Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Chaudhari Evans

Pages: [1]

I just purchased a Zhumell 12" as my GRAB and GO scope. It was on craigslist and the price was SO low, that I couldn't pass it buy. Got it for just under $400! It is two pieces - the stand and tube. Each piece is under 40 lbs. I need to walk down 5 steps and then 15 feet into the driveway and I am observing.

However, the tube is AWKWARD to say the least. I was thinking about adding two handles, one to each side of the aluminum tube to carry it. Has anybody else out there done anything similar to this? The handles on my CPC1100 make maneuvering and carrying the fork/tube VERY easy and that weight 70 lbs. Does anybody know of an easy way to carry the tube minus the handle? If anyone has mounted handles, what handles would somebody recommend? Does anybody think that the aluminum tube can have handles added without ruining the structural integrity of the tube?

I went with the 12" Zhumell because of many trees and buildings are in my townhouse complex, so nearly everything I look at will be within 10 to 20 degrees from zenith. At 6'4", the eyepiece height of the 12" is much more comfortable for me than an 8 or 10".

Thanks for any help you can provide!


I see a lot of pulse width modulation. I want to do go about it differently, adjusting the voltage with a digital Potentiometer to increase or decrease heat output for a dew heater. Do any electronics gurus have any experience with these? Would this even work? Any helpful tips for utilizing one of these chips in a circuit would be much appreciated!

General Astronomy & Observing / Ring Nebula
« on: December 30, 2017, 11:37:34 PM »
Hey All,

I saw this amazing object for the first time last weekend and noticed that I was not able to see it really unless I used averted vision. Is this normal for this DSO? Or maybe is it linking to sky conditions and aperture?

Bought a massive 17.5" Coulter blue tube dobsonian on my local CL for $800. Before I purchased it I looked at Jupiter and saw many Jovian features and took the plunge and bought it. I also did a quick star test and did notice a bit of undercorrection with my ronchi screen. I decided it was a fair buy because the scope had some features that I liked. Took it home and realized how heavy everything was. Not really transportable with one person. I knew I needed to do a weight reduction or build a truss dob in the near future. I took the mirror cell out and was glad to see the mirror in very nice shape. No chips or nicks in the glass, coating intact with no scratches ob the mirror. Was surprised to find a 9 point floating mirror cell with a stainless steel sling. very well constructed, I don't think I have seen other Coulters built like this. Glass is 17.5" x 1.625" , Pyrex with a nice bevel. Had a layer of dust so I gave the mirror a bath and gently cleaned the surface.

Attached Thumbnails

Mounts Questions & Expirience / Improving the ES Twilight II Alt-Az Mount
« on: December 29, 2017, 03:15:36 AM »
I've always enjoyed the sturdiness and simplicity of my Explore Scientific Twilight II. Even loaded up on one side with 6-inch refractor, with nothing to balance it out on the other side, it has worked surprisingly well for me. I've avoided the inevitable tracking difficulties that come with overloading an Alt-Az by focusing on easier targets requiring relatively low magnifications. For the 6 years that I've owned the mount, I've rarely used powers higher than 200x, and even then only on the moon--as easy a target for tracking as there is.
This summer I finally expanded my observing into the wondrous and delicate realm of double stars. No sooner had my newfound love blossomed than I began cursing the Twilight II. The altitude axis is simple: just balance properly, and the motion remains smooth all the way up to my scope's limits of power. But the azimuth axis remained frustratingly jerky. 10 seconds of heavenly observation would be followed by 30 seconds or more of losing the star outside of the field, watching it fly past from one end to the other, losing it again, re-centering in the finder, and so on, before finally managing to place the star just outside of the field and waiting for it to transit for 10 more gorgeous seconds of observing.
I put up with it; great doubles are worth the pain! But I thought there had to be a way to smooth things out.
I spent a short while searching various bearing companies' websites before finding what I needed: a thrust bearing, just small enough to fit inside the outer diameter of the Twilight II's lower segment, and with a large enough inner diameter to surround the post that extends up into the top segment.The KoyoNTA-3648 needle bearing cost me a whopping $7.60 on Amazon (with free shipping!). It has a static load capacity of 32,000 pounds and dynamic load capacity of 5570 pounds, so I should be okay until I achieve my ultimate goal of mounting the Yerkes refractor in my backyard.
So how does it work? Check out the video below:
This thing really spins! Even with the other half of the mount remaining (for the next couple days) unloaded, the azimuth motion is noticeably smoother. When my Stellarvue 80/9D finally arrives in the mail, I'll make another video to show the motion with both scopes mounted up.
Until then, clear skies and happy tracking!

