View Single Post
  #5  
Old 04-03-2009, 12:01 PM
Omaroo's Avatar
Omaroo (Chris Malikoff)
Let there be night...

Omaroo is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Hobart, TAS
Posts: 7,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbeal View Post
I don't fully agree. Yes, the weight is closer to the pivot, but in most cases, certainly mine, the associated side by side contraption adds more weight than is saved. If I have a choice, over/under.
Gary
Thank you Gary - my sentiments exactly. The double (or even triple-width) saddle is a huge lump on its own. I see absolutely no advantage in side by side - in fact it's harder to fully balance in 3-D around the Dec axis. Invariably you have one large scope (with additional camera) on one side and a smaller guide scope on the other. Where's the balance advantage in that? No only do you have to balance the whole kit and kaboodle forwards and backwards - but now sideways as well. On my setup, the weight on the LHS due to the finderscopes is perfectly offset by the weight of the cable loom on the right.

I much prefer to vertically stack - the weight distribution is far more linear, and I think lighter in overall weight either side of the RA bearing. It really doesn't matter how close to the bearing the weight is - it's either present there or its not. The inertial difference between it being located close to the bearing or not is insignificant, and the weight of the side-by-side saddle is more, so I don't see any advantages other then it being quicker to swap the main scope out....which I never do.
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (20090304-P3040017.jpg)
73.9 KB150 views
Click for full-size image (20090304-P3040018.jpg)
79.0 KB159 views

Last edited by Omaroo; 04-03-2009 at 12:29 PM.
Reply With Quote