38 replies to this topic

[Mlad]

Hello everyone,

some time ago I asked you what telescope you would choose as a complement to my Explore Scientific Dobsonian 12" Gen. II (Truss Tube) and it seems that the best option was a refractor with an aperture of 4"-5" and f/6 to f/9...

 

OK. What if I complicate things a bit...
I am looking for an idea for a telescope that I will take to dark places in the south and north of Europe when flying by plane?

Let's not take into account super, ultra-light Dobsonians. But it's best if it's with Go-To.

That's why you go to places with incredibly dark skies to see difficult objects, right? The target is not objects in the solar system.

Hence the conclusion that the aperture should be as large as possible, right?

 

That's why Celestron Evolution 6 caught my eye. A tube in hand luggage, absolutely not in checked luggage. The rest, i.e. the tripod and installation in the luggage compartment.

 

I would also like to use it to see solar eclipses in 2026 and 2027. The telescope is supposed to be super easy to use for my family members, my wife and two children.

Is this a good idea. Does anyone have a better one?

 

Regards,

Przemek

[Paul Romero]

Hi,

I use a 45 mm BORG with a DSLR on a star tracker mount. I stuff that in my carry-on with my clothes and toiletries. The tent, sleeping bag, and air mattress go in the “personal item” and is stuffed under the seat in front of me. No luggage.

This is for astrophotography. I include a pair of binoculars and a smart phone for visual.

For solar photography, I add a filter at the DSLR and the solar film in front of the BORG. This gives me detailed solar photos, but not the prominences shown with Ha filters.

Clear Skies,

Paul

Edited by Paul Romero, 14 November 2024 - 10:06 AM.

[Sebastian_Sajaroff]

I don’t carry any telescope when I go to dark skies.
I go with handheld binoculars, optionally a monopod, and a zero gravity chair.
Strolling through Sagittarius, Scorpius, Cygnus, Carina, Crux, Magellanic Clouds, Monoceros or Orion on 10x50 is a mystic breathtaking experience. It will knock your socks off.

Edited by Sebastian_Sajaroff, 14 November 2024 - 10:12 AM.

[Sebastian_Sajaroff]

It’s just my personal preference, but I don’t go to dark sky places to observe difficult objects. I go there to experience an immersive view of the Universe, like being inside a huge transparent spaceship. It’s also a spiritual moment, kind of a silent prayer.

[SeattleScott]

I wouldn’t want to check a GoTo mount. I don’t trust a motorized mount to those baggage handlers. Something with encoders would work, or pack a PiFinder or Celestron Starsense phone dock in your carry on bag.

My airline scope is a 6” Mak with manual AZ4 mount.

[Sebastian_Sajaroff]

Total solar eclipses are awesome (in the true sense of that word).
I observed the April 8th 2024 one along with my family using solar glasses and my 70 mm refractor+wedge and a 25 mm Plossl. Nothing complicated.
Once totality arrived we went naked eye, no regrets !

Time flies during the eclipse specially once 90% of the Sun is covered, you don’t want to waste that precious time tinkering with cables, counterweights, adapters, electronics, etc.

[bobzeq25]

Hello everyone,
some time ago I asked you what telescope you would choose as a complement to my Explore Scientific Dobsonian 12" Gen. II (Truss Tube) and it seems that the best option was a refractor with an aperture of 4"-5" and f/6 to f/9...
 
OK. What if I complicate things a bit...
I am looking for an idea for a telescope that I will take to dark places in the south and north of Europe when flying by plane?
Let's not take into account super, ultra-light Dobsonians. But it's best if it's with Go-To.
That's why you go to places with incredibly dark skies to see difficult objects, right? The target is not objects in the solar system.
Hence the conclusion that the aperture should be as large as possible, right?
 
That's why Celestron Evolution 6 caught my eye. A tube in hand luggage, absolutely not in checked luggage. The rest, i.e. the tripod and installation in the luggage compartment.
 
I would also like to use it to see solar eclipses in 2026 and 2027. The telescope is supposed to be super easy to use for my family members, my wife and two children.
Is this a good idea. Does anyone have a better one?
 
Regards,
Przemek

It's a fine idea. Others will have other choices (on a trip to the Southern Hemisphere, mine was a 66mm refractor on a camera tripod). But they're not you. I'd spend some money on a good widefield eyepiece, the weakness of what you want to do is the long focal length of the scope, compared to a refractor.

