Jump to content


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Meade 16"Truss Anybody?

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
86 replies to this topic

#1 jack45

jack45

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3194
  • Joined: 07 Jul 2003

Posted 05 November 2005 - 11:15 AM

I'm getting the word that Meade has a 16"truss coming out to go along with there other new sizes. Anybody hear about it, we need spies in some of these companies so we can get information ahead of time?

How many people would wait or not buy that 12" Meade truss if they knew that a 16"truss was on the way?


Clear Skies!

#2 miniventures

miniventures

    Something Else

  • *****
  • Posts: 11262
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2003

Posted 05 November 2005 - 11:27 AM

I have heard that Meade has one in the works as well--my source is one of the large internet dealers. Would I wait to buy one? Hmmmmm don't know.

#3 RichT

RichT

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2004

Posted 05 November 2005 - 07:06 PM

Either a 12" or a 16" would be a really nice step up in aperture for me. I'd wait for the 16", but not too long. I'm looking forward to some reviews on the 12".

#4 Scanning4Comets

Scanning4Comets

    Markus

  • *****
  • Posts: 14341
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2004

Posted 05 November 2005 - 08:38 PM

Word is out that GSO is making a 16" version of there telescopes as well.
-----------------------
Mark
12" F/5 reflector
30mm 1rpd, (comin' soon)
20mm Nag T2 (still negotiating a deal)
14mm Meade series 4000 UWA
10mm Pentax XW,9on the way here)
2" GSO Barlow

#5 Starkler

Starkler

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 785
  • Joined: 04 Nov 2005

Posted 06 November 2005 - 02:28 AM

The word from Lee Andrews is that the 16" GSO truss dob will be available in Australia in March 2006

#6 Ptarmigan

Ptarmigan

    Lagopus lagopus

  • *****
  • Posts: 3853
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2004

Posted 06 November 2005 - 02:55 AM

Sound cool to me. Maybe they can make 20+ inch Truss telescope. :cool:

#7 Relativist

Relativist

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4613
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 06 November 2005 - 05:14 AM

If this is true, I will be SOOOOOO thankfull that at least 1 " should I upgrade from 10" to 12" " thread will not be posted. :praying:

#8 BluewaterObserva

BluewaterObserva

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • ***--
  • Posts: 5809
  • Joined: 18 May 2004

Posted 06 November 2005 - 09:02 AM

It makes sense. I was surprised the 16" was not part of their intial offerings in the lightbridge line.

#9 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----

Posted 06 November 2005 - 01:34 PM

Post deleted by Phisher2112

#10 Joe Osborn

Joe Osborn

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2005

Posted 06 November 2005 - 01:54 PM

If Mead does make a "stacking" 16" TD, and someone in my area buys one, and if I can view through it, and I like it(that is the mirror is of good quality), then I would buy one.

But if it is anything like Truss they are marketing now, Past board rocker, non-stacking, I'd have to pass.

Joe

#11 rogerandgarf

rogerandgarf

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 334
  • Joined: 01 Jun 2005

Posted 06 November 2005 - 10:51 PM

I'm NOT listening, I'M NOT I'M NOT......

#12 snorkler

snorkler

    Aperture Aficionado

  • *****
  • Posts: 11035
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2004

Posted 06 November 2005 - 11:10 PM

Joe,

The rocker box construction on the Meade truss Dobs is apparently plywood on the deluxe models. It's hard to tell whether the standard model uses particle board or plywood - conflicting information.

Other conflicting information - the primary and secondary mirror tubes are "metal" according to Meade, OPT, and Anacortes, but aluminum according to Astronomics.

#13 ForgottenMObject

ForgottenMObject

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3666
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2004

Posted 07 November 2005 - 08:06 AM

We also wonder who makes the optics - some evidence seems to indicate that they may be Meade-made and not produced overseas.

A 16" makes sense. There has been word out that a 16" Asian Dob would show up next year. That may be of the same line as these or a similar, competing line, but it does seem logical that it would be a truss-tube and not a huge solid-tube behemoth.

Plywood instead of particleboard on the higher-end versions of the Meade Dobs? Nice...

#14 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 24971
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003

Posted 07 November 2005 - 10:42 AM

Andrews has been given the exclusive distribution rights for the Guan Sheng 16" dob (I can't remember whether in Australia or England, sorry), according to a press release, so, obviously, GSO will be producing a 16" dob.
Who will distribute it in the US? We'll probably know some time early next year.

#15 Joe Osborn

Joe Osborn

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2005

Posted 07 November 2005 - 11:30 AM

Joe,

The rocker box construction on the Meade truss Dobs is apparently plywood on the deluxe models. It's hard to tell whether the standard model uses particle board or plywood - conflicting information.

Other conflicting information - the primary and secondary mirror tubes are "metal" according to Meade, OPT, and Anacortes, but aluminum according to Astronomics.


I think that Astronomics has been reliable, and AL tubes make sense, so that is probably what they are.

I could still put a three piece 16" truss in my car, but it sure would be nice if it stacked and took less room.

Well we will have to see if the rumors are true, and see what the end product is.

My planes were too upgrade to the Discovery 15" in about two years, by then we will know more.

I got to tell you that I have an excellent 10" mirror from Discovery, and it would make it difficult for me to change vendors, even at a very good price.

Joe

#16 trainsktg

trainsktg

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4957
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2005

Posted 07 November 2005 - 11:54 AM

My understanding is that the Meade dob mirrors were always of good, decent quality, just the rest of the scope was cheap plastic and cardboard trash (I should know, I have one...everything mechanical has been replaced). However without playing the guessing game with the new ones, since Meade (nor Orion, GSO or Celestron for that matter) never actually lists wavefront error numbers on their specifications, exactly what does "diffraction limited optics" mean in their book? I would feel much better knowing my mirror was absolutely 1/6, 1/8 or even 1/4 wave instead of just having a feel-good "Meade Optics Inside" sticker stuck to the side of the tube. Although they look slick, has anyone been able to find specs that have meaning?

Keith

#17 Joe Osborn

Joe Osborn

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2005

Posted 07 November 2005 - 12:38 PM

Well my understanding, and it is limited, is that "Diffraction Limited" is 1/4 wave. I also understand that under average seeing conditions this is about as much as is needed as the conditions will not allow the Telescope to perform beyond this. That is the Telescope can can not deliver because of the conditions. Having said that, I understand that in Nebulas etc. that we probably could not tell the differance, visualy, between a 1/4 wave and 1/10 wave, except that the 1/10 wave will deliver better contrast then the 1/4 wave.

This is what I mean when I say that my 10" is excellent. I have consistantly better contrast then I see in many, many different scopes, and it appears that it is not just my opinion, as I am told this by many people who look through my scope as well.

Joe

#18 h0ughy

h0ughy

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2005

Posted 07 November 2005 - 08:31 PM

The word from Lee Andrews is that the 16" GSO truss dob will be available in Australia in March 2006


Hi Guys I am new here too, from the www.iceinspace.com.au forum. I have some more news of the 16" which you might consider. Andrews Comms will be inporting 100 units into Australia by march 2006.

I hope that you guys here will appreciate the fact that us Aussies will be getting a go at something before your Northerners for a change :)

#19 Relativist

Relativist

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4613
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 07 November 2005 - 10:37 PM

Wow, I like what I'm hearing so far. Some people have mentioned things like stacking features. Personally I am not hung up on all of that, and would prefer not to have the bottom oversized just so it stacks. Sounds like it will be cheap big apeture. Also, since they are using a tube up at the secondary, we might be able to put in curved veins. This is going to get interesting.

#20 Tim13

Tim13

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2004

Posted 08 November 2005 - 01:09 AM

The 12 to 18 inch dob market is ripe for the picking if someone can put together a reasonable package, at an attractive cost. It looks like Meade is going to be the first major manufacturer to give it a go.

It's kind of funny how things go. For the past 18 months, everyone has been caught up in the 80-100mm apo refractor frenzy. There are more quality small aperture apos available today than you can shake a stick at, and now it looks like the mass produced truss dob is going to be "the next big thing."

This is personally a bad thing for me. With an 80mm apo, 100mm achro, and 8 inch SCT, the last piece to the collection will be a largish dob. I've been casually looking at the plain vanilla Orion 12 inch offering lately, but not being seriously in the market yet, I'm hoping for the Meade 16 inch rumors to pan out. I know that there will be a large dob in my future within 18 to 24 months, the question is which one. The 16 inch would fit the bill very nicely.

Tim

#21 Joe Osborn

Joe Osborn

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2005

Posted 08 November 2005 - 01:42 AM

Wow, I like what I'm hearing so far. Some people have mentioned things like stacking features. Personally I am not hung up on all of that, and would prefer not to have the bottom oversized just so it stacks. Sounds like it will be cheap big apeture. Also, since they are using a tube up at the secondary, we might be able to put in curved veins. This is going to get interesting.


Well when you consider the size of a 16" scope set up in your house, or broken down into three parts, you may wish it stacked. So you would have this monster thing around to save a few inches in the foot print?

Joe

#22 Relativist

Relativist

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4613
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 08 November 2005 - 01:55 AM

well, lets say it looks similar to the current meade truss dobs. I would store a 16" truss by putting the secondary tube on top of the main tube. The trusses would go in a closet somewhere. Also, since they are using a metal tube I don't think mechanically it's a good idea to oversize it to much. In fact I wonder how much torque such a tube can take, and if there will be any noticable flexture.

#23 Joe Osborn

Joe Osborn

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 491
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2005

Posted 08 November 2005 - 09:03 AM

well, lets say it looks similar to the current meade truss dobs. I would store a 16" truss by putting the secondary tube on top of the main tube. The trusses would go in a closet somewhere. Also, since they are using a metal tube I don't think mechanically it's a good idea to oversize it to much. In fact I wonder how much torque such a tube can take, and if there will be any noticable flexture.


You have a point there, and another reason I do not like it. They took a split tube DOB, cut out the center, and added tubes. The primary section must remain large inorder for the bearings to mount in the proper place for balance, so you still have this huge rocker box, huge tube, a second tube with no place to put it. and a bag of poles. Once you break it down to transport back home, you have to leave it apart and wonder what to do with it or put it back together again. You can as you suggest stack the top tube on to the bottom tube, but how are you going to secure it?

Lets see now, I have two scopes now that I have a hard time stowing, add this third one, build a room to stow them in, buy a vehicle to transport in, move to the country so I can use them better. Sounds better already!

Joe

#24 Relativist

Relativist

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4613
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 08 November 2005 - 11:47 AM

Well my first thought is I can use some velcro and a round plastic or thin wood seperator. But untill I see one in person I don't know what the solution is. It shouldn't be that difficult...

#25 erik

erik

    telescope surgeon

  • *****
  • Posts: 24811
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2004

Posted 08 November 2005 - 10:13 PM

well, lets say it looks similar to the current meade truss dobs. I would store a 16" truss by putting the secondary tube on top of the main tube. The trusses would go in a closet somewhere. Also, since they are using a metal tube I don't think mechanically it's a good idea to oversize it to much. In fact I wonder how much torque such a tube can take, and if there will be any noticable flexture.


You have a point there, and another reason I do not like it. They took a split tube DOB, cut out the center, and added tubes. The primary section must remain large inorder for the bearings to mount in the proper place for balance, so you still have this huge rocker box, huge tube, a second tube with no place to put it. and a bag of poles. Once you break it down to transport back home, you have to leave it apart and wonder what to do with it or put it back together again. You can as you suggest stack the top tube on to the bottom tube, but how are you going to secure it?

Lets see now, I have two scopes now that I have a hard time stowing, add this third one, build a room to stow them in, buy a vehicle to transport in, move to the country so I can use them better. Sounds better already!

Joe

i agree on several of your points. the length of the bottom section is a big detriment, IMO. as i mentioned earlier, it also makes modifying it more difficult, because the truss tubes are so short. it is a good start, but hopefully, meade will see the shortcomings and introduce an improved model in the future... :)


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.



Recent Reviews


Imaging/Sketching Contest






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics