23 replies to this topic

[KI5CAW]

I have never actually seen a J. W. Fecker telescope. If you have one I'd love to see a picture of it!

[DAVIDG]

 I own three Celestar models made by JW Fecker and sold in the 1950's. Here is picture of my two 4" Celestars. I also have 6" Celestar.

 

                 - Dave 

 

[B 26354]

 I own three Celestar models made by JW Fecker and sold in the 1950's. Here is picture of my two 4" Celestars. I also have 6" Celestar.

I'm so jealous. When I was a teenager back in the late '50s, I had a 4.25" Spacek Newt on a non-motorized EQ mount... and my main astro-buddy had a blue 4" JW Fecker, just like yours. Loved that scope! Owning a 6" Fecker was a life-long dream that never came true.

 

[BJS]

The club I belong to had a Fecker 12" MCT. Beautiful scope but Fecker didn't install a central baffle. We made a baffle for it and then it gave a pretty good image.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by BJS, 02 July 2024 - 01:56 PM.

[strdst]

Here's another little Fecker. Celestar 4" serial # 245. I wonder how many were made?

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by strdst, 04 July 2024 - 12:42 AM.

[Terra Nova]

I think one now resides in China!

[DAVIDG]

 My 6" Celestar is #628  and my blue 4" is #264. The green 4" was missing the serial number plate but I believe it was on the first ones made. It is totally complete in that I have the original wooden storage box and the original eyepieces. 

  I also purchased a number of parts which I believe were from the estate of Roy Swain who worked for Fecker during the time they were manufactured.

  Lew Chilton published a list of the known units a few years ago. Attached is his spread sheet.  From the serial number in Lew's spread sheet it looks like around 500 C4 were made and around 50 of C6.

 

  Happy July 4th !

 

           - Dave 

 

           FECKER CELESTAR REGISTRY.xls   98KB   22 downloads           

[John Rogers]

Fecker built a lot of observatory-class telescopes.  Here is one from a 1954 advertisement in S&T.

 

 

I would be curious as to whether this scope still exists.

 

 

[SpaceConqueror3]

One of those recently sold on Seattle's FacebookMarketplace, a huge missed opportunity. I wish I would have sprung for it but until I clear out some of what I already got in our little house, my wife would kill me if I brought it the door.

[tim53]

"These Feckers were flying Messerschmidts!"

[Don W]

There was a local gentleman astronomer that had an observatory with 3 domes in our town, Oshkosh, Wis. The smallest had a lovely 3” Bardou refractor.

 

The 2nd had a 5” J.W. Fecker refractor with a special cage that held pre-printed sheets for marking sunspots. He had records of sunspots back to the 40s.

 

The third had a 16” J.W. Fecker Cassegrain with a 5” J.W. Fecker refractor piggybacked on top. 

[strdst]

So for three nights I've taken my little Fecker out for views, giving a bit of time to temp stabilize while I cook dinner, only to find a fantastic dark winter sky that has totally fogged over. Need to quit cooking from scratch? Sorry wet li'l fogger! Maybe tomorrow night we'll skip dinner and catch some clear.

[highfnum]

DAVIDG  very cool 

what targets do they work best at?

[jimeh]

I have a 4" celestar and I'm floored by how good the views are with this scope.

 

Getting EPs to focus can be a bit tedious. Short focal length orthos don't have enough inward travel to reach focus, but a 7mm Delite works just fine. Even the original 1/3" eyepiece won't reach focus with the original barlow. I've thought about moving the primary forward, but I'm not ready to do that yet. If I could reach focus with more EPs, I would use this scope more often.

 

Optically, it's one of the best 4" scopes I've ever used

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by jimeh, 15 January 2025 - 11:46 AM.

[tim53]

I don't know what the primary cell on one of these looks like, but in decades past I've moved the primary cell in a couple newtonians of mine up or down the tube by using aluminum angle pieces as L brackets attached to the legs of the cell with screw holes that can be set either ahead of or behind the original mounting holes, thus enabling moving the mirror forward or backward in the tube without needing to drill additional holes in the tube.

 

-Tim.

[pbealo]

I have a few Feckers:

 

1) 4" Celestar newt

2) ^" Celestar Mak-newt

3) 12" classical cassegrain w/3" guide refractor & planetary camera

4) 16" classical cass w/3" guide refractor & planetary cemera & spectrograph (takes 16mm film)

5) Numerous eyepieces incl a set of Fecker orthos

 

Pictures of a few of them can be foung=d here: http://www.chachka.net/

 

Peter

[pairofdocs]

Scotia-Glenville high had one of the 4” fecker’s. I was allowed to use it and found for the first time m27. I loved the scope and wish I could find one

[CHASLX200]

The club I belong to had a Fecker 12" MCT. Beautiful scope but Fecker didn't install a central baffle. We made a baffle for it and then it gave a pretty good image.

I want that mount. Anytime i see that name i am thinking of another F word.

[DAVIDG]

DAVIDG  very cool 

what targets do they work best at?

 The 4" one work well for general observing. On my  green one, I touched up the figure on the mirror. They are well engineered scope and work well. 

   The 6" Mak required a fair about of work to get to work correctly. There was no baffling and the focal plane was flooded with sky glow until I installed the baffling. 

 

               - Dave 

[BJS]

My clubs 6" mct was simply a guide scope...as you say, no baffling and the focuser had maybe 1" of travel.... lol
Only meant to guide the 12" mct.

[jimeh]

My clubs 6" mct was simply a guide scope...as you say, no baffling and the focuser had maybe 1" of travel.... lol
Only meant to guide the 12" mct.

I don't know what EP design Fecker used, but it's an extremely narrow AFOV, significantly less than 40 degrees, and requires a lot of (I never get the terminology right with focusing) outfocus?

 

The EPs are sharp AF, but antiquated for anyone under 90 years old. Unfortunately, the scope was designed for these EPs and a lot of modern EPs won't reach focus, so most Celestars are doomed.

 

The one inch of focuser travel was probably fine at a time when aftermarket eyepieces wasn't really a thing yet. If the supplied EPs worked, then it had enough travel. Also, I don't think 1.25" EPs were that common in the late 1950s.

 

It was a beautifully made scope that didn't lend itself to updating.

Edited by jimeh, 22 January 2025 - 04:36 AM.

[deSitter]

I don't know what EP design Fecker used, but it's an extremely narrow AFOV, significantly less than 40 degrees, and requires a lot of (I never get the terminology right with focusing) outfocus?

 

The EPs are sharp AF, but antiquated for anyone under 90 years old. Unfortunately, the scope was designed for these EPs and a lot of modern EPs won't reach focus, so most Celestars are doomed.

 

The one inch of focuser travel was probably fine at a time when aftermarket eyepieces wasn't really a thing yet. If the supplied EPs worked, then it had enough travel. Also, I don't think 1.25" EPs were that common in the late 1950s.

 

It was a beautifully made scope that didn't lend itself to updating.

Some scopes are designed to work with Huygens eyepieces, which have an internal field stop. Using a modern long Plossl with such a scope will need a lot more outward travel to reach focus.

 

Agreed, I still don't know what back focus means. At least I think I don't!

 

-drl

[x-ray]

I restored a 4" Fecker refractor from 1931, made the oak pier for it.  I brought it to Stellafane a few years ago.

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 

[ccwemyss]

I remember seeing it there. Gorgeous!

 

Chip W.