Jump to content


Photo

Setting circles

  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

#1 js1976

js1976

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 27 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Madison, MS

Posted 21 April 2014 - 07:59 PM

How many of you use setting circles to navigate with a dob? Appears to be an affordable way for a beginner to navigate vs a push or go to. All you do is level the base and line up with Polaris correct?

#2 js1976

js1976

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 27 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Madison, MS

Posted 21 April 2014 - 08:05 PM

Looking at an Apertura 10...would you go with the pre installed circles or the halo?

#3 beatlejuice

beatlejuice

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1664
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2011
  • Loc: Hamilton, ON,Canada

Posted 21 April 2014 - 08:54 PM

Looking at an Apertura 10...would you go with the pre installed circles or the halo?



Also get the levelling feet and you would want to buy a digital inclinometer.

Or you can do the circles on your own and not get the halo.

This Degree circle thread should keep you busy for a couple of hours. :grin:

Eric

#4 js1976

js1976

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 27 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Madison, MS

Posted 21 April 2014 - 09:11 PM

If you get the halo it comes with leveling feet, and thanks for the link. I'm sure it will keep me busy!

#5 js1976

js1976

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 52
  • Joined: 27 Dec 2012
  • Loc: Madison, MS

Posted 21 April 2014 - 09:20 PM

Ok, I was thumbing through that thread and I'm confused! Do you set your scope based on Polaris or magnetic north?

#6 cbwerner

cbwerner

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 1615
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Maidens, VA

Posted 21 April 2014 - 09:36 PM

True north, which Polaris almost is. You should be able to get a chart to show Polaris' offset from North (angle and direction based on when you look), and there are offsets for true north when using a compass, based on your location. Visually, you just need to get close though unless you are relying on DSCs for fainter or harder to find objects.

#7 rlmxracer

rlmxracer

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 325
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2011
  • Loc: Motocross Mecca (Riverside) , CA

Posted 21 April 2014 - 11:03 PM

I've had great luck with just leveling the mount and using the digital inclinometer alone. I get the current altitude from sky safari then move the scope in azimuth to the general area. Using this method works very well for me and has actually taught me to star hope fairly well.

#8 kfiscus

kfiscus

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2297
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Albert Lea, MN, USA

Posted 22 April 2014 - 12:18 AM

They're selling the Halo with an inclinometer included now. I'm thinking about getting one.

#9 orion61

orion61

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4829
  • Joined: 20 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Birthplace James T Kirk

Posted 22 April 2014 - 06:15 PM

You can find ANYTHING the expensive Computerixed Go-To scopes with 140,000 objects can with DSS!
Plus your scope is not "locked" in position and you can
Star Hop anywhere with it without losing alignment!
Downfall is that it is Push too, but you burn 5 calories every object you "push to" ha ha... Do you think you could hit
500 objects a night??

#10 DavidOpticsmart

DavidOpticsmart

    Vendor (Opticsmart.com)

  • -----
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 319
  • Joined: 15 Aug 2011
  • Loc: Alabama

Posted 22 April 2014 - 06:44 PM

Ok, I was thumbing through that thread and I'm confused! Do you set your scope based on Polaris or magnetic north?


You set the base down with its compass pointing to magnetic north. Then you find Polaris and center it in the eyepiece. The magnetic pointer will be "off" from the Zero-degree position by the amount of magnetic declination in your area (plus or minus any minor error due to compass inaccuracy, magnetic interference, user sloppiness in setup, etc). Then you simply slide the pointer back to zero to "calibrate" it to Polaris, which will eliminate the magnetic declination and any of those errors mentioned, from the azimuth readings. If you can't see Polaris, you can use any visible star or planet, and just calibrate (slide) the pointer to that star/planet's azimuth (although a star near the north or south celestial pole will make calibration easier and more accurate because it will move more slowly through the field of view).

