Re: [APML]: The Little Astrograph That Isn't

[Brad Barton <bbarton@holli.com>]

Jack Schmidling wrote:
>
> Jumping to the section on correctors for Newts I
> had a feeling I was in trouble when I read that the 200" Hale scope has
> a useful field of only about a half inch.  

Gee Jack, I hope for your sake, that this is true.  If not you've set 
yourself up for a carpet bombing.  Does it really say that in the ATM 
series books?  Does anyone know if this is true?  It seems preposterous on 
the face of it.  Could it be that they are talking about half an inch on 
the film plane rather than half an inch out of an entire 200" mirror?  
If that were the case, why build one?  How big a film image does the Hale 
capture?  My guess would be _big_.  

Brad