Mesu optics mount

[adamsp123]

I know it is a pricey mount, but anyone got any comments on the design and its capability.

Mesu-Optics, Mesu-Mount

One of my concerns would be the wear on the RA axis as the weight of the scopes will be exerting quite a moment force due to gravity on the top and bottom of the RA gear ring housing.

[MartinB]

I don't think that is a pricey mount at all given it's capabilities - 2x65kg +/-2 arc secs PE and under £6000!

I can't see how it balances, it just looks weird. Could you get one Pete and let us know how you get on

[Ad Astra]

Looks like a nice solution for a newtonian - especially if you wanted a visual and a photographic OTA up at the same time.

I have concerns about the accessibility of the eyepiece, though.

All together, I think I'd prefer something along the line of a split-ring equatorial like this Buy 12.5" Next Generation Telescope (Split-Ring Equatorial Newtonian)

Just a thought!

Dan

[adamsp123]

I don't think that is a pricey mount at all given it's capabilities - 2x65kg +/-2 arc secs PE and under £6000!

I can't see how it balances, it just looks weird. Could you get one Pete and let us know how you get on

OK

Seriously if it is as capable as specified AND reliable then it is a nice investment - no meridian flip - oh joy, the "balancing" is done by the extra long "tripod" leg, clearly this must give enough counter force to compensate for the over hanging load, which begs my earlier concern regarding wear rates on the RA axis.

I would only consider this price of mount for AP not visual work.

[RobH]

I want one

[adamsp123]

I emailed Lucas with question regarding my bearing concern and got this back the next day.

2 months for delivery after ordering....... long hard think required.

You don’t need to worry about load on the bearings.

I did a test to see when the destruction of the mount starts.

When the mount is in 45 degree position that happened with 14285 Newton! - 1.4 tonnes I think!

With that force the mount breaks down but the bearings are still undamaged.

We use industrial bearings that reach a fraction of their load limit.

They can make millions of revolutions before they start wearing.

The top end of the mount is a close box construction with a 300mm diameter disc at the bottom end 20mm thickness.

That’s a very stiff 20 kg construction.

The frame is made of 80X80mm tube and is also very stiff and also 20 kg mass.

It all results is a construction that is much better than a German mount on a tripod or pillar.

It has no meridian flips and because of its friction drive and servo controller it has a very good tracking behavior.

The torque you mention is compensated by the bearings and is pushing all the play in the bearings to one side.

That’s a very good thing to create a good running RA axis.

[Erwin Kats]

maybe you would like to take a look on the website of dutch astrophotographer Rob Kantelberg

Astrophotography by Rob kantelberg

[Peter Drew]

I would back the comments offered by the manufacturer. I obviously couldn't see what was in the RA housing but suspected this was the case. Well made friction drives are hard to beat, I'm assuming that it means that the mount could operate without much counterweighting although I notice that all the scopes in the photos seemed to have another one fitted in the expected c/w position .

[brianb]

Looks fun, I don't see any particular issues with the "overhanging" RA axis (many fork mounts have been built over the years and this is just a variation... the comments I'd have are:

1. there would seem to be a need for a counterbalance if using it to support just one OTA or two OTAs with significantly different weights

2. a Newtonian would need rotating rings (but then this is also a real issue with GEMs).

I really like the low slung base, should be a lot better than a GEM on a spindly legged tripod & probably with flexure in the mounting plate even if on a masonry pillar.