#11 kevinrr

kevinrr

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 33
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Morristown, TN

Posted 26 April 2014 - 02:03 AM

When I put the setting circle and altitude gauge on my 12" dob it transformed my viewing experience. Using a dob without a coordinate location system is like trying to drive a car without ever pressing the gas....you can do it but you will be sorely disappointed with the results and you will never figure out the potential of the equipment.

My last night out a couple nights ago I located about 15 messier objects in a couple hours with ease.

#12 kevinrr

kevinrr

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 33
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Morristown, TN

Posted 26 April 2014 - 02:04 AM

Go and search for the "big dob mod" thread. I found many of the ideas for my mods there, and they made a world of difference. Mine is now battery powered and fully lighted.

#13 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11307
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 26 April 2014 - 04:41 AM

Using a dob without a coordinate location system is like trying to drive a car without ever pressing the gas....you can do it but you will be sorely disappointed with the results and you will never figure out the potential of the equipment.


Wow, that certainly hasn't been my experience!

My last night out a couple nights ago I located about 15 messier objects in a couple hours with ease.


Right. And having learned the Messiers by star-hopping, I can locate 15 of them in 15 minutes simply by pointing my Dob to the right place in the sky.

#14 BrooksObs

BrooksObs

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 917
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2012

Posted 26 April 2014 - 08:13 AM

Using a dob without a coordinate location system is like trying to drive a car without ever pressing the gas....you can do it but you will be sorely disappointed with the results and you will never figure out the potential of the equipment.


Wow, that certainly hasn't been my experience!

My last night out a couple nights ago I located about 15 messier objects in a couple hours with ease.


Right. And having learned the Messiers by star-hopping, I can locate 15 of them in 15 minutes simply by pointing my Dob to the right place in the sky.


I have to most definitely agree with Tony's response in this matter. Only those who never bothered to take the time to properly learn the constellations at the outset of the observing careers are so critically handicapped as to have to depend on gizmos to find their way around the sky. I regard it as the modern bane of the hobby, as it honestly places one at a great disadvantage in his observing efforts. I've used large alt-az scopes for over 40 years now unassisted by circles, or other outside methods for locating objects and I find that I can usually work at a pace 2x to 3x faster in locating objects than do the amateur astronomers relying on tech gizmos for locating objects. Nothing replaces an excellent knowledge of the constellations star patterns as the most valuable of observing tools.

BrooksObs

#15 howard929

howard929

    Member

  • *****
  • Posts: 3741
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2011
  • Loc: Low End of High Ground

Posted 26 April 2014 - 08:21 AM

Ok, I was thumbing through that thread and I'm confused! Do you set your scope based on Polaris or magnetic north?


I sort of cheat this a bit and just use magnetic north. There always seems to be something I can find naked eye and with real time information from Stellarium, zero in and tweak the pointer. On long sessions over 3 hours, things tend to slide away from those initial settings due to inaccuracy of a level base. It's pretty much a slam dunk for say Saturn to be still in the finder but may not be in a higher power eyepiece. With 10 degrees off each side of zero, small re-tweaks brings things back to where they should be.

#16 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11307
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 26 April 2014 - 10:46 AM

Only those who never bothered to take the time to properly learn the constellations at the outset of the observing careers are so critically handicapped as to have to depend on gizmos to find their way around the sky.


Well ... I can and do find my way around the sky without any mechanical or electronic aid both under dark skies and from my local city park. But I must say that when I'm star-hopping to (say) Uranus and Neptune, deep in the notoriously faint Great Sea, it can be fairly time-consuming.

So although I don't agree with those who say that finding aids are essential in heavily light-polluted surroundings, I certainly sympathize with them.

Dark skies are a totally different matter -- in that environment star-hopping is a piece of cake.

But that assumes that you have good visual skills with maps. It's something that I do -- either because I was born that way or from constant practice with terrestrial maps throughout my childhood. People who can't make sense of a conventional road map are likely to have at least equal problems with star maps.

Remember also that even at an otherwise pristine site, the full Moon washes out most of the reference stars.

