Last night I tried this new feature in TSX that takes info from the polar alignment report of T-Point, has one slew to a low point to the N or S. It then offsets the mount from a "fiducial" star. You then physically move the mount to recenter this star. The polar alignment is then complete and it not necessary to recalibrate into the model (per previous older methods) as the model is automatically updated to the new position upon completion.
Great, but not working (for me and one other person I know who tried it). e.g., the PA report indicates that the mount should be lowered 2 tics but doing so makes the star move further away from the center.
I suspect it may be a S.H. bug. Has anyone else experienced this or had success? I don't believe that moving the mount contrary to the PA report can be the answer. One would need to conclude that the PA report is totally wrong. As we have used the PA report for years to achieve good PA (with recalibration verification that adjustments to the mount are valid) it seems unlikely that now the PA report is corrupted.
You've jogged my memory. See www.bisque.com/sc/forums/p/24730/115868.aspx#115868 Matthew Bisque said this at the time (May 27):
"This southern hemisphere only bug, introduced in daily build 8805 has been corrected in TheSky build 8916 or later (to be released as a daily build soon).
As a work around, in the meantime, rely on the details given near the end of the report."
Build 8908 latest version so this has yet to be fixed!
Let's all beat up on Daniel Bisque and convince him to publicly release a new daily build sooner rather than later. LOL if they were actually released to the public daily.
Let's all beat up on Daniel Bisque and convince him to publicly release a new daily build sooner rather than later. LOL if they were actually released to the public daily.
Well, that's a bit harsh! But I agree that sooner rather than later with a known bug would be rather helpful. For sure it would have saved me a couple of days of confusion. They have know about this since May and now it's July.
It appears that to see accurate information about T-Point PA one must click on "Show alternative PA" at the bottom of the report. Sure enough the information about ME is reversed (and correct). So that "probably" means that the offset calculated by "Accurate PA" is correct as far as ME. My results with MA seem odd. My report said to move the mount 10 tics but the photo I took showed that the offset was quite small in that direction (towards the y axis). My camera is North up so ME is the vertical axis, MA horizontal.
Let's all beat up on Daniel Bisque and convince him to publicly release a new daily build sooner rather than later. LOL if they were actually released to the public daily.
Well, it would be nice if they would reply to queries... I've politely asked for assistance and told them I'm willing to spend significant amounts of money, yet their communication is sporadic at best! Hardly confidence inspiring when a new mount is $10-25k
Nice detective work there Peter. Yes I thought it was odd when T-Point said no adjustment needed (and then it has lower by 1.3tics which is miniscule) but when I used accurate polar alignment the adjustments were in the opposite direction and quite large.
Hmm. Need to do another large T-point model and follow TPoint directions only.
Nice detective work there Peter. Yes I thought it was odd when T-Point said no adjustment needed (and then it has lower by 1.3tics which is miniscule) but when I used accurate polar alignment the adjustments were in the opposite direction and quite large.
Hmm. Need to do another large T-point model and follow TPoint directions only.
Greg.
Actually Greg, be careful how you read this! I put up another post at SB that Patrick Wallace answered.
1. The report that you normally look at is incorrect in ME and says to move the mount in the wrong direction.
2. If you go to the bottom of that page there is a check box for advanced PA settings. The information in that section is correct!
3. Accurate PA feature uses information from the advanced PA settings.
4. So, when you just ignored what #1 said and you just re-centered the star you actually did exactly the right thing! Your PA should be right on.
This seems to me to be quite poor on the part of SB. They have known about this bug in the S.H. for nearly 6 weeks but have not fixed up the report that all of us depend on. If I were setting up nightly in the field having the wrong info displayed this would probably stuff up lots of hours if not the whole night. I really think it has been a big mistake for them to wait this long to fix something that is probably quite easy to fix. Maybe we just don't count very much down here in the S.H. Admittedly the number of SB mounts in the S.H. is probably small comparatively. However, it is a serious community and I think deserves better.
OK so I do use the accurate PA recentre the star low in the north or south. That's what I did last time and autoguiding errors went down so I figured it was correct. It did throw me a bit like you said as I had to adjust in the opposite direction and by quite a lot more than the report said.
Why does the TPoint polar alignment report suddenly generate wrong adjustments? Gee is that for all its adjustments? As I did several iterations to get to that last one with the accurate PA.
In their defence SB does warn that the latest build may have bugs.
Well, it would be nice if they would reply to queries... I've politely asked for assistance and told them I'm willing to spend significant amounts of money, yet their communication is sporadic at best! Hardly confidence inspiring when a new mount is $10-25k
DT
For that sort of money David I would seriously consider the AP1600 with absolute encoders. That sounds state of the art and under .2 arc sec guiding. Unguided 10 minute round star images are possible. Plus you can install them later as an upgrade at home. ME11 needs to go back to Bisque for that and ME11 is more expensive than AP1600 in the first place.
I have nothing but glowing recommendations for anything I have had from AP. They are the best in the land at whatever they do.
I have also found them very responsive plus you usually can get comms from Roland via the Yahoo AP group easily.
OK so I use accurate Polar Alignment not what the report says unless I click on advanced polar alignment. Why is there an advanced or accurate polar alignment?? It implies someone would be satisfied with a non accurate alignment? As-if.
