Davey-T Posted July 22, 2016 Author Share Posted July 22, 2016 Oh good another problem, left it happily doing my 85 point model which it did OK last time and was up to 20 odd points solving OK when I came, just been out to see how it's getting on and I've got a new error message in orange "Sync failed: Sync matching failed " Tried altering exposure to 10 sec's as there was a bit of high cloud but didn't help and it said " Solved OK " anyway. Closed MM and started it again but get the same message straight away. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisLX200 Posted July 22, 2016 Share Posted July 22, 2016 It's internet based (Meinberg NTP), and yes - it does need contuinuous updates for accuracy. Mine is set to correct the PC time every 10 seconds, Per's driver then updates the mount time from the PC whenever it is not tracking (it cannot update while tracking because corrections would obviously be detrimental!). ChrisH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey-T Posted July 23, 2016 Author Share Posted July 23, 2016 Thanks Chris Is millisecond accuracy needed ? Don't know what was going on just then but wiped it all out run model again with no orange warnings and have RMS of 5.8 with 50 points. Still don't entirely understand the principle of this, is a 50 point/ 5.8 RMS model better than an 80 point / 9.6 RMS model ? Rubbish sky here so just doing a ten minute HA sub to see if it's any better than last time Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisLX200 Posted July 23, 2016 Share Posted July 23, 2016 5 hours ago, Davey-T said: Thanks Chris Is millisecond accuracy needed ? Don't know what was going on just then but wiped it all out run model again with no orange warnings and have RMS of 5.8 with 50 points. Still don't entirely understand the principle of this, is a 50 point/ 5.8 RMS model better than an 80 point / 9.6 RMS model ? Rubbish sky here so just doing a ten minute HA sub to see if it's any better than last time Dave For pointing to within a few arc-second accuracy, yes you do need accurate time. I'm uncertain how having inaccurate time would affect the modelling process but I suspect there would just be a consistant offset which would be compensated for, I don't think this would affect accurate tracking - just pointing. The GPS dongle gets you pretty close to accurate time but I wanted to track the ISS and that was the main reason I went to some length to ensure the best accuracy I could, you can understand that even a 1 second error would put the fast-moving ISS out of the FOV. Your 10 second time error equates to a 2.5 arcminute displacement. Your 'Sync Failed - Sync matching failed' error in ModeMaker: yes, I've seen that error myself. I'm not sure but I think it's because the plate-solved co-ordinates are a long way out from what the model expected, the error is just too large so the mount rejects it. When I've had that in the past I just manually deleted the model and started again (new 3 base points and refinement points). I've only seen it near the beginning of a modelling run so I assume there was some older data in there which was conflicting or possibly corrupt. ChrisH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey-T Posted July 23, 2016 Author Share Posted July 23, 2016 Thanks Chris, The second time I cleared everything and restarted the "Sync failed " message disappeared so all is well again. If I GOTO a star, used Altair last night it ends up spot on the crosshairs in Maxim and the HC reports miniscule PA error. Another rubbish imaging night last night so nothing lost in practicing stuff, stayed out until 2.30am then the objective stated dewing up so packed it in. I've managed to make the LX200 track the ISS in the past with lot's of failures so hopefully the 10Micron will be easier. Must psych myself up to update the firmware today Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey-T Posted July 23, 2016 Author Share Posted July 23, 2016 Managed a reasonable 20 minute HA sub through some clouds last night. No calibration Ignore the corners haven't fitted the flattener reducer yet Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davey-T Posted July 29, 2016 Author Share Posted July 29, 2016 On 18/07/2016 at 13:33, ChrisLX200 said: Sorry, I've never connected mine wirelessly and I'm uncertain as to whether it's possible or not to update that way. There was some comment on the 10M forum about the new issue of GPS module requiring you to use the latest firmware but again, I took no notice because mine (old version I guess) worked anyway. I think we're up to v.2.13.22 now. ChrisH Just to let you know I've updated successfully via wireless LAN and the GPS works eventually, it's even slower than the iEQ45 which takes 10mins sometimes, cant figure out why when it only takes the LX200GPS less than a minute ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisLX200 Posted July 29, 2016 Share Posted July 29, 2016 At least it works I had my doubts - perhaps it does a lot of checking along the way because it only takes a minute or so via LAN. ChrisH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.