Scope and EP help.

[simon84]

Hi Themos,

From what I can gather from information I've been given nothing has been modified. Seems really strange but my tube is measuring up the same as a regular 300P. Still I'm not one to complain (too much) but I never did get my call back that I was promised.

[Astro_Baby]

Well I'd want the scope running in spec from the start. An extension tube has all sorts of potential hassles.

Firstly they often have a stepped interior which may preclude using Barlows, secondly your adding 2-3" of extra leverage which witha heavy EP will be at best ungainly and at worst put a lot of stress on the focuser and cause balance issues with the tube.

I'd be very inclined to want this sorted out myself rather than applying an aftermarket fix to the tube.

[simon84]

Never thought of it that way, I know I got the scope at a reduced price but not for that reason. So best option is to insist on it being replaced.

Will be calling them back first thing in the morning.

[themos]

Astro_Baby corrected me on the problems of extension tubes, thanks.

[John]

....Something about checking with the owner first...

If it was a pre-owned scope then I guess they will want to find out what, if any, modifications the previous owner might have carried out. Were you told it was pre-owned when you bought it ?.

If the physical tube length of your scope is the same as a standard model then the next "suspect" would be that the primary mirror and it's cell has been moved up the tube a bit - perhaps to get an imaging device to focus. It might be something that can easily be "undone" otherwise an extension tube for visual use should solve the problem.

My only nagging thought is whether the secondary mirror, assuming that it's the standard one, is large enough to handle the larger diameter light cone that it now intercepts if the primary has indeed been moved closer to it ?

John

[simon84]

Hi John,

No I wasnt told that it was owned by someone before me. It was advertised on the companys website as a review model that had been sent to the BBC Sky at Night magazine.

When the scope arrived to me it was all in its origional packaging which looked like it had been resealed apart from the box with the mirror and cell in it which had a security seal on it. There is no indication that an attempt has been made to move the mirror up the tube.

I have now been back on the phone to the supplier twice and have indicated that a £20 fix is not acceptable for a telescope costing £1000 +. If the scope had been listed as having this problem then I would accept that but it was listed as in a "full A1 working condition". I have been told to expect a call back from the manager today but as yet nothing.

I have also been on to the main importer of Skywatcher to see if they can assist.

Will keep you informed of any advances.

Cheers.

[John]

I hope you get it sorted soon and I hope it doesn't dent your enthusiam for the hobby - you don't seem the sort to get put off easily though

John

[simon84]

Hi John,

Not a chance of me losing any enthusiasm, too many wonderful things I want to see. I've taken my old Meade 114mm reflector out of its box for the time being, better than nothing.

Not alot can put me off, stubborn as a mule me

[simon84]

As its nearly the end of the day and I've not yet recieved a call I thought I'd give them a quick tinkle. The answer I got was that there was no one in store until tomorrow morning who could help with a technical problem. Well why didnt they call me back like promised before they went home?

Again I've been promised a call back tomorrow morning and I've now been put to the top of the list.......at the thought of there being a list of people with problems and that its taken me 5 days and multiple phone calls to get to the top of it my confidence, if there was any, in Pulsar Optical has now hit rock bottom.

Do I really stand a chance of getting this sorted. Not so sure now.