Posts Made By: Floyd Blue

Ok, I have purchased the WO Megrez 80mm Fluorite Triplet. Now it is just a little wait time until the check arrives there and the scope arrives here. 8)

[COLOR="Blue"]The Clipper chip used a data encryption algorithm called Skipjack invented by the National Security Agency of the U.S. Government; this algorithm was initially classified secret so that it could not be subjected to the peer review that was usual in the encryption research community. The government did state that it used an 80-bit key, that the algorithm was symmetric, and that it was similar to the DES algorithm. The Skipjack algorithm was declassified and published by NSA on June 24, 1998. The initial cost of the chips was said to be $16 (unprogrammed) or $26 (programmed), with its logic designed by Mykotronx, and fabricated by VLSI Technology, Inc.

But the heart of the concept was key escrow. In the factory, any new telephone or other device with a Clipper chip would be given a "cryptographic key", that would then be provided to the government in "escrow". If government agencies "established their authority" to listen to a communication, then the password would be given to those government agencies, who could then decrypt all data transmitted by that particular telephone. The newly formed Electronic Frontier Foundation preferred the term "key surrender" to emphasize what was really occurring.[/COLOR]

They wanted to put these into all communication devices!
They also had other devices that they wanted to place in all electronics, like TV and such.
Of course, they would never misuse these devices, right?
They did manage to install GPS units in all cell phones, but they would not use them to monitor your every movement, right?
So, do we want devices installed to monitor us in our daily lives?

Well, when I look at the Double Cluster with my 127mm, the stars are true pin points that range from the absolute pins to large brilliant points of marvelous colors and the field is completely flat and free of aberration. That alone is worth the cost of admission.
My 14.5" Starmaster also gives a beautiful view of the Double Cluster, but not the same tight pin point view.

Well, I just mounted the WO 80mm on the 127ED for the first time. I just finished the mounting plate and wanted to see how it looked.
What do you think?

Here is a ridiculous stack of three scopes. I was testing my new mounting plates that allow the WO 80mm and the Meade 80mm to mount in different ways.
The Meade will mount on the 127ED or the WO 80mm.
The WO 80mm will mount to the LXD650 directly or to the 127ED.

Well, I did a laser test with a red laser on the WO Megrez 80mm APO (Fluorite?) Triplet and I am posting a picture (modified from original post) of what I saw. The strange part is that the photo that was posted that showed an middle Fluorite lens showed the middle lens as transparent and the front and rear lenses as green. But in my test the front and rear lenses are transparent and the middle lens shows red.
Is this because I used a red laser, or is it showing that the front and rear lenses are Fluorite and the middle lens is some other glass?

Well, Ok! I broke down and called William Optics and talked to them about my Objective. Bottom line is!!!!! FPL53 was used on the Megrez 80mm f/6 APO Triplet and not CaF2. It was explained that marketing decided to call it a Fluorite because others were calling FPL53 a Fluorite. :S Well, I guess that is fine except that there is Fluorite (CaF2) and there is FPL53 but they are not the same chemically at all. However, as pointed out by them, FPL53 does perform very much like Fluorite, so the triplet is as color corrected as a Fluorite triplet.
I guess this settles the discussion once in for all.
Earlier Megrez APO triplets used FPL53 and the new ones use OK3, but none of them used Fluorite. 8)
Just how confusing is that? 8O

[COLOR="Blue"]Dear Floyd,
the glass used is called OK4, produced by LZOS.

“Fluorite” was a bit of a loose term, which could be construed to include “synthetic fluorite” or fluorite glass, especially since glasses like FPL-53 or OK4 are mainly made of fluorite (to what proportion, I do not know, because I am not an expert on the subject). For more info, you can also contact Markus Ludes, from whom we source these LOMO lenses.

Check here below how it was used in the past (you can use google groups to search…). As to WO, we have since amended the terminology of our products; the scope is not called triplet fluorite but SUPER APO; we will only use “fluorite” for CaF2.
A few months ago, we have already run a thread on our yahoo group about this. You can check Apr. 2006 for more discussions.

At the end of the day, it should make little difference what is inside, as long as it performs as it should. Design and execution are way more important that the glass inside, also because it is not the fluorite that makes the difference, but the mating glasses and overall design. But this is my personal opinion only.

For more info, please do not hesitate to contact me. Enjoy your scope, it is capable of a GREAT performance, you will see!

Best wishes and keep up the good work on Astro Mart, I always read your posts!

Daniel
[/COLOR]

This is made even more confusing to me because of the explanation I received yesterday, but I can understand that the person that I talked with may have confused OK4 with FPL53. Still, this is not exactly clear. I guess the written response is the better one and I will accept it as the facts in this case.

Ok, I would like to post the references made to Fluorite and FPL53. I will not post who made these statements because I do not have his permission. But it is easily seen that there is some use of the term Fluorite and FPL53 together and it appears that the FPL53 is indeed a type or derivative of Fluorite.
It does not really matter who wrote this I guess, but it is a well respected optician. I only post this to help in our understanding of this situation and to show how this misinterpretation might have occurred.

[COLOR="Red"]Ohara FPL 53 and Fluorite, CaF2, have almost identical optical characteristics.
FPL 53 is made primarily of Fluorite. CaF2 is made of layers of crystal planes,
while FPL53 is an homogenous glass that can be more easily polished and can be
coated with a protective hard multi-layer anti-reflection coating.

CaF2 is normally left uncoated since the crystal planes that are exposed when
the blank is cut and polished will interfere with the coating adhesion.
Extraordinary procedures are required to coat a CaF2 optic - very expensive to
do in production.

There is also an equivalent material available from another Japanese glass
maker that is much less expensive than Ohara FPL53. Again, it has similar
properties to CaF2.[/COLOR]

[COLOR="Red"]The Term E.D. stands for extra low dispersion, and it applies to a variety
of glasses, INCLUDING Fluorite. Thus, Fluorite refractors are actually ED
apochromats. Some ED glasses barely qualify for this term, so that a lens
made with this material can have significant color error. It is entirely
up to the manufacturer which E.D. material to use, and if the competitive
pressures are on, the manufacturer will, of course, use the cheapest
material, thus compromising the color correction. The best ED glass
(FPL53) is every bit as good as Fluorite in correcting for color and other
aberrations. This ED glass is actually made from Fluorite and costs more.
The only difference is in the far U.V. transmission (3500A and below)
where fluorite is superior. [/COLOR]

[COLOR="Red"]will try to correct you. The "Fluorite-Glass" blend you refer to is Ohara
FPL53 which is superior to crystalline fluorite and costs a bundle more. It is
almost totally pure fluorite with certain additives to make it a glass instead
of crystal.

According to my sources in Japan, no one there uses the old crystalline
material anymore. They ALL use either FPL53 or the older FPL52 because of its
superior workability and stability during polishing. The labor time required
for finishing an FPL53 lens vs. a pure fluorite lens is 5 times less. Some
companies refer to this new material as fluorite, some call it fluorite-ED and
some call it SD. The only pure fluorite lenses now made come out of China where
the labor rate is still very low. I dont know of any telescope companies using
Chinese made fluorite lenses. [/COLOR]

Now, where does this leave us as far as understanding the use of the term Fluorite? I think it does make it a bit more clear that the terminology used for the materials in objectives is a bit loose at times and perhaps confusing even for those in the industry.
Perhaps William Optics was not so far off after all? :S

Finally a clear night and the Jet Stream is directly overhead. The stars look like a Christmas tree. :S

Well, I talked with Don at Wyorock and he is making me a custom focuser for the 127ED! It will have a rotating ring to allow the focuser to rotate and all custom machined mounting flanges. We talked for quite a while and it turns out we have a lot in common, same age, both pilots, lived near each other in Utah and love Astronomy. SO, he made me a deal I could not refuse and I accepted. Will be done within the week. Quick service!
Really nice people there, called me on their dime and answered all my emails and questions. They will send me pictures soon and I will post them.