You've correctly identified that a strength is easy to use for your inexperienced family.

An out of the box idea. Even easier, and more portable, would be a Seestar 50 or a Vespera, two good smart telescopes. They connect to a tablet or phone with an app that does a great deal of the work, aligning itself, and going to anything it knows is a good target at the time. Just an idea.

The Vespera.

"Size & weight

48 x 20 x 9 cm 5 kg"

That's the whole thing. <smile> Fits in a backpack.

https://vaonis.com/

The Seestar is even smaller.

Edited by bobzeq25, 14 November 2024 - 10:57 AM.

[Rabbanah]

This is my travel rig. It fits under the seat as my personal item. It is the FS60, but you could go with the 76 for more aperture. I don't have a tracking mount with this set up, but the AZ-GTI would likely fit as an alternative. This setup has gone with me to Australia and South America a few times now and I have loved every second with it. You will be amazed at what a small scope can do in truly dark skies.

 

 

Edited by Rabbanah, 14 November 2024 - 10:47 AM.

[Mlad]

Total solar eclipses are awesome (in the true sense of that word).
I observed the April 8th 2024 one along with my family using solar glasses and my 70 mm refractor+wedge and a 25 mm Plossl. Nothing complicated.
Once totality arrived we went naked eye, no regrets !

Time flies during the eclipse specially once 90% of the Sun is covered, you don’t want to waste that precious time tinkering with cables, counterweights, adapters, electronics, etc.

 

The point is that I don't want excessive difficulties. I don't want cables, counterweights, adapters and unnecessary electronics. The maximum that I consider OK is a mount with go-to integrated in one small device without hanging cables.

 

 

 

It's a fine idea. Others will have other choices (on a trip to the Southern Hemisphere, mine was a 66mm refractor on a camera tripod). But they're not you. I'd spend some money on a good widefield eyepiece, the weakness of what you want to do is the long focal length of the scope, compared to a refractor.

You've correctly identified that a strength is easy to use for your inexperienced family.

An out of the box idea. Even easier, and more portable, would be a Seestar 50 or a Vespera, two good smart telescopes. They connect to a tablet or phone with an app that does a great deal of the work, aligning itself, and going to anything it knows is a good target at the time. Just an idea.

The Vespera.

"Size & weight

48 x 20 x 9 cm 5 kg"

That's the whole thing. <smile> https://vaonis.com/

The Seestar is even smaller.

From a logistical point of view, it is a very good idea, but visual observations in a dark, magical place are for me an introduction to the philosophy of life. Our colleagues wrote about it above. I feel it too, although I appreciate not only seeing with my own eyes, but I would like to delve deeper into the city than I can. Although I can't complain anyway (Bortle 2/3).

I think it's a great loss to be in such a place and not take advantage of the opportunity. You can definitely combine observing with your eyes, binoculars and telescope during each night of observation. And it's beautiful!

 

As for the visible field of view, it's not that bad in the 2" version (that's what I plan to do) and with the 0.63 focal length reducer from Celestron.

I'm very tempted by the idea of ​​maximum possible aperture with a handy Go-To with an integrated battery, charged at the campsite or hotel during the day.

 

Regards,
Przemek

[rob1986]

Id bet you could design a bagfor an 8" GEM newt that planned to remove the rear cell/spider/focuser, and place the rest in a checked bag.

Or alternatively,for a dob create a bag system that would do the same, and use a bag that fit inside the now empty tube for clothes etc. That would even work for a ten incher. (12?)

The gem

The cell, spider, and focuser obviously go in a "personal item"

Edited by rob1986, 14 November 2024 - 11:10 AM.

[ngc7319_20]

Obsession 18UC with full go-to option... 18" F/4.2... 4 giant Pelican cases and a ski case for the poles...  maybe 350 pounds... bag fees ran around $1000 round trip 

Edited by ngc7319_20, 14 November 2024 - 11:09 AM.

[Mlad]

Obsession 18UC with full go-to option... 18" F/4.2... 4 giant Pelican cases and a ski case for the poles...  bag fees around $1000 round trip....

Interesting that you omitted the cost of the 18" telescope from Obsession...

 

Of course, everyone would like to visit the coolest places on Earth and the Moon with something like this, but... we are talking about a budget of, say, approximately USD 2,500 with a certain tolerance.

