A reason to get up early

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 08:30 Fri 06 Dec 2013

DRT wrote:+20mins the cloud lifted. Mars was low in the sky and decidedly bright and red, but I couldn't see Daniel.

I was waving!

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 13:51 Fri 06 Dec 2013

djewesbury wrote:
DRT wrote:+20mins the cloud lifted. Mars was low in the sky and decidedly bright and red, but I couldn't see Daniel.
I was waving!

Not waving, but drowning.

Sorry, no more poetry.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 23:43 Fri 06 Dec 2013

DRT wrote:I own a Skywatcher Heritage 130p Dobsonian (purchased from that site) that I find to be easy to use and to give good results when pointed upwards. I have not pointed towards anyone's window so can't comment on its performance for watching showers of a non-astronomical nature. I bought this scope after many, many hours of research and it seems to do what it says on the tin. More research has persuaded me to purchase higher grade eyepieces which I will be road testing on Jupiter this evening.

This is a remarkably reasonable investment. And it is your tool of choice? I may have to get on to Santy.

Post by **DRT** » 23:48 Fri 06 Dec 2013

LGTrotter wrote:This is a remarkably reasonable investment. And it is your tool of choice?

I think it was very good value, but good eyepieces cost 50% of the price of the scope, each! By the time I have a decent set it will add up to around £400, which isn't too painful when compared to some other hobbies.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 23:53 Fri 06 Dec 2013

Dumb arse question time; why spend more than twice the price of the thing itself on eyepieces and why more than one?

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 23:54 Fri 06 Dec 2013

LGTrotter wrote:
DRT wrote:I own a Skywatcher Heritage 130p Dobsonian (purchased from that site) that I find to be easy to use and to give good results when pointed upwards. I have not pointed towards anyone's window so can't comment on its performance for watching showers of a non-astronomical nature. I bought this scope after many, many hours of research and it seems to do what it says on the tin. More research has persuaded me to purchase higher grade eyepieces which I will be road testing on Jupiter this evening.
This is a remarkably reasonable investment. And it is your tool of choice? I may have to get on to Santy.

Observation:
The only people I've met who say Santy are Irish. And I've lived in Ireland for 20 years. Is Santy a common term in zummerzett?

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 23:58 Fri 06 Dec 2013

djewesbury wrote:Observation:
The only people I've met who say Santy are Irish. And I've lived in Ireland for 20 years. Is Santy a common term in zummerzett?

I caught it in Brighton. Draw your own conclusions.

You haven't sent your brother home already you miserable sod?

Post by **DRT** » 00:03 Sat 07 Dec 2013

LGTrotter wrote:Dumb arse question time; why spend more than twice the price of the thing itself on eyepieces and why more than one?

I don't know whether or not you know anything about golf, but you could think of the telescope as a driver (i.e. it gets you in the game) and the eyepieces let you work with fine-tuning of distance and accuracy, just like a golfer's irons.

The telescope is a big tube with a large mirror in it. You could look at or through it all day and night without seeing a star or a planet. The eyepieces contain the lenses that focus the image captured by the telescope's mirror and allow you to focus that image so that your eye can see it clearly. Eyepieces come in different sizes to give different levels of magnification. A large, low-powered lens will give a clear view of the whole moon but will show Jupiter as a small bright dot. A small, high-powered lens will allow you to look at the edge of a crater on the moon and will allow you to see the bands of clouds on Jupiter and some of its moons. There are many sizes between the two extremes. Three or four lenses give you good options.

Post by **jdaw1** » 00:23 Sat 07 Dec 2013

But your telescope can’t see the hexagon.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 00:24 Sat 07 Dec 2013

Good clear explanation. Ta.

I have also wondered about a microscope. Is it better to look out or look in?

Out, obviously.

Post by **DRT** » 08:06 Sat 07 Dec 2013

jdaw1 wrote:But your telescope can’t see the hexagon.

My telescope not powerful enough and I would be very surprised if any earth-based scope could see that. I have yet to view Saturn.

LGTrotter wrote:Is it better to look out or look in?

I think both have their merits, and looking in would definitely be warmer than looking out.

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 21:41 Sat 07 Dec 2013

So I take it that all this chat simply means no-one has seen Ison.

Post by **DRT** » 21:46 Sat 07 Dec 2013

AHB wrote:So I take it that all this chat simply means no-one has seen Ison.

Ison is dead.
But I did see the Orion Nebula last night and it was spectacular. Unfortunately, the gap in the cloud only lasted as long as an English middle-order batsman so it was more of a glance than a detailed observation.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 22:16 Sat 07 Dec 2013

I'd have said top order batsman. Due to Bell, the middle order's average is a little higher.

Post by **DRT** » 22:48 Sat 07 Dec 2013

djewesbury wrote:I'd have said top order batsman. Due to Bell, the middle order's average is a little higher.

I think "batsman" would probably do.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 00:05 Sun 08 Dec 2013

Cook's all right, as is Root. Bell much to my chagrin has turned out well. Carberry is playing as well as any of them.

This belongs in another thread.

Post by **DRT** » 00:11 Sun 08 Dec 2013

LGTrotter wrote:This belongs in another thread.

Done.

Post by **jdaw1** » 22:31 Tue 10 Dec 2013

NASA wrote:On Dec. 10, 2013, researchers presented science results from the comet's last days at the 2013 Fall American Geophysical Union meeting in San Francisco, Calif. They described how this unique comet lost mass in advance of reaching perihelion and most likely broke up during its closest approach, as well, as summarized what this means for determining what the comet was made of.
!
When Comet ISON was first spotted in September 2012, it was relatively bright for a comet at such a great distance from the sun. Consequently, many people had high hopes it would provide a beautiful light show visible in the night sky throughout December 2013. That potential ended when Comet ISON disrupted during perihelion. However, the legacy of the comet will go on for years as scientists analyze the tremendous data set collected during ISON's journey.

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 18:14 Thu 12 Dec 2013

And of course, tomorrow and Saturday morning should be the peak of the Gemeinid meteor shower - weather forecast is for fog tomorrow and rain on Saturday morning.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 00:25 Sun 22 Dec 2013

LGTrotter wrote:
DRT wrote:I own a Skywatcher Heritage 130p Dobsonian (purchased from that site) that I find to be easy to use and to give good results when pointed upwards. I have not pointed towards anyone's window so can't comment on its performance for watching showers of a non-astronomical nature. I bought this scope after many, many hours of research and it seems to do what it says on the tin. More research has persuaded me to purchase higher grade eyepieces which I will be road testing on Jupiter this evening.
This is a remarkably reasonable investment. And it is your tool of choice? I may have to get on to Santy.

Do you need other add-ons and what might these be?

Post by **DRT** » 00:38 Sun 22 Dec 2013

My initial investment was around £150. I have since spent £300 on "bits" that significantly improve the experience. I am about to spend all of that again on a bigger tube.

The pattern is very similar to First Bottle of LBV >> First Bottle of VP >> First Case of VP >> Case of F70 >> Where Did My Money Go? >> I Need A Case of Nacional 1963.

If you are considering venturing into the world of pouring your money into the sky instead of a decanter please visit http://stargazerslounge.com/ and ask lots of questions before ploughing in

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 01:10 Sun 22 Dec 2013

DRT wrote:please visit http://stargazerslounge.com/ and ask lots of questions before ploughing in

Don't try and fob me off on the astronomers. You're stuck with me.

DRT wrote:I am about to spend all of that again on a bigger tube:

So should you buy a bigger tube in the first place?

Post by **DRT** » 01:50 Sun 22 Dec 2013

LGTrotter wrote:
DRT wrote:I am about to spend all of that again on a bigger tube:
So should you buy a bigger tube in the first place?

That depends on your budget and your expectations. A small scope like mine will give stunning views of the moon, interesting but small views of the planets and fuzzy views of DSO's (Deep Space Objects). Trading up from a £130 to a £500 tube will make all of those things better, but will not make anything look like a Hubble long-exposure spectacular view of a distant galaxy.

You will not regret buying the same scope as I have. You might regret spending 4x the price and deciding your expectations were too high.

PopulusTremula · Post by **PopulusTremula** » 09:47 Sun 22 Dec 2013

Derek,

How much extra is a motor drive to provide tracking? For astrophotography it would be quite useful but all of a sudden the techie side starts to encroach on the easy and enjoyable hobby part of astronomy and with that the costs go supernova.

On the other hand, I always found it annoying having to manually track and of course the higher the magnification the quicker the pace of the object in the eyepiece.

Sent from my GT-I9195 using Tapatalk 2

Post by **DRT** » 10:58 Sun 22 Dec 2013

The scope I am thinking of buying costs £529. The same scope with auto-tracking costs £959. I think it is probably essential to have auto-tracking if you want to get into photography but manual tracking is fine for me.

Post by **jdaw1** » 12:57 Sun 22 Dec 2013

DRT wrote:The scope I am thinking of buying costs £529. The same scope with auto-tracking costs £959. I think it is probably essential to have auto-tracking if you want to get into photography but manual tracking is fine for me.

The smugness of posting the pictures here would surely justify the price.

Post by **DRT** » 13:01 Sun 22 Dec 2013

Perhaps, but I would also have to buy a camera and lots of bits and bobs so the actual price difference would be north of £1k.

Post by **PhilW** » 17:44 Sun 22 Dec 2013

A friend of mine had a Celestron 6SE which he was very happy with; though he upgraded within 6 months, which he warns as a common problem with the hobby, and would recommend going for the 8SE if you can afford it! Good set of features including auto-setup, go-to and tracking, as well as excellent image quality. Not cheap though. He is now heavily into highly composited image creation, generated from multiple frame overlays from tracked images over several minutes, quite impressive stuff.

He also recommends checking with any local astronomy group, since once you get bitten by the bug people often upgrade several times in the first couple of years, so well worth checking their classifieds for good deals for their old scopes.

Post by **jdaw1** » 18:06 Sun 22 Dec 2013

DRT wrote:The pattern is very similar to First Bottle of LBV >> First Bottle of VP >> First Case of VP >> Case of F70 >> Where Did My Money Go? >> I Need A Case of Nacional 1963.

My stocks of N31 are critically low (i.e., below half a pipe).

Post by **DRT** » 20:29 Sun 22 Dec 2013

PhilW wrote:A friend of mine had a Celestron 6SE which he was very happy with; though he upgraded within 6 months, which he warns as a common problem with the hobby, and would recommend going for the 8SE if you can afford it! Good set of features including auto-setup, go-to and tracking, as well as excellent image quality. Not cheap though. He is now heavily into highly composited image creation, generated from multiple frame overlays from tracked images over several minutes, quite impressive stuff.

He also recommends checking with any local astronomy group, since once you get bitten by the bug people often upgrade several times in the first couple of years, so well worth checking their classifieds for good deals for their old scopes.

That does seem to be a familiar story from what I have seen on the bulletin boards, but I think I am safe because I have no personality traits or history that suggest I would become excessively obsessed with an expensive hobby and choose to spend lots of time surrounded by geeks with similar interests.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 20:40 Sun 22 Dec 2013

"My name is Derek and I'm an addict."

Post by **DRT** » 21:01 Sun 22 Dec 2013

I've just been out to look at Jupiter and I would be prepared to swear under oath that I seen the Great Red Spot. It was either that or a random reflection from my neighbours security light.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:06 Sun 22 Dec 2013

DRT wrote:my neighbours security light.

Gentlemen, should this go in the obvious place?

Post by **DRT** » 21:07 Sun 22 Dec 2013

djewesbury wrote:
DRT wrote:my neighbours security light.
Gentlemen, should this go in the obvious place?

Yes, it was a gift.

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:08 Sun 22 Dec 2013

DRT wrote:
djewesbury wrote:
DRT wrote:my neighbours security light.
Gentlemen, should this go in the obvious place?
Yes, it was a gift.

*bows in grateful acceptance*

Post by **Alex Bridgeman** » 21:51 Sun 22 Dec 2013

LGTrotter wrote:
DRT wrote:I am about to spend all of that again on a bigger tube:
So should you buy a bigger tube in the first place?

I keep getting adverts through email offering me the opportunity to get a bigger tube. Would you like me to forward these on to you?

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 21:53 Sun 22 Dec 2013

AHB wrote:
LGTrotter wrote:
DRT wrote:I am about to spend all of that again on a bigger tube:
So should you buy a bigger tube in the first place?
I keep getting adverts through email offering me the opportunity to get a bigger tube. Would you like me to forward these on to you?

Alex! I never had you down as a double-entendreist. If I had known I would have given you one.

Post by **DRT** » 21:54 Sun 22 Dec 2013

I don't have the equipment required to do good quality astro-photography, but my small telescope and a digital camera yielded this a few minutes ago...

: Jupiter_and_Europa.jpg (15.65 KiB) Viewed 8991 times

djewesbury · Post by **djewesbury** » 21:55 Sun 22 Dec 2013

That's rather wonderful. I have listened to Jupiter on a radio telescope. It's filthy.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 22:06 Sun 22 Dec 2013

"All these worlds are yours, except Europa, attempt no landings there". Arthur C Clarke, fictionally telling us to stay off. Seen any signs of a new civilisation developing there?

Post by **DRT** » 22:13 Sun 22 Dec 2013

No signs of civilisation, but the large black obelisk is still parked off to the left. I'll let you know if anything stirs.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 22:35 Fri 27 Dec 2013

Good stars tonight, bit of haze on the horizon though. Got anything for your loyal subjects tonight Derek?

Post by **DRT** » 01:03 Sat 28 Dec 2013

Very clear viewing tonight but camera skills let me down

Post by **DRT** » 17:38 Fri 03 Jan 2014

One for Owen!

: 2014-01-03 18.56.26.jpg (26.03 KiB) Viewed 8936 times

Not great but you can see a few craters around the edge of the shadow.

My Astro webcam arrives next week

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 18:38 Fri 03 Jan 2014

DRT wrote:My Astro webcam arrives next week

Thanks Derek, I though you had gone a bit quiet on the astronomical front, mind you; the weather an' all! Does the webcam mean we will be able to have a live stream of whatever you're looking at? Or are you doing one of those things where every telescope in the world looks at something for research purposes?

Post by **DRT** » 18:44 Fri 03 Jan 2014

It's a bit of an experiment. I read lots of things about people spending thousands on astro-photography equipment so that they can take pictures of planets and nebula that look like they have been drawn by a 5 year old with a crayon. If you want a photo that looks like it was taken by Hubble you need to own Hubble. I just want to find out what kind of pics I can get with a cheap option. If nothing else I should get some really good shots of the moon.

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 19:04 Fri 03 Jan 2014

I happened to notice a low moon this evening, 'frail and faint as a sickle of straw'. It might be a bit thin for your purposes, but I understand that can be an attraction.

Post by **DRT** » 19:11 Fri 03 Jan 2014

LGTrotter wrote:I happened to notice a low moon this evening, 'frail and faint as a sickle of straw'. It might be a bit thin for your purposes, but I understand that can be an attraction.

Did you notice the name of the file I uploaded, which is the date and time stamp of when it was taken

LGTrotter · Post by **LGTrotter** » 19:54 Fri 03 Jan 2014

DRT wrote:
LGTrotter wrote:I happened to notice a low moon this evening, 'frail and faint as a sickle of straw'. It might be a bit thin for your purposes, but I understand that can be an attraction.
Did you notice the name of the file I uploaded, which is the date and time stamp of when it was taken

My moon was more on it's back. Anyway they can't possibly have the same moon covering the whole country.

Post by **DRT** » 20:06 Fri 03 Jan 2014

LGTrotter wrote:My moon was more on it's back.

Are you sure it was the moon that was on its back?

PS: Camera + telescope optics = things do not quite appear as they do to the eye.