the continuation of the Sky at Night, and I wish all the team the very best.

[Demo johnny]

For avoidance of doubt I think he will be a good addition to the show.

[skir]

I cant see why he should be a regular on the show. The only thing he has to offer is a pretty damn good impression of SPM. Even if he has a passing interest in the hobby, why make him a regular?. That like adding Brian May or Jonathan Ross (or countless other annoying people) to the show.

Its fine as it is. I personally would find it insultingto the memory of SPM , if Culshaw was added to the show simply because he does a damn good SPM impression. Although SPM did really like Culshaw's impression of him.

Patrick is gone. We really dont need an impressionist on the show every month to keep Patrick's memory alive.

What scientific value would Culshaw bring to the show?

Just my 2 cents.

That's perhaps a bit unfair on Brian may as he's well qualified to do the job, as he has a PhD in astrophysics.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[nickdud]

corks for me, he has been on more than a few times over the years anyway and im sure he knows what hes doing by now, with the Big Man gone now the program had to change a little and as it has become more than just a backyard 'podcast' over the years with world wide filming venues i'm sure the extra bodies will make the job easier and more varied.

GOOD LUCK TO THEM ALL AND LONG MAY THE SHOW CONTINUE

[russ.will]

It's only two shows PM (Post Moore) - Give it a while to settle down people.

Aunty Beeb has known this day would come for a long while. Culshaw adds a true amature to the show, he isn't stupid and won't trade on his SPM immitation for long. Feedback would stop it and anyway, it's more of an affectionate tribute. PLUS, we have the excellent Dr. Green who adds an extra level of expertise in a fascinating suject and they're both pretty solid performers on screen.

Russell

[russ.will]

And stop blaspheming against Brian May!

He may be as mad as a badger, but he wrote the rules of the Rock Handbook.

Russell

[Kropster]

It can be the beginning of the end when the producers start to try and make the show more 'popular'.

Watch out for glamourous female presenters and fast cut sequences set to pop music and dumbing down..... any of those will mark the end of the show as we know it