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

Intes MK63. I don't NEED another scope!

  • Please log in to reply
123 replies to this topic

#26 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 24 November 2016 - 04:35 PM

Second thought.  There are two pointers.  one on the base and one on the forks.  So it's not a driven RA circle, dagnabbit.  So you set the RA before you deflect to the next object, which is rather stoopid, in my view (but how most classics did it, because they were too lazy to design a driven circle).

 

-Tim.


  • Geo31 and Augustus like this

#27 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 24 November 2016 - 08:29 PM

Seeing is poor, and Venus was low just now. I think there's hope for the optics, but

so far it doesn't quite grab me. I was going to put it away, but I just covered it up and I'll go back out in a few hours and look at some objects higher up.  

 

One  thing though. It shakes quite a bit for quite a while when focusing. I think I got things tight, but maybe not. 


Edited by tim53, 24 November 2016 - 08:34 PM.


#28 rolo

rolo

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,289
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2007
  • Loc: GA

Posted 25 November 2016 - 08:23 AM

How about Jupiter and little star testing?



#29 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 25 November 2016 - 11:06 AM

I went back out last night after my sister and kids left for the evening.  It was windy (we have santa ana winds this week), and there were high thin clouds, so I was only able to find a couple naked eye stars to play with.  I can't tell anything about the optics yet, the seeing was awful (maybe a 2/10).  

 

But that tripod has to go.  Or at least I need to try the Celestron tripod under it - the one I bought when Franks Camera here was being cleaned out  (it's an 80s version, new old stock, but with the plastic leg clamps).  There's just not a large enough footprint for the base of the mount to rest on.  The tripod has a nice wooden tray that won't fit on the tripod without popping off the supports as you push the leg tips into the ground.

 

The wooden box it came in would be wonderful if it were just one inch larger in all directions.  As it is, it just pi$$es me off.  You have to be too careful putting the OTA/fork assembly in, as there is too little clearance (none, really) between the forks and the walls, and between the guidescope and the end of the box.  I love the hardware, though.

 

I do like the way the guidescope is mounted and adjusted, but if I were to build such a system (something similar, I've been thinking about for some years), I'd make it taller for fat fingers to get in between the scope and the guidescope for easier adjustment.  That would also allow for larger adjustments (for finding off axis guide stars and such).  The other thing I'd do for a guidescope mount like that would be to use a flexible metal plate on the sky end rather than a pin.  The pin is only ridgid when the nut on the main end is tight, so while you're making adjustments, the scope can jump around because it's loose everywhere, just staying on the screws and pin-side of the play under its own weight.  The optics on the guidescope seem to be reasonably good, though I only viewed through it much on downtown LA skyscrapers 7 miles away during daylight.  

 

The finder doesn't appear to be adjustable, and it's not coaxial with the main scope (but possibly close enough to still be able to find things).  It's got a nice reticle and good optics.  I like the helical focuser on the finder.  

 

The drive seems to work okay, but I have to set the pot to nearly the maximum speed to keep things in the field.  So "fast" on the HC doesn't go much faster.  The other button is "stop" which does work well (!).

 

I'm going to experiment with it when I get more time.  We're planning to go out to Cosmic Acres overnight and through tomorrow, so not until Sunday, if there's time and the weather permits.

 

It should be pretty easy to set up an autocollimation stand for this scope over my oil pan flat.  One of these days.

 

-Tim.


  • Terra Nova and Bomber Bob like this

#30 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 25 November 2016 - 03:35 PM

Spousal unit woke up with a cold this am, so we're staying home today. We might go tomorrow if she feels better. I'm going to look at my inventory and decide which scope or two to list for culling. 



#31 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 30 November 2016 - 07:52 PM

I have the scope out now. Seeing is awful again due to Santa Ana winds aloft (it's calm down here), but through it all I can tell that venus' gibbous disk has subtle shading on it. Center near terminator is slightly dimmer than rest. 



#32 fjs

fjs

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,896
  • Joined: 25 Mar 2013
  • Loc: Olympic Peninsula, les États-Unis

Posted 30 November 2016 - 08:04 PM

Jeez Tim! I keep waiting for you to have good seeing. Can you just take it to Hawaii or Peru or Mars or somewhere already?

