Posts Made By: Ron Bee

Ain't the FS102 beautiful and DSOs through it satisfyingly challenging as well as pleasing in many instances, Ivan ;-)? Ain't the FS102 > 3d FOV make finding those DSOs almost like child's play? And panning the Milky Way! Dark sky is the 4-incher best friend!

Ron the 4-inch Tall Evangelist B[ee]

How dark Dan? I just had a great view of the M51 with *easy* spiral arms and (harder) bridge through the sweet 10" LX200 at the "Faithful Star Party" under the naked limiting magnitude of 6.1 sky.

Try bumping up the magnification.

Ron B[ee]

You mean like this, Howard?
http://members.cox.net/ronby/Planet-Sketches/Pluto-060203.jpg

Ron B[ee]

Here's a complete account of the plucking of Pluto through my 4" TV-102 APO refractor.
http://members.cox.net/ronby/Solar-System/Pluto-0603.htm

Ron B[ee]

Here are some sample photos from the TV-102 (with smaller image scale at the eyepiece of course) I've found on the web.
http://planets.lamost.org/ETV102FirstLight.htm
http://www.skyoptics.net/past-astrophotos.htm (scroll down to TV-102)

I've seen more details and sharper view through the eyepiece with my 4" TV-102 than both pictures (with smaller image scale of course).
http://members.cox.net/ronby/Planet-Sketches/Jupiter-022203.jpg
http://members.cox.net/ronby/Planet-Sketches/Jupiter-052203.jpg
One incredible night last year, before I had dared to sketch, I counted 9 distinct bands on Jupiter (a sight not seen this year).

Lastly, Sol R. has only 6 inch apertures and the details he could see with it is astonishing!

Still IMO you can't really compare scope A at site X to scope B at site Y (or even scope A and A at site X and Y) because seeing is the great Astro-Roulette ;-).

Ron B[ee]

And very well you should, John. DSO is very rewarding, fun, even thrilling when chasing down objects at the limit of your telescopes. Besides, the planets aren't always there :-(.

As you now know, you were told incorrectly about the only way to see M51 spiral arms is with CCD. I *instantaneous* saw it at a dark sky star party not two weeks ago through my host's sweatly Meade 10" LX200 - so obvious and stunning were the arms (haven't seen these yet through my TV-102 :-(). I also distastefully climbed the ladder :-( to the 16" Dobs and was rewarded with a better view! M104 through the 10" LX200 has the dark lane so clearly through it.

I don't know how dark your sky is. Here's a sketch of M51 from my TV-102 through my backyard.
http://members.cox.net/ronby/DSO-Sketches/M51-051803-inv2.jpg
I saw M51 later at 6000 ft dark sky and it was very noticeably better (I need to go back and do a sketch up there). I also need to work on my DSO sketching skills :-(.
Please note that the foreground star I saw is mag 13.5!

If you haven't gone out to the dark sky, please do - you'll be amazed at the difference. Even the so called most difficult Herschel 400 object NGC 6118 could not escape the 4-incher under dark skies! But aperture wins and wins so absolutely well under the dark skies!

Ron B[ee]

Horsehead? This is one of my Light Cup's holy grail ;-), though we've failed every year from my backyard :-(. So I did a bit research. From my dossier, Walter Houston wrote he has glimpsed it with his 4" Clark refractor, and have detected with a 5" and 6" at low power. Jeff Medkeff has sighted it with his 4.5" reflector! Amazingly, Phil Harrington saw it through the 10x70 and 11x80 binos with H-Beta filter at WSP. I also saw a report of seeing it with a 4" TV Genesis without the H-Beta filter. Jay Freeman saw it at Fremont Peak with his 5" Meade ED refractor without filter. Other reports said it is quite easy with the 10" Newt. Dark sky is needed in all cases.

Ron B[ee]

Hello there Walter,

Great to hear from another fellow 4-incher! Plato craterlets need good seeing to be able to see them. The central one is the easiest with the rest not so easy. Approx. 150x will show the central one.

Here's a link to my observation as well as additional
info.
http://members.cox.net/ronby/Solar-System/Moon-051103.htm
Try a yellow filter; I was so surprised to find it works so well!

Good luck and please report back.

Ron B[ee]

It's **not** a stupid question but a good question, John! There's a very recent discussion, on SAA with contributions by Roland Christen and Thomas Back.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=278e5035.0305071622.2c9643e4%40posting.google.com&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Doil%2Bspaced%2Bgroup:sci.astro.amateur%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26group%3Dsci.astro.amateur%26selm%3D278e5035.0305071622.2c9643e4%2540posting.google.com%26rnum%3D1

Ron B[ee]

I agree with some of the things you said wholeheartedly.

But in my humble opinion, all I know is, for myself I haven't been to every square foot on the planet, have not seen every telescopes on planet, haven't done a 1-on-1 or 1-on-many comparison on every telescopes at every places on the planet, have not watched every nights since the beginning of my life-cycle, to be wise enough to make any sort of generalized conclusion. What works for me best may not work for others. What works for me best where I am or where I will be, may not work for others.

Thus the *generalized* truth *for me* is: keep an opened mind ;-).

Ron B[ee]