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

Astro-Physics 10" Mak-Cass

  • Please log in to reply
515 replies to this topic

#476 nobake

nobake

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 200
  • Joined: 17 Mar 2005
  • Loc: Eastern Iowa

Posted 20 September 2019 - 07:56 PM

Is anyone using the 10" Mak-Cass on a Losmandy G11G? 

 

I'm going to need a mount for one and would like something nice and sturdy but don't want to spend the money for the premium level.

 

thanks,

matt



#477 nobake

nobake

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 200
  • Joined: 17 Mar 2005
  • Loc: Eastern Iowa

Posted 21 September 2019 - 07:18 AM

answering my own question - I found Jay Reynolds Freeman's observing report(s) on his 2000 vintage mak and he used a G11 and didn't make any note of the mount causing problems.

 

matt



#478 vahe

vahe

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Houston, Texas

Posted 21 September 2019 - 08:50 AM

My two cents:

.
It can be done although you are pushing the mount to its absolute limits, for years I mounted my 10" TEC  Mak on G11, this was an early "Celestron G11", the TEC is roughly 35 pounds and in strictly visual mode the only extra weight added to the Mak was a Zeiss viewer. For this setup I used four 11 pound counterweights.
Several safety issues to consider for mounting a 10" Mak on G11, you will need a more rigid saddle with a minimum of two locking knobs, the original saddle is not strong enough, I used a 12" RobinCasady saddle, and even with Casady saddle it was a good safety measure to install a safety bolt under the sliding plate just in case if the Mak starts to slide down.
I know many have used C14's on G11 for visual but again you are at its limits.

.
Personally I would not even consider risking a $22K Mak on a G11, any vintage, regardless of its advertised load capacity.
.
Vahe


  • Gleason likes this

#479 Swimmeruk

Swimmeruk

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2010

Posted 21 September 2019 - 09:06 AM

I am planning to go with the G11 as well but I want to work thru the saddle dovetail set up and try to get it right.  I plan to stick with visual viewing and hope that the efforts to drop weight work out.  Thanks for the recommendation for the robin casady saddle.

Chad



#480 nobake

nobake

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 200
  • Joined: 17 Mar 2005
  • Loc: Eastern Iowa

Posted 21 September 2019 - 09:16 AM

Thanks for the information and advice, Vahe. 

 

matt



#481 Gleason

Gleason

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 232
  • Joined: 03 Jan 2013
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 25 September 2019 - 06:42 PM

The mechanical smoothness of the Mak focuser is effortless, so it means little pressure on the tube when focusing. With that said, tolerance for vibration is a highly individual thing.  I would probably consider the Losmandy G11GT-LT Equatorial GoTo Mount on the HD folding tripod if I had to go that route today.  Remember guys, these are high magnification instruments.  You don't want "Jello" observing, even when idling at 100X.  My Mak + AP 1100 requires at least 2 X #18 counterweights.  Even better when you add #10 weight for fine tuning balance.   Keep your counterweights close to the center axis as possible.  

 

cheers 

 

jg



#482 Paul G

Paul G

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,687
  • Joined: 08 May 2003
  • Loc: Freedonia

Posted 26 September 2019 - 09:47 AM

Isn’t Casady out of the astronomy business?



#483 vahe

vahe

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,692
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Houston, Texas

Posted 26 September 2019 - 09:50 AM

Isn’t Casady out of the astronomy business?

Yes, but their saddles show up on Amart occasionally.

.

Vahe



#484 Swimmeruk

Swimmeruk

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2010

Posted 22 October 2019 - 04:47 PM

Just an update for those following this thread.  Emailed Daleen and it seems that the July notified 10" Maks are not on any schedule for completion.  Was supposed to be Sept.  Not that this is changing my mind but with no schedule is I guess a little more unsettling.  Hope  whatever has put them behind gets worked out.

-Chad



#485 DeanS

DeanS

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,443
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2005
  • Loc: Central Kentucky

Posted 22 October 2019 - 04:52 PM

Isn’t Casady out of the astronomy business?

bndastro.com has taken over and selling Robins products now.  I believe the same guy that made them before is still doing them for these guys.  Saw them at OkieTex and are indeed the same as Robins.


  • peleuba and Chris Cook like this

#486 Gleason

Gleason

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 232
  • Joined: 03 Jan 2013
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 28 November 2019 - 02:17 PM

I assume the Mak-Cass scopes have been put into storage for winter as there are no new observing reports.  Or folks are just board with it already? ;-)  Seeing has been pretty bad around my locs lately.  I did see the new Mach 2 at AIC.  Quite nice and it would hold the Mak easily.  Smaller, more portable than the 1100 me thinks.  Also got a look at the Panther 160 in person.  Bit of an odd duck, larger and heavier than I thought, but it would appear to also hold the Mak for casual visual without the hassle of German EQ.  Panther hand control logic could be a problem for a tired brain on a cold late night. ;-)

 

j



#487 Swimmeruk

Swimmeruk

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2010

Posted 30 November 2019 - 01:50 PM

I got an update that the new batch is being worked on YAY.....


  • R Botero and Gleason like this

#488 Gleason

Gleason

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 232
  • Joined: 03 Jan 2013
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 14 December 2019 - 08:51 PM

I got an update that the new batch is being worked on YAY.....

I hope your are right.  There was an indication on one of the AP user groups, that most likely there will not be another production run of the RHA 305.  A much different and perhaps more difficult beast to build.  Just ordered (secret Santa), the new Pentax 40mm - R for the Mak-Cass. Should be a great combination. 



#489 Enyo

Enyo

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 73
  • Joined: 15 May 2003

Posted 10 January 2020 - 10:03 PM

Got a call from Daleen today.  The scope is a couple of weeks away from shipping.  So ordered a bunch of stuff to upgrade my Mach1 mount to deal with it.  Will arrive a little over 20 years from when I got on the interest list.


  • R Botero, eros312, coz and 3 others like this

#490 macdonjh

macdonjh

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,950
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2006

Posted 11 January 2020 - 08:35 AM

My two cents:

.
It can be done although you are pushing the mount to its absolute limits, for years I mounted my 10" TEC  Mak on G11, this was an early "Celestron G11", the TEC is roughly 35 pounds and in strictly visual mode the only extra weight added to the Mak was a Zeiss viewer. For this setup I used four 11 pound counterweights.
Several safety issues to consider for mounting a 10" Mak on G11, you will need a more rigid saddle with a minimum of two locking knobs, the original saddle is not strong enough, I used a 12" RobinCasady saddle, and even with Casady saddle it was a good safety measure to install a safety bolt under the sliding plate just in case if the Mak starts to slide down.
I know many have used C14's on G11 for visual but again you are at its limits.

.
Personally I would not even consider risking a $22K Mak on a G11, any vintage, regardless of its advertised load capacity.
.
Vahe

Here are two photos of 25 kg telelscopes on my G11.

 

Parks 1.JPG

I used this 10" Parks hybrid for a couple of years in a mobile set-up with Losmandy's standard heavy tripod and a Robin Cassady saddle.  I had to be sure it was well balanced and I lowered the slew speed to 600.  Other than that I had no trouble observing.  The scope never fell off the mount.  Not once.

 

Plot 6 052916 in NW.JPG

I started using this scope in 2016.  The installation was a little more stable since I traded a tripod for a permanent pier.  Still no issues at all.

 

I don't know that my G11 would have performed well as an imaging mount with either of these scopes.  As has been said, they put the G11 "right at the edge" of its capabilities.  And the Parks is a weird load, with off-axis mass in a couple of different places making it hard to balance.  I was surprised how well it worked, actually.  A friend used a C14 on a G11 years ago and I thought it was shaky.  In fact, that experience was one factor in my deciding to buy a C11 instead of a C14 a few years later.  Go figure.

 

bndastro.com has taken over and selling Robins products now.  I believe the same guy that made them before is still doing them for these guys.  Saw them at OkieTex and are indeed the same as Robins.

I didn't know anyone had taken over manufacturing Robin Cassady's components.  That's good.  I have a Robin Cassady saddle on one of my mounts.  On two others, I have an ADM saddle, since I didn't know Robin Cassady's parts were being made.  The ADM saddles are also good, I have no complaints.


  • Tyson M likes this

#491 RalphMeisterTigerMan

RalphMeisterTigerMan

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,020
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2016

Posted 11 January 2020 - 11:04 AM

It would be interesting to put a Questar 12 beside one of Roland's 10" Mak-Cass but I do not think that a comparison would be possible since the Questar 12's were severely over-built to the point where they took a long time to reach ambient tempurature.

 

I saw pics where Roland went to great pains to decrease the mass of the back end of the Mak and to manufacture the entire OTA so that the cooling time was not that much of an issue. I also read reports from amateurs where the optical performance of this particular scope was amazing. Detail on several of Juptier's moons was particularly impressive and so was the magnification that was being used on this occasion, if memory serves all of the conditions came together just right so that it was actually possible for observing above 1,000 X. 

 

Now that's a Planet Killer!

 

Clear skies!

RalphMeisterTigerMan


  • Paul Hyndman, John O'Grady, coz and 1 other like this

#492 sqrlman

sqrlman

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 180
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2008

Posted 12 January 2020 - 06:04 PM

My two cents:

.
It can be done although you are pushing the mount to its absolute limits, for years I mounted my 10" TEC  Mak on G11, this was an early "Celestron G11", the TEC is roughly 35 pounds and in strictly visual mode the only extra weight added to the Mak was a Zeiss viewer. For this setup I used four 11 pound counterweights.
Several safety issues to consider for mounting a 10" Mak on G11, you will need a more rigid saddle with a minimum of two locking knobs, the original saddle is not strong enough, I used a 12" RobinCasady saddle, and even with Casady saddle it was a good safety measure to install a safety bolt under the sliding plate just in case if the Mak starts to slide down.
I know many have used C14's on G11 for visual but again you are at its limits.

.
Personally I would not even consider risking a $22K Mak on a G11, any vintage, regardless of its advertised load capacity.
.
Vahe

I owned a 10" TEC and the OTA weighed 45 lbs. I have weighed it and it was listed on the TEC website at 45 lbs. Not 35lbs.

In 2003 on SAA you even said it weighed 55 lbs with the rings and dovetail. The AP Mak only weighs 31 lbs. Not much more than my Meade 10" SCT and I use it on a CG5. The AP Mak is 4.5" shorter than the TEC 10 and that counts for something.

AP Mak on a G11, no problem at all.

 

 

Steve


  • Paul G, peleuba and Tyson M like this

#493 Gleason

Gleason

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 232
  • Joined: 03 Jan 2013
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 13 January 2020 - 12:45 AM

It would be interesting to put a Questar 12 beside one of Roland's 10" Mak-Cass but I do not think that a comparison would be possible since the Questar 12's were severely over-built to the point where they took a long time to reach ambient tempurature.

 

I saw pics where Roland went to great pains to decrease the mass of the back end of the Mak and to manufacture the entire OTA so that the cooling time was not that much of an issue. I also read reports from amateurs where the optical performance of this particular scope was amazing. Detail on several of Juptier's moons was particularly impressive and so was the magnification that was being used on this occasion, if memory serves all of the conditions came together just right so that it was actually possible for observing above 1,000 X. 

 

Now that's a Planet Killer!

 

Clear skies!

RalphMeisterTigerMan

I would bet that albedo features on Jupiter's moons would be quite possible in the 10" Mak-Cass, if the planet was up high enough like it has been in the southern hemisphere this past opposition.  It relishes exceptional seeing and high magnification.  I tried on several arc-second nights from 37N and saw no hint of shading on either of the largest moons @ 600X.  With the upcoming Mars opposition, it will be interesting to hunt for the 2 tiny moons.  


  • Tyson M likes this

#494 Gleason

Gleason

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 232
  • Joined: 03 Jan 2013
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 13 January 2020 - 12:55 AM

I owned a 10" TEC and the OTA weighed 45 lbs. I have weighed it and it was listed on the TEC website at 45 lbs. Not 35lbs.

In 2003 on SAA you even said it weighed 55 lbs with the rings and dovetail. The AP Mak only weighs 31 lbs. Not much more than my Meade 10" SCT and I use it on a CG5. The AP Mak is 4.5" shorter than the TEC 10 and that counts for something.

AP Mak on a G11, no problem at all.

 

 

Steve

The ideal mount is the new Mach 2 from AP.  It will carry the Mak-Cass with ease and small enough to be quite portable.  There is that crazy famous photo of the Mak-Cass mounted to the top of a GT130 on the Mach2.  ;-)



#495 luxo II

luxo II

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,486
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 13 January 2020 - 04:25 AM

Not sure how open the back of the AP is. On my 10” Matthias Wirth went nuts and the backend has more holes than Swiss cheese... hence my nickname for it "the cheesegrater". And the primary is conical and thin with a seal between the edge of the mirror and the OTA, so that damp/dirty air does not enter the OTA.

The central baffle tube is highly unusual and I’ll refrain from disclosing the details as that’s clearly a bit of a secret. The result is a scope that does not show a central plume after setup. Without insulation, as it has a metal tube there is some swirling air visible from the inside vs outside temperature difference, but insulation kills that effectively.

 

It's high time the manufacturers of big maks wise up and insulate their tubes from the inside, it would not be so difficult.


Edited by luxo II, 13 January 2020 - 04:39 AM.


#496 Gleason

Gleason

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 232
  • Joined: 03 Jan 2013
  • Loc: SF Bay Area

Posted 13 January 2020 - 01:19 PM

Not sure how open the back of the AP is. On my 10” Matthias Wirth went nuts and the backend has more holes than Swiss cheese... hence my nickname for it "the cheesegrater". And the primary is conical and thin with a seal between the edge of the mirror and the OTA, so that damp/dirty air does not enter the OTA.

The central baffle tube is highly unusual and I’ll refrain from disclosing the details as that’s clearly a bit of a secret. The result is a scope that does not show a central plume after setup. Without insulation, as it has a metal tube there is some swirling air visible from the inside vs outside temperature difference, but insulation kills that effectively.

 

It's high time the manufacturers of big maks wise up and insulate their tubes from the inside, it would not be so difficult.

The AP has two removable backplates on the rear cell held in place by spring loaded capture bolts.   I usually remove these in early evening.  In fact I just keep them off all night.  

Attached Thumbnails

  • 20190613_181944(0)_resized.jpg

  • eros312, Tyson M and luxo II like this

#497 stuart keenor

stuart keenor

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 155
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2011

Posted 13 January 2020 - 02:39 PM

Very nice 👍 I can’t wait to test the 12” zen and compare it to my previous 10 f 15 intes micro scope but also I will do a side by side comparison with a 10” f5.5 Mak newt from intes micro none of these scope have any insulation sadly just cooling fans

#498 macdonjh

macdonjh

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,950
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2006

Posted 14 January 2020 - 07:32 AM

the Mak-Cass mounted to the top of a GT130 on the Mach2.  ;-)

That seems wrong somehow...  Upside-down?  Backward?



#499 luxo II

luxo II

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,486
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 15 January 2020 - 06:16 AM

none of these scope have any insulation sadly

Easily fixed I suggest - a roll of EVA foam or a yoga mat with a velcro strap will do (ugly, but it works). A cheap reflective sunscreen for a car is even better. Net cost possibly $10.


Edited by luxo II, 15 January 2020 - 06:17 AM.


#500 stuart keenor

stuart keenor

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 155
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2011

Posted 15 January 2020 - 05:24 PM

Will definitely try this 👍as il be in southern Spain so it will be warm was going to get cover for both scopes any recommendations ??


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