#33 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 30 November 2016 - 08:05 PM

 Rest on the ground now, but seeing a little better. Venus looks okay. I'll try a star higher up when it gets darker


  • Augustus likes this

#34 strdst

strdst

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,009
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Oregon Territory

Posted 30 November 2016 - 10:07 PM

I have the scope out now. Seeing is awful again due to Santa Ana winds aloft (it's calm down here), but through it all I can tell that venus' gibbous disk has subtle shading on it. Center near terminator is slightly dimmer than rest. 

I remember those winds when living in Whittier. When you notice the traffic light is twinkling while you wait for it to change... 


  • tim53 likes this

#35 Augustus

Augustus

    Fly Me To The Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,635
  • Joined: 26 Dec 2015
  • Loc: Stamford, Connecticut

Posted 08 February 2017 - 02:00 PM

Any updates?



#36 Richard Whalen

Richard Whalen

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,862
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Florida

Posted 09 February 2017 - 05:07 PM

Hi Tim,

 

It looks very nice. Personally, I like Maks, but they do have their downsides; they take a while to cool down and they will dew up if possible. I think you are correct that it is primarily a planetary scope.

 

It looks like the one that was for sale by Teddi Kroll last year. I wanted to buy it, but could not scrape together the funds before it was sold. Bummer.

 

If you get tired of it and want to sell, I will likely be interested. Let me know: charles (at) stellanova.com

 

Have fun,    Charles

Being from Intes, I doubt it has a Pyrex mirror, so cool down should not be much of an issue other than some heat plums unless you have an internal fan to mix it up. Probably less than your typical SCT.


  • Deven Matlick and Augustus like this

#37 Richard Whalen

Richard Whalen

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,862
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Florida

Posted 10 February 2017 - 08:56 PM

Don't just restrict it to planetary, will be great on doubles, open clusters, planetary nebula and not bad on galaxies for a 6" scope. Should have very good contrast....Make a dew shield!


  • Augustus likes this

#38 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 16 May 2019 - 09:00 AM

Okay, so it's been over 2 years!  I think, now that I've got the 8" f/8 mirror fixed and need to get it sent out for coating, I'll try working on the MK63 next, as the next "easiest" project to tackle.  

 

Here are the ronchigrams I took a couple years ago, and why I haven't used this scope since the first couple nights I took it out.  There's a hole around the hole, and a TDE, if we assume that both issues are in the primary (this is dpac of the whole telescope, as built).

 

Inside focus:

post-6788-0-46525600-1485131189.jpg

 

And outside focus:

post-6788-0-41146800-1485131197.jpg


  • KentTolley likes this

#39 photoracer18

photoracer18

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,457
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Martinsburg, WV

Posted 16 May 2019 - 03:06 PM

Yes, it's got a 1 1/4" low profile JMI crayford that screws onto the visual back threads.  So I can use it on the guidescope as well.  I might check to see if JMI has any more of these in stock so I don't have to do that.  The illuminated red dot diagonal that came with the scope is an after market modification.  It's neat, but I don't expect I'll use it to manually guide.   I'll probably just use a Pt Grey camera to guide with on my computer screen.
 
-Tim.


Same focuser as the MK-65 JMI used to import.

#40 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 19 May 2019 - 04:42 PM

holy cow!

 

Anybody ever defork one of thesebefore?  I've taken off the guide scope, taken out all the screws that appear to go into the primary mirror cell, taken out the screws holding the forks to the base, and I still can't figure out how to take the forks off or the mirror cell out.  I'd much rather set just the OTA on the bench, and set it up so I can take the mirror out, test it and work on it, and put it back to test again without the forks getting in the way.



#41 rolo

rolo

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,289
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2007
  • Loc: GA

Posted 19 May 2019 - 04:51 PM

I did and installed a dovetail but I don't remember cause it was a long time ago....sorry

Attached Thumbnails

  • Intes MK63 copy.jpg

  • mattyfatz likes this

#42 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 19,988
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 19 May 2019 - 04:55 PM

Never had 1.



#43 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 19 May 2019 - 05:22 PM

Ok. Figured it out. Was rather a pain and a lot of what they did makes little to no sense (to me). It’s like they wanted to hide the fasteners.  But it’s such a spartan telescope that I have to wonder why. 

 

Anyway, now I have a mess. The tube was painted after assembly, cause it’s bare under the fork brackets. The bolt

for the sky end of the guide scope has a nut on the inside of the tube, and the finder brackets have Phillips screws on the inside of the tube. The finder isn’t adjustable, so it’s kind of useless. But I did like the helical focuser on it. 

 

I may modify the hell out of it if I get the optics working well. The other option would be to put it all back to stock and sell it. 

 

I wanted to get more experience refiguring things before tackling my more challenging projects. 

 

Remember when i ruminated that the mirror might be too tight right in the cell?  Well it isn’t. Moving around a bit even. The baffle tube is screwed onto the cell, with a bright green o ring or gasket against the mirror. So at least getting it out should be easy. 

Attached Thumbnails

  • 9C052751-8EF0-4541-B628-849A32AEF19F.jpeg
  • A324545B-F909-4620-8443-99124723D8F8.jpeg
  • 48F45CAF-CB9A-4A8D-85B3-FF15E87B23C8.jpeg

Edited by tim53, 19 May 2019 - 05:39 PM.


#44 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 19 May 2019 - 05:51 PM

Radius of curvature of the mirror is 31.5", so focal length of 15.75".  The mirror is 6.625" in diameter, so it's an f/2.38.  Clear aperture on the meniscus is exactly 6".

 

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • A8D390E6-C964-4DFD-983B-7E32311A0972.jpeg

Edited by tim53, 19 May 2019 - 05:54 PM.


#45 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 19 May 2019 - 06:34 PM

Wow, ROC is so EASY!

 

And when I did these, I started to think, uh oh.  They look pretty decent. 

 

Inside ROC:

20190519_160828_L_68PN_InsideROC.jpg

 

Outside ROC:

20190519_161817_L_68PN_outsideROC.jpg

 

And I started to worry that the problems were in the meniscus.  But then I thought, hey, this was easy, and I'm still set up and on my xyz stage.  I'll try at ROC.  That's where it gets interesting:

 

20190519_161425_L_68PN_atROC.jpg

 

So it's a crummy, machine polished sphere.

 

Now I know what I have to do.  I probably should order some pitch, since the lap I made for the 6" gregorian is about an inch smaller and is all lumpy from sitting the past couple years.  I might have some from an old kit I bought a while back, but it's likely about 60 years old!

 

It's late Sunday afternoon, so I prolly ought to put this away for the next couple weeks.

 

-Tim.


  • rolo likes this

#46 rolo

rolo

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,289
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2007
  • Loc: GA

Posted 20 May 2019 - 10:36 AM

That explains the hole you got on the DPAC of the complete scope. Interesting that it doesn't show up on the Ronchi lines of the mirror by itself.


  • tim53 likes this

#47 tim53

tim53

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 15,007
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Highland Park, CA

Posted 20 May 2019 - 11:22 AM

That explains the hole you got on the DPAC of the complete scope. Interesting that it doesn't show up on the Ronchi lines of the mirror by itself.

It does if you look closely. This shows how sensitive dpac is. 



#48 DAVIDG

DAVIDG

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,624
  • Joined: 02 Dec 2004
  • Loc: Hockessin, De

Posted 20 May 2019 - 12:41 PM

 You also have to remember  that in Double Pass testing, your testing the complete optical system. So while the hole in Tim's primary  isn't standing out in the Ronchi image at the radius of curvature of just testing the mirror, when the error is magnified by the interaction with the meniscus and the secondary on the back of meniscus along with DPAC being a double pass, it clearly show up. 

  So when you test optics you need  to understand that all the errors add. Some may add together  and some may cancel but your looking at the complete system.  Just like in electronics a small error in one part may get amplified many time in another part and the result is a large total error. 

   The good news is some pitch and polish will fix this system and Tim will be able to fully correct his Mak  to make an excellent telescope.

 

                   - Dave 


  • Augustus likes this

#49 bremms

bremms

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,262
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2012
  • Loc: SC

Posted 20 May 2019 - 12:46 PM

That's about what mine looked like. Meh at best.



#50 rolo

rolo

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,289
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2007
  • Loc: GA

Posted 20 May 2019 - 08:55 PM

It does if you look closely. This shows how sensitive dpac is. 

Not in this case, at least not the mirror by itself. You didn't notice the hole yourself until you tested it at ROC on the primary by itself. You still have the TE and what looks to be roughness or radial polishing marks on the meniscus. At least it looks that way on your Old DPAC test of the complete scope. Are you just going to polish the primary or will you work on the meniscus as well?




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 Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics