February 2005 - Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

Re: Tonight
by Chuck Hards 06 Feb '05

06 Feb '05

Anonymous wrote: > On a hunch, I took the 12" Dob out this evening for > a backyard tour of the > sky. Yup, it sucked. If I could only glue 3 of these > together I might have > something. A trinocular. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

2 1

Re: Tonights star party
by Chuck Hards 06 Feb '05

06 Feb '05

Debbie, I wanted to let you know that the Big Scope has a very limited FOV due to it's long focal length. Large objects will require mosaicking techniques to image the entire object. We couldn't fit all of M42 in a very low-power eyepiece with a large field stop. Perhaps a tele-compressor will be of limited help, but the real solution is a huge detector chip, like the size of a postage stamp. We only saw the central core of M35 with the Big Scope at low power. Also, as far as I know the Big Scope has already been named the Grim telescope, hasn't it? If not, that's my nomination. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

Re: [Utah-astronomy] M35 image posted
by astrodeb＠charter.net 06 Feb '05

06 Feb '05

I forgot the link. www.utahastronomy.com/astrodeb/RZ_M35PIC1 Debbie > > From: <astrodeb(a)charter.net> > Date: 2005/02/06 Sun PM 02:23:11 MST > To: <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] M35 image posted > > I got out Wednesday night and tried out my new Kwick Focus Hartmann mask to get a sharper focus with my Canon Digital Rebel. I think we did a better job of focusing than we did back in December. Stars look better than the M38 image. > > I'm still limited to only 30 second exposures because of my polar alignment issues. I'm going to try to train my mount next time by turning on PEC and feeding the guiding corrections into the mount's computer. > > I took 32 30 second frames at my house in St. George. By the time we got the image focused and framed the battery died so I had to recharge the battery for a while. I guess I need a spare for dark sky locations. We came back out and M35 was just past zenith and high overhead. This was my only target for that night. I tried to take an image of the Flame Nebula but the batteries died again. Maybe I'll try the Flame-Horsehead area next time. > > Debbie > > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

2 1

M35 image posted
by astrodeb＠charter.net 06 Feb '05

06 Feb '05

I got out Wednesday night and tried out my new Kwick Focus Hartmann mask to get a sharper focus with my Canon Digital Rebel. I think we did a better job of focusing than we did back in December. Stars look better than the M38 image. I'm still limited to only 30 second exposures because of my polar alignment issues. I'm going to try to train my mount next time by turning on PEC and feeding the guiding corrections into the mount's computer. I took 32 30 second frames at my house in St. George. By the time we got the image focused and framed the battery died so I had to recharge the battery for a while. I guess I need a spare for dark sky locations. We came back out and M35 was just past zenith and high overhead. This was my only target for that night. I tried to take an image of the Flame Nebula but the batteries died again. Maybe I'll try the Flame-Horsehead area next time. Debbie

2 2

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Why the hostility?
by Seth Jarvis 04 Feb '05

04 Feb '05

I'll offer this response once in this forum, and then I recommend that any additional comments anyone would care to exchange should probably go off-list through private emails to avoid cluttering up what should be a forum for astronomy-related messages. Quoting Chuck Hards: "Many of us are old enough to remember when Hansen opened it's doors, and that it was a much more freindly and open environment than Clark, or the final phases of Hansen." How so? Customer service drives this place. If we're being less friendly now than in years gone by (I was on the Hansen Planetarium staff under both Mark Littmann and Von Del Chamberlain), I'd like to know about it so I can correct the problem. "I certainly felt that any tax dollars of mine going into the old institution were much better spent." I don't see how you can make that claim. We have four times the public attendance, more and better exhibits, and three times the number of school kids seeing educational programs than we had at Hansen and nobody's taxes have gone up to pay for it. "Any county rules that on the surface seem to forbid an association between an astronomical society and the planetarium can be undone, they are just words on paper and not physical barriers." Words on paper are the basis of our government. The "Short Rule" was a 1999 decision by the Utah Supreme Court. Public employees may not give public assets (use of this building is considered a public asset) to private persons or organizations without fair market compensation and approval by elected representatives. SLAS is not being unfairly discriminated against. The rules apply to _all_ private groups wishing to use the planetarium. It's your tax dollars that are protected by this policy. "For the planetarium to now shrug it's shoulders, point to questionable polices and rental fees, and grin sheepishly seems like a cop-out to many of us." I'm never sheepish, and I'm certainly not grinning. You and others have criticized the planetarium for being unfair to SLAS, and I'm explaining to you that the county policy, and the Utah laws on which it is based, is far from "questionable." It is strict and unambiguous. "Remember that we are not "tin-foil hat" types standing around looking at the night sky hoping for UFOs to land." Who ever said you were? The accomplishments of amateur astronomers are well known and respected by the planetarium staff. "It's pretty much up to you, sir, to change the environment at this point." I hope I've made it clear that it is most certainly _not_ up to me. If SLAS doesn't want to associate with the planetarium, that's SLAS's decision to make. The Clark Planetarium has at no time, nor ever will, act in any arbitrary manner to diminish our interest in cooperating with SLAS to promote astronomy education in our community. Best regards, Seth Jarvis, Director Clark Planetarium