The adjustments are correct from the wizard, however the reporting is wrong. It's reversed. I found this last night after performing the MKS5000 upgrade on my PME over the weekend, obviously destroying the existing polar alignment.... the marker I placed on the mount, fell off while I was pulling stuff apart, only realised the sticker had come off when I was beginning the polar alignment process. A few hours scratching my head and wondering if ripping the guts out of the mount had been a bad idea. Their wizard works, just center the star, the adjustments you apply will likely be reversed to what they report. Also, probably perform the "re-calibration" after you make the adjustment. I tend not to trust stuff, so once I zero out polar alignment I perform a new synch and build my bigger model from the accurate and polar aligned synch.
Pretty happy with the upgrade, now I have an obese PMX, all the mechanical aspects that I love about the PME, with the usability and smarts of my trusty PMX. I'm still yet to build a new large point model and apply PEC, but it turns on, homes, synchs, slews and has worked perfectly so far!
My understanding is that after "accurate polar alignment" it is not necessary to recalibrate the model. The model knows that you moved the mount, and since the move is exact (unlike just using the tic marks on the adjusters) it updates itself. Patrick Wallace has said a recalibration after is totally unnecessary.
My understanding is that after "accurate polar alignment" it is not necessary to recalibrate the model. The model knows that you moved the mount, and since the move is exact (unlike just using the tic marks on the adjusters) it updates itself. Patrick Wallace has said a recalibration after is totally unnecessary.
Peter
Sorry dude, not from my observations. Your synch stays where the original synch was, I start from there and build a new one after I finish the alignments. Else, you'll notice that while your pointing is repeatable, it will be offset by the last adjustment you did after you conduct a home/switch off the mount. I spent a lot of time trying to isolate this issue, deployed various time solutions as I initially thought it was time source based. I could be wrong, but thats my process and it works, I don't end up with a silly offset. I've seen it on both the PME and PMX, MKS4000 and MKS5000.
edit:
Just to re-iterate, once i've done a few runs and perform my last polar alignment adjustment using the wizard, I blow it all away, do a new synch, then build my actual model.
I am in the middle of a 300 point T-point model. I suppose I'll see how it works as it says that the model has taken it into account but I believe you.
Sorry dude, not from my observations. Your synch stays where the original synch was, I start from there and build a new one after I finish the alignments. Else, you'll notice that while your pointing is repeatable, it will be offset by the last adjustment you did after you conduct a home/switch off the mount. I spent a lot of time trying to isolate this issue, deployed various time solutions as I initially thought it was time source based. I could be wrong, but thats my process and it works, I don't end up with a silly offset. I've seen it on both the PME and PMX, MKS4000 and MKS5000.
edit:
Just to re-iterate, once i've done a few runs and perform my last polar alignment adjustment using the wizard, I blow it all away, do a new synch, then build my actual model.
OK, whatever floats your boat. But, I'll say that the latest posts by Mr. Wallace say quite different things, especially about syncs. Contrary to the manual he advises not to have any sync at all. He said that the only reason SB recommends a sync is in case PA is not good enough to get an initial plate solve. The model itself serves as the sync if you will. I haven't had a sync in TSX for a long time now. Obviously your mileage may vary. In saying that, why not put up a post at SB about your experience? If your observations differ from what is being preached there I think it's important to share it so others can benefit.
Peter
Edit: Obviously your method works, no doubt. However, I think more than a few might think it completely unnecessary to delete your model and start over just because you adjusted PA. A recalibration into your model will save that model by updating the terms that changed when you moved the alignment. I think you would find this works quite well if you just don't have a sync. What I do is add the first point of a new model by hand (without any sync). Then I just run an automated collection, super model, accurate PA, done.
What's the advantage of the MKS5000 over the MKS4000 on the PME?
Apart from the nicer singing tone that it makes hehehe.
Greg.
Some people would argue none since there is no longer any serial connection, only USB. I seem to remember that this was, and may still be, causing issues for remote imagers. Something about having only one way to access the mount remotely in case there is an error. Not sure. I just remember a whole slew of posts where many were unhappy to not have a serial connection + USB.
What's the advantage of the MKS5000 over the MKS4000 on the PME?
Apart from the nicer singing tone that it makes hehehe.
Greg.
Actually, the singing tone is a bit muffled lol.... the board sits pretty deep inside the mount. I did have a chuckle when it homed and made the MX sound I was used to before.
Colder conditions MKS5000 is supposed to have improved track rates etc. It gets very cold inside my observatory during winter, even with a dome, ice everywhere lol.
USB through the mount, Power through the mount with more modern cabling options. I preferred the PMX for cabling in general, but appreciated the much larger internal spaces for cabling through the mount; however, running chunky cables through the inside during summer was fine but as things started getting crazy cold stuff gets a lot stiffer. There are also a bunch of keystones I can expand upon but I'll figure that out later.
New hand paddle, I prefer it over the older one.
Mainly, I wanted to ensure that the mount was somewhat modernised as a baseline for the new image train that has just arrived.
During the upgrade I pretty much pulled the entire thing apart, inspected everything I could get to. After re-assembly and initial power on tests / TCS configuration, I performed spring plunger adjustments based on load I'll be placing on it.
Tonight I collected PE data, seeing was fairly crappy before the big cold low system slams through here. PEC applied, all seems fine, though I'll grab another run once the weather improves.
PL16803 is now on the back of the CDK, dark library is sorted, mount is mostly done, SX Lodestar X2's calibration masters are ready. Now I just need the new gear weather curse to pass
