Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Mounts

Pages: << 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | >> (show all)
neilson
professor emeritus


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: OzAndrewJ]
      #5391217 - 08/28/12 11:01 AM Attachment (37 downloads)

Andrew
Yes it is held in place buy just those 3 bolts. Here is a picture of the base. There are 3 round indention's in the base to receive the 3 things the screws fit in. I am including the picture below. The base is thick cast aluminum. Even if your bearing is tight there is a very small amount of flexing with all that weight. I was thinking that the first time I saw that and I had wished the 3 screws were larger bolts. The only way I got that flexing was loaded and I had to wiggle it hard and look very close and it was slight and stopped instantly. I hope that isn't what I saw in my picture. The bouncing of the spring in the wormblock is easy to cause and I think it is more likely the problem. I hope so because at least I can try to do something about that.

Andrew and ED,
That picture was with my camera mounted directly in the 2" SCT adapter with NO focal reducer or diagonal installed.
2500mm focal length. I know its not perfect but its pretty good for a first attempt at 3min unguided. I dont plan to image at this focal length. The purpose of imaging at 2500mm is to magnify the problems so I can try to correct them. as with using iso 100 so the small stars wont be a ball of light but lines showing if the problems are wind or the mount. Of course this one is the mount. The same peak is identical in each image just farther along as the time is increased making me wonder if it was pec. or bouncing from the spring. At this magnification I would think if it was the spring it would be larger. Is this something that PEC would cure or even guiding. I will have to figure out how to get rid of the movement in the ota and try again. This was with no wind. If there would of been even a little wind this would be real bad, it just bounces too easily.
I did notice every few attempts I would get what looked like out of polar alignment, a long line going up I did an iterative polar alignment although it might not of been perfect. But wouldn't it of shown in these pictures too. Maybe its the mount having trouble tracking with this weight.
neilson

Edited by neilson (08/28/12 11:46 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
WadeH237
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 02/24/07

Loc: Snohomish, WA
Re: Why me? new [Re: neilson]
      #5391368 - 08/28/12 12:19 PM

Quote:

I know its not perfect but its pretty good for a first attempt at 3min unguided.




No, it's not pretty good. It's really, spectacularly bad.

Pretty good would be stars with some elongation. What you have here is evidence that the mount is tracking for a bit, then jumping to a different position and then tracking again. Particularly in the second image, you can see that this has happened several times. Even the large, oversaturated star shows non-roundness that corresponds to these jumps.

The problem with this kind of behavior is that it likely cannot be guided out, since there appear to be sudden and large movements. If the images you've posted are indeed characteristic of your mount, then it is quite unsuitable for deep sky astrophotography.

All that said, the images that you've posted are just one data point, and the saturated star will pretty much not reveal anything interesting. A better test would be to pick a field rich with fainter stars (none of which should be saturated) so that you can get lots of data points. That will make it much easier to see what the mount is actually doing.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ur7x
professor emeritus


Reged: 01/08/12

Re: Why me? new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5391399 - 08/28/12 12:35 PM

Let me fix that for ya...


Quote:



If the mount needs better gears, stronger springs, etc. someone (Meade) should get to work on fixing it so that it performs as per Meade's advertising spec's.





While I can't believe it, I do applaud the efforts that some will go... making a brand new mount, that is still under factory warranty... work... I think Nelson has had his mount apart 5 or 6 times and if I read his posts right is even adjusting internal parts with a crescent wrench and a hammer.

Maybe I was too hard on Meade for shipping mounts with firmware problems and then not offering free upgrades... but shipping mounts that need to be wrenched and "straightened" with the 'ol "persuader" is a bit much.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
blueman
Photon Catcher
*****

Reged: 07/20/07

Loc: California
Re: Why me? new [Re: ur7x]
      #5391493 - 08/28/12 01:30 PM

I must agree with you. I can not justify taking apart a new mount and then working on it to make it attempt to work properly.
First off, does this void warranty or the ability to return it. If so, well not the mount is truly yours and you will just have to live with it.
Personaly, I would never accept a new mount that would not track and guide properly. Even a good price does not make that a good deal. If you continue to have problems, just when is enough, well, enough?
Blueman
Quote:

Let me fix that for ya...


Quote:



If the mount needs better gears, stronger springs, etc. someone (Meade) should get to work on fixing it so that it performs as per Meade's advertising spec's.





While I can't believe it, I do applaud the efforts that some will go... making a brand new mount, that is still under factory warranty... work... I think Nelson has had his mount apart 5 or 6 times and if I read his posts right is even adjusting internal parts with a crescent wrench and a hammer.