9 18

Olive Branches
by Seth Jarvis 04 Feb '05

04 Feb '05

>One of the groups has to be the bigger person and go >first with a small step or gesture. All Clark can do >is say no. Thank you for that. Yes, we'd love an opportunity to share information about the planetarium with visitors to SPOC. However, if your event for the Big Scope (which is impressive!)is tonight, that's not enough notice for us to pull together a table, literature and a volunteer to man it. When would be the next opportunity? We'd also like to give information about SLAS and other area astronomy clubs to everyone who buys a telescope from us. Last year we sold close to 200 telescopes, mostly 6, 8 & 10" Dobsonians, to first-time telescope owners. We also host "try before you buy" programs here at the planetarium on clear weekend evenings for telescope sales, but by doing it from downtown we are obviously limited in what we can show people. Nonetheless, even from downtown a view of the Moon or Saturn from a decent telescope is sufficiently impressive to seal a person's interest in owning a telescope. We are always eager to help people make smart telescope-buying choices. BTW, we DO have star parties - just not as regularly as SLAS does. Our Mars-Party last September (the August date was clouded-out) in West Jordan drew over a thousand people. We had a dozen telescopes, each with long lines of waiting viewers. Our AstroVan outreach program hosts star parties at schools frequently. So... I'd like to propose that we provide information about local astronomy clubs to our telescope customers. I'm hearing a SLAS member express interest in having us distribute information about the planetarium at SLAS star parties. We also have staff members (myself included) who own some fairly nice telescopes and we'd love a chance to set them up and participate in the star party. It may be that this is the extent of our organizations' connection for a while, but it seems to me to be a logical and straightforward way for us to be mutually supportive towards our common goal of encouraging public appreciation for astronomy. If an officer of SLAS would like to consider this and get back to me about it, I'd appreciate it. Best Regards, Seth Jarvis

1 0

Re: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Tonights star party...
by astrodeb＠charter.net 04 Feb '05

04 Feb '05

I'd like to hook up my digital camera to the 32" scope. Think of the images that we could produce. Way to go guys! I'm going to have to drive north and take a peek sometime. Debbie > > From: diveboss(a)xmission.com > Date: 2005/02/04 Fri AM 10:22:51 MST > To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Tonights star party... > > You know, with a scope of this quality, this close to home, I may have to > get that eye surgery i've been putting off... I lost my keen eyesight as a > youth doing things I was warned not to do lest I go blind, and now I am > paying the price. ;) > > I too meant to thank everyone as well for their contibutions including > Chuck. If it weren't for his contribution, we might have had to use a > ladies compact mirror to bend the light through the fixed eyepiece. And > that fixed eyepiece design is just one more superb aspect of this scope. > Good idea! > > Guy > > > > > Quoting Siegfried Jachmann <ziggy943(a)xmission.com>: > > > This is a milestone. > > > > Congrats to all that have participated and contributed. We have raised > > the > > bar. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

2 1

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Why the hostility?
by Canopus56 04 Feb '05

04 Feb '05

Congrats on the big scope. Siegfried replied: > We each have our own interests. In order for a > "working relationship" to work there needs to be a > mutually beneficial situation. We already have > a full plate of public service. At this time I see > no mutual benefit. Maybe any grand opening of Big Scope would present an opportunity to extend a hand out to Clark by asking that they send a representative and display table. One of the groups has to be the bigger person and go first with a small step or gesture. All Clark can do is say no. >> (Canopus56 wrote) >> I understood from the November meeting that SLAS had >> some kind of a liason or representative on the Clark >> board. Siegfried replied: > Not to my knowledge. Only one SLAS member that I am > aware of is on the Clark advisory board but not as a > representative of SLAS. Thanks, Siegfried. Would you post or send me, via private email, the contact info for that person? Regards, Canopus56 (Kurt Fisher, SLAS member) P.S. - Any ideas or proposals for the what the dedicated name of Big Scope will be? __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: Tonights star party
by Chuck Hards 03 Feb '05

03 Feb '05

Guy wrote: > Siegfried > and Chuck hogged the eyepiece at every chance. Moi? Hogged? At least I wasn't in a bikini, drinking beer. (That was last week.) Thank you, Siegfried, Bruce, and all others who contributed at all levels. It was most definitely worth it. What a great facility, what a great telescope! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

1 0

Why the hostility?
by Seth Jarvis 03 Feb '05

03 Feb '05

Hey! What's going on? What is it that we're supposed to have done that warrants the kind of hostility I'm reading about the planetarium? I saw the Rolly report in yesterday's paper, too. Rolly got his facts wrong. We had to discontinue giving SLAS free access to the planetarium long before we moved to Gateway. Part of the fallout of the Doug Short vs. Salt Lake County controversy in the late 90's was a decision by the Utah Supreme Court that is known as the "Short Rule." It forbids county agencies (such as the planetarium) from giving away goods or services to private groups (such as SLAS). We've had to discontinue allowing SLAS to use the planetarium for free in exactly the same way we've turned down other private groups who make similar requests. The only meeting space in the Clark Planetarium that can accommodate the membership of SLAS at its meetings is the Star Theater. Our one small classroom can only accommodate about 30 people comfortably. SLAS is welcome to meet in either space, but they'll have to pay the same rental rates for those spaces as anyone else. If I were SLAS, I'd object to paying those rental rates, too, but that doesn't mean the planetarium is being deliberately mean to SLAS. Yes, we are "more commercially oriented" now as the Clark Planetarium than we were as Hansen Planetarium, but that's because the only way our community gets to have a planetarium at all is for us to be entrepreneurial. Ask the County Council about their expectations for a financially self-sufficient planetarium if you doubt me. I'd love to see what areas of cooperation can be achieved with SLAS. We just have to work within the laws and county policies that govern the use of our facility. SLAS has goals and strategies for achieving it's goals that are, in general, the same as those of the planetarium. We both exist to encourage public awareness of the value of astronomy. I'd be more than happy to see how our respective organizations can be of service to each other. Seth Jarvis, Director Clark Planetarium sjarvis(a)slco.org

6 6