- Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

I discovered a great site for adults: http://www.HappyHug.com
by Betty Trimbo 07 Mar '03

07 Mar '03

Hi, I was surfing and discovered a great site for Adults: http://www.HappyHug.com This is a new site for adults. They are operating since 9 december 2002. It looks good to me!! Betty _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

List Info
by Cynthia Blue 06 Mar '03

06 Mar '03

It looks like xmission will be upgrading their email list serve software in the near future. This may mean some downtime for the list. It will probably only be an hour or less. Not sure of the date yet, but when I find out, I'll let ya'll know. Just and FYI. :) Cyn http://www.cynthiablue.net http://www.animalfoster.com http://www.utahdogs.com

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Celestron's New CGE Series
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

I'd go with TEC's new 140 APO. A steal at $4250. An Astro-Physics 6" refractor sells for $6480 with a 2.7" focuser and $8800 with a 4" focuser with field flattener. But plan on waiting about 5 years or more for one. Street prices are much higher. I'd mount the 140 APO on a G11 tripod with my GM-8 mount head. Then I would try digicam imaging before getting into CCD. I'm not in a hurry to plunk down thousands of dollars on a CCD outfit. Debbie

6 6

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Astro-Physics refractors
by UTAHDEB＠aol.com 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

Chuck, Check out this article on Cloudynights.com. <A HREF="http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews2/TMB5.htm">Cloudy Nights TMB 5"</A> Some people are buying the objective lens and building a tube assembly around it. The TMB 6" refractor is a fine scope too if you don't mind the 41.6 lb OTA and have a mount to handle it. Debbie

1 0

Astro-Physics refractors
by Chuck Hards 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

If you don't want to wait 5 years for an A-P refractor, Roland Christen published his APO designs years ago. I'll bet you could build a better tube assembly for 1/4 his price or less. For the triplet, you'd have to grind, polish and figure 6 surfaces, however, surface tolerances on lenses are somewhat relaxed over those of reflective surfaces. You may have to figure an extra concave surface also, for testing (via the contact method, by counting rings). Also, some crystaline glasses (flourite, etc.) are very picky as to what you grind and polish them with. Depending on the exact design, maybe flourite isn't needed and more conventional ED glass will suffice. But it is very do-able. Just a thought for the impatient do-it-yourselfer. C. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/

1 0

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Mars
by David Dunn 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

You forgot Planned to be attended by David Dunn: add 90% -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Hards [mailto:chuckhards@yahoo.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 9:04 AM To: utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Mars Chances of cloudy skies: New telescope or accessory: add 50% New moon: add 50% Rare celestial event: add 50% Next day off work: add 75% Utah location add 50% The numbers were against me, even without Kims voodoo! C. --- Kim Hyatt <khyatt(a)smithlayton.com> wrote: > Would that I had that kind of influence on the > weather... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Gibson [mailto:xajax99@yahoo.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 8:23 AM > To: utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Mars > > > > Chuck > > > You missed it because Kim was doing some kind of a > chant and muttering > something about "...may thoes with new Apogee 20X80s > have couldy skys for a > month". It must have work. Look outside righ now. We > have beautiful blue > skys over Dugway. > > > Jim > > > Chuck Hards <chuckhards(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > I got up at 4:00 am to try and see Mars pass between > M-8 & M-20, but of course it was too overcast. > Thought it would be the perfect opportunity to put > the > 20x80's to the test. > > Did anybody else manage to see this event? > > Mars will still be roughly "between" the objects > tomorrow morning, though it has passed the halfway > point. > > C. > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more > http://taxes.yahoo.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > > > > _____ > > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! > <http://rd.yahoo.com/finance/mailtagline/*http://taxes.yahoo.com/> > Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more > > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy

3 2

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Celestron's New CGE Series
by Dale Hooper 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

Joe, I'm no expert on it - but I can parrot some of the reasons that I've heard. Part of the problem is that unlike PC's, with CCD camera's you don't get the mega-volume mass production benefits as mentioned by Chuck. At least currently. Astroimaging CCD's are mainly monochrome; camcorders - for the most part use "color" CCD chips. Currently color chips don't have the photon well depth needed, etc. because the pixels are split up to support the red, green, and blue components. I'm also not sure if the defect requirements are the same on camcorder CCD's as they are on astroimaging CCD's. But, this could all change if the color CCD chips become usable for astro imaging - then we could get mass production benefits. Perhaps then we could maybe get away from all the color filter wheels, etc. like Jim Seargeant and other CCD experts have to use. > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Bauman [mailto:bau@desnews.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 11:29 AM > To: utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Celestron's New CGE Series > > > Don't you think CCD prices will drop drastically? I can't > help but feel > they're high now just like PCs were when they first came out, > but will go > down as technology and production improve. My first PC was an > IBM that cost > around $5,000 about 1984, with "spin-writer" printer and a monochrome > monitor. It didn't even have a hard drive. It's worthless now > except as a > museum piece. In a few years it was far outclassed by > computers that were > much less pricy. -- Joe > > Joe Bauman > science & military reporter > Deseret News > bau(a)desnews.com > (801) 237-2169 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >

1 0

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Celestron's New CGE Series
by Kim Hyatt 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

Isn't that about the cost of a 6-inch Astrophysics refractor? If I had the money, that's what I'd rather have. On the other hand, $6K would finance a nice climbing trip to the Himalayas... -----Original Message----- From: Joe Bauman [mailto:bau@desnews.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 9:28 AM To: utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Celestron's New CGE Series Great, I forgot my drooling bib! Now what'll I do! Let's have a discussion on this, everyone. If you had $6,100 (its cost including shipping to SLC) to do the best you could with astrophotography, what telescope would you invest in? The only drawback I see is that it's f/11. But what do you think? A URL that gets you right there is: http://www.optcorp.com/cart/ProductDetail.asp?PR_ProductID=1950 Best wishes, Joe Joe Bauman science & military reporter Deseret News bau(a)desnews.com (801) 237-2169 _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy

3 3

RE: [Utah-astronomy] Celestron's New CGE Series
by Dale Hooper 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

I would love to get my hands on one of these - after they have had a good problem shakeout period. I've already told my wife that we really need to replace the observatory scope with one of these. <g> Of course, I can't afford it for about 6-7 tax returns. A focal reducer should resolve the f/11 drawback. It's also fastar (f/2.1) compatible. I'm kind of curious about why they don't offer the carbon fiber tube for the 14" like they do the 11". Well, it's time to get a towel to wipe all the drool off of my keyboard. > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Bauman [mailto:bau@desnews.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 9:28 AM > To: utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Celestron's New CGE Series > > > Great, I forgot my drooling bib! Now what'll I do! > > Let's have a discussion on this, everyone. If you had $6,100 (its cost > including shipping to SLC) to do the best you could with > astrophotography, > what telescope would you invest in? The only drawback I see > is that it's > f/11. But what do you think? > > A URL that gets you right there is: > http://www.optcorp.com/cart/ProductDetail.asp?PR_ProductID=1950 > > > Best wishes, Joe > > Joe Bauman > science & military reporter > Deseret News > bau(a)desnews.com > (801) 237-2169 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy >

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Re: Go-to scopes
by RStmarie＠aol.com 05 Mar '03

05 Mar '03

I know this isn't an aviation forum but... lots of crossover between the two hobbies. Brent and Ken both have airplanes. I know Chuck is an aficionado of WW1 in particular. I fly for a living at FedEx. How many other aviators have we got out there? And Wayne, what are you building? And Chuck, who has the 2-33?

9 8