Posts Made By: Scott Baker

Stu,
You're going to have to wait for a valid comparison, since the Meade 14" won't be shipping (according to Meade) until January of next year. However, from all reviews of the the UHTC coating on the 10" and 12" scopes, it will make the optics superior to the Celeston, I'm sure.
--
Scott Baker
http://members.cts.com/nebula/s/scottb80/
San Diego Astronomy Association
http://www.sdaa.org
International Dark-Sky Association
http://www.darksky.org

Personally, I think the 12" is the maximum size for a "transportable" scope, and still be setup by one person. The 14", although provided with a field tripod, is really for permanent installations, in my opinion.
--
Scott Baker
http://members.cts.com/nebula/s/scottb80/
San Diego Astronomy Association
http://www.sdaa.org
International Dark-Sky Association
http://www.darksky.org

Quick and dirty? A laser collimator.
For Real Precision? A star.

--
Scott Baker
Vice President, New Member Mentor
San Diego Astronomy Association
http://www.sdaa.org
International Dark-Sky Association
http://www.darksky.org
Personal web page: www.starcrwzr.com

Roger,
For your focus problem, try turning the knob all the way CCW, until it stops, then back CW, until it stops, several times. This will move the mirror from one end to the other on the baffle and will help redistribute the grease. If this doesn't work, then you may need to remove the focus knob assembly and re-grease it. I give instructions for installing the bearing modification on my web page, www.starcrwzr.com/focuser.htm which should help you get it apart and re-greased. I highly recommend this modification.

Your second problem sounds like collimation to me. First thing you should do is throw away the laser, they are useless, in my humble opinion, on SCT's. Next, collimate the scope in the daytime, using an artificial star, it's MUCH easier. Search the Mapug archive for information on doing this. www.mapug.com

As far as mounting the scope, the best think I can recommend is a little bearing grease on the threads of the bolt and inside on the threads of the base. You'll be surprised how much easier it is to mount.

Hope this helps.

--
Scott Baker
Vice President, New Member Mentor
San Diego Astronomy Association
http://www.sdaa.org
International Dark-Sky Association
http://www.darksky.org
Personal web page: www.starcrwzr.com

The weight listed above is correct. The Vice President of Sales for Meade, Scott Peters, brought one down to Oceanside Photo and Telescope last week. He verified the weight. One of our members was given permission to lift the scope off the tripod, move it to horizontal at waist height and put it back on the tripod. With two "spotters" on each side, he was able to do it, with some redness in the face. This member is used to hoisting his 12" on and off, and has the 14" on order, and wanted to try it in case no one could help. It is possible, BUT, it is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED, by Meade (and I concur) that two people do the job. The hardest task is lifting it up from ground level, out of the foam, once that is done, then it's a tiny bit easier to get on the tripod. I don't believe that even Arnold Schwarzenegger could get it on a wedge by himself.
--
Scott Baker
Vice President, New Member Mentor
San Diego Astronomy Association
http://www.sdaa.org
International Dark-Sky Association
http://www.darksky.org
Personal web page: http://www.starcrwzr.com

Alex,
I'm pretty sure that the output is pulsed 5 volts. You contol the pulse rate to control the brightness.

--
Scott Baker
Vice President, New Member Mentor
San Diego Astronomy Association
http://www.sdaa.org
International Dark-Sky Association
http://www.darksky.org
Personal web page: http://www.starcrwzr.com

Mike,
I used playgound sand, but I think that any sand would do the job, I liked the playground sand because it's a little cleaner then most.
--
Scott Baker
Vice President, New Member Mentor
San Diego Astronomy Association
http://www.sdaa.org
International Dark-Sky Association
http://www.darksky.org
Personal web page: http://www.starcrwzr.com

Rob,
I have the Meade "Astrometric" reticle eyepiece. They're accurate, but you need to do some calibration, via timings, for every scope you use them with. Due to the differences in focal lengths of scopes, each will measure a different amount. So what happens is, after you've calibrated the eyepiece to your scope, the gradient's might not be a nice round number, but more likely a fraction, like 1.3 arc seconds per gradient, etc. The eyepieces come with instructions on how to calibrate them.
--
Scott Baker
Vice President, New Member Mentor
San Diego Astronomy Association
http://www.sdaa.org
International Dark-Sky Association
http://www.darksky.org
Personal web page: http://www.starcrwzr.com

David,
I have the same scope and the usual limit of power is my Meade 8.8mm Ultrawide. On rare, and I mean rare nights, I use an inexpensive 7mm Siebert, I couldn't see spending any sort of money on an eyepiece that I only use two or three times a year.
--
Scott Baker
Vice President, New Member Mentor
San Diego Astronomy Association
http://www.sdaa.org
International Dark-Sky Association
http://www.darksky.org
Personal web page: http://www.starcrwzr.com

Yeah, I love that hat too. Bought it in Alaska last year while on a cruise. With my fat head, it's hard to find one that fits, alone one that I like. If you're interested, it's a Tilley, guaranteed for life, even against loss. Here's the web page for the one I have...

http://www.tilley.com/shop3.asp?productno=T4&detail=low&path=root\Tilley_Hats

As far as the base goes, it's designed for a 25" scope! That's an 18" diameter, heavy wall, steel pipe, filled with concrete, with a 24"X 1" thick flange. It's embedded in 5 cubic yards of concrete, under the foundation. Rock Solid would be an understatement. I didn't put it in, but bought into the building, last year.

Scott Baker