Maybe I was too hard on Meade for shipping mounts with firmware problems and then not offering free upgrades... but shipping mounts that need to be wrenched and "straightened" is a bit much.




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
niteman1946
sage


Reged: 02/16/08

Loc: Fort Worth, TX
Re: Why me? new [Re: blueman]
      #5391531 - 08/28/12 01:49 PM

Reading this thread is like watching a train wreck. I shouldn't, but just can't help myself.

My sympathies to you Neilson. You've put up a great battle in this, and deserve credit for your persistance and optimism.

Mark


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Stew57
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: Why me? new [Re: niteman1946]
      #5391663 - 08/28/12 02:42 PM

Does anyone think Meade has tested this mount in polar mode, under the stars, with an eye towards ap, with a 10" ota? If they have either they think it works and don't want to offend the users telling them they don't know what they are doing, or they realize they have trouble and are not talking. Surely they have tried them out themselves?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Why me? new [Re: Stew57]
      #5391691 - 08/28/12 03:04 PM

I don't know what to say.

So, the firmware was inop on shipment. That alone meant it was impossible for Meade to have tested the mount. But they did fix it.

But dry bearings and claiming they checked it before shipping a second one?

And the drive- clearly no one ever saw this thing track. Mechanically and electronically it was a non-starter.

And the tracking really has been bad on every last one anyone has checked.

Really Neilson, they owe you for putting up with this. But I'm afraid of what they'll say about work hardening a spring with a hammer vis-a-vis the warranty.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
neilson
professor emeritus


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: niteman1946]
      #5391768 - 08/28/12 03:43 PM

Hi Everyone,
I thank you for all your comments and encouragement. I have been using allen wrenches to make all adjustments. Between both mounts I have taken them apart about 20+ times. Each time I had to put it back together to see how each adjustment effected it with the load. Its been alot of work especially in this south Texas heat, but that's how bad I wanted it to work. There were no warranty issues because The adjustments were done under Meades knowledge and advisement. And they did replaced the first one.

There will be no more wasted time with that heavy load. My 23lb 152mm refractor works good with this mount.
A 9.25 20lb ota should do well also.
Despite everyone constantly telling me this isn't going to work, I tried. Let anyone who thinks this will work see that it doesn't. At least I couldn't get it too. Meade says it will but you have to get it just right. I was never able too. I did get it to work so much better than when I received it and I think I got close. But in AP close isn't good enough, Its got to be perfect.

I am officially throwing in the towel. But I am not sending the mount back. I like it and after all the work I did to get it to working better. I am disappointed it was so far from handling the advertised 40lbs in polar, That's why I bought it. not for alt/az, that was just a bonus. And I had no desire for duel scope until I tried it, its really cool. But I wanted something to handle more than the 30lbs my LXD75 does so well. Its not the LX80. OK everybody all together say "I TOLD YOU SO", yes you all did and you were right. I am wrong. I did have fun trying though. And anybody planning to buy an LX80, I really like it, but don't expect it to do imaging well in polar with a 10" 30lb ota.

neilson

Edited by neilson (08/28/12 04:00 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Stew57
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: Why me? new [Re: neilson]
      #5391905 - 08/28/12 05:10 PM

Fun is the key and I for one am glad the expierence has not dampened your spirits. Hery I took an ETX80 and modified it to do some elementary AP, so I am on your side. The battle is sometimes half the fun. Hopefully Meade is working behind the scenes to help you out. You never know. At $800 I almost succumbed to temptation but am glad I resisted. I may use the CGEM for the portable mount (despite it not being as portable as I would like) and look for something a bit bigger for home. I wish Meade had just updated the LXD to a beefier mount.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mkofski
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 07/19/11

Loc: Greenfield, Indiana, USA
Re: Why me? new [Re: neilson]
      #5391934 - 08/28/12 05:24 PM

Quote:

Hi Everyone,
I thank you for all your comments and encouragement. I have been using allen wrenches to make all adjustments. Between both mounts I have taken them apart about 20+ times. Each time I had to put it back together to see how each adjustment effected it with the load. Its been alot of work especially in this south Texas heat, but that's how bad I wanted it to work. There were no warranty issues because The adjustments were done under Meades knowledge and advisement. And they did replaced the first one.

There will be no more wasted time with that heavy load. My 23lb 152mm refractor works good with this mount.
A 9.25 20lb ota should do well also.
Despite everyone constantly telling me this isn't going to work, I tried. Let anyone who thinks this will work see that it doesn't. At least I couldn't get it too. Meade says it will but you have to get it just right. I was never able too. I did get it to work so much better than when I received it and I think I got close. But in AP close isn't good enough, Its got to be perfect.

