Quote:We need an open-source telescope. Probably most of the bits already exist.
I lost count of my scopes. Now I just want mobility. I came, I saw, I bought some interesting accessories, and put names to faces: NEAF 2012, ASAE 2012, SWAP 2013, ASAE 2013.
Quote:It's my impression that you are seriously underestimating the difficulty of what you want. All that auto configuration software is difficult and adding wifi won't help.I know that HP can do it for a $50 printer but they are making printers in the millions and making their profit on the ink.The thing to bear in mind is that the complexity cannot be reduced, all that can be done is move it around. You want to move it to the developer rather than the user so the development task is much more complex.I've seen this at work, where we make microanalysis systems. Managers assume that a simple product that's easy to use will be simple to develop. The converse is true.Chris
Quote:It needs to be PC free. It needs to be completely wireless capable for all functions. It needs to be internet aware and secure. We're talking at least as smart as a $50 HP printer.So, quite literally I'm talking about something you'd put together like Legos.
8" GSO RC with CSL Moonlite FocuserTelevue TV60isLosmandy G11 with Gemini 2 (with Ovision upgrade)
SBIG STT-8300m with Self Guiding filter wheel
A wide assortment of lenses for my Canon.
Quote:the NexSXW/NexSXD folks (Maite) have reverse-engineered the Celestron protocol to the point that they can fool a Celestron hand controller into controlling Vixen servo motors. It's just one more step to making a completely generic mount control system, i.e. by providing the motors.
George You know you're getting on when the equipment you farmed with is showing up as suburban lawn ornaments.
Quote:There are a bunch of people already who sell 3rd-party mount controllers. Too many, in my opinion.FS2BoxdoerferPulsar (on the Gemini G41/G53 mounts)SiTechUrsa Minorand someone has already written Arduino code to emulate a Synscan motor board, so you can use an existing Synscan hand controller to drive your franken-mount.plus, the NexSXW/NexSXD folks (Maite) have reverse-engineered the Celestron protocol to the point that they can fool a Celestron hand controller into controlling Vixen servo motors. It's just one more step to making a completely generic mount control system, i.e. by providing the motors.I believe it is also possible albeit expensive to pay Software Bisque to put an MKS-5000 in whatever mount you want, on their web page they have some info on a Byers mount that was converted to MKS-3000 (?) so basically it's a Paramount.IMHO with such a tiny market and with so many vendors/hobbyists there, I can't see the value of yet another project unless it is head-and-shoulders above the rest.Everybody can make their own franken-mount controller, but to do it cheaply... and with a good feature set, is hard. Probably impossible.Where I can see value:- provide a good motor set and gears; everybody can buy Pittman motors, I'm talking about a Maxon motor, gearhead, and optical encoder. Something of the same class as an AP motor/gearhead.- because the people who want cheap GoTo will buy a Celestron or a Synscan.- a very robust controller to manage the motor gearbox.Basically, something like the AP handset and GTO CP3, but totally generic. SiTech comes closest, but requires a PC.
Quote:What these things don't do at all is present themselves to your mobile device as effortlessly as a Bluetooth keyboard. I feel if we can get mounts to that point, the hobby will be vastly more accessible to modern users. If it were an Arduino project, that definitely sounds like a neat idea to me.
Quote:I just ran into another issue... if one is building an open-source telescope control system, the only choice is Linux.
Quote:Since there are a number of things to control, it seems to me that the basis of any network of devices would be based on the ASCOM model and API. The first problem is ASCOM platform is currently Windows-only, but I think the current developers would provide some support for ports to tablet and phone OSes (Android and iOS). Then apps like SkySafari can flourish in the environment.(I wonder what the Southern Stars guys would say about having ASCOM on Android and iOS?)I understand the current ASCOM is .NET or something, so you have to change the api to something else suitable for the other OSes. The protocols on the other side (the driver side) are whatever the devices need, just like they are today. You still have the same physical interfaces (wired or wireless) to choose from.That gives you a framework on the device controller (mount, focuser, camera, dome, ...) side to work toward.I think some monolithic soup-to-nuts device would be going the wrong way.