 

It seems to me that the Celestron Evolution 6, despite its limitations, is the most versatile instrument I have ever thought of. Considering everything I've written so far.

 

I must add that if I want to use manual zoom, of course Celestron Evolution 6 will be great at it, regardless of whether it is in this or a completely different mounting... it is short with a relatively large aperture for equipment that fits in hand luggage (OTA) .

 

Regards,
Przemek

Edited by Mlad, 14 November 2024 - 11:14 AM.

[sevenofnine]

This 5" Mak from Sky-Watcher and the AZ-GTi mount might work. The scope will fit in a small duffel bag that can go in the overhead bin or possibly under the seat in front of you. The mount gets wrapped in a towel and put a a padded tripod travel bag. Good luck! 

 

https://www.skywatch...ymax-127-az-gti.

 

.

 

This Orion 127 Mak (Synta) has been a very good scope for me 

Edited by sevenofnine, 14 November 2024 - 04:26 PM.

[Sketcher]

From the topic title, I thought you wanted something like the Stratospheric Observatory For Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA).  I'm disappointed . . .

[Japetus Eye]

It seems to me that the Celestron Evolution 6, despite its limitations, is the most versatile instrument I have ever thought of. Considering everything I've written so far.

 

I must add that if I want to use manual zoom, of course Celestron Evolution 6 will be great at it, regardless of whether it is in this or a completely different mounting... it is short with a relatively large aperture for equipment that fits in hand luggage (OTA) .

 

Regards,
Przemek

The idea of ​​a compact OTA seems good, 6" is a good compromise between aperture and portability, but the Nexstar Evolution mount seems to me to be rather bulky to be able to properly protect it in checked luggage... Like Seattle Scott, I don't trust the way airline ground staff treat luggage... But, even so, I suppose that by opting for a hard case and the best possible packaging, it may arrive intact at its destination. Perhaps it would be a good idea to warn the counter staff when checking in so that they can properly label the case as "delicate material"... I suppose that is possible...

[rob1986]

I have been told by airline staff that they want nothing to do with multi grand fragile checked baggage. If you can take a chello, a base, of a tuba costing tens of thousands on the plane as a "carry on", you can do the same with a telescope.

Edit after looking online this is highly airline specific, and manager specific, but seemingly, we dont want responsibility is a big part of everything.

On 777s they told me that they have a special closet for this sort of thing.

Edited by rob1986, 14 November 2024 - 03:31 PM.

[maniack]

The AZ-GTi is the small GoTo mount to get for travel. I'd suggest a much more robust carbon fiber tripod rather than the basic Sky-watcher tripod that is bulky yet not very stable. I have a couple of Leofoto 324 (4 sections, 32mm is the diameter of the largest section) tripod - I'd put 28mm leg diameter as the minimum for a lighter scope, 32+ is better.

 

As for the scope this depends on what you want to look at. For faint fuzzies larger aperture is better, and it's hard to beat a 6" Celestron SCT in that regard. A 5" Synta (Celestron, Sky-watcher, or Orion) maksutov would be similar in weight but the aperture is reduced, and the 6" SCT can go wider.

 

If you want to look at wide field views a short focal length refractor might be a better choice. There are 4" options that are very pricey and can break down small enough to go in a carry-on - the Borg 107FL might be the biggest aperture (and lightweight, and I believe can fit into a carry-on without being taken apart), Tak FSQ106EDX4 if you're made of money (but it's too heavy for an AZ-GTi), Tak FC100DC, etc. Or an ST102 achromat would fit.

Edited by maniack, 14 November 2024 - 03:53 PM.

[zizzapnia]

I just got back from a similar trip across the U.S. by air. Like you, I wanted as much aperture as I could bring. I had the lower power/wide field views covered with binoculars. I brought a 6-inch collapsible tabletop reflector, mounted on a Svbony SV225 alt-az mount on a tripod table I built for it. It has an azimuth circle and digital angle gauge for locating objects- works great and more reliable than the go-to that the scope came with. Total scope weight was 25 lbs.

 

 

The OTA, about 9 lbs., wrapped in some jackets and a little foam padding on the ends, went in a 22" carry on hardshell roller suitcase.

 

The mount and tripod break down flat and were packed in a 26" checked suitcase along with two of my Bino Body Mounts for binoculars, a windscreen, chemical heatpacks (I brought way too many), tripod seat and seat cushion, and some other gear. The circular eyepiece tray/stabilizer is 18" in diameter, to give you a sense of scale. It just fit into the bottom of the suitcase. Total weight was about 45 lbs.

 

 

The plastic shoebox holds the SV225 mount. The long thing is the windscreen:

 

 

Bino Body Mount with my 15x70s (we had suitable chairs at our destination- consider that):

 

 

...disassembled:

 

 

Windscreen:

 

 

My 15x70 binoculars went under my wife's seat and I carried on an underseat bag with 10x56 binoculars, three eyepieces, a barlow, a finderscope, and various other gear.

 

The only thing that got broken was a small plastic box in the checked bag that held the hardware for the bino mounts. The hardware was fine.

 

You should be able to get a 6-inch SCT and mount in a similar set of suitcases. It'll be a bit heavier because of the mount and tripod.

Edited by zizzapnia, 14 November 2024 - 04:16 PM.

[Japetus Eye]

Acabo de regresar de un viaje similar por los EE. UU. en avión. Al igual que tú, quería la mayor apertura posible. Tenía los binoculares para cubrir las vistas de campo amplio y de menor aumento. Llevé un reflector de mesa plegable de 6 pulgadas, montado en una montura altacimutal Svbony SV225 sobre una mesa de trípode que construí para él. Tiene un círculo acimutal y un medidor de ángulo digital para localizar objetos; funciona muy bien y es más confiable que el telescopio que venía con el telescopio. El peso total del telescopio fue de 25 libras.

 

 

 

El OTA, de aproximadamente 9 libras, envuelto en algunas chaquetas y un poco de relleno de espuma en los extremos, fue dentro de una maleta rígida con ruedas de 22 pulgadas.

 

La montura y el trípode se desmontan y se empaquetan en una maleta de 26" junto con dos de mis monturas para binoculares, un parabrisas, paquetes de calor químicos (llevé demasiados), asiento y cojín para trípode y otros equipos. La bandeja/estabilizador circular para oculares tiene un diámetro de 18" para que te hagas una idea de la escala. Encaja perfectamente en el fondo de la maleta. El peso total fue de aproximadamente 45 libras.

 

 

 

La caja de zapatos de plástico contiene el soporte SV225. Lo largo es el parabrisas:

 

 

 

Montura para binoculares con mis 15x70 (teníamos sillas adecuadas en nuestro destino, considere esto):

 

 

 

 

...desmontado:

 

 

 

Parabrisas:

 

 

 

Mis binoculares 15x70 fueron colocados debajo del asiento de mi esposa y yo llevaba un bolso debajo del asiento con binoculares 10x56, tres oculares, una Barlow, un buscador y varios otros equipos.

 

Lo único que se rompió fue una pequeña caja de plástico en la maleta facturada que contenía los accesorios para los soportes de los binoculares. Los accesorios estaban bien.

 

Deberías poder conseguir un SCT de 6 pulgadas y montarlo en un conjunto de maletas similar. Será un poco más pesado debido a la montura y el trípode.

¡¡¡Brillante !! 

[SeattleScott]

I have been told by airline staff that they want nothing to do with multi grand fragile checked baggage. If you can take a chello, a base, of a tuba costing tens of thousands on the plane as a "carry on", you can do the same with a telescope.

Edit after looking online this is highly airline specific, and manager specific, but seemingly, we dont want responsibility is a big part of everything.

On 777s they told me that they have a special closet for this sort of thing.

I still think the obvious solution is to just carry on the OTA and check an affordable and sturdy mount like my AZ4 (current version is called AZ5 and has at least one notable improvement). He isn't talking about using 300x on Jupiter. He is talking about looking at DSO. He doesn't need motors for tracking. He just wants a computer to help find stuff in unfamiliar skies. So just get a 6" SCT or Mak with a manual mount and stick a PiFinder in your pocket. 

 

My 6" Mak was something like $650. Probably a bit more today. Looks like a 6" SCT OTA is around $650. 

My AZ4 was $200. The AZ5 is more like $300-350 (refinements and inflation). 

My adapted StarSense phone dock cost around $200. PiFinder can cost about $250-450 depending on the model. 

I much prefer this approach to the usual three-star alignment, especially if I am in a different hemisphere where I don't know the stars. Why "align" when you can plate solve? I can't imagine why anyone would buy DSC's anymore. I suspect I may never use the GoTo on my Eq mount again. Little reason to when I can just turn on tracking and use StarSense to locate stuff. Maybe with the AR6 since it can't take the StarSense?

FWIW the Mak tops out at about 1.8 degrees wide FOV and still operates at full aperture.

 

So for around $1,200-1,500 he could have the aperture he wants, a mount that even a baggage handler can't break, and one of the easiest computerized object location systems in existence. 

 

Now it looks like a 6" Evo could be had for perhaps a bit over $1,500, and that would have tracking to help with high power viewing. But certainly more fragile for airline transport if you can't secure a spot in the special closet. 

[Mlad]

I still think the obvious solution is to just carry on the OTA and check an affordable and sturdy mount like my AZ4 (current version is called AZ5 and has at least one notable improvement). He isn't talking about using 300x on Jupiter. He is talking about looking at DSO. He doesn't need motors for tracking. He just wants a computer to help find stuff in unfamiliar skies. So just get a 6" SCT or Mak with a manual mount and stick a PiFinder in your pocket. 

 

My 6" Mak was something like $650. Probably a bit more today. Looks like a 6" SCT OTA is around $650. 

My AZ4 was $200. The AZ5 is more like $300-350 (refinements and inflation). 

My adapted StarSense phone dock cost around $200. PiFinder can cost about $250-450 depending on the model. 

I much prefer this approach to the usual three-star alignment, especially if I am in a different hemisphere where I don't know the stars. Why "align" when you can plate solve? I can't imagine why anyone would buy DSC's anymore. I suspect I may never use the GoTo on my Eq mount again. Little reason to when I can just turn on tracking and use StarSense to locate stuff. Maybe with the AR6 since it can't take the StarSense?

FWIW the Mak tops out at about 1.8 degrees wide FOV and still operates at full aperture.

 

So for around $1,200-1,500 he could have the aperture he wants, a mount that even a baggage handler can't break, and one of the easiest computerized object location systems in existence. 

 

Now it looks like a 6" Evo could be had for perhaps a bit over $1,500, and that would have tracking to help with high power viewing. But certainly more fragile for airline transport if you can't secure a spot in the special closet. 

Hello everyone,
AZ5 has a load capacity of only 5 kg, OTA SCT 6" weighs approx. 4.5-5 kg. You still need to add accessories... The idea of ​​AZ5 is out of the question. However, AZ4 is still available for purchase, it has a load capacity of 6.8 kg, but there is no micro-movements - this is also out of the question even if I decided that mount without Go-To would be enough. Even VIXEN Porta II has a load capacity of only 5 kg. Alternatively, the Explore Scientific Twilight I AZ can lift approximately 8 kg and has micro-movements. However, I became interested in Sky-Watcher AZ-GTiX. I could hang a 6" SCT and 8/10x50 ED or 15x70 ED binoculars, DSLR, or in the future, instead of binoculars, I could use a light, short doublet refractor (approx. f/6-f/7.5).

 

I want a compact Go-To (however, the load capacity must be at least approximately 8 kg or more for a 6" SCT) for tracking (less for finding objects, because that's half the "fun").

 

The zizzapnia idea is brilliant and I will implement it with my binoculars this year!

I think I forgot to write earlier that I always take binoculars with me, so taking only binoculars does not solve the problem of the best telescope for dark skies (aperture).

 

Of course I take refractors into account, but the obvious limitation of the aperture to a maximum of 80-85 mm compared to 150 mm, even with a central obstruction, seems unreasonable under really dark skies. I repeat that in my opinion, under such a sky you need to find difficult objects or, to make it much easier to observe (more details and contrast), the so-called obvious. And for this we need the largest aperture that we can take in hand luggage on the plane.

 

Regards,
Przemek

Edited by Mlad, 15 November 2024 - 02:21 AM.

[maniack]

Hello everyone,
AZ5 has a load capacity of only 5 kg, OTA SCT 6" weighs approx. 4.5-5 kg. You still need to add accessories... The idea of ​​AZ5 is out of the question. However, AZ4 is still available for purchase, it has a load capacity of 6.8 kg, but there is no micro-movements - this is also out of the question even if I decided that mount without Go-To would be enough. Even VIXEN Porta II has a load capacity of only 5 kg. Alternatively, the Explore Scientific Twilight I AZ can lift approximately 8 kg and has micro-movements. However, I became interested in Sky-Watcher AZ-GTiX. I could hang a 6" SCT and 8/10x50 ED or 15x70 ED binoculars, DSLR, or in the future, instead of binoculars, I could use a light, short doublet refractor (approx. f/6-f/7.5).

 

I want a compact Go-To (however, the load capacity must be at least approximately 8 kg or more for a 6" SCT) for tracking (less for finding objects, because that's half the "fun").

 

The zizzapnia idea is brilliant and I will implement it with my binoculars this year!

I think I forgot to write earlier that I always take binoculars with me, so taking only binoculars does not solve the problem of the best telescope for dark skies (aperture).

 

Of course I take refractors into account, but the obvious limitation of the aperture to a maximum of 80-85 mm compared to 150 mm, even with a central obstruction, seems unreasonable under really dark skies. I repeat that in my opinion, under such a sky you need to find difficult objects or, to make it much easier to observe (more details and contrast), the so-called obvious. And for this we need the largest aperture that we can take in hand luggage on the plane.

 

Regards,
Przemek

If you want more load capacity than the AZ-GTiX then an iOptron AZ Mount Pro would be the next option in portability. But it's quite a bit heavier than the AZ-GTiX and much more expensive.

[Japetus Eye]

I understand your point of view and also that of Seattle Scott, who opts for simplicity when travelling (by plane, at least).

 

I don't know how good the AZ dual GTiX is, but if it works as well as its little sister, the GTi, it is a very interesting investment, and suitable for your purposes because it is so compact. Anyway, since it has a higher load capacity, you will also have to get it a sturdy tripod, preferably made of steel. If you use it with only one optical tube (for example, the SCT 6") you will have to counterbalance it, since you will be close to the limit of the load capacity for one side. On the other hand, you will also have to have a suitable powerbank, one that can guarantee you power supply for at least 3-4 hours of observation (that would be a capacity of about 100Wh).

 

All of that (the steel tripod, the counterweight, the powerbank, and maybe more things that I'm missing) are things "additional" to the mount and optical accessories, which you must expect to carry, in weight and volume. By the way, check the policy of the airline you are traveling with regarding the transportation of external batteries.

[maniack]

I understand your point of view and also that of Seattle Scott, who opts for simplicity when travelling (by plane, at least).

I don't know how good the AZ dual GTiX is, but if it works as well as its little sister, the GTi, it is a very interesting investment, and suitable for your purposes because it is so compact. Anyway, since it has a higher load capacity, you will also have to get it a sturdy tripod, preferably made of steel. If you use it with only one optical tube (for example, the SCT 6") you will have to counterbalance it, since you will be close to the limit of the load capacity for one side. On the other hand, you will also have to have a suitable powerbank, one that can guarantee you power supply for at least 3-4 hours of observation (that would be a capacity of about 100Wh).

All of that (the steel tripod, the counterweight, the powerbank, and maybe more things that I'm missing) are things "additional" to the mount and optical accessories, which you must expect to carry, in weight and volume. By the way, check the policy of the airline you are traveling with regarding the transportation of external batteries.

My C5 does well on the carbon fiber tripod with 32mm legs. I'd imagine a C6 on a 40mm CF tripod would be fine (RT90C or equivalent).

I can easily get 3-4 hours on a 33wh Talentcell battery. The larger mount and scope might need a bigger battery, but my 66wh lasts forever on my 8SE.

[Japetus Eye]

My C5 does well on the carbon fiber tripod with 32mm legs. I'd imagine a C6 on a 40mm CF tripod would be fine (RT90C or equivalent).

I can easily get 3-4 hours on a 33wh Talentcell battery. The larger mount and scope might need a bigger battery, but my 66wh lasts forever on my 8SE.

Yes, I suppose that a carbon tripod with these characteristics will be fine and will give stability enough to the set, as well as being lighter than a steel one.

 

As for the battery capacity, I made a theoretical estimate. I started from an average requirement of the mount of 1.5 Ah. To be honest, I don't know the specific data, so I estimate it on the high side. Wh=Ah*V. The capacity needed for 1 hour of use would be Wh=1.5*12=18Wh x 4 hours of continuous use = 72Wh. Assuming a depth of discharge of 70% (it is advisable not to rush the discharge of the batteries), we should add 30% more capacity: 21.6Wh. Thus, the necessary capacity according to this calculation: 72+21.6 = 93.6Wh, approx. 100Wh. In effect, it is a overestimated calculation, but that would allow him, if he wanted to, to prolong the session.