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

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Observing on the moon
by Lambert, Aaron 23 Sep '05

23 Sep '05

> Dale Hooper wrote: > > When we go back to the moon in 2018, I'll be a spry 58 years old - so I > should certainly live long enough to make the journey myself. <g> So, I > was curious what it would take if I plop my Meade LX-200 out on the > lunar surface and want to observe? Why would you want to settle for such a small scope? On the moon, you ought to be able to heft a 30" dob with little problem, even at 58. :) Aaron

1 0

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Observing on the moon
by David Dunn 23 Sep '05

23 Sep '05

You will want to set up on the far side of the Moon. I think the earth shine, which we see all the time reflecting off the Moon, will make it such that you wouldn't be able to see very well. You could probably set it up inside a glass dome. The dome would need to be made such that it didn't distort the image. I big Dob with one of the Meade DSI eyepieces would be the way to go. Then you could share the image with all of us Earthbound astronomers. Dave -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces+david.dunn=albertsons.com(a)mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+david.dunn=albertsons.com@mailman.xmissio n.com] On Behalf Of Dale Hooper Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 10:33 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Observing on the moon When we go back to the moon in 2018, I'll be a spry 58 years old - so I should certainly live long enough to make the journey myself. <g> So, I was curious what it would take if I plop my Meade LX-200 out on the lunar surface and want to observe? Visually - I'm going to have a tough time because the helmet visor sure makes it tough to get to the eyepiece. Tracking & Pointing - I think I'm going to need some software on a laptop to get this thing to point to the right place - because I sure can't use a sidereal rate here. It would be easier with pointing a dob because things wouldn't be moving very quickly - but that eyepiece problem would need to be resolved. Exclusion zones - I've got this one big blue ball in the sky that is always basically in about the same location. Plus, there is still the very bright sun subtending about 30 arcminutes - emitting at every frequency. But it's only up 2 weeks each month. Guiding - I think my autoguider would still work just fine - but for those of us with Meade telescopes - we'll probably still have to use AO7's because of the high periodic error. How long will it work? - I'm curious how long it would take for all of the grease to out-gas leaving me with ground up (but not squeaky - because of no sound) gears? Plus, temperature extremes are going to punish it much worse than anything I see in Cache Valley. Clear skies, Dale. _______________________________________________ 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

1 0

Observing on the moon
by Dale Hooper 23 Sep '05

23 Sep '05

When we go back to the moon in 2018, I'll be a spry 58 years old - so I should certainly live long enough to make the journey myself. <g> So, I was curious what it would take if I plop my Meade LX-200 out on the lunar surface and want to observe? Visually - I'm going to have a tough time because the helmet visor sure makes it tough to get to the eyepiece. Tracking & Pointing - I think I'm going to need some software on a laptop to get this thing to point to the right place - because I sure can't use a sidereal rate here. It would be easier with pointing a dob because things wouldn't be moving very quickly - but that eyepiece problem would need to be resolved. Exclusion zones - I've got this one big blue ball in the sky that is always basically in about the same location. Plus, there is still the very bright sun subtending about 30 arcminutes - emitting at every frequency. But it's only up 2 weeks each month. Guiding - I think my autoguider would still work just fine - but for those of us with Meade telescopes - we'll probably still have to use AO7's because of the high periodic error. How long will it work? - I'm curious how long it would take for all of the grease to out-gas leaving me with ground up (but not squeaky - because of no sound) gears? Plus, temperature extremes are going to punish it much worse than anything I see in Cache Valley. Clear skies, Dale.

1 0

Back to the moon
by Michael Carnes 23 Sep '05

23 Sep '05

Here's a nice, thought-provoking article about NASA's new moon strategy. It deals with a lot of interesting generational issues and may in some way address Kurt's complaints about old thinking. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/SiliconInsider/story?id=1146899&page=1

2 1

Not the first slide off dome
by Patrick Wiggins 22 Sep '05

22 Sep '05

I'd never heard of a slide off dome before we decided to build one at SPOC. Still, before advertising we had the first I emailed a couple of acquaintances at S&T and asked if they'd ever heard of someone else building one. Alas, they had: http://forums.astronomydaily.com/viewtopic.php?t=1102 Oh well, I guess we still have the only one in Stansbury Park... :-) Patrick

3 2

Re: [Utah-astronomy] NASA's plan to return to the moon
by Michael Carnes 21 Sep '05

21 Sep '05

Kurt, we'll just have to agree to disagree on that. I've got very fond memories of the X-15 and think it was a hell of a vehicle. But I just don't think that it was anywhere close to a technology that could reach orbital or escape velocities. I love the idea of a true space plane, but I don't feel any kind of Manhattan-style project will get us there. There is so much to learn in all areas of technology and materials science. I think you build on what you have. One day you look around and find that all the pieces are nearly there. I just don't think we're at that point. ------------------- >I was very disappointed to see NASA promoting this >"back to past" repeat of the Apollo program as the >CEV. It's old dead Apollo technology. What is needed >is to knuckle down and complete the promise of the >60's X-plane program and finish a true >single-stage-to-orbit space plane.

2 1

Re: [Utah-astronomy] NASA's plan to return to the moon
by Michael Carnes 21 Sep '05

21 Sep '05

>>my dive computer console 'scuse my ignorace Guy. What's that?

3 5

RE: [Utah-astronomy] NASA's plan to return to the moon
by Michael Carnes 21 Sep '05

21 Sep '05

>But playing the devil's advocate - I think that having the shuttle >really did help with the HST. The ISS still has the potential to help >with future mission staging and "might" actually produce some real >science. My turn to play devil's advocate. No question in my mind that the HST is the single most important astronomical instrument ever built (except perhaps for Galileo's little refractor). I say this both for the quality and quantity of data it's returned and for its ability to connect with a larger public. But HST was designed to be launched and serviced by the shuttle. Problems with the shuttle caused HST to be launched several years late, and current problems probably mean that Hubble will die too soon. Let me hasten to say that those servicing missions have been the high point of the shuttle's many times aloft. The question we can never answer is what kind of scope would HST have been with no shuttle. It's fun to speculate. We'd still have had heavy lift capability, so we could have gotten something up. Perhaps we'd have built a platform that was serviceable by robot (something HST isn't). Or perhaps we'd have launched new scopes every few years. That may have actually been the more economical way to avoid wear, tear and obscelescence. I remember one of the early shuttle missions where they rescued a satellite after its Pegasus booster had failed on a previous shuttle release. NASA was boasting how the shuttle had saved the satellite, when the shuttle-based launch had been the initial reason for failure. They could have sent the thing up on a Delta for a quarter the money and no risk to life. The Trib has an interestingly skeptical editorial today about the new NASA direction. In essence, they like the change in technology, but they're doubtful about the financials. While they're correct in their skepticism, the current situation is untenable, so change is absolutely necessary. I'm delighted to see the human space program go back to moving humans and the cargo business go back to unmanned rockets.

5 5

Re: [Utah-astronomy] NASA's plan to return to the moon
by Michael Carnes 21 Sep '05

21 Sep '05

Thanks Patrick. Looks like a helpful tool to keep from being dead. Isn't that the Windoze laptop he keeps in a plastic bag? It allows him to play computer games while he's getting some bottom time. :-) But seriously, here are some examples: http://www.sportextreme.com/pq209/ Patrick

1 0

Here's your answer Kim
by Michael Carnes 21 Sep '05

21 Sep '05

Kim, You wanted to know just what we'd gotten out of ISS. Now we know. http://www.boston.com/news/odd/articles/2005/09/21/noodle_maker_to_film_ad_…

1 0