Thanks for your feedback Paul.
All I am trying to do is support someone who has expended a lot of time & effort and taken a system that is
well past it's design intent & design criteria, and via - exceptional personal competence, capability and experience - achieved ground breaking success.
I am well aware that there are many that are able to achieve this task, as there are many experienced astro imagers out there.
What Bert has achieved has
broken new ground that is being emulated by quite a number of other astro imagers overseas, and they are also having outstanding success with nearly identical systems.
But not in Australia.
Us Australians are innovation deficient - where we are very slow to respond to new technologies, and instead criticise new technology until it is so well established that we are unable to ignore it.
I have spent a life (38 years) in the global automotive industry in a specialist function - Science of Measurement (Metrology) - where the Australian industry is at least a decade behind Europe, US and Asia in our implementation of new processes in engineering.
Self fulfilling prophecy, where the demise of our auto industry is due to our reluctance to adopt new technology (well documented within the industry).
But this isn't restricted to the auto industry, it is of our countries major malaise issues.
I recommend those that are uncomfortable with the theme of f3 don't attempt it, and leave it to others whom are prepared to take things step by step and image at speeds that the balance of users of f5 and slower (most of you) simply are incapable of comprehending.
This is the central theme of all this banter, most of you do not understand this project, and thereby out of caution elect to criticise - a standard Australian idiosyncrasy (tall poppy).
Bert has broken new ground and shown what can be achieved with dedicated effort, and considered step by step implementation. He has not rushed into any of the tasks, and methodically taken each challenge as it comes.
This is a model for us all, as I see many astro imaging systems that people think are a simple plug and play, and will win them imaging awards within weeks of implementation.
What the
Plus they aren't kidding !!
A "System" is as strong as it's weakest link, and there's 20 odd suppliers in this system, why "must" the telescope be the target of all this criticism.
Bert's issues were NEVER with the telescope, they were with flexure in the CFW and it's mating connections, there's never ever been anything wrong with the telescope.
Bert puts up full res images - as such he is not able to hide any errors whatsoever, if there is any error it hits you in the face straight away. If you are putting up reduced images you are hiding your issues.
Whom of you put up full res images, I don't see anyone other than Mike S. So your data is hiding errors, not a balanced data set in the first place.
Only in full res is an image fully testable.
Bert's images also have an accuracy of 1 pixel movement in 2 hours, do yours ? This is only available from a system working correctly, with ultra precision optics working perfectly.
Yes, I rarely make any comments on Ice In Space, and why is this - I find nearly all of the comments are biased - and far too many pushing a barrow, whether it be free gear they get from suppliers (they know who they are), or free loan gear to trial. Not open enough to new technologies to open your eyes and actually learn something.