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: << 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | >> (show all)
dmdouglass
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5358058 - 08/08/12 01:36 PM

Hi Rich...

Well, we bought them. And we sorta like them.
And, speaking for myself only, I think things will work out.
If we can identify a problem, and have a fix for it, then the product will work.

If you don't like the product, then don't buy it.
If you want to keep watching us work with it, by all means, please do so.
If you have some constructive input, or can share some information that can help us... your input is welcome (at lest by me...)

Actually, this mount will work for me "as is", for the configuration and usage that i purchased it for. Granted, i will be a little more "attentive" to the tripod!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter D.
sage
*****

Reged: 02/09/12

Loc: Central New York
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: Starhawk]
      #5358064 - 08/08/12 01:39 PM

Quote:

What keeps you guys fighting issues on this thing, anyway? I mean, I don't care who it came from, there's no way I'd nurse any product this way. One of these would have been the last straw, long ago. At this point, I'm just amazed by this. I can't think of a product launch riddled with so many faults combinded with users who were willing to keep playing with it.

Frankly, I'm really amazed by this. There seems to be so little this product can be relied on to do correctly, I just have trouble seeing why folks keep moving on with it.

-Rich




I think that it's because this product has so much potential, and if it fails it may be the end of Meade (who has famously served a wide spectrum of amateurs for so many years).

Although I for one have decided to postpone my purchase decision, I haven't abandoned hope: if the issues can be resolved, the LX80 can be a tremendous value for the money! There is no other product on the market that can be both an az/alt (which is great for visual) and polar (required for AP) mount that can support (at least theoretically) more payload than mounts in the same class costing typically 50% more? What a great way of encouraging new amateurs to get their feet wet in AP inexpensively; even if they get discouraged by the learning curve, they would learn something (which is a big part of our hobby) and still would have a great mount for visual.

Much thanks to David, Kevin, Andrew and the rest for their perseverance in pursuing solutions and just trying to get to the bottom of some very puzzling issues. Even mmalik's devil's advocate view has some hope imbedded, from my perspective. Plus, it's really entertaining reading!

Somebody has to do this so that the facts are on the table for all to see; that's how issues are resolved and quality is improved. Yes it would be nice if Meade had resolved these issues in development, but in the real world this is how things often go: early adopters are part of the beta test team. I gotta believe that Meade was counting on our support; why else would they have brought the product in at such a low price and then raised the ante 25% after only a few months?

Face it, if Meade can pull a success out of this, all our hats will be off.

Pete


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


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: Peter D.]
      #5358182 - 08/08/12 02:33 PM

I think I will add a little more here to my original comments. I have personally learned a great deal from this experience so far. And i am sure there is still more to learn.

To me, it is becoming clearer that one of the "hidden" issues, is weight and mass. The Meade configuration(s) weight specifications, as listed on their website, are:

Multi-OTA =70 lbs
Alt-AZ or German Equatorial = 40 lbs

I am wondering if some of us (myself included) may have misunderstood that.

Multi-OTA (OTA’s on both sides of the mount – as shown in the images) 70 lbs.

Most of us (I think) are used to “payload” weights, i.e. not to include counterweights. I think in this case, Meade is saying if you use a dual OTA setup, then the far side OTA is actually part of the counterweight equation. That is a bit different. I am wondering if some are reading the statement as that you can have up to 70 lbs in the OTA, with counterweights on the far side to offset. I am pretty sure this mount will NOT handle that.

As I review the weight statement, I think I now understand the “Alt/AZ or German Equatorial” statement, at 40 lbs. They are saying single OTA, in either configuration, and counterweights are required in both, but are not in the total weight value specified. This is MY OPION ONLY.

One of the things “learned” in this thread, is the 50% concept for AP work. I have never heard that before. Is it true? Unknown, but I am starting to see it elsewhere. If so, then “payload” for OP (OTA – Eyepieces-Finders-Cameras) should not exceed 20 lbs (or close ??).

I think we are starting to see the effects of this condition (weight of the OTA). My single OTA, including finder, and camera, is well under 20 lbs. Kevin and Dennis are (with the original equipment) well over 20 lbs. Neilson too. And, as they lighten the load, the results are changing. We need more commentary from them (and maybe some other LX80 users) to close in on this.