Mounts Questions & Expirience / PEC Recording with a CGX mount.
« on: December 28, 2017, 12:09:56 AM »
I am using a CGX-L which I guidewith PHDusing Celestrons ASCM drivers. As you probably know it is controlled through the hand controller via USB.

Now I 'used' to use EQmod which I had a fairly good handle on how to record perodic error using that. But with this new to me setup I was wondering if there was and 'good' way to automate the data collection.

Or is the old manual guide while recording for 6 minutes or so still the best?

What about the huge ring gear on the CGX-L is 6 minutes enough?

Thanks in advance

Reflectors Telescopes Forum / Seaguls at the eyepiece of my Orion XX14g
« on: December 27, 2017, 10:58:02 AM »
Hello guys, I would appreciate some advice here.

A couple of months ago I bought a Paracorr type 2 to remove coma wirth my 14" f4.6 scope, the Paracorr works just fine with all my eyepieces except on the Nagler 31mm. While the view is perfect in the center of the FOV, off-axis, stars show an ugly enlarged shape, like seaguls in the outer part of the FOV.

The orientation of the enlargement of one star varies as I move the star across the edge of the FOV. If I were to draw lines to prolong the enlargement, all of them would be concentric at the center of the FOV, so the stars kind of enlarge towards the center of the FOV.

I thought the eyepiece was faulty, but I've been testing it this weekend on a 10" Meade LX200R and the views are perfect on the 31mm Nagler, so something else in my optical system is to blame.

I don't understand why this problem occurs only on my 31mm Nagler, other eyepieces like the Nikon-NAV 17mm offers perfect views in the entire FOV. The secondary mirror looks well placed and I can't see any visible deformation in my optical system.

So what is going on?

Thanks in advance!

Reflectors Telescopes Forum / Wood for making new dob base
« on: December 27, 2017, 10:52:20 AM »
I know some people with these commercially made dobs have replaced the particle board with laminate surface bases with bases made from real wood.  I have two related questions.Is there an advantage to having a real wood base over the stock one, if the stock one is still in good shape?Is there one type of wood that is preferable over other types of wood for such a project?  If yes, what type of wood do you recommend, and why?I am not into woodworking. But, I have a friend who is, and he owes me a favor. Thanks, in advance, for any good advice you can give.

In Virgo, directly between Spica and Syrma, on Google Sky, should you click on infra red you can see what seems like a black rectangle with a very bright object behind it.

The Planet X Nibiru conspiracy wackos are stating the black rectangle is google trying to cover up evidence of Nibiru. 

Of course... Nibiru is a "dark world" that is "not visible with normal light." 

As frequently as otherwise intelligent men and women ask me about the entire Nibiru garbage I figured I must have some definitive info.  I thought maybe someone here has an IR installation and has already checked it out, or could post their own images here.  I'd go out in a few hours and take look myself with the C14 / Hyperstar / Atik, and a few filters, but we've got only thick clouds tonight here.  Besides... I don't know what I'm doing with IR anyways.

The weather has been utterly dreadful for months.  When the rain and clouds haven't made celebrating hopeless, family obligations have wiped out the remaining chances.  I haven't had my telescope out - even after - to probably 8 weeks now.
During previous "low" periods, I used to spend a lot of time thinking/reading about astronomy.  Recently though, I am having trouble sustaining my mojo.  This is my first article to CN in well over a month.
Sent in my LG-H915 using Tapatalk

Pages: [1]