|
Well I did not get the response I was hopeing for:
"the bottom line is this cell, with some variations in dimension, will perform flawlessly in supporting your mirror. There is a good article written by a Japanese engineer about wavefront error vs support points and he shows that optically, a 9 point cell would be sufficient for a 16" It is in the Sky and Telescope for November 1994. And last, I have almost a match to your scope with my 16" f/4.6 with a 1.6" thick mirror and similar variation in the cell pad placement. When you see the central star of the Ring Nebula, mottling on the surface of Io, and detail withing the festoons on Jupiter you know the construction is well within needed tolerances.
Last, I wanted to relate a time last year when I observed two nights with with what I and others that used my telescope considered premium views, only to come home, remove the mirror for cleaning and find one of the flotation pads had broken loose from the orientation ring and had rotated 30 degrees.
It had been that way all weekend from the dust imprint on the back from the flotation points."
Personally I think it's an excuse for yet more shoddy workmanship.
Anyone else care to comment on this?
|