I regard it as the modern bane of the hobby, as it honestly places one at a great disadvantage in his observing efforts.


I know lots of experienced observers who are very good at star-hopping but still prefer to use Go To when available.

As for beginners, they seem to fall into two classes. Many (probably most) use Go To or setting circles as a way to avoid learning the sky -- just as many people who drive around using GPS units have no idea where they are in the broader scheme of things. As long as the GPS gets them to their destination, they're content not to know that they drove within a block of the most famous monument in their city.

But other beginners use these as aids to learning the sky. If you're inclined to learn the sky anyway, having Go To or setting circles to help you along and confirm your understanding can be very helpful.

#17 gene 4181

gene 4181

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1802
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2013
  • Loc: n.e. ohio

Posted 26 April 2014 - 11:15 AM

How many of you use setting circles to navigate with a dob? Appears to be an affordable way for a beginner to navigate vs a push or go to. All you do is level the base and line up with Polaris correct?

if it keeps you out there doin it go for it. i don't use them. i learned the old fashioned way, the old way. was it easy, no. but i persevered and learned it. i only use a telrad and red flashlight with a sky chart. but everyone to their own. you do what works for you. and yes, it would be an affordable way to find things versus push to or go-to. if you had a sky&telescope pocket atlas, i could talk to you on the phone for 20 minutes and you wouldn't need any of that other stuff either. sometimes an explanation is that's needed. feel free to send a private message, i'll explain it to ya.

#18 rlmxracer

rlmxracer

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 325
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2011
  • Loc: Motocross Mecca (Riverside) , CA

Posted 26 April 2014 - 11:18 AM

Bane of the hobby? Really? First off in order to use any goto or setting circles you need to at least learn the bright stars. This ends up being a stepping stone to learning the constilations. I started with a goto scope to keep my young son interested by always having a object in the fov. Now I've used digital assistance on our dob and in doing so have learned the sky pretty well. Star hopping is a skill that takes a while to learn. I've been at it almost 3years and am just starting to get confident in finding objects manually. I see goto and setting circles as aids to learning the sky and as a benefit help keep a rookies interest.

#19 kevinrr

kevinrr

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 33
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Morristown, TN

Posted 26 April 2014 - 11:36 AM

I know that a lot of the old heads favor "learning the sky" intimately and using star charts and star hopping as a means to find what it is you're looking for. Of course, knowledge of the sky comes with time and experience, and these people are to be commended for their time spent in the hobby to get to a point where it is feasible for them to do it that way.

We are, however, in the "beginner" section of the forum, and by definition those who post here looking for guidance will lack that experience and ability. That should not be reflective of their intelligence or level of motivation to "learn the hobby", only of their current level of inexperience, right?

So with that said, what's with the "disapproval" you older guys have for computerized or manual coordinate locating systems? It seems to me as though you guys should be happy more people are engaging in the hobby *by any means*, rather than insisting that everyone do it the way you think it should be done (or thinking that they are not "doing it right" otherwise).

If you told me that your grandfather could build a house without using a measuring tape or square and have it come out level and square, does that mean that everyone should have to do it that way? Does that mean that those who ask about or use a measuring tape and square are being lazy or doing it wrong? The measuring tape is just a tool to help the average person achieve faster and more reliable results, right? How is that different from using setting circles or a goto scope? Whatever means are used to get the desired results should be perfectly acceptable.

You say you are able to star hop and locate DSO's and other specific objects quickly and easily. That's great for you. I found a good amount of difficulty in trying to star hop to faint objects (for me, "faint" being defined as anything mag8 or higher since I live in an orange zone and there are numerous street lights within 100 yards of my home). Sometimes I could get there and sometimes I couldn't even though I knew I was in the right area. Maybe you would think of it as laziness or frown on it, but I probably would have abandoned the hobby after a year or 2 if I had to rely solely on constellation maps and star hopping as a means to locate faint objects in the sky. It just didn't hold my interest and I felt like I was wasting time in a futile effort. I might spend a half hour or more trying to locate a single object. So after a couple of hours I would get bored and pack it in, having seen very little of what I set out to see.

The setting circle method has allowed a significant increase in my ability to locate objects and enjoy the hobby. It literally opened my eyes and probably increased my interest in the hobby tenfold. I expect that my experience as a beginner is similar to that of other beginners, thus my advice.

I do not think it is feasible to expect the majority of beginners to have your abilities, and if you expect them to take the time to learn them (which could require years of experience) they might become lost to the hobby. Let's face it...most young and middle aged people who might try to join the hobby today do not have a ton of spare time, so anything to help increase efficiency is going to be hugely beneficial. As for me personally, I do well to get 2-3 hours per week at the scope, so I'd like for that to count for as much as possible rather than holding myself to others' standards unnecessarily.

You're also overlooking the fact that as a user operates the goto/push-to system, they will eventually learn the sky anyway, but they will not become frustrated or bored in the meantime. This seems like a win-win for the hobby, so I don't understand the resistance.

#20 gene 4181

gene 4181

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1802
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2013
  • Loc: n.e. ohio

Posted 26 April 2014 - 12:10 PM

in all fairness, tony flanders didn't say bane to the hobby, it was brooks obs. i say if it keeps you out there doing it, at the eyepiece go for it. there's no right or wrong to this. your response is a great example of this, if a inclinometer and a setting circle on the base does it for you, that's great. if a cell phone and an app does it for you, god bless you. need a laptop to find it, no problem. what ever floats your boat. at least your out there at night doin it.

#21 Dennis_S253

Dennis_S253

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1729
  • Joined: 22 Nov 2011
  • Loc: West Central Florida

Posted 26 April 2014 - 01:03 PM

I used setting circles on my B&L 4" SCT for years. I thought it was great. I was really good at it. I don't know if it really helped me to learn the night sky though. I would set the scope up and get Polaris zeroed in. Check a couple stars to see if everything was good and start looking by using the setting circles. I could find M13 or 92 and never know I was in Hercules. I found what I was looking for though. I also don't have a bunch of time as I get up at 5:30 everyday to be at work by 7:00. So I get to look on Friday and Saturday if the weather is nice. Learning the night sky is nice to do. I'm not sure if it as important as it was 2000 years ago though. Use whatever makes you happy. It is nice to look at Leo and say Wow, There's some nice Galaxy's not to far from that star right there. It's also nice when your talking to someone that is a Leo "born" and they have never seen the constellation. They have no idea how big it is. Again, if your looking that's great. Do whatever makes you happy.

#22 Abhat

Abhat

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 802
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2013
  • Loc: Central Maryland, USA

Posted 26 April 2014 - 01:50 PM

I personally found setting circles quite confusing. I had to have a light shining on the circle as well as on the Altimeter. Then I had to have my laptop with me see current alt-az reading. Laptop screwed my night vision. Then if you are still not in 1 deg accuracy I could still not find the object unless you had a wide field scope. I never used setting circles for more than a day.

Then I added a Telard to the 9X50 RACI. That was a magical synergy. Learnt the constellations, bought a few books and learned star hopping and no problems so far. In fact exploring the sky is so much fun.

I would still love to get the computerized Go-to system someday mainly for tracking and finding extremely faint objects that are not visible through 9X50. With tracking you don't have to keep nudging the scope every few seconds.

#23 SkipW

SkipW

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 337
  • Joined: 03 Feb 2011
  • Loc: Oklahoma, USA

Posted 26 April 2014 - 09:52 PM

... I have to most definitely agree with Tony's response in this matter. Only those who never bothered to take the time to properly learn the constellations at the outset of the observing careers are so critically handicapped as to have to depend on gizmos to find their way around the sky. I regard it as the modern bane of the hobby, as it honestly places one at a great disadvantage in his observing efforts. I've used large alt-az scopes for over 40 years now unassisted by circles, or other outside methods for locating objects and I find that I can usually work at a pace 2x to 3x faster in locating objects than do the amateur astronomers relying on tech gizmos for locating objects. Nothing replaces an excellent knowledge of the constellations star patterns as the most valuable of observing tools.

BrooksObs

A large scope on an alt-az mount isn't a "gizmo"?

#24 Tony Flanders

Tony Flanders

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11307
  • Joined: 18 May 2006
  • Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA

Posted 27 April 2014 - 05:19 AM

We are, however, in the "beginner" section of the forum, and by definition those who post here looking for guidance will lack that experience and ability.


I was a beginner not so very long ago -- I can remember it quite well. Go To scopes were available, but not very practical for me due to cost and size. Digital setting circles weren't widely available, and would have had many of the same problems. So I found my way around the sky by star-hopping simply because it seemed like the easiest and most obvious way to do so.

I do not remember it as being hard at all -- I was finding tons of stuff right off the bat.

Exactly why this wasn't the case for you is an interesting question. Perhaps you approached it wrong, without the appropriate tools and techniques. Perhaps light pollution is more of a problem for you -- though I do live very near the center of one of the biggest metropolitan areas in North America, deep inside the white zone. Perhaps your visual memory, spatial sense, and map-reading skills aren't as good.

So with that said, what's with the "disapproval" you older guys have for computerized or manual coordinate locating systems?


Interesting question. I think there are a bunch of motivations, some laudable some much less so. More on this below.

It seems to me as though you guys should be happy more people are engaging in the hobby *by any means*


I couldn't agree more!

If you told me that your grandfather could build a house without using a measuring tape or square and have it come out level and square, does that mean that everyone should have to do it that way? Does that mean that those who ask about or use a measuring tape and square are being lazy or doing it wrong?


I don't think that is an accurate analogy. In fact, you can't build a house well without a measuring tape and square. These tools have been used since prehistory. If I didn't have them, my first step would be to make them -- which wouldn't be particularly difficult.

Would an ancient Egyptian pyramid builder feel resentful that we now can buy superb squares and measuring tapes at our local stores? Maybe a little, but mostly he would just consider these to be the same tools that he was using, but better.

Likewise, Go To is just an improved version of setting circles -- which, by the way, have been in widespread use for well over a century. Anybody who praises setting circles and denigrates Go To is highly inconsistent. All that Go To does is take the drudge work out of setting circles; you're still approaching the sky in the same way.

However, people who use either setting circles or Go To are approaching the sky in a totally different way from people who star-hop. It's a matter of working from the inside out rather than the outside in. Not only the process but the end result is profoundly different.

If you find a galaxy in the Virgo Cluster by star-hopping, you know deep down in your gut that it is inside a massive aggregation of galaxies lying in the same part of the sky. And a little bit of reflection will make it clear that it's no accident that this is far from the plane of the Milky Way.

If you find two Virgo galaxies by looking up the coordinates of their NGC numbers, each one is a specialty item -- an island universe. You could view dozens of galaxies that way before it vaguely dawns on you that they might be related.

This is even more true in the Milky Way, where nebulae and star clusters form a continuum to the star-hopper.

So part of the reason that star-hoppers complain about setting-circle users is a sense that you're missing out something truly valuable and wonderful -- the big picture. And worse, you have no idea what you're missing.

I feel exactly the same about the younger generation of drivers who have never known any way to get anywhere except using GPS. Their worlds are tiny -- just the little bubble around their cars that's shown on the GPS screen. They don't have any idea how things fit together in two dimensions -- don't even quite realize that there are two dimensions.

The setting circle method has allowed a significant increase in my ability to locate objects and enjoy the hobby. It literally opened my eyes and probably increased my interest in the hobby tenfold.


That's great! I wish you well.

You're also overlooking the fact that as a user operates the goto/push-to system, they will eventually learn the sky anyway.


I wish it were so, but that is quite obviously not the case. Some Go To users do indeed learn the sky and end up at the same place as star-hoppers, but by a different route. But for many, the sky remains forever a disjointed collection of island universes.

What about the less worthy complaints of star-hoppers about Go To and setting circles? Well, there's obviously at least a little element of "sour grapes." I had to work hard when I was a kid, he isn't working hard -- grr, grr, there must be something wrong.

#25 csa/montana

csa/montana

    Den Mama

  • *****
  • Posts: 86525
  • Joined: 14 May 2005
  • Loc: montana

Posted 27 April 2014 - 09:02 AM

I know that a lot of the old heads favor "learning the sky" intimately and using star charts and star hopping as a means to find what it is you're looking for. Of course, knowledge of the sky comes with time and experience, and these people are to be commended for their time spent in the hobby to get to a point where it is feasible for them to do it that way.

We are, however, in the "beginner" section of the forum, and by definition those who post here looking for guidance will lack that experience and ability. That should not be reflective of their intelligence or level of motivation to "learn the hobby", only of their current level of inexperience, right?

So with that said, what's with the "disapproval" you older guys have for computerized or manual coordinate locating systems? It seems to me as though you guys should be happy more people are engaging in the hobby *by any means*, rather than insisting that everyone do it the way you think it should be done (or thinking that they are not "doing it right" otherwise).

If you told me that your grandfather could build a house without using a measuring tape or square and have it come out level and square, does that mean that everyone should have to do it that way? Does that mean that those who ask about or use a measuring tape and square are being lazy or doing it wrong? The measuring tape is just a tool to help the average person achieve faster and more reliable results, right? How is that different from using setting circles or a goto scope? Whatever means are used to get the desired results should be perfectly acceptable.

You say you are able to star hop and locate DSO's and other specific objects quickly and easily. That's great for you. I found a good amount of difficulty in trying to star hop to faint objects (for me, "faint" being defined as anything mag8 or higher since I live in an orange zone and there are numerous street lights within 100 yards of my home). Sometimes I could get there and sometimes I couldn't even though I knew I was in the right area. Maybe you would think of it as laziness or frown on it, but I probably would have abandoned the hobby after a year or 2 if I had to rely solely on constellation maps and star hopping as a means to locate faint objects in the sky. It just didn't hold my interest and I felt like I was wasting time in a futile effort. I might spend a half hour or more trying to locate a single object. So after a couple of hours I would get bored and pack it in, having seen very little of what I set out to see.

The setting circle method has allowed a significant increase in my ability to locate objects and enjoy the hobby. It literally opened my eyes and probably increased my interest in the hobby tenfold. I expect that my experience as a beginner is similar to that of other beginners, thus my advice.

I do not think it is feasible to expect the majority of beginners to have your abilities, and if you expect them to take the time to learn them (which could require years of experience) they might become lost to the hobby. Let's face it...most young and middle aged people who might try to join the hobby today do not have a ton of spare time, so anything to help increase efficiency is going to be hugely beneficial. As for me personally, I do well to get 2-3 hours per week at the scope, so I'd like for that to count for as much as possible rather than holding myself to others' standards unnecessarily.

You're also overlooking the fact that as a user operates the goto/push-to system, they will eventually learn the sky anyway, but they will not become frustrated or bored in the meantime. This seems like a win-win for the hobby, so I don't understand the resistance.


+1 An excellent post! :bow:

I started the lengthy "Degree Circle" thread in Equipment as a novice in using a telescope. David of the "Halo" said that thread encouraged him to market his product. I don't think it matters how a person views the night skies; whatever "system" they are using, if it gives them the satisfaction of finding targets, and allows them to enjoy our spectacular night sky; then there is no right or wrong way to observe. These added observing aids simply makes it easier, especially for newcomers to start observing; but don't kid yourselves, they work equally as well for seasoned observers. We all should remember our first view thru our telescope, and how intimidating it was to find something in the night sky!






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics