RE: ATM "more normal" scope pix

[Bob Prabowo <BOB@bahana.co.id>]

Hi guys,

I think a truss tube telescope might considered as "abnormal" because it
doesn't look like a telescope. The first thing that people would think
of when they hear a word telescope would be a refractor or a Newtonian,
people think  that a telescope must have a tube. 

Last weekend, in the scientific camping program for Junior high school
students, I brought my 13" and displayed it. It was part of a plan B in
case the sky was cloudy (plan A was to have a kind of public observing
session under a bright 3-day old moon sky, and plan B was to conduct a
telescope making and mirror making class if the weather didn't permit,
we're lucky the sky was clear.. and brrriiighhtt.) 
Anyway, during the briefing session (where I explained the star party
rules) I briefly told them that they can build their own telescope. The
13" scope was placed next to a Meade SCT, Meade refractor and Tasco
refractors (do you guys call it Trashco?). Every kid in that room knew
that the SCT and the refractors were telescopes. But they didn't know
that the wooden box with aluminum truss was also a telescope (to my
surprise, some friends from my club also didn't know that it's a
telescope). The kids asked where the tube was (there were 8 aluminium
tubes, but apparently these weren't the tube they had in mind).  

A truss style Dobsonian might look difficult to build. But it's not. 
I've made two telescopes so far (telescopes only, without the mirrors).
The 13" is my second telescope. The first one is an ugly 5.6" version of
Alice :-) It was my first telescope and my first woodworking project. 
I made both of the scopes with hand tools. It wasn't until the
construction of my 13" was 75% finished that i could afford a jig saw,
and then an electric drill. But I built it mostly with hand tools.  
When the construction of my 13" was finally finished, I took a looooong
look at it and said to myself "So, this is how a truss tube telescope
looks like." That was my first close encounter with a truss tube
telescope (second actually, the first one was with my ugly version of
Alice)

Don't let the appearance intimidates you. A truss style scope is not
more difficult to build than a solid tube one. When you build a solid
tube scope, you have to build the rocker box and the ground box, right?
Why not take one more step further and build the mirror box and the
upper cage or ring? By the time you finished the ground and the rocker
box you will have all the skills needed to make the mirror box and the
upper ring.  

For a smaller telescope it may be better to stick with solid tube
design. But IMHO, when it comes to portability and compactness, nothing
beats truss tube Dobsonian (my 13" when it's disassembled is only half
the size of my 8" SCT case).  But as to which style one should build,
it's really a matter of a personal taste.

Bob P. Sumitro
Jakarta, Indonesia

visit my still-under-construction astronomy and telescope making page:
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/2670/