So, it seems (and this is NOT the final word), the mount works with the heavier payloads, but is not as accurate. Useable for visual (in both modes). For AP, the mount may be needing some “relief”. This MAY affect the PE results (we should know more on this from multiple users by end of weekend), and it may also affect guiding. We should know more on this from multiple users by end of weekend. Kevin and Co, and Neilson have the ability to lighten load. I do NOT have the ability to “heavy up”. I have multiple OTAs but no mounting equipment for “piggyback” configuration. So…. I will stay “light”.

More to learn.


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


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: TALK2KEV]
      #5358255 - 08/08/12 03:14 PM

Kevin,
Meade hasn't sent my handle or labels, they refused. For most of us Meade customer service is at a stand still until the manager gets back from vacation Thursday. Same with the defective parts I'm waiting on. The manager has to deal with this. I wonder if they left them off to save cost or reduce weight lol.
I haven't included pictures of my tweaking the wormblock because I don't recommend anyone to try it. Its too easy to cause damage and if you don't put locktight on all the screws they will unscrew after 5 or 10 minutes of use. Its different than the LX200 setup. If somebody insists on trying it then I will explain what I did, but I strongly recommend sending it back to Meade for this.
I didn't time how long between my jumps when guiding but it was maybe 7 min. guessing. Hopefully I will get to guide with my refractor tonight.
neilson


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


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: neilson]
      #5358305 - 08/08/12 03:46 PM

David,
I think that 50% for AP applies to a few lightweight mounts from some companies but I dont think it applies to the CGEM because I hear it handles their 11" for AP fine. My LXD75 was rated at 30lbs and it came with a huge 29lbs Schmidt Newtonian 10" and did 90sec unguided. You couldn't increase over the 30lbs. though. But it did the 30lbs for AP.
In my opinion since Meades' last mount met its rated weight for AP I would of expected this one to. In duel scope I had 63lbs no problem so I think it should of handled 40lbs in polar but mine wont. It has a hard time with 29lbs. I would of expected it to at least handle 29lbs for AP like the LXD75, especially since mine came with it. I don't think I am asking too much and I don't think price has anything to do with it. Meade claimed 40lbs in polar not 25 or 27lbs. That's my opinion.
neilson


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


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: neilson]
      #5358334 - 08/08/12 03:56 PM

Nielson and Kevin...

As we look at this "jump and recover" thing... we need to remember the "worm cycle period".

595.51 Seconds (aka 596 seconds)
600 Seconds would be 10 Min

AND... i am remembering Nielsons story of a "Spring something" .... somewhere in the RA gears... Hopefully Nielson can expand on that again.

What catches your eye here (or at least mine) is the "..and return (recover)". I have watched it at least 3 seperate times. The target will sort of "jump", and then in a sec or two, drift back to where it belongs. This was both during a guiding exercise, a Pempro run (unguided), and a long term exposure (imaging - unguided).

I was thinking more along the lines of 15-20 min, but could have easily missed one between frames. Long run logs (30 min) should catch this. We should know more by end of weekend.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jared
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 10/11/05

Loc: Piedmont, California, U.S.
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: dmdouglass]
      #5358363 - 08/08/12 04:09 PM

Quote:

<snip>

As I review the weight statement, I think I now understand the “Alt/AZ or German Equatorial” statement, at 40 lbs. They are saying single OTA, in either configuration, and counterweights are required in both, but are not in the total weight value specified. This is MY OPION ONLY.

One of the things “learned” in this thread, is the 50% concept for AP work. I have never heard that before. Is it true? Unknown, but I am starting to see it elsewhere. If so, then “payload” for OP (OTA – Eyepieces-Finders-Cameras) should not exceed 20 lbs (or close ??).

<snip>

More to learn.




Most manufacturers when they quote capacity mean OTA and accessories and do NOT include the weight of the counterweights and counterweight shaft. I can't think of any exceptions to this, though there might be.

As far as capacity... Most manufacturers when quoting capacity are describing the visual capacity since that is how most mounts are still used. The exceptions are the manufacturers who make mounts intended primarily for astrophotography, such as Astro-Physics, Takahashi, and Software Bisque. This is where the recommendation for keeping the astrophotography payload at 50% of the recommended payload come from.

Basically, the requirements for tracking accuracy in a long exposure image are much higher than the requirements for visual use, so a mount that works well with a 30 pound payload visually may not be appropriate for use with a 30 pound payload for astrophotography.

If you are buying a Tak, Astro-Physics, Bisque, Planewave, ASA or similar mount you can pretty much assume that the capacity rating is for astrophotography. Almost anyone else, you can assume it was intended for visual. Personally, I wish the manufacturers would state which use they are rating for, but I don't think there is anything wrong with Meade (or Celestron or Losmandy or iOptron) listing the visual capacity since that is most often how their mounts are used.

By the way, the 50% recommendation is a rule of thumb only. Unfortunately, there is no "bright line" that, when crossed, makes the mount stable/unstable for a given use. Usually, performance degrades slowly as you add weight, and these issues can be somewhat mitigated by careful balance, lower moment arms, careful adjustment of backlash, replacement of grease, etc.. You have to judge for yourself based on experience and other user's comments what is "good enough".


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Peter D.
sage
*****

Reged: 02/09/12

Loc: Central New York
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: Jared]
      #5358466 - 08/08/12 05:19 PM

The LX80 is unique in that it is designed to handle two OTA's at once in the alt/az mode, one on each side of the DEC bearing. Since if only one OTA is installed then there must be a balancing weight on the other side, with two OTAs level in the alt/az mode an additional OTA can take the place of the balance weight, effectively doubling the payload in that configuration without any additional stess on the mount. By that logic the LX80 should be able to take 80 lbs of payload if both sides were 40 lbs with no additional balance weights, but they have limited it to 70 lbs in a realistic configuration. I don't think they ever intended it to be capable of taking 50 lbs on one side with the other side limited to 20 lbs plus balance weights, but you should be able to load it with two 35 lb OTAs balanced in polar mode too if the second OTA didn't hit the tripod.

Speaking of design capacity specifications, the only sensible way to specify the maximum payload "by the numbers" is to consider its structural strength and stability: de-rating that by some percentage to allow for flex and dampening is a function of expectations for a particular application and is therefore subjective. From a strictly engineering perspective a mount's rating could therefore be determined solely by its physical breaking point (plus a margin) and geometry (loaded CG in relation to tripod base area). Anything additional stiffness would be a subjective quality assessment, to be determined by the market: A high-end mount would be expected to have extra stiffness, but an entry-level one could be barely adequate and still meet the expectations of some. Such was the case of the LXD55 with the SN10 (which was probably fine if well balanced with no wind providing you didn't touch it), and may be the case for the LX80 loaded with the 10" SCT. One user's needs and expectations could be very different from another's. The commonly accepted "50% for AP" rule is strictly subjective!!! Personally, I would expect a fully loaded high-end mount not to wiggle perceptibly when touched in any application, but that criteria would not normally be applied to an entry-level mount in the same application.

Pete


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


Reged: 03/08/06

Loc: Oklahoma
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: Peter D.]
      #5358643 - 08/08/12 07:09 PM

The 50% of payload for AP is as Jared stated a Rule of Thumb

And its a numbers game you can image at a higher weight or even max payload the problem is you will need to take short subs because your are working the mount harder you will see more errors. so you use short subs because you know your are going to through more away. the problem with very short subs is Signal to Noise Ratio some of which can not be over come. the other factor is FL 500mm or short FL is more forgiving than a 1500mm FL. In a nut shell its easier to throw a football between the goal post at 20 yards now move out to 40 yards and use a hula hoop you can do this but you are going to miss more. But even using the rule of thumb and you image very light you will toss subs, We have never used 100% of our subs but with the lighter load your mount is not working as hard so you can take longer subs increasing SNR and again if you read in AP post I don't care what mount it is they will say a good place to be is 50% of payload. We are using well over the 50% rule on the LX55 and wanted more payload to help this ratio. We have Capped at 5 min subs but hoping that with bearing and better balance do to that fact it so buttery with the bearings. We could better our load on the mount. we was looking at pushing 8 min sub or even 10 sub with new LX80 but at this point we cant even get good 5 min subs. I hope that will change.

david

Not sure on the time rate on star jump I'm going to start using video to log and doc. that.

The light single OTA tracking didn't get better, but the sky wasn't great so I'm going to do another test and video everything.

Edited by TALK2KEV (08/09/12 09:45 AM)


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


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: Peter D.]
      #5358688 - 08/08/12 07:43 PM

Hi guys,
I was just looking on the meade website and when you look at the additional information it states the duel scope mode combined load is 75lbs and 40lbs in the other modes. Also it brags about the PEC for astrophotography in polar mode. To me that implies this mount is meant for AP in polar mode. Besides normally polar's primarily for AP, and Alt/Az is for visual, even though each can be for both. I think they meant for it to handle 40lbs for AP but someone was cutting cost, or the engineers screwed up. Right now its not a question of the mount performing good at 40lbs in AP but of it being able to handle 30lbs or 40lbs at all in polar.
As for the springy thing, the wormblock is spring loaded. whenever somethings out of balance or overloaded the wormgear is designed to pop out disengaging from the ring gear. This is to protect the plastic gears and motor from damage.
neilson


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

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: neilson]
      #5358706 - 08/08/12 07:55 PM

I thought spring loaded worms were to reduce backlash and the clutch was supposed to slip if you overloaded.


Since you had yours open do you remember if the worm gear is a true hobbed gear or is a angle cut spur type gear?

thanks

I found a photo of the worm gear. hobbed good for meade

Edited by Stew57 (08/08/12 08:02 PM)


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


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: Stew57]
      #5358746 - 08/08/12 08:23 PM

The clutch is not supposed to slip. Its just to easily disengage the drives when moving the ota for setup. The spring loaded wormgear does help reduce backlash by keeping the wormgear pressed against the ringgear but its mostly to allow Meade to use plastic gears and smaller motors and it will kick out before you damage them. It also allows the wormgear to stay pressed against the ring gear if its got low and high spots.
So it does help backlash (I did fail to say that before)and it protect the motor and gears from damage.
That's my opinion.
neilson


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

Reged: 05/03/09

Loc: Silsbee Texas
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: neilson]
      #5358795 - 08/08/12 08:56 PM

Power is transmitted through a worm/worm gear assembly in one direction. It would only save gears if the motor was strong enough and the mount was stopped some how. Pushing on the mount with a stopped motor will never damage the motor or spur gears. Seems a slipping worm over the worm gear would do damage to them. They are the more precision part, and more expensive too. But if that is what it is for it is what it is.
The question is how well it works keeping the backlash down (a real problem for the meades of the past) and the PE.
Hope you are having better weather than Beaumont.


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


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: Stew57]
      #5358958 - 08/08/12 11:10 PM

Mark,
When I got my mount it had 1/4" easy movement in the RA drive. All I had to do was wiggle it back and forth and pop, it would jump right out of gear and the ota would drop until it caught or I stopped it. And yes I was very upset but Meade told me it was normal for it to have 1/4" movement. Really! Yes there were a few brass shavings when I opened it up. So I adjusted it tighter. And there is a stop screw or the increased spring pressure will cause the steal worm to create brass shavings. It would pop out easier with my large ota and 2 weights, or even my big 6" refractor than with nothing of course.
Its probably meant to pop out if you hit something because somethings gotta give like the plastic gears.
The LX200ACF has a similar setup but no plastic gears and if you have a runaway mount and hit the stops the worm kicks out so the larger motor wont burn up or something break. But it can handle the ota weight and alot of heavy accessories.

One reason they say the reason for spring loaded wormblocks are because on amateur mounts they mass produce the ring gears and they are not as precise and not perfectly round so if the worm is spring loaded it can follow the high and low points of the ring gear.

But on my mount the weight of the ota would cause the spring to bounce. When I increase the pressure the steal worm digs into the brass ring so I have to adjust a screw that limits how far the worm can go down. It seemed to work good at first until it got to a low spot in the ring gear and had back and forth play in the gears. I slightly adjusted it down until it had no play. Now when it got to the high spots in the ring gear the pressure caused the motor to drag and slow and amps on my power supply meter go up. So I had to decrease the spring pressure until the drag was minimal. Now there is a little play in the RA drive from the spring loaded wormblock.
The ota is a few pounds too much. If the ring gear was more round then I could increase the spring pressure and there would be no play in the RA drive. And my 10"ota would work fine on this mount in polar mode.

Some including me put a larger spring in the LX200's wormblock. I did so the wormgear wouldn't bounce in and out of the ring gear so easy. I got smoother unguided tracking.
I live south of San Antonio and its too windy tonight.
neilson

Edited by neilson (08/09/12 12:03 AM)


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


Reged: 03/08/06

Loc: Oklahoma
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: neilson]
      #5359392 - 08/09/12 08:28 AM

Well I had a clear night a for a few hours did some more tests.

Andrew

(1) I have a old 497 HC that we use on Lx55 it has a bad display so I used Autostar Suite with its Hand controller emulator to see the display we used this controller in this way before when the display first went out until a replacement was shipped in.I set up the mount with the Audiostar controller to save time after getting the mount alignment. I parked the mount and switched controllers after time location and Ra ratio and Dec ration was changed in the old controller to +2.75075 in both RA and Dec. and used the lx55/75 polar mode parked the mount then just entered the time told the mount to goto Vega and it was just on the edge of the 20mm ep the scope used was a single OTA AT72mm Fl 430mm used PHD everything connected just fine calibrated PHD
in that part of the sky and tried guiding right away I noticed the stars drifting the old bad tracking problem was back so i tried to calibrate the tracking was so bad it wouldn't do it so I tried Meade Envisage 7.10 to see if it would do any better and no luck on either program to guide with a old 497 HC from our Lx55. the set up hit the scales at 10 Lbs.

So just as Andrew said the firmware update is a work around to deal with a issue in the motor controller boards.

So if I was to replace both motor controller boards with ones from a LX75 or Lx55 and use a old HC as set in the above test would everything work like a LX75 but in the LX80 and used a old 497 hc? just a thought!

It was a fun test just not a happy ending!


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


Reged: 03/08/06

Loc: Oklahoma
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: TALK2KEV]
      #5359410 - 08/09/12 08:51 AM Attachment (12 downloads)

This was the single OTA a 72mm Astro-Tech Ed F/6 FL430mm Camera and all just under 10 Lbs and the focuser was upside down for clearance so I can get to focus lock easy

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


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: TALK2KEV]
      #5359464 - 08/09/12 09:41 AM

Kevin... I am somewhat confused.

Did you ever try the single OTA (as above) with the standard AudioStar 497 (thus similar to my setup) ?? And if so, what were the results??

I do not recall seeing any numbers or graphs for this sinlge OTA setup. If we are "on track", then the results are of very significant importance.


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


Reged: 08/22/10

Re: LX80 RA Tracking new [Re: TALK2KEV]
      #5359635 - 08/09/12 11:00 AM

Kevin, That's a beautiful telescope. At only 10 pounds I bet the mount doesn't even know its there. cool!
neilson


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

Reged: 09/16/08

Loc: Tucson, Arizona
Re: LX80 RA Tracking *DELETED* [Re: dmdouglass]
      #5359638 - 08/09/12 11:02 AM

Post deleted by Starhawk

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


Reged: 12/23/07

Loc: Tempe, AZ
Re: LX80 RA Tracking [Re: Starhawk]
      #5359883 - 08/09/12 01:07 PM

Mark, in this case, I think I am in agreement with you. I simply do not know what Dennis/Kevin were trying to do. They got the combined OTA-Mount weight down, and I was hoping for some comparison numbers and graphs. I am sort of lost on their direction. At least Nielson is trying smaller OTA combinations, and reporting good GOTOs and steady views. But still, no numbers, and no guiding graphs.

As a thought, you can always put this thread on ignore. Not sure what your posting was intended to say or do. But, since you are still watching…..

The little brown UPS truck is supposed to visit with me today. I am putting the observing tent up, and getting everything ready, in anticipation. The weather is looking good (I think), and I have a plan for the evening. I will list here in detail what I plan on doing. Maybe then, others may try to duplicate the procedure, and produce some comparable results.

I will spend about 20-30 min doing the polar alignment, getting it good and tight. I will then move to my single target for the evening, SAO141665, a nice mag 4.8(ish) star, with a nice identifiable star filed. Using the SBIG, I will capture several 2-min frames (unguided), to verify the polar alignment. I should have a good steady image (which I will post).

Next, I will change the camera to the DSI-2. After focus, I will lock on with PHD (thus training PHD to the mount), and log a 40-min guided run. 40-min is 3+ turns of the worm. Following that run, I will turn off guiding, using the “disable guiding commands”, and start a new log. PHD will continue to log, and a “unguided” 40-min run will follow. This will produce data which should be comparable to the Pempro run, which will follow.

Following the PHD runs, I will do a 40-min Pempro run, doing PEC analisis.

As a reminder, my configuration will be a single OTA (the Meade SC-6), with a published weight of 13 lbs. I will try and do a sample weight of the OTA, spotter, and cameras before this evenings tests.

Tonight run(s) will be done using the standard AudioStar controller, with current non-modified firmware. I expect to see repeated occurrences of the “jump out of the box and recover” sequences. Hopefully, we will see a repeatable frequency which will help identify that occurrence. I also expect to see VERY GOOD to EXCELLENT numbers, as before. We shall see. The numbers will be what they are.

All results will be published here on the thread. After that, I am not sure there is anything else I can contribute. It will probably be time for me to sit back, and watch, and return to my normal observing programs.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: << 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | >> (show all)


Extra information
21 registered and 36 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: 68106

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics