Jump to content


Photo

TDM for Paramount ME!

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 Chris Purves

Chris Purves

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 132
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Wimbledon, London

Posted 10 October 2012 - 02:27 PM

Hi Guys,

Seems there is now an aftermarket encoder for the Paramount ME available from TDM.

http://mda-telescoop...d=78&Itemid=110

Not quite clear from the instructions if you can still through the mount cable - looks like it should be fine.

Couldn't work out the pricing though.

I suppose the timing also sucks a little given the new ME 2 just announced although I guess it adds value back to the ones many of us have.

Chris

#2 Chris Purves

Chris Purves

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 132
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Wimbledon, London

Posted 10 October 2012 - 03:11 PM

This from the SB forum.

Yikes!
Step one of the installation procedure on this web page is very disconcerting. 

Are the manufacturers of this product aware that the "circular cap" they recommend removing is integral to the mount's structural design and integrity, and defines the preload of the right ascension bearings? 

This is akin to replacing the lug nuts on the wheel of your car.  If the replacement components are not designed properly, and the correct torque applied when tightening the replacement component, the results can be catastrophic!

Daniel R. Bisque Software Bisque 912 12th St Golden, CO 80401 USA

#3 wolfman_4_ever

wolfman_4_ever

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1245
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2011
  • Loc: El Segundo, Ca, So. Cal

Posted 10 October 2012 - 05:25 PM

Lol!

Typical manufactures response. Is it like putting 22's on a car with stock 16" rims? How about oil weights?

Don't put in a polar scope! It may twist the torque specs on the flux capacitor!

#4 jmiele

jmiele

    Patron Saint?

  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2010

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:58 PM

Dave, Do you have an ME? I do and I've got to say, given their performance I can't think of ANY reason why they would require a "quick fix work around for a poor performing mount" like TMD. (I'm sure the radar will any second go off on Melmac and Alph will be along to punch me in the nose for that one.) :) Is there something about sub arc second PEC and < 10 arc second all sky pointing that requires improvement? Oh and zero backlash....all right out of the box.

Chris, I have found the Bisque team to be super responsive and very skilled in the support of their mounts. Once again, for me, the quandary is WHY? You have a super mount according to your sig line. Top imagers and universities find it more than adequate to support their imaging needs and scientific endeavors.

Best, Joe

#5 korborh

korborh

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 858
  • Joined: 29 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Arizona

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:05 PM

Oh and zero backlash....all right out of the box.


Surely you are exaggerating :). Backlash cannot be zero and is not. SB specs it at < 2" , which is noticeable if you are guiding sub-arcsec.

#6 wolfman_4_ever

wolfman_4_ever

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1245
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2011
  • Loc: El Segundo, Ca, So. Cal

Posted 11 October 2012 - 12:10 AM

Dave, Do you have an ME? I do and I've got to say, given their performance I can't think of ANY reason why they would require a "quick fix work around for a poor performing mount" like TMD. (I'm sure the radar will any second go off on Melmac and Alph will be along to punch me in the nose for that one.) :) Is there something about sub arc second PEC and < 10 arc second all sky pointing that requires improvement? Oh and zero backlash....all right out of the box.

Chris, I have found the Bisque team to be super responsive and very skilled in the support of their mounts. Once again, for me, the quandary is WHY? You have a super mount according to your sig line. Top imagers and universities find it more than adequate to support their imaging needs and scientific endeavors.

Best, Joe


I use to have Windows ME.. Threw it in the trash.. Too much backlash from the public..

It does not have sub arc second PE.. It says right on the webpage, max +-7 That's a wide swing from sub-arc second.. I guess you have to be lucky at what you get?
And that's the same as the MEII!!

10 arcsecond all sky pointing?? From the mount?? Notta! From the TheSkyX? Why yes!! how do I know this? Cause i run it with my cge-pro! And I get less than 4!

Have you looking in the Bisque forums? Ya there support is great but don't catch Daniel on a bad day.. see above quote as an example..

I've put my logs on this forum with the TDM.. I've also said i will put my mount up against any... ANY!!! gear driven mount and smoke it!

So now time to go roll a fatty!

And that's a walk off!!

#7 korborh

korborh

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 858
  • Joined: 29 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Arizona

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:07 AM

Yeah, its not like if the bearing pre-load was changed that the mount will spin out of control and destroy the observatory or something catastrophic :slap:

#8 Chris Purves

Chris Purves

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 132
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Wimbledon, London

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:53 AM

Can anyone explain what bearing pre-load is ? I tried the most obvious sources but was left non the wiser.

To Joe - I am guessing SB think the ME can be improved upon as the new version comes with optional encoders on both axes.

Chris

#9 frolinmod

frolinmod

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1891
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Southern California

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:53 AM

According to this document, the required preload for ME declination shaft nut is 14-16 lbs. Daniel says it's 16lbs for the RA.

Chris, the name of the company that makes the Paramount line of mounts is "Software Bisque." :p

Dave, my ME has 3 arc second peak-to-peak PE out of the box without PEC programmed. It is sub arc second with PEC programmed.

To me it doesn't appear that Software Bisque went anywhere near out on a limb with its published ME specifications. It appears they left themselves a huge cushion. The ME2 specifications may have a similarly huge cushion. Or maybe I just have a particularly good ME, Software Bisque will forget everything it learned over the years, and the ME2 will stink. We'll know soon.

#10 Chris Purves

Chris Purves

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 132
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Wimbledon, London

Posted 11 October 2012 - 02:32 AM

Chris, the name of the company that makes the Paramount line of mounts is "Software Bisque."


Thanks for reminding me although you can see from my sig I do own one and so did know this :)

OK fair enough - I did refer to them as Paramount after all.


Cheers
Chris

#11 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5631
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 11 October 2012 - 06:38 AM

Yeah I don't understand the value of a TDM on a mount that is sub-1" with PE enabled.

Really I don't.

On a mount which is 5" peak-to-peak with PE enabled, then it makes sense.

#12 jmiele

jmiele

    Patron Saint?

  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2010

Posted 11 October 2012 - 08:31 AM

wolfman, Dan's frustration is because people fail to use the available resources to understand their equipment. Folks don't read the manual and use the knowledge base to get answers and they are repeatedly asked. Take a look for a problem previously answered before just posting for for a new question.

As for throwing an ME in the trash, where do you live again. :) Seriously, if you fully understand the operation of an ME, sub arc second performance is a given. If you feel that TDM is required on an ME - you do NOT understand an the operation of an ME... period.

Joe

#13 jmiele

jmiele

    Patron Saint?

  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2010

Posted 11 October 2012 - 08:38 AM

To Joe - I am guessing SB think the ME can be improved upon as the new version comes with optional encoders on both axes.

Chris


On axis and/or secondary encoders offer "potential" places for improvement - yes. However, nothing changes the fact that the performance of the ME mounts is amazing as it stands. That fact is well documented by the 1000's of images, taken by both scientific and weekend warrior communities.

Best, Joe

#14 Ray Gralak

Ray Gralak

    Vendor (PEMPro)

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 381
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2008

Posted 11 October 2012 - 08:52 AM

Yeah I don't understand the value of a TDM on a mount that is sub-1" with PE enabled.

Really I don't.

On a mount which is 5" peak-to-peak with PE enabled, then it makes sense.

Not to mention that using the TDM would totally eliminate the possibility of using ProTrack. With Protrack enabled I think that the TDM would keep trying to adjust the RA tracking rate back to sidereal. IMO the TDM would be a waste for this mount or any mount that has low corrected PE and a tracking rate correction feature.

-Ray

#15 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5631
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 11 October 2012 - 08:59 AM

Here's some news...

The Heidenhain ERN 180 encoder used in the TDM costs 220 EUR retail.

Seeing as the interpolator box is purely electronics, makes the $1800 price tag of the TDM even that more difficult to swallow..

#16 jmiele

jmiele

    Patron Saint?

  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2010

Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:15 PM

So we agree Ray. :) BTW, I can't wait to see what your new software can do with an additional set of encoders on my new AP1600GTO. :) I want to compare performance against Pro Track.

#17 Ray Gralak

Ray Gralak

    Vendor (PEMPro)

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 381
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2008

Posted 11 October 2012 - 04:17 PM

So we agree Ray. :) BTW, I can't wait to see what your new software can do with an additional set of encoders on my new AP1600GTO. :) I want to compare performance against Pro Track.

You won't need encoders to do that comparison. You could use any AP mount with the GTOCP3 control box. It could be that all of the AP mounts might all of sudden become more valuable in the used marketplace (and other mounts, not so much).

-Ray

#18 jmiele

jmiele

    Patron Saint?

  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2010

Posted 12 October 2012 - 11:17 AM

Not to get off track - much, but does that mean there will not be tracking drive correction at release? Because that is one of the several reasons I purchased one with the secondary encoders. Thanks in advance.. Joe

#19 Ray Gralak

Ray Gralak

    Vendor (PEMPro)

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 381
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2008

Posted 12 October 2012 - 11:37 AM

Not to get off track - much, but does that mean there will not be tracking drive correction at release? Because that is one of the several reasons I purchased one with the secondary encoders. Thanks in advance.. Joe

Of course there is going to be tracking rate drive correction for the encoders. It's there for the first generation encoder system in the 3600. It will be there in the second generation encoder systems in the 1600. My point was simply that you don't need to have encoders to make use of tracking rate correction in APCC. Any AP mount with a GTOCP3 controller will do.

-Ray

#20 jmiele

jmiele

    Patron Saint?

  • *****
  • Posts: 4331
  • Joined: 04 Dec 2010

Posted 12 October 2012 - 06:43 PM

Just making sure. :)

Joe






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics