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

Lazzarotti Gladius still in business?

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 rcg

rcg

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1662
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2005
  • Loc: SE Missouri

Posted 05 January 2019 - 12:59 AM

A few years back there was a new cassegrain tube design, I think it was of DK optical design. The Inventor was a guy named Lazzerotti and he called his opwn tube design the Gladius. I was based on a minimalist carbon fiber frame. What happened to this scope design? Did he go out of business, pass away, or was it just unsuccessful? Does anyone know the story?


Edited by rcg, 05 January 2019 - 01:00 AM.


#2 pierce

pierce

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 635
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Santa Cruz, CA

Posted 05 January 2019 - 01:09 AM

while google found me this,

http://www.alpineast...arotti_Home.htm

 

I note its no longer linked on Alpine's home page, so you might ask them... Alpine appears to still be in business, they had a bunch of christmas specials last month, etc.   The Lazzarotti pages are 10 years old.



#3 luxo II

luxo II

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 888
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 05 January 2019 - 05:48 AM

I can see why that never caught on - he was no mechanical engineer. That assembly is hopelessly prone to misalignment do to varying flexure and torsional twisting at different positions in the sky. Enough to ruin collimation of a cassegrain.

 

Donald Dilworth came up with a much better "tubeless" cassegrain which appeared in S&T a few decades ago. Difficult and demanding to make, but it worked. 

 

There really is a reason why a machined outer tube OTA works best for cassegrains.


Edited by luxo II, 05 January 2019 - 05:54 AM.


#4 James Ball

James Ball

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 22 Jun 2014
  • Loc: Western Kentucky

Posted 05 January 2019 - 11:48 AM

I can see why that never caught on - he was no mechanical engineer. That assembly is hopelessly prone to misalignment do to varying flexure and torsional twisting at different positions in the sky. Enough to ruin collimation of a cassegrain.

 

Donald Dilworth came up with a much better "tubeless" cassegrain which appeared in S&T a few decades ago. Difficult and demanding to make, but it worked. 

 

There really is a reason why a machined outer tube OTA works best for cassegrains.

But I do like the look of the secondary support "ring".  I wonder if that would work in a Newt to reduce the defraction spikes similar to curved vanes but only having "vanes" on one side of the secondary instead of above and below?



#5 bandazar

bandazar

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 371
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2005

Posted 05 January 2019 - 04:30 PM

The f ratios are also ridiculously high.  Maybe this was done because of the design.  And at that price, many people probably could get a takahashi.  There might be a market for open tubed cassegrains.  But it would have to be at faster focal ratios and  at least a price that is comparable to what is on the market.  The big savings would be in weight and cool-down.  Assuming it could be done.



#6 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12604
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 05 January 2019 - 07:49 PM

...going back some time now Paolo produced quite a lot of excellent hi-res planetary images with one of his Gladius scopes.

 

You can see some fine examples in his "Solar System" pages of his website here: http://www.paololazz...to/solar-system

 

It appears he has not engaged in planetary imaging for quite some time...

 

He also does quite a lot of photography, here's the main page of his site: http://www.paololazzarotti.photo/

 

I get the impression he has branched off into other pursuits & that the "Gladius" (which he says was a "concept telescope") was either not commercially viable, or suffered other issues...

 

I would be hesitant to "write off" its merit or capabilities as some posts "might" suggest - the results back then with a ccd camera which would be considered far inferior to today's cmos planetary cameras, demonstrates that his Gladius was a very capable performer indeed! waytogo.gif waytogo.gif waytogo.gif

 

 


  • ATM57, ShaulaB and gfstallin like this

#7 pierce

pierce

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 635
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Santa Cruz, CA

Posted 05 January 2019 - 08:00 PM

The f ratios are also ridiculously high.  Maybe this was done because of the design.  And at that price, many people probably could get a takahashi.  There might be a market for open tubed cassegrains.  But it would have to be at faster focal ratios and  at least a price that is comparable to what is on the market.  The big savings would be in weight and cool-down.  Assuming it could be done.

