Jump to content


Photo

WOW!!!! get a load of this. *DELETED* *DELETED*

  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 donnie3

donnie3

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2712
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2004
  • Loc: bartlesville oklahoma

Posted 15 February 2013 - 11:23 PM

Post deleted by donnie3

#2 GlennLeDrew

GlennLeDrew

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10712
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Posted 15 February 2013 - 11:58 PM

I wonder how long the slip bearings will last? The mass of all that metal must result in a bit more intimate contact than desired between the sleeves.

#3 frozen.kryo

frozen.kryo

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 146
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2011
  • Loc: East of the Sun, West of the Moon

Posted 16 February 2013 - 12:27 AM

Good thing he's permanently mounted. It's very easy to strip out the altitude alignment threads with that much weight. Lol! 55 lbs of counterweights. Must be close to 100lbs total for that setup.

#4 stevew

stevew

    Now I've done it

  • -----
  • Posts: 4344
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2006
  • Loc: British Columbia Canada

Posted 16 February 2013 - 01:58 AM

He should be reported for cruel and unusual punishment to an equatorial mount.


#5 highfnum

highfnum

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2412
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2006
  • Loc: NE USA

Posted 16 February 2013 - 04:51 AM

Does it vibrate on those bolts?

#6 rmollise

rmollise

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15584
  • Joined: 06 Jul 2007

Posted 16 February 2013 - 08:02 AM

Good thing he's permanently mounted. It's very easy to strip out the altitude alignment threads with that much weight. Lol! 55 lbs of counterweights. Must be close to 100lbs total for that setup.


It's not going to strip the bolts, nor is it going to wear out bearings or bearing surfaces. A mount is not used enough, in harsh enough conditions to worry about stuff like that. Four minute unguided subs, though? I'd have to see the proof on that. :lol:

#7 Madratter

Madratter

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6434
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2013

Posted 16 February 2013 - 09:17 AM

Is that the Shorty 80 on there? If so, maybe the shorty 80 might be too much on my Powerstar III C-8 as the guide scope. That would be too bad since that is actually cheaper than the Deluxe 50 guide package Orion is selling.

#8 jgraham

jgraham

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 13766
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Miami Valley Astronomical Society

Posted 16 February 2013 - 09:35 AM

Roller bearings will be okay. If they are Teflon (or any other polymer) sleeves the Teflon will creep. A catastrophic fracture is a real possibility as well. It'll be fun while it lasts. I've had a scope drop off of a mount before. That's not a sound that you want to hear.

#9 rmollise

rmollise

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15584
  • Joined: 06 Jul 2007

Posted 16 February 2013 - 10:06 AM

Roller bearings will be okay. If they are Teflon (or any other polymer) sleeves the Teflon will creep. A catastrophic fracture is a real possibility as well. It'll be fun while it lasts. I've had a scope drop off of a mount before. That's not a sound that you want to hear.


For starters, this mount does not use Teflon bearings on its RA axis, and the RA axis is where most of the action is. I've never seen an OTA drop off a mount due to a bearing failure, and am not sure how that would happen. Again, a mount is not the engine on your car. It is exposed to much less stress. Would this load for a CG5 be my choice for imaging? No, but it's not going to BLOW UP because of some possible "bearing failure." ;)

#10 RobertED

RobertED

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3199
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2003
  • Loc: Smithfield, RI

Posted 16 February 2013 - 10:12 AM

It IS a thing of beauty, though!!! :flower:

#11 donnie3

donnie3

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2712
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2004
  • Loc: bartlesville oklahoma

Posted 16 February 2013 - 05:32 PM

need some help please! i was not suppose to use someone elses photo on a post ( per modarator) now im trying to delete it and im having not results. ive sent the modarator a private message for help on this subject but no reply. thanks, donnie

#12 junomike

junomike

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1905
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 16 February 2013 - 06:53 PM

Ok, how about a "link" to what ya guys are all talkin 'bout!

Mike

#13 stevew

stevew

    Now I've done it

  • -----
  • Posts: 4344
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2006
  • Loc: British Columbia Canada

Posted 16 February 2013 - 07:33 PM

Ok, how about a "link" to what ya guys are all talkin 'bout!

Mike

It was a picture of a C11 with what looked like an Orion 80ED piggybacked on it, plus finder etc, mounted on a CG5 with 5 11lb counter weights.

#14 stevew

stevew

    Now I've done it

  • -----
  • Posts: 4344
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2006
  • Loc: British Columbia Canada

Posted 16 February 2013 - 07:43 PM

need some help please! i was not suppose to use someone elses photo on a post ( per modarator) now im trying to delete it and im having not results. ive sent the modarator a private message for help on this subject but no reply. thanks, donnie

Donnie,
It looks like the moderator has already deleted the image.
No worries.

#15 azure1961p

azure1961p

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10384
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2009
  • Loc: USA

Posted 16 February 2013 - 11:06 PM

How would anyone know whose photo it was and why was it questioned at all? Was there anything derogatory or misleading? I'm trying to grasp the red flag that led to this. A pic of a scope without copyright permission?

Pete

#16 korborh

korborh

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 804
  • Joined: 29 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Arizona

Posted 16 February 2013 - 11:23 PM

Just a nice photo of a seemingly overloaded CG5. It should not have been deleted. Who objected to this photo? It was good to know what folks are loading up the CG5 with.

#17 Cotts

Cotts

    Just Wondering

  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Toronto, Ontario

Posted 17 February 2013 - 12:40 AM

OK. Let me try to sort this out.
1. The picture was, by the OP's own admission, culled from somewhere on the internet (that it was from some other part of CN is immaterial - it was not the OP's own work). The posting of pictures here that are not your own is a violation of the TOS. If anyone wants to post such a picture the correct way to do so is to post a LINK to the picture.
2. I did not delete anything. The OP did so. I locked the thread briefly earlier this afternoon in order to consult with my fellow Mods to make sure I handled the thing correctly. I believe I did so. Then I returned the thread to Cats and Casses. I asked the OP to remove the picture (using the edit feature) and to post a link to it instead. Then I went off-line for a few hours. The OP then deleted his first post entirely - not at all what was asked of him. So now the picture is gone from the thread and, as some have pointed out, the thread lacks any meaning without the picture.

The lesson here is for everyone to try to become more familiar with the TOS here on Cloudy Nights.

Dave

#18 korborh

korborh

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 804
  • Joined: 29 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Arizona

Posted 17 February 2013 - 12:45 AM

Dave, thanks for the clarification. Yes a link would have been the correct thing to do.

#19 azure1961p

azure1961p

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10384
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2009
  • Loc: USA

Posted 17 February 2013 - 08:59 AM

Ok thanks!

Pete






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics