View Single Post
  #5  
Old 03-10-2024, 12:34 PM
PRejto's Avatar
PRejto (Peter)
Registered User

PRejto is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Rylstone, NSW, Australia
Posts: 1,503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo.G View Post
n I'd guess the mount holes which held the flange to the tube were oversized to make installation somewhat easier but allowing for the heavy image train to pull it around. Is it a steel or aluminium tube?

I'd expect something like that from my second hand Skywatcher 152 achromat, not something that I could only ever dream of being able to own.
Leo, It was certaily a surprise to me too. However, in TEC's defense, my OTA is pretty old and I highly doubt that when it was made anyone would have though, or even been able, to add such weight behind the flange. Their design is updated now so I don't think my issues would apply to their newer model. The older models, possibly yes. I saw no evidence of enlarged holes removing the original flange. I think the inner portion was/is just too shallow to hold that much weight. 30 microns isn't a lot but does amplify with a long imaging train.

P
Reply With Quote