 

D-K scopes are generally at least f/16, I thought ?   OTOH, F/25 is kinda insane.   I note they use an f/4 primary...  classic SCT's like Celestron have a F/2 primary, I believe.   ahh, I see Mssr.  Lazzarotti is a 'fine art' photographer, who's astronomy interests were strictly planetary:   http://www.paololazz...to/solar-system



#8 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12604
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 05 January 2019 - 09:33 PM

...nothing "insane" in f25 scopes, especially when the camera sensors had much larger pixel-sizing in general..!

 

I'd already supplied the link in the post above your own pierce - but fyi the cameras mentioned have pixel sizes 2x or 3x times larger than current cmos "standards" - & of course the current cams run at far greater frame-rates. ;)

 

The larger pixels in the sensors he used makes f25 relatively "small beer" but as I said above, the "Gladius" must've been a pretty good performer & not too "fragile" structurally-wise as intimated...I well remember Paolo detailing a trip to Sicily for one of his imaging forays with said scope! waytogo.gif


  • gfstallin likes this

#9 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12604
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 05 January 2019 - 09:45 PM

...completely within the ambit of the OP's thread/questions, this link might "possibly" throw some light on the fate of the "Gladius" as a production telescope: as I've said Paolo produced many top-shelf planetary images with his own Gladius but perhaps my suggestion in my 2nd last para. in my Post #6...

 

https://astro-foren....eport-–-part-I/



#10 photoracer18

photoracer18

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2559
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Martinsburg, WV

Posted 07 January 2019 - 05:35 PM

D-K scopes are generally at least f/16, I thought ?   OTOH, F/25 is kinda insane.   I note they use an f/4 primary...  classic SCT's like Celestron have a F/2 primary, I believe.   ahh, I see Mssr.  Lazzarotti is a 'fine art' photographer, who's astronomy interests were strictly planetary:   http://www.paololazz...to/solar-system

DK imaging scopes tend to be F6-F7 as they have corrective optics between the secondary and the focuser I think.

#11 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12604
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 07 January 2019 - 06:00 PM

DK imaging scopes tend to be F6-F7 as they have corrective optics between the secondary and the focuser I think.

You're referring to a "CD-K" my friend, that is, a corrected Dall-Kirkham.

 

These utilise a correcting lens system as opposed to the D-K...

 

Both types have ellipsoidal primary mirrors & spheroidal secondaries...you're correct in that the CD-K is a "faster" scope than either the classical Cassegrain or D-K Cassegrain.



#12 gnowellsct

gnowellsct

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15348
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2009

Posted 10 January 2019 - 08:20 AM

It was a beautiful looking scope. You would have to be nuts to use an unprotected mirror in heavy dew. Never mind additional vulnerability if used at a star party. And no protective mirror cell...that primary had "chip my edge" written all over it. The planetary images that I saw from these scopes were no better than what you might make with a 9.25 at much lower cost. Aside from all that it was a great scope.
  • gfstallin likes this

#13 gfstallin

gfstallin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2015
  • Loc: Cheverly, Maryland USA

Posted 11 January 2019 - 04:15 AM

It was a beautiful looking scope. You would have to be nuts to use an unprotected mirror in heavy dew. Never mind additional vulnerability if used at a star party. And no protective mirror cell...that primary had "chip my edge" written all over it. The planetary images that I saw from these scopes were no better than what you might make with a 9.25 at much lower cost. Aside from all that it was a great scope.

My first reaction upon seeing photos of this scope was to find a way to contact Lazzarotti and see if I could ever get my hands on one of these. I speak Italian and I am a member of a couple active Italian astronomy forums, so I figured it wouldn't be too difficult to at least make contact. And then came my second reaction: to question how practical this telescope actually is. My optics last about 20 minutes unprotected under "normal" conditions. In what is heavy dew for us, I doubt they'd last 10. Also, being in the dead center of a major urban area, downwind of coal use and production country, at the southern end of the largest conurbation in North America, constant exposure of the mirrors to everything else in the atmosphere besides water just seems like a perfect recipe for rapid coatings degradation. 

