- Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

Red Sox, Red Eclipse 2004
by astrodeb＠charter.net 29 Oct '04

29 Oct '04

I found this on the digital-astro group. http://www.lecza.com/astro/eclipse2004/ Debbie

1 0

Rutan's "astronauts"
by Chuck Hards 28 Oct '04

28 Oct '04

To counter Burt Rutan yet again, I think the term "astronaut" should be reserved for pilots, crew, and PAID professional employees. Those who are purely paying passengers should be called "space travellers" or something similar. Otherwise the title becomes diluted and loses any prestige pretty much immediatlely. After all, Michael Jackson could buy a seat for his favorite chimp; would the chimp then be an astronaut? Come on, reality check time. Is the term going to be "awarded" to anyone with the bucks to buy a ticket? I think Rutan is counting on the title for all passengers as a marketing tool. Cheap shot. Really cheap. If that's the case, the term now carries no cachet or prestige at all, in fact it's the replacement word for "payload". > Space Race 2: Flying High Beyond The Sky > > The mission now for Burt Rutan's team is to create > 3,000 new astronauts a year, > beginning in four or five years. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

4 4

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Rutan's "astronauts"
by Michael Carnes 28 Oct '04

28 Oct '04

What about asstronauts? Meaning they just sit there.... To counter Burt Rutan yet again, I think the term "astronaut" should be reserved for pilots, crew, and PAID professional employees.

2 1

Huygens
by Chuck Hards 28 Oct '04

28 Oct '04

Let's hope ESA didn't sub-out the parachute deployment sensor to Lockheed-Martin... __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

1 0

New Saturn Picture
by Siegfried Jachmann 27 Oct '04

27 Oct '04

Joe, I see it the same way and wondered the same thing even before reading your post. The ring is not parallel with the belts. I'm also wondering where the top of the planet disappeared to. Siegfried Jachmann Family History Network Comptroller 801-553-8881

6 9

Baseball eclipse
by Patrick Wiggins 27 Oct '04

27 Oct '04

More on this in Monday's News but since there was some talk here a few days ago about recent baseball games, I thought I'd note that, weather permitting, those at Wednesday's world series game will be able to watch a total eclipse of the Moon while watching the game. >From what I've been able to dig up, this will be the first time that a total lunar eclipse has happened during a world series game. Patrick p.s. Just curious, but anyone know how the "world" series got it's name? Other than the US and Canada have any other countries ever participated?

3 3

Re: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: A Solution
by astrodeb＠charter.net 27 Oct '04

27 Oct '04

> > From: Joe Bauman <bau(a)desnews.com> > Date: 2004/10/26 Tue AM 11:12:32 MDT > To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: A Solution > > Oh yes. Hey Joe, at least you didn't get hurt. A scope that size could do some damage to a person if it fell on him/her. Good Luck, 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 >

3 3

Re: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: A Solution
by astrodeb＠charter.net 26 Oct '04

26 Oct '04

Thanks Chuck. That make perfect sense. Debbie > > From: Chuck Hards <chuckhards(a)yahoo.com> > Date: 2004/10/26 Tue AM 11:52:36 MDT > To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: Re: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: A Solution > > Hi Debbie: > > --- astrodeb(a)charter.net wrote: > > > > That is why I got a GEM mount. It is much easier > > to balance. I have one question for Chuck. When you > > say the gears should be working uphill, do you mean > > towards the telescope side or towards the > > counterweight side? > > If you can't achieve precise balance: > > Telescope side should be slightly heavy when looking > west of the meridian, counterweight side when looking > east of the meridian. The load should always be > against the direction of rotation. When the > telescope isn't "working" against the gears, it's > acting as a governor, not a drive, and it was not > designed to do this. The result can be erratic > tracking if the mount is loaded to near it's limit or > was designed poorly from the outset. > > > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. > http://messenger.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > 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: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: A Solution
by astrodeb＠charter.net 26 Oct '04

26 Oct '04

> > From: Chuck Hards <chuckhards(a)yahoo.com> > Date: 2004/10/26 Tue AM 06:57:05 MDT > To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: A Solution > > Hi Joe: > > Balancing a SCT can be tricky because of the very > short moments of inertia involved. I really can't > post a quick method of balancing - but I can say that > most commercial telescopes don't have the ability to > be completely balanced in every accessorized > situation and SCT's are no exception. Even those > weights that slide for-and-aft on a rail only address > balance in one dimension, and you have to think about > balance as a radial function around each particular > axis as well. It's a dynamic balance you're after, > under any orientation, not just a static balance in a > few orientations. And of course whenever you change > an accessory the balance will change. It can be a > trying procedure, don't be frustrated into a "good > enough" mentality. > When your telescope gets back, I'll meet you somewhere > and we'll give it a look. > > --- Joe Bauman <bau(a)desnews.com> wrote: > > > I want to try > > again. I have a balance bar that runs along the > > bottom, and some > > weights that can be extended out from the tube on > > their rods. First, > > can you give me a quick primer on how to balance in > > dec (it's fairly > > obvious how to do it in RA). I'm assuming moving > > the weights up or > > down on the bars would do it, but I'm having trouble > > picturing how. > > More importantly, I feel certain I would have to set > > up and align on > > north first and then balance. There's just no room > > between the tube > > and the wedge for anything sticking out while it is > > going through the > > motions of aligning. But I am hesitant to loosen the > > settings in RA > > and DEC after it's set up in order to balance it -- > > won't that throw > > off the tracking? Thanks, Joe > > That is why I got a GEM mount. It is much easier to balance. I have one question for Chuck. When you say the gears should be working uphill, do you mean towards the telescope side or towards the counterweight side? Debbie > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > > _______________________________________________ > 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] Re: A Solution
by astrodeb＠charter.net 26 Oct '04

26 Oct '04

I took out my refractor this morning and noticed my Starbeam red dot pointer is higher on the clamshell ring than the piggy-back bracket. All I have to do is move the piggy-back bracket where the Starbeam is mounted on the clamshell ring. Then I move the Starbeam to the right ride of the clamshell ring where the piggy-back bracket is. With the bracket nearly at the top of the clamshell ring, the scope should not be in the camera's viewfinder. Thanks to all that responded. Joe, one of the first things I do when I set up is balance the scope in RA then balance the scope in Dec. Otherwise, stars tend to trail when taking photos because of the movement of the scope. Debbie > > From: Joe Bauman <bau(a)desnews.com> > Date: 2004/10/20 Wed AM 07:06:52 MDT > To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Techinical Problems with Astrophotography > > With that solution, I suspect some telescopes may need balance > weights. At the back of the tube it's close to the axis and doesn't > tend to throw off the 'scope too much. But at the front it may be off > balance. Just a thought. -- Joe > >astrodeb(a)charter.net wrote: > >> > >> But the biggest problem was that my piggy-back adapter is not high > >> enough above the telescope. I got some of the telescope in the lower > >> left corner of the slide. > >Had the same problem with my C-8 and later my C-14. In both cases I fixed the > >problem by moving the piggyback adapter and camera to up near the > >front of the tube. > > > >Patrick > > > >_______________________________________________ > >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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 >

4 8