I am officially throwing in the towel. But I am not sending the mount back. I like it and after all the work I did to get it to working better. I am disappointed it was so far from handling the advertised 40lbs in polar, That's why I bought it. not for alt/az, that was just a bonus. And I had no desire for duel scope until I tried it, its really cool. But I wanted something to handle more than the 30lbs my LXD75 does so well. Its not the LX80. OK everybody all together say "I TOLD YOU SO", yes you all did and you were right. I am wrong. I did have fun trying though. And anybody planning to buy an LX80, I really like it, but don't expect it to do imaging well in polar with a 10" 30lb ota.

neilson




Neilson,

I commend you for the effort! Many of us waiting on the LX80's will benefit from your work. Hope Meade resolves all the problems and takes care of you when they do... you deserve some special attention from Meade! You and the other "beta" testers could have easily returned all the early shipping LX80 and reported that here. Then Meade's sales would have tanked on this mount like I assume they have on the LX800.

Still looks like a good mount for the money to me. I wanted it primarily for the dual OTA AltAz configuration. Entry level AP would just be a bonus for me.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
herrointment
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 03/12/11

Loc: North of Hwy. 64
Re: Why me? new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5391970 - 08/28/12 05:41 PM

nielson...

It's been very interesting reading about your efforts with this mount.

Thanks for posting them here on CN.......and best of luck with whatever comes your way in the future!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Starhawk
Space Ranger
*****

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: Why me? new [Re: herrointment]
      #5392047 - 08/28/12 06:36 PM

Neilson,

Someday you'll be really well prepared for another mount because of this. So, it isn't time wasted. As for referring you you as a "Beta tester" I have to say no, this was supposedly ready-to-go hardware, not a preproduction prototype.

You have now seen the elephant. Someday you'll get to the other side of the mount universe- where things do exactly what the mfg claims. And when you get there, you'll have the history to appreciate it.

-Rich


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
TALK2KEV
sage


Reged: 03/08/06

Loc: Oklahoma
Re: Why me? new [Re: herrointment]
      #5392061 - 08/28/12 06:54 PM

I'm very confused Meade called me back about the bad Latitude lock

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khbwsJO8uyw&feature=plcp

They are wanting me to ship the mount back I asked about parts they said none are available only option was a new mount. About 10 mins latter Meade called back I thought it would be to tell me they would send out the base part instead of a new mount head . But no they want the tripod back as well. I told him this make no sense its like I bought a car with a bad tire and they want to give me a new car. Not sure why Meade want to pay shipping on both Items twice the base plate would be so much cheaper to ship and it takes only two allen bolts and the base plate would be free from the mount head. My dilemma is that I'm seeing other Lx80 users with different problems lose RA ect. I don't want a new set of problems. They sent Shipping label to my Email so as soon as they get confirmation from UPS they would put the New mount new tripod in route to me. I thought maybe it was a trust issue so I said what about shipping the mount to a local Meade dealer in my area I could go down there and take the base plate off my self. He said no that wouldn't work either. So If i send the mount and tripod back I'll be with out a mount for a few days maybe a week or so!

Edited by TALK2KEV (08/28/12 06:56 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Joe Ogiba
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 02/14/02

Loc: NJ USA
Re: Why me? new [Re: Mkofski]
      #5392063 - 08/28/12 06:56 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Hi Everyone,
I thank you for all your comments and encouragement. I have been using allen wrenches to make all adjustments. Between both mounts I have taken them apart about 20+ times. Each time I had to put it back together to see how each adjustment effected it with the load. Its been alot of work especially in this south Texas heat, but that's how bad I wanted it to work. There were no warranty issues because The adjustments were done under Meades knowledge and advisement. And they did replaced the first one.

There will be no more wasted time with that heavy load. My 23lb 152mm refractor works good with this mount.
A 9.25 20lb ota should do well also.
Despite everyone constantly telling me this isn't going to work, I tried. Let anyone who thinks this will work see that it doesn't. At least I couldn't get it too. Meade says it will but you have to get it just right. I was never able too. I did get it to work so much better than when I received it and I think I got close. But in AP close isn't good enough, Its got to be perfect.

I am officially throwing in the towel. But I am not sending the mount back. I like it and after all the work I did to get it to working better. I am disappointed it was so far from handling the advertised 40lbs in polar, That's why I bought it. not for alt/az, that was just a bonus. And I had no desire for duel scope until I tried it, its really cool. But I wanted something to handle more than the 30lbs my LXD75 does so well. Its not the LX80. OK everybody all together say "I TOLD YOU SO", yes you all did and you were right. I am wrong. I did have fun trying though. And anybody planning to buy an LX80, I really like it, but don't expect it to do imaging well in polar with a 10" 30lb ota.

neilson




Neilson,

I commend you for the effort! Many of us waiting on the LX80's will benefit from your work. Hope Meade resolves all the problems and takes care of you when they do... you deserve some special attention from Meade! You and the other "beta" testers could have easily returned all the early shipping LX80 and reported that here. Then Meade's sales would have tanked on this mount like I assume they have on the LX800.

Still looks like a good mount for the money to me. I wanted it primarily for the dual OTA AltAz configuration. Entry level AP would just be a bonus for me.



Ditto


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
TALK2KEV
sage


Reged: 03/08/06

Loc: Oklahoma
Re: Why me? new [Re: Joe Ogiba]
      #5392067 - 08/28/12 07:00 PM

Neilson
sorry to hear that the new mount didn't fix your problem and just think how much better the mount behaved after 1.00 worth of grease.

Good luck man!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
OzAndrewJ
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 11/30/10

Re: Why me? new [Re: neilson]
      #5392168 - 08/28/12 08:09 PM

Gday Neilson

Quote:

Yes it is held in place buy just those 3 bolts. Here is a picture of the base. There are 3 round indention's in the base to receive the 3 things the screws fit in. I am including the picture below. The base is thick cast aluminum. Even if your bearing is tight there is a very small amount of flexing with all that weight.




But where is it flexing.??
The way its designed, the three lower screws may be holding it in a position that allows it to flex a bit under load when polar. ie like a freestanding pier
This will be determined by how neatly the upper part of the base fits.
With the lower three bolts removed/loosened, how much lateral movement could you
get between the two pieces, ie how neat was the fit at the top joint???

Quote:

I was thinking that the first time I saw that and I had wished the 3 screws were larger bolts. The only way I got that flexing was loaded and I had to wiggle it hard and look very close and it was slight and stopped instantly. I hope that isn't what I saw in my picture.




Possible.
Again remember, you are only talking 10s of arcsecs in the images, which isn't visible when looking at the mount itself. It may explain the V shaped trail you saw.
Anyway, after reading yr last few posts, good luck with it in dual AltAz.
Thats mainly what i was looking at if for, esp for mounting solar scopes.

Andrew


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: Why me? new [Re: OzAndrewJ]
      #5392284 - 08/28/12 09:50 PM

Hi Neilson…

I think you have done well. You have stayed persistent in your effort to make the mount work, hopefully to the weight of the OTA you purchased. One thing you did not mention when describing the imaging setups for the two images. Wind. Were you getting buffeted at all ?? That too would/could cause some of what you displayed. In the end, I think you will enjoy using your mount. Not to sure about the 10” though.

I think what we are seeing here, is the apparent need to be able to do “after market” upgrades to this particular mount. That is apparently not that unusual. There seems to be a “cottage industry” of after market vendors to work on mounts and OTAs. And not just Meade, although Meade is a popular mfg, and their mounts are included to the availability of “upgrade”.

What comes to mind are the likes of “Dr Clay” (P. Clay Sherrod) with the LX200 series, and other Meade models, and more currently, Ed Thomas (Deep Space Products), who has been a recent poster in this thread. I am sure there are many others performing this type of service.

I know that Ed, who is a personal friend of mine, works on many different mounts, performing what he is calling “Hypertune” maintenance to them. Such works as these would not be out there, if all mounts worked perfectly “out of the box”.

Ed will be getting a look at my mount early next week. It will be interesting to see if he becomes interested in adding this mount to those he normally offers services for. Ed has developed at excellent reputation here on CN for his work. I am sure that after he has had a chance to inspect the mount, and evaluate what he thinks can be done, we will all be seeing a complete report, either from him or myself.

Again, my congratulations on getting as far as you did. I’ll bet with a lighter OTA, you will have very very good images.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: Why me? new [Re: dmdouglass]
      #5392292 - 08/28/12 09:58 PM

Hi Kevin....

The return of an entire mount, is not a new request from Meade. They have been doing that with the LX200 series for years. There have been many, many upset users who complain about the unavailablity of "parts"....

And that is not just for warranty work. Out of warranty as well. I do not understand it myself, but it does seem to be their corporate position.