 

In its minimalism, it is a fantastically beautiful piece of equipment. For some reason (maybe cultural?), Italians excel at this type of design. Much like the hand-built Lamborghini, I'm just not sure it is practical as a daily driver for many, if not most, folks.  

 

George


Edited by gfstallin, 11 January 2019 - 04:19 AM.

  • gnowellsct likes this

#14 gnowellsct

gnowellsct

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 15348
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2009

Posted 11 January 2019 - 11:48 PM

My first reaction upon seeing photos of this scope was to find a way to contact Lazzarotti and see if I could ever get my hands on one of these. I speak Italian and I am a member of a couple active Italian astronomy forums, so I figured it wouldn't be too difficult to at least make contact. And then came my second reaction: to question how practical this telescope actually is. My optics last about 20 minutes unprotected under "normal" conditions. In what is heavy dew for us, I doubt they'd last 10. Also, being in the dead center of a major urban area, downwind of coal use and production country, at the southern end of the largest conurbation in North America, constant exposure of the mirrors to everything else in the atmosphere besides water just seems like a perfect recipe for rapid coatings degradation. 

 

In its minimalism, it is a fantastically beautiful piece of equipment. For some reason (maybe cultural?), Italians excel at this type of design. Much like the hand-built Lamborghini, I'm just not sure it is practical as a daily driver for many, if not most, folks.  

 

George

I saw one at NEAF and you sort of couldn't take your eyes off it.  But I also like the look of white suits and white sport coats.  I don't own them because I can't go out in something like that for more than fifteen minutes without getting some kind of kuhrap on it and after that it never looks the same.    The gladius is not a scope that someone like me should own, even if I could afford it.  If I had a house with giant closets and had 50 white suits I suppose I'd be the kind of guy who could wear them once and toss them out.  But I'm not.    

 

I would also say, that as a c14 owner I have worked at f/11 for nearly twenty years.  I like it....but I also like my refractors which inhabit the f/6.3 to f/7.7 territory.  But this is not a situation where if some is good (f/11) more is better (f/25).  Maybe it wouldn't matter if you had the thing on a Parmount ME and had reliable arc second pointing.  But even if you accept the idea that the gladius is going to be an imaging scope and is not really for visual use, I'm not sure that it's the best tool for the job.  And outside of professional astronomy I'm not really sure that any scope is ever strictly one use or another.  Someday you'll point your gladius at m51.  Someday you'll use your "open clusters and galaxy panorama" low cost achro to look at Jupiter.  And you end up pointing the narrow field C14 at the Double Cluster even though you know you'll only see 1/3 of it.    GN

 

Anyhow, 


  • gfstallin likes this

#15 pierce

pierce

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 635
  • Joined: 18 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Santa Cruz, CA

Posted 12 January 2019 - 09:24 PM

indeed, 6.7m focal length, I think?   even a 40mm eyepiece, that would be 170X as your LOWEST power.   .... its pretty obvious to me that scope's prime purpose is as a planetary imager.



#16 Kokatha man

Kokatha man

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12604
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: "cooker-ta man" downunda...

Posted 12 January 2019 - 10:04 PM

indeed, 6.7m focal length, I think?   even a 40mm eyepiece, that would be 170X as your LOWEST power.   .... its pretty obvious to me that scope's prime purpose is as a planetary imager.

Yes indeed pierce - that was indeed what its primary purpose was..! wink.gif

 

I know a lot of folks don't read much of what they see, but my link in Post #9 "probably" had something to do with the Gladius' demise imho:  https://astro-foren....eport-–-part-I/

 

I'd dispute what's been said about the general quality of the images Paolo achieved & also (regardless of mount capabilities, somewhat less important for planetary imaging btw) there are a few weirdos like ourselves who have extremely rarely - if ever - looked through their C14's..! rofl2.gif

 

Pressed, between the C11 & C14 over the last 12 years I think we might've peered through them about 3 or 4 times at most bigshock.gif ...quite different to the number of times via the big Newts btw... smile.gif




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