LOL! On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 2:15 PM, Hutchings, Mat <mat.hutchings@siemens.com>wrote:
Pretty sure that this post is going to generate some comments/corrections. I am staying out of it.
Got my bag of popcorn and a soda; this could get interesting.
Mat
-----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Erik Hansen Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:29 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Journey to the 1.8 meter
I was not suggesting a smaller secondary, I was suggesting a smaller primary with a more efficient design.> The true aperture is 41 inches, so you are getting the resolution of a 41 inch scope, my point is a 45 inch primary with a more conventional secondary would give same light gathering with probably same ladder height as a 70 inch with a 29 inch secondary. I doubt it puts the Grim to shame, it would be interesting to compare the 2 at SPOC, and hear what the comments are.
The other issue, is what is the largest field of view with the scope? With some eyepieces any object centered will not be there long. The time it takes someone to climb down the ladder and another one up, the object will be out of the field of view....will they have more than a minute or less than a minute.