Now you need to ask yourself if you want to return the mount, and get a different one back (???) or make the after market "fix" that was described earlier. I forget what the part was called, but apparently a part available from a hardware store, that effectivly replaces the cature nut.

It would/could be a "tough" decision. Such a replacement "could" void future warranty claims. You could always ask Meade customer support.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
blueman
Photon Catcher
*****

Reged: 07/20/07

Loc: California
Re: Why me? [Re: neilson]
      #5392293 - 08/28/12 09:58 PM

Well, I for one do not understand at all. The mount doesn't work as advertised, it will not handle the scope it shipped with, the fixes and attempts at making it work did not result in it working as advertised and yet somehow they get credit and a sale for selling a mount that is not what it is suppose to be?
Why should anyone pay to be a beta tester and accept a mount that is obviously not a very good mount, even if the price was cheap.
It is rewarding a poor job and encorraging manufacturers to produce faulty equipment with no repercushions.
Oh well, I guess that is just astronomy.
Blueman
Quote:

Hi Everyone,
I thank you for all your comments and encouragement. I have been using allen wrenches to make all adjustments. Between both mounts I have taken them apart about 20+ times. Each time I had to put it back together to see how each adjustment effected it with the load. Its been alot of work especially in this south Texas heat, but that's how bad I wanted it to work. There were no warranty issues because The adjustments were done under Meades knowledge and advisement. And they did replaced the first one.

There will be no more wasted time with that heavy load. My 23lb 152mm refractor works good with this mount.
A 9.25 20lb ota should do well also.
Despite everyone constantly telling me this isn't going to work, I tried. Let anyone who thinks this will work see that it doesn't. At least I couldn't get it too. Meade says it will but you have to get it just right. I was never able too. I did get it to work so much better than when I received it and I think I got close. But in AP close isn't good enough, Its got to be perfect.

I am officially throwing in the towel. But I am not sending the mount back. I like it and after all the work I did to get it to working better. I am disappointed it was so far from handling the advertised 40lbs in polar, That's why I bought it. not for alt/az, that was just a bonus. And I had no desire for duel scope until I tried it, its really cool. But I wanted something to handle more than the 30lbs my LXD75 does so well. Its not the LX80. OK everybody all together say "I TOLD YOU SO", yes you all did and you were right. I am wrong. I did have fun trying though. And anybody planning to buy an LX80, I really like it, but don't expect it to do imaging well in polar with a 10" 30lb ota.

neilson




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: Why me? [Re: blueman]
      #5392463 - 08/28/12 11:50 PM

Hi Blueman…

Apparently you are not alone in not understanding.

The LX80 is a complex multi-configurable mount. We, the owners and users of this mount, have been saying from day one that in Alt/AZ, both in Single OTA, and Multi-OTA, this mount is simply wonderful. It performs very well, and simply delivers. Unfortunately for me, Meade has disabled guiding in Alt/AZ. That may or may not be being addressed at this time. Time will tell.

All of the problems have been in Polar. The big one was the original RA tracking. That was found, and addressed (fixed) by Meade with a new firmware release. A second problem in Polar is PEC. It is broken. But that too has been acknowledged by Meade, and should be fixed soon. Probably with another firmware release. Guiding (in Polar) may or may not be an issue. If you have the ST-4 guiding equipment, you probably will have a problem for a while. If you are trying to Guide with Meades “Envisage”, which is for the DSI cameras (has NOTHING to do with the LX80), then there is a problem, which Meade says in print that they will be fixing.

The last of the Polar problems is Payload Weight (OTA and other items). Apparently, there is an issue, which will probably affect AP users more than visual. With the lighter OTA’s, the problem is NOT evident. Mine, for example is the Meade 6” SC, which weights 10 lbs. No problems noted.

Neilson said in his last post that the mount seems to work well with his lighter OTA. And he has said that he otherwise likes the mount. I can understand that. I own one, and I like it too.

Work as advertised? I’m not sure Meade has addressed AP users. I have asked them to comment to the group about the weight limits, as applies to visual vs AP. Thus far, they have only referenced their printed specification.

Hope that helps. The LX80 is going to please many users. It will be a problem for users of heavier configurations who want to use it in Polar and do AP. Guiding will continue to be an issue, although PHD does work with this mount. Users who want to use the ST-4 (I hope I am referencing that correctly) guiding equipment will need to wait for Meade to introduce their external controller, which is referenced in the LX80 manual. However, word seems to be that such an introduction is not in the near future.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: << 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | >> (show all)


Extra information
17 registered and 27 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Dave M, richard7, bilgebay 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 68217

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics