Remote Imaging Setup Options

[Whirlwind]

So I'm finally getting to the end of my tether with the weather in the UK.  My telescopes spend more time admiring the inside of the cover than actually doing any imaging.  And in the unusual case of when it is clear it tends to be on a work night when I have to be in early.  It also doesn't help that the neighbours have recently installed security lights with the intent of not only illuminating their back garden for half the night but also the local town too  (and I don't own the house anyway so a permanent observatory isn't really an option anyway).

So hence I am seriously considering uplifting the whole setup and moving it somewhere remote in another country (probably Spain).  I am hence mulling over my options for a remote telescope setup.  To try and provide flexibility I'm likely to use two setups on the same mount.  One a wide field and another to provide higher resolution imaging.

The mount that will be used will be a Mach1GTO which has a 'stated' payload of 30kg and as it stands I have the following telescope options:-  an FLT98 (617mm 445mm with reducer), a Vixen AX103S (825mm) and a VC200L (although not generally a fan of the star shapes).  I currently have one camera a QSI540wsg8 with astrodon filters (LRGB, 3n Ha,  3nm OIII, 3nm SII and 3nm NII).  I use PRISM though an Eagle2 wirelessly. 

I'm reasonably comfortable that the QSI540 and FLT98 at 445mm would be used for the widefield work (3.4" /pixel).

However I'm mulling over the options for a high resolution setup and really have come to the following (and slight impasse):-

The AX103S is a lovely 'scope but is a bit too short on focal length.  But I could get something like the QSI6120wsg which would give a 0.78"/pixel resolution (although this exceeds the theoretical resolution capable of the telescope).

Alternatively I could get a 5"/6" refractor (lets say a Esprit150/FLT132/TOA130) with a QSI6120 or a 16200 CCD which would give a resolution of up to  0.61"/pixel or 1.18"/pixel (although the latter would need larger filters)

Finally I could get something like the C9.25edge with reducer with a 16200 CCD which gives a 0.72"/pixel (this would also be better for photometry if I got a hankering for this).

The 6120wsg CCD does have some advantages in that the read noise is much lower than the 16200 so should be great for narrowband (and I will only need smaller filters) but it does have a slightly smaller FOV at a similar resolution (but it's not a massive difference).

So I'm opening up the question to the everyone to see whether anyone has gone through a similar thought process?
Am I missing a potential option (I'm generally steering away from the 'cheaper' RCs). In an ideal world I'd get an OS Rifast a 300mm F3.8 but well I would prefer to win the lottery first so things at this size are really out (and there is little online evidence of how far a Mach1 can be pushed - though I have seen 22kg+ systems being stated as working)!

So any thoughts?

 

[kippford]

Sorry if I am misunderstanding, but are you going with the scope or will it be remotely operated?

[hughgilhespie]

10 hours ago, Whirlwind said:

I use PRISM though an Eagle2 wirelessly. 

Somewhat off topic - I can't really help with your scope/camera choices - but I would love to hear how you get on with Prism. I have been considering swapping from SGP to Prism as it seems to allow more / easier observatory automation, particularly the use of scripts.

Regards, Hugh

[Whirlwind]

11 hours ago, kippford said:

Sorry if I am misunderstanding, but are you going with the scope or will it be remotely operated?

Ah sorry, yeah remotely operated.  Unless I get the lottery win and then I will move with the 'scope.

[Whirlwind]

1 hour ago, hughgilhespie said:

Somewhat off topic - I can't really help with your scope/camera choices - but I would love to hear how you get on with Prism. I have been considering swapping from SGP to Prism as it seems to allow more / easier observatory automation, particularly the use of scripts.

Regards, Hugh

No worries.  I can't say I've used the scripts but I do find the everything all in one place a lot easier to manage.  The interface is a bit 90's style with lots of tabs and so forth and I can't say I've fully used every feature (for example the spectroscopy part).  The English manual is a bit lacking but the actual software has been around for at least ten years and I think has been used more extensively in France (and I think originated from professional observatories).  

However compared to where I came from where I have multiple programs open all over the place it definitely has made my life and setup easier.  Is there anything more specific you want to know?

[hughgilhespie]

Thanks, that's helpful. I do like the sound of 'one program does it all'.

Regards, Hugh

[SamAndrew]

Personally I wouldn't go for 2 scopes straight out of the gate, I'd focus on the one I have and get that working nicely first; there's lots of extra bits to consider with a remote setup: lens cap automation (ideally one with built in flat panel), autofocuser, camera rotator, remote control of the power supplies, weather monitoring, roof control, a camera to keep an eye on everything. I wouldn't want to add complication by doubling up on a load of those straight away resulting in extra USB hubs that will potentially cause further headaches. 

Initially just one scope would keep me entertained for quite some time, I'd then consider a second further down the line.