#41  
Old 15-02-2013, 11:27 PM
Mighty_oz (Marcus)
Registered User

Mighty_oz is offline
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Atm somewhere in Perth
Posts: 575
Quote:
Originally Posted by binofied View Post
Here was me thinking I was going to read something about a 16" RC from GSO, have they actually been sighted in the wild yet?
They appear to be a figment of someones imagination But what a dream it could be !
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 16-02-2013, 09:48 AM
Satchmo's Avatar
Satchmo (Mark)
Registered User

Satchmo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,858
Binofied- It was just your sort of experience in your GSO 10" RC thread I was looking for when I called for peoples experience of the 12" RC earlier in this thread. I'd imagine that the larger you go the greater the opto-mechanical issues become, but at least all solvable with time and patience it seems with your 10".
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 16-02-2013, 04:34 PM
binofied
Registered User

binofied is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Auckland New Zealand
Posts: 44
Thanks Mark, yes I suppose the only thing to realise is that off the shelf it will not be perfect. For me, on the 10", it simply came down to a me being silly and not listening to myself. I knew in my heart that the focuser was not up to scratch but was wasting lots of time wishing and trying to make it work. I should have simply gone and got the Moonlite or Feathertouch straight away. I also didn't know if the TS2.5-Flat would work as I didn't find any images with a full size chip taken through it and felt all the other flatteners were not up to the mark being 2", I just wasted time before actually buying it. The 16" BTW will have far less field curvature and may even be ok on a big chip without a flattener this is one area where bigger is better. You would need a proper mount, be prepared to go and spend serious coin on the mount to take advantage of this scope. I think it will be a winner, time will tell :-)

Last edited by binofied; 16-02-2013 at 04:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 16-02-2013, 08:34 PM
Poita (Peter)
Registered User

Poita is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NSW Country
Posts: 3,585
Replacing the focuser seems to be a pretty standard requirement on most scopes it would seem. Bigger does seem to be better with these, the bigger you get the smaller the % obstruction and the flatter the field.
If it is a truss design hopefully it won't take a mega mount. Brett had a big RC on his Mach1 and it wasn't even breathing heavy.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 12-03-2013, 05:21 PM
BPO's Avatar
BPO
Registered User

BPO is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 386
Don't the Astro-Tech versions ship without a focuser?
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 12-03-2013, 06:08 PM
mithrandir's Avatar
mithrandir (Andrew)
Registered User

mithrandir is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Glenhaven
Posts: 4,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by BPO View Post
Don't the Astro-Tech versions ship without a focuser?
According to Astro-Tech, the 10" CF and 12" Al ship without focuser. The other models have one. There's no listing for the 16" CF.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 17-10-2013, 04:25 PM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,481
To resurrect this old post, it appears that the 12" GSO RC and 16" GSO RC are both about to be released with a tuss tube design. The 12" shipment has be delayed to co-inside with the availability of the 16" from Andrews Coms. Should be a very interesting set of scopes. Had seen an image just prior on a Dutch site and they look very shmick.
Allan

Last edited by allan gould; 17-10-2013 at 06:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 17-10-2013, 06:43 PM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,481
This apparently is what it will look like
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (RC16%20Rear.jpg)
74.6 KB110 views
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 17-10-2013, 07:36 PM
Logieberra's Avatar
Logieberra (Logan)
Registered User

Logieberra is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Canberra
Posts: 1,543
Shame they don't revisit their focuser design -- a purely imaging scope with a visual focuser...
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 17-10-2013, 09:25 PM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan gould View Post
To resurrect this old post, it appears that the 12" GSO RC and 16" GSO RC are both about to be released with a tuss tube design. The 12" shipment has be delayed to co-inside with the availability of the 16" from Andrews Coms. Should be a very interesting set of scopes. Had seen an image just prior on a Dutch site and they look very shmick.
Allan
Yep heard the very same thing today Allan. I put my order in for a truss. I have the mirrors, just need the truss.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 17-10-2013, 09:26 PM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logieberra View Post
Shame they don't revisit their focuser design -- a purely imaging scope with a visual focuser...
Agreed the focusor is crap. Also they need to get on with a flattener for their system.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 17-10-2013, 09:34 PM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,481
Paul
Seriously considering the 12" truss scope as it will function well (just) in the 2.3 meter observatory and will give me the light grasp that I have been looking for. Also the trusses are carbon fibre and thus should weigh considerably (?) less than the solid tube 12".
Decisions, decisions.
Paul are you converting your 12" to the truss model?
Allan
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 17-10-2013, 09:48 PM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by allan gould View Post
Paul
Seriously considering the 12" truss scope as it will function well (just) in the 2.3 meter observatory and will give me the light grasp that I have been looking for. Also the trusses are carbon fibre and thus should weigh considerably (?) less than the solid tube 12".
Decisions, decisions.
Paul are you converting your 12" to the truss model?
Allan
Yep I will convert the existing system I have to a new truss, assuming Jim Sheng will sell me a truss (he should, but there may be a catch, like the f ratio being slightly different).
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 18-10-2013, 05:45 PM
alpal's Avatar
alpal
Registered User

alpal is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,795
Hi Paul,
I can't wait to see your results with the 16'" RC.

cheers
Allan
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 18-10-2013, 06:15 PM
netwolf's Avatar
netwolf
Registered User

netwolf is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,902
Pictures on CN forum astro tech version of 12" carbon truss

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthrea.../1#Post6140473
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 18-10-2013, 07:33 PM
Paul Haese's Avatar
Paul Haese
Registered User

Paul Haese is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 9,363
Allan, I am just sticking to the RC12 at this stage.

Netwolf, isn't that sweet looking.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 18-10-2013, 08:25 PM
alpal's Avatar
alpal
Registered User

alpal is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Haese View Post
Allan, I am just sticking to the RC12 at this stage.

Netwolf, isn't that sweet looking.
OK Paul,
well - someone else may buy one & publish some pics - I hope so.

Getting an accurate hyperbolic curve on a 16" mirror would be no easy task.
I wonder how good they will be?

cheers
Allan
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 18-10-2013, 11:41 PM
allan gould's Avatar
allan gould
Registered User

allan gould is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,481
think I will be going for the 12" truss scope at this stage. It looks really good and if the 10" is any guide then it should be excellent value for money. Just want more aperture, but who doesn't?
One thing is that it doesn't seem to have as much back focus as the current 10 and 12" scopes but maybe they just left the spacers out of the images.
Allan
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 19-10-2013, 08:28 PM
Satchmo's Avatar
Satchmo (Mark)
Registered User

Satchmo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,858
I wonder who the 'budget' 16" RC is aimed at - theres certainly no budget mount to put it on - but I guess a Paramount ME might handle it ?
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 19-10-2013, 08:42 PM
h0ughy's Avatar
h0ughy (David)
DOGHOUSE REBORN

h0ughy is online now
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NEWCASTLE NSW Australia
Posts: 30,540
Quote:
Originally Posted by Satchmo View Post
I wonder who the 'budget' 16" RC is aimed at - theres certainly no budget mount to put it on - but I guess a Paramount ME might handle it ?
the EQ8
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 10:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
Celestron Australia
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement