New Dob for you to consider!!

[Dave47tuc (David)]

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/prod...er300pFlexTube

Who has them in Aus

[koputai (Jason)]

Would you buy a scope called a 'Flex Tube'?
I reckon there'd be a ton of flex in those parallel tubes once you hang a decent Panoptic on the end.

Cheers,
Jason.

[rmcpb (Rob)]

Laws of leverage look stacked against the tubes with their single point anchor at the bottom even if they are sized correctly for the tube not to flex. Odd they don't have a double anchor at the bottom.

[OneOfOne (Trevor)]

Interesting concept...

[peterbat (Peter)]

Looks somewhat similar to the new 16" GSO model. ( http://www.gs-telescope.com/content.asp?id=85 )
A couple of weeks ago Bintel had the GSO one on their home page as coming soon, at AUD$2295. I can't find it on their site now though...
Apart from the truss arrangement, very similar to the Lightbridge, not surprising considering GSO make the Lightbridge for Meade.
Peter

[Starkler (Geoff)]

Originally Posted by peterbat

Looks somewhat similar to the new 16" GSO model. ( http://www.gs-telescope.com/content.asp?id=85 )

I would think that the gso would be considerably more rigid given that the poles appear to be much thicker and being non circular in cross section should resist flexing and twisting.

[ausastronomer (John Bambury)]

I dont see any major problems with it.

The truss poles are above the balance point and it is carrying the top end with secondary mirror only plus focuser and eyepiece.

I could be wrong as I haven't seen in person how strong the truss poles are, but I would certainly try it before condemning it.

Cheers,
John B

[Starkler (Geoff)]

Newsflash!

These are now listed with prices at Andrews as "coming soon".

The 8 and 10 inch are $100 cheaper than the lightbridge, the 12inch $200 cheaper.
Will the flextube come with a crayford focuser? one would hope so.

[Satchmo]

"Flex-Tube"

Great concept.

Rather unfortunate name

[Starkler (Geoff)]

Yes great concept. I just wish someone could come up with a way of making the rather bulky dob bases collapsible for transport.

For example my gso 10" tube rides nicely on the back seat of the magna but the only place I can carry the base is on the front seat meaning no passengers.

[wavelandscott (Scott)]

Originally Posted by Starkler

Yes great concept. I just wish someone could come up with a way of making the rather bulky dob bases collapsible for transport.

For example my gso 10" tube rides nicely on the back seat of the magna but the only place I can carry the base is on the front seat meaning no passengers.

There always is the Obsession ultra compact solution (or similar)...I've not seen one in person but I've heard good things about them...

[Satchmo]

Why not cut the base board and ground board into a square( same size as rocker box), then the tube can nest into the mount layed down on the back seat ? You would have to relocate the feet and azimuth pads, but this would make th emount in line with traditional dob design. You may have to cover the exposed faces of the partical board with body filler or some iron on edging.

[Starkler (Geoff)]

Originally Posted by Satchmo

Why not cut the base board and ground board into a square( same size as rocker box), then the tube can nest into the mount layed down on the back seat ?

Thats one idea and it does puzzle me a bit why they persist with making round bases on the larger models.

It would be ridiculous to suggest that the 16" lightbridge base needs such a huge footprint for stability reasons, however the round base does allow room to fit stiffening ribs to the outside of the rocker box sides (as done with the 12" flextube Im happy to say).

[danielsun]

Being collapsible, I wonder how it goes for staying in collimation after each set up?

[dhumpie]

Check it out......its Skywatchers new line...

http://www.skywatchertelescope.net/s...1=1&class2=106

Darren

[dhumpie]

And a preview review....

http://nightskies.net/scopetest/scop.../flextube.html

Darren

[Miaplacidus (Brian)]

No one seems to have mentioned the potential advantage of being able to adjust for binoviewers by simply shortening slightly the amount by which the UTA is extended. Am I missing something obvious here, or would this work?

Cheers,

Brian.

[Starkler (Geoff)]

Originally Posted by Miaplacidus

No one seems to have mentioned the potential advantage of being able to adjust for binoviewers by simply shortening slightly the amount by which the UTA is extended. Am I missing something obvious here, or would this work?

I have actually seen that thought mentioned somewhere else..

The usefulness for that purpose will probably require further modifications including a larger secondary to catch a fatter light cone once the tube is shortened, weight balancing considerations and accurate stops fitted to the telescoping tubes to keep everything square. Still it looks promising.

At $200 less than the lightbridge in 12" flavour, it looks like serious competition and maybe lightbridge prices will fall

[toyos]

A few things that I experienced myself:
- That "SkyWatcher’s patented tension adjustment control on the altitude bearings" was not smooth and annoyingly jerky.
- Those "buttery smooth azimuth bearings" etched grooves on the base after a while. This was the reason why GSO decided to switch back to using teflon pads.

And will the collimation really hold throughout the evening with those two thin bars that you're gonna use all night to pull push and rotate the telescope?

[Satchmo]

Originally Posted by Miaplacidus

No one seems to have mentioned the potential advantage of being able to adjust for binoviewers by simply shortening slightly the amount by which the UTA is extended. Am I missing something obvious here, or would this work?

Yes. except that a typical binoviewer needs an F8 or slower light cone to get through its internals without vignetting so using one with an F5 scope will only allow half the aperture or so to be seen.