I'm asking this question because I'm assuming that it's been done successfully by someone somewhere.
As I continue to struggle with the OAG learning curve, I've begun asking myself "why not at least try a conventional guide scope?" Yes I know that there are countless posts advising against it. Most are centered around Flexure, and the general rule that the Guide Scope' focal length should be at least 1/3 of the focal length of your main Telescope. That's a real problem, because my Celestron EdgeHD 11" has a native focal length of 2800mm. One third of that, is a whopping 933.33mm.
My preference is to not add a reducer. I mean, the main reason why I purchased the EdgeHD 11" in the first place was for it's Focal Length.
My understanding is that flexure can be mitigated, to a certain extent, by ensuring that the guide scope is mounted in a very very solid manner, and keeping the weight down as much as possible. That part is doable. But the issue of a 933mm guide scope remains.
My Questions are:
a. Is there anything less than 933mm that would work successfully as a guide scope for the EdgeHD 11"?
b. If so, how many mm?
c. What type of scope should I try? A Refractor? Can you recommend one?
d. Could something like the scope in the following link work? It has a focal length of 1000mm and weighs just 4.4lbs. Link: https://www.celestro...specifications
Please don't waste your time or mine with sarcastic, rude or useless replies; or replies stating what is already known.
Lastly, the learning curve with the OAG is starting to see slow but consistent progress. And, I haven't waved the surrender flag yet. I'm just a sucker simplicity and ease of use.
Thanks in advance.