Jump to content


Photo

You can start speculating - New LX850 Announced

  • Please log in to reply
91 replies to this topic

#76 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5719
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:01 PM

IMHO you need the laptop anyway to drive your CCD.

the only use case for not bringing a laptop is if you're using a DSLR. which is limited in terms of maximum exposure time because it's not cooled.

if you're taking 4-8 minute DSLR subs, then most of these mounts are massive overkill.

#77 Bowmoreman

Bowmoreman

    Clear enough skies

  • *****
  • Posts: 9162
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Bolton, MA

Posted 17 January 2013 - 12:40 PM

Gentle reminder to all... NOT directed at any given poster...

lets try to keep on original topic: the 850... and avoid drifts off topic!

thanks for understanding!

#78 OzAndrewJ

OzAndrewJ

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2010

Posted 17 January 2013 - 05:02 PM

Gday Pak

The Starlock's claim to fame is that it communicates DIRECTLY with the motor controllers which is supposed to somehow improve tracking.



This has been discussed before, but i would like to reclarify.
After looking at the initial code,
( and assuming it hasnt changed drastically meantime )
the Starlock does NOT directly talk to the motor "controllers",
it just issues standard serial pulseguide commands,
which then get processed as and when possible.
Where the big innovation appears to be is
code has been added to the telescope side
to allow genuine "standalone" two way comms
between the mount and the StarLock lump.
Ie the scope can independently control when and what Starlock does
based on whatever else is happening,
thus avoiding clashes when third party operations interrupt guiding.
I'm sure there are some extra smarts in the StarLock end of things too,
but as to DIRECT motor "control", nup.

Andrew Johansen Melbourne Australia

#79 galaxy_jason

galaxy_jason

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 22 May 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 17 January 2013 - 09:39 PM

However as has been discussed quite a bit, the focal length of the guide scope vs. the OTA are at such a disparity that the guiding accuracy is limited.

---------------

Jason Ware straight out said that there was a lot of flexure in the system


Not if the sensor on the guide scope has very fine pixels.

I didn't say there was a lot of flexure in the system. I said. I believe there was some mirror movement. The rest of the system looks very good.

As for the mirror movement, I am currently working with a 14" where this has been addressed. Its looking really good.

#80 galaxy_jason

galaxy_jason

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 22 May 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 17 January 2013 - 09:44 PM

But it doesn't matter! I've produced hundreds of publication quality, perfectly guided photos with an RCX 12" that has a corrected PE of about 10".


What is the average achievable star FWHM in arc-seconds in long-exp (10+ min) *RAW* subs (calibrated/linear-stretched only)? That would be needed for proper quantification and comparison of the telescope system. Are these available to peruse?



Meaningless in the seeing we have been having. For example, tonight the best FOCUS (two sec exposure) FWHM I can get is around 3" in a 14" LX850. However, in a ten minute sub that is only growing to about 3.8" with no trailing. Starlock is working as advertised.

#81 galaxy_jason

galaxy_jason

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 22 May 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 17 January 2013 - 09:52 PM

Gday Pak

After looking at the initial code,


Considerable code changes in various areas since the initial release.

#82 Pak

Pak

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 189
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2012
  • Loc: The Great Arc

Posted 17 January 2013 - 10:28 PM

Sorry Jason I didn't mean to misquote you. I was reading between the lines. Or trying too. I thought you mentioned having the Starlock on the saddle introduced flexure that was addressed by moving the Starlock onto the top of the OTA. It was that to which I was referring.

However as has been discussed quite a bit, the focal length of the guide scope vs. the OTA are at such a disparity that the guiding accuracy is limited.

---------------

Jason Ware straight out said that there was a lot of flexure in the system


Not if the sensor on the guide scope has very fine pixels.

I didn't say there was a lot of flexure in the system. I said. I believe there was some mirror movement. The rest of the system looks very good.

As for the mirror movement, I am currently working with a 14" where this has been addressed. Its looking really good.



#83 OzAndrewJ

OzAndrewJ

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2010

Posted 17 January 2013 - 10:47 PM

Gday Jason

> Gday Pak

> After looking at the initial code,

Considerable code changes in various areas since the initial release.



Yep, seen some of it ;)
but none of what i have seen so far, ( up to 1.0k ), tells me they have changed all the code to allow StarLock to talk "DIRECTLY" to the motors, which is what i was addressing.
To do that would require a rewrite of Starlocks comms and a complete replacement of the electronics inside the LX850 ( as the LX800 used basically the same cards as the LX200s and hence the motor cards are controlled by the main motherboard ).
I hardly think that change will have happened in the timeframe given.
If you send me a copy of the latest rom, i can check it out fairly quickly.
If not, it wont take long to confirm once the scopes are out in the wild. :cool:

Andrew Johansen Melbourne Australia

#84 galaxy_jason

galaxy_jason

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 22 May 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 17 January 2013 - 10:48 PM

Sorry Jason I didn't mean to misquote you. I was reading between the lines. Or trying too. I thought you mentioned having the Starlock on the saddle introduced flexure that was addressed by moving the Starlock onto the top of the OTA. It was that to which I was referring.


Good point, thanks. I did move it to the tube. I think it made a bit of difference but I think the majority of the movement I was seeing was mirror. The guys at the factory have compared it in both places and they have not seen much of a difference.

#85 galaxy_jason

galaxy_jason

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 22 May 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:43 PM

Andrew we are on version Z :)

#86 galaxy_jason

galaxy_jason

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 22 May 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:49 PM


Latest code version.
14" f8
2845mm f.l.
10 minute sub in HA.
Average to Poor CSC seeing.
800x....

http://galaxyphoto.c...k_track1_17.jpg

#87 galaxy_jason

galaxy_jason

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 22 May 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 17 January 2013 - 11:53 PM

Actually the FWHM is a bit lower than shown. Just realized I forgot to set the image scale for the 14" and check the "arc seconds" box so it was reading in pixels. I think that is just over 2" if I did the math right.

#88 OzAndrewJ

OzAndrewJ

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2010

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:25 AM

Gday Jason

Andrew we are on version Z



Damn, i was hoping for version "X" :grin:

Andrew Johansen Melbourne Australia

PS Does hi precision pointing/tracking near Venus work OK ????

#89 galaxy_jason

galaxy_jason

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 22 May 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:33 AM

We have already been through version X. It had a problem with Uranus. Just kidding.

I haven't tested that but I believe the software keeps track of the planet locations.

#90 OzAndrewJ

OzAndrewJ

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2010

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:39 AM

Gday Jason

I haven't tested that but I believe the software keeps track of the planet locations.



I saw the new code to exclude the bright planets and moon in 1.0k, but if i read the code correctly, it had used Earths data for Venus, hence my suspicion of if the system worked properly near Venus.
All will come out in the wash :cool:

Andrew Johansen Melbourne Australia

#91 n2dpsky

n2dpsky

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 13
  • Joined: 01 May 2012

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:39 AM

Nice image. Perfectly shaped star, especially for 2800mm fl. Thanks, Jason.

#92 galaxy_jason

galaxy_jason

    Vendor

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 258
  • Joined: 22 May 2007
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 18 January 2013 - 12:52 AM

2845 :)






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics