Re: [APML] STV Mounting Question

[steve banbury <banburys@sonic.net>]

Kent--I'm all ears!

I didn't have a bit of trouble last summer using the STV, a  GEG and my C11.

I thought I could have an easier life devoid of mirror shift and GEG's
by switching to a TV101. I have 2 DOVELM plates securely bolted to a
1/2 inch thick aluminum plate, with a TV101 and an Oracle installed.
The STV is dovetailed to the same plate at one edge, the TV101 in the
center directly over the mount, and the Oracle is off to the other side.

I haven't had a single untrailed image all summer!

Tony Hallas mentioned to me he had never been particularly happy with the
results of 2 refractors side by side mounted.

I can't for the life of me understand the "why" of it.

I kinda wonder about the TeleVue clamshell holder's.
I kinda wonder if the DOVELM's are misaligned with respect to the polar
axis if my drift alignments are invalid.

I kinda wonder why I ever went here!!

Steve


KGKIRKLEY@aol.com wrote:

>
> Ahhhh yes........but...........
>
> I used to avoid using rings too.
> I tried various tangent assemblies with guidescopes, as this seemed like a
> simple and elegant solution.
> I felt rings were clumsey and antiquated.
> I tried mounting guidescopes using side-by-side configurations.
> I tried using beautiful refractors as guidescopes; TV 101, AP Traveler
> What did I get, various amounts of flexure.
>
> After acquiring a simple, light weight refractor and sturdy rings.......guess
> what, the flexure was no longer present.
>
> Now I've switched to the STV and the efinder and/or telephoto lens
> arrangement.
> And now, using rings is a simple and elegant solution.
>
> Kent Kirkley
>
> --  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
>              Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>


--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>