| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Astro - Amateur Forum » 10 inch dobs
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
|
| Author |
Message |
| David Weinshenker |
 Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 6:30 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
MAT wrote:
Quote:
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky??
It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable.
if you think a big honkin yard long dob is portable you are delusional.
Depends on whether it is of the "classical" Sonotube style, or one of the
"collapsible truss tube" ones which can be readily separated into compact
mirror box and upper cage units (and a stack of truss poles)...
"The Dobsonian Telescope: A Practical Manual for Building Large Aperture Telescopes"
(D. Kriege + R. Berry, pub. Willmann-Bell) describes in detail the construction of
the latter type.
-dave w |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 1:27 am |
|
|
|
|
On Apr 25, 6:36 pm, "MAT" <y...@telus.com> wrote:
Quote: Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky??
It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable.
if you think a big honkin yard long dob is portable you are delusional.
If a telescope that is only 3 to 4 feet long doesn't seem portable to
you, maybe you should give up astronomy and take up weight training. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 1:59 pm |
|
|
|
|
On Apr 26, 4:27 am, wsnel...@hotmail.com wrote:
Quote: On Apr 25, 6:36 pm, "MAT" <y...@telus.com> wrote:
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky??
It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable.
if you think a big honkin yard long dob is portable you are delusional.
If a telescope that is only 3 to 4 feet long doesn't seem portable to
you, maybe you should give up astronomy and take up weight training.
Sir, that was just about one of the funniest replies I have ever read
on Usenet! Man, I about fell out of my chair laughing. BTW, I recently
completed a 10" f/6 DOB - just the tube alone is about 70" I have 10
" Discovery mirror in this baby and use a 2" focuser most of the time.
I am 68 years old and I can easily lift this tube off the alt/az mount
with the rocker box attached, with the 2" thick mirror in, large 2"
the focuser in and the spotting scope mounted. This guy sounds like
he can barely roll out of bed! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Johnny Borborigmi |
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 7:37 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On 2008-04-25 18:36:46 -0400, "MAT" <ym@telus.com> said:
Quote:
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky??
It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable.
if you think a big honkin yard long dob is portable you are delusional.
True. I had a 13.1" Coulter dob and it was a BEAST to move. Looked like
a cannon. Awesome views but a beast to move. I called it "The Beast". |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| MAT |
| Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 8:06 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
15-20 lbs. is designed for weaklings.
Quote: If a telescope that is only 3 to 4 feet long doesn't seem portable to
you, maybe you should give up astronomy and take up weight training. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 4:10 am |
|
|
|
|
On Apr 26, 5:37 pm, Johnny Borborigmi <gr...@tummy.com> wrote:
Quote: On 2008-04-25 18:36:46 -0400, "MAT" <y...@telus.com> said:
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky??
It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable.
if you think a big honkin yard long dob is portable you are delusional.
True. I had a 13.1" Coulter dob and it was a BEAST to move. Looked like
a cannon. Awesome views but a beast to move. I called it "The Beast".
Johnny, I am an older man and just completed building a 10" f/6 DOB.
Never had the time when I was younger and working, but I always wanted
to do this. Took me a year to get this thing perfect. This morning at
5AM I trained it on Jupiter with a 2 inch, 15 MM eyepiece and a 2X
Barlow. The view was astonishing. I could easily see the red clouds
circling the planet and three of its moons.
I have a Discovery mirror in this thing which appears flawless judging
from the bench tests several months ago and what I saw this morning.
Talk about jazzed! I do have to tell you, though, that absolutely dead
on collimation is vital to getting these views. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jack |
| Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 9:13 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Apr 27, 10:26 am, David Nakamoto <david.nakam...@verizon.net>
wrote:
Quote: pourmeadou...@yahoo.com wrote:
On Apr 26, 5:37 pm, Johnny Borborigmi <gr...@tummy.com> wrote:
On 2008-04-25 18:36:46 -0400, "MAT" <y...@telus.com> said:
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky??
It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable.
if you think a big honkin yard long dob is portable you are delusional..
True. I had a 13.1" Coulter dob and it was a BEAST to move. Looked like
a cannon. Awesome views but a beast to move. I called it "The Beast".
Johnny, I am an older man and just completed building a 10" f/6 DOB.
Never had the time when I was younger and working, but I always wanted
to do this. Took me a year to get this thing perfect. This morning at
5AM I trained it on Jupiter with a 2 inch, 15 MM eyepiece and a 2X
Barlow. The view was astonishing. I could easily see the red clouds
circling the planet and three of its moons.
I have a Discovery mirror in this thing which appears flawless judging
from the bench tests several months ago and what I saw this morning.
Talk about jazzed! I do have to tell you, though, that absolutely dead
on collimation is vital to getting these views.
Discovery telescopes optics are some of the best for the dollar,
according to quite a few people who should know in the LAAS, or at least
they were when they first came out, and I hope they continued with that
"tradition". By the sounds of it, they have; Good for them!
Short focal length Newts need good collimation always. One of the nice
things for some of us using a Newt; they need more Tender Loving Care in
order to perform, and it makes you feel like your telescope needs you
when you have to collimate it on a regular basis. (^_^)
And yes, I have a 10-inch Dob from Orion, and I love it.
--- Dave- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Thanks for your kind reply. I knew going in that skimping on the
optics would be defeating my purpose. I not only wanted a beautifull-
crafted DOB, but one that performed up there with the best of them. I
paid $700 just for that mirror alone.
I also put on a 2" Wyorock Crayford focuser beautifully machined out
of aircraft aluminum. I specified 2.5" of rack out - and damn glad I
did. Early on I ran into very serious problems with those low-profile
focusers. Lose it in on rack-in with a fixed primary and you're
screwed to the wall. Big differences in where that focal plane lies
with different eyepieces, not to mention Barlows. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| David Nakamoto |
| Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2008 12:26 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
pourmeadouble@yahoo.com wrote:
Quote: On Apr 26, 5:37 pm, Johnny Borborigmi <gr...@tummy.com> wrote:
On 2008-04-25 18:36:46 -0400, "MAT" <y...@telus.com> said:
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky??
It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable.
if you think a big honkin yard long dob is portable you are delusional.
True. I had a 13.1" Coulter dob and it was a BEAST to move. Looked like
a cannon. Awesome views but a beast to move. I called it "The Beast".
Johnny, I am an older man and just completed building a 10" f/6 DOB.
Never had the time when I was younger and working, but I always wanted
to do this. Took me a year to get this thing perfect. This morning at
5AM I trained it on Jupiter with a 2 inch, 15 MM eyepiece and a 2X
Barlow. The view was astonishing. I could easily see the red clouds
circling the planet and three of its moons.
I have a Discovery mirror in this thing which appears flawless judging
from the bench tests several months ago and what I saw this morning.
Talk about jazzed! I do have to tell you, though, that absolutely dead
on collimation is vital to getting these views.
Discovery telescopes optics are some of the best for the dollar,
according to quite a few people who should know in the LAAS, or at least
they were when they first came out, and I hope they continued with that
"tradition". By the sounds of it, they have; Good for them!
Short focal length Newts need good collimation always. One of the nice
things for some of us using a Newt; they need more Tender Loving Care in
order to perform, and it makes you feel like your telescope needs you
when you have to collimate it on a regular basis. (^_^)
And yes, I have a 10-inch Dob from Orion, and I love it.
--- Dave |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Page 2 of 2 Goto page Previous 1, 2
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Wed Oct 15, 2008 3:33 pm
|
|