Changing the way we do things

[AstroTiger]

For sometime now, i have been thinking about the way we practise astronomy

The things we do, why we do it that way.

I feel with the IYA coming it might be a good time to thrash out a review of those annoying things we use, and what we would use instead.

For me one of the things i would like to see the back of is the finder, red spot or otherwise.

What would i like to replace it with?

Try sending a green laser beam down the eyepiece so it goes into the sky from the telescope, this way you can see precisely where the telescope is pointing.

What do you think to this idea?

[Astronut]

I'll stick with a red-dot and optical finder thanks. A guy in my home town was arrested earlier this year for using a green laser. Mind you, he was pointing it at a police helicopter at the time.

http://stargazerslounge.com/index.php/topic,26570.0.html

[philsail1]

Well, a bit of "lateral thinking" re alterantives to finderscopes ("red dot fiddlers" as someone on here once called them), might do a bit of good - one never knows!

Good thought there "Astro Tiger."

regards,

philsail1

[narrowbandpaul]

sounds like a good idea...but one snag...

the time independant nature of maxwells equations...

imagine parallel rays of light from an astronomical object. These rays get bent by lens or mirror, and are focussed to a point....

now reverse the situation, with the point of light this time being the green laser beam...the light will follow the same path, and emerge a parallel rays.

I think this might happen, but thinking what happens to a laser beam shone down the scope by hand, makes me think otherwise?

so I dont know?

if a collimated beam of radiation emerges...then a good plan!!!

in fact that would be pretty cool to see

[Kaptain Klevtsov]

The laser hits the secondary, then the primary, then the secondary again and back up the hole from whence it came!

Kaptain Klevtsov

[narrowbandpaul]

as in collimation!

how obvious...

but if it didnt hit the centre of the primary, it would get reflected at a different angle

[Naz]

The laser hits the secondary, then the primary, then the secondary again and back up the hole from whence it came!

Kaptain Klevtsov

Not in a refractor

Archie

[Astro_Baby]

Autofocus would be a good one - cameras do it easy enough.

How about auto collimation - could be done with a small LED array and some stepper motors - now that would be good.

[Reggie]

Autofocus and alternative finders are already an option, I like the autoc ollimation idea but we'd get hammered on costs if it were practical. I'd like to see the prices of the additional electronics that some of us use come down in price, having made my own electronic focuser, dew heater controller, dslr serial remote shutter cable for a fraction of the cost of an off the shelf item.

[Astro_Baby]

I dont think auto collimation would be that expensive if it was production engineered and in volume myself. Its only a case of generating a test pattern and then having stepper motors do the push and pull on the primary. I'd accept primary collimation only as its rare you need to mess about with the secondary.

My camera fires a test pattern from the flash unit and then uses that to get a focus. If it can be made to work in a cheap camera I cant see why it would be too tough for a telescope optics to do the same. I grant you focus on a cemra is simpler in some respects but its not that much different.

[Reggie]

I'd say something like the flash not working at light year distances would have something to do with it not being viable to use a similar method. But as previously stated, autofocus for for telescopes with a camera attached is already a viable option, it just doesn't use flash.

[Astronut]

I'd like to see a complete redesign of secondary holders and adjustments so that they're on a par with primary cells. Primary adjustment is very precise but it's a different story with secondaries. Even with bobs knobs fitted they're so imprecise and fiddly to adjust.