Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?

Expand Messages
  • Darrel Moon
    To all, OPT has the 20 RCX400 optical tube assembly listed as a stand-alone item on their web site and since the 16 OTA mounts on the MaxMount in the same
    Message 1 of 29 , Dec 31, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      To all,
       
      OPT has the 20" RCX400 optical tube assembly listed as a stand-alone item on their web site and since the 16" OTA mounts on the MaxMount in the same fashion, I would guess it may also be available:
       
       
      Best regards,
       
      Darrel Moon
    • Dave Beckstrom
      Hi Larry, Excellent post. Thanks for the good info and for sharing your experiences. It really has been fun trying to decide what to purchase and we are
      Message 2 of 29 , Dec 31, 2006
      • 0 Attachment

        Hi Larry,

         

        Excellent post.  Thanks for the good info and for sharing your experiences.

         

        It really has been fun trying to decide what to purchase and we are indeed lucky to have so many choices available to us.

         

        I’m 44.  Hopefully I won’t be shuffling off this mortal coil any time soon, but you never know. This whole thing has been quite an adventure.  I went from wanting a telescope to use on my deck to having an observatory!    

         

        I’ve done an immense amount of reading in the last couple of months and it does sound like there have been a lot of problems with the RCX400.  I think Meade needs to think outside of the box a little more.  Instead of integrating the electronics so tightly into the mount, they should put as much of the electronics as possible into a module that would unplug from the mount.  This would then permit the telescope to be put on any mount and would mean a much larger audience of people likely to buy this telescope.  The electronics could easily be designed with something as basic as a jumper that when set would tell the electronics only to do focusing and collimation. 

         

        The way they have designed the RCX400, you’re stuck with either the forks or buying the Max mount.  Not everyone will want either of those solutions.  That means they will turn to a competitor’s product and it does sound like there will be something to compete with the RCX400 soon.  So hopefully Meade is planning….

         

        Kind regards,

         

        Dave

         

         

         


        From: RCX400@yahoogroups.com [mailto:RCX400@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ldultz@...
        Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 10:51 PM
        To: RCX400@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: RE: [RCX400] Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?

         

        Dave, I think my experience may be analogous to what you're planning.
        I had used telescopes as an adolescent and decided to get back into
        astronomy 4 years ago with more financial resources this time around.
        I started w/a Celestron CGE, but then the RCX line came out and I
        waited for a 14" which I planned to use for astrophotograpy w/ an SBIG
        2000 XM. Unfortunately although the RCX is an excellent visual scope,
        I have yet to get the mount to behave accurately enough to do any
        decent work with it. I won't bore you with the details of the trips
        back to Meade, and the replacement scope I eventually demanded... In
        any event, I still use the RCX visually, and it works well as a GoTo
        mount, but the 14" is just not stable enough, and the mechanics not
        sound enough (even w/Buck's gears) for more than a 30sec exposure,
        even w/autoguiding. So now I'm using a Takahashi Epsilon 180 and a
        Canon 20Da, and this combination is working out well for me. I'm no
        pro, but the fast focal ratio, wide field and well made Tak NJP mount
        allow me to take pictures that are better than anything I previously
        imagined. Your mileage may vary, of course, but that's my tale of woe
        and eventual redemption. I don't know your age, but I felt that I
        didn't have eough decades ahead of me to start with smaller scopes and
        work up slowly so I jumped in with larger investments in scopes, the
        observatory and its accoutrements. I'll echo a sentiment I read on one
        of these forums recently - we are fortunate to have and be able to
        afford the luxuries of choosing amongst these options, and whatever
        you decide I'm sure you'll be pleased with your abilities to explore
        the universe around us. Best of luck. Larry

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Dave Beckstrom <dbeck@atving. com>
        Date: Friday, December 29, 2006 8:11 pm
        Subject: RE: [RCX400] Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?
        To: RCX400@yahoogroups. com

        > Hi Dean,
        >
        >
        >
        > You're pretty astute! Yes, I am most interested in imaging. I
        > actually do
        > not yet own a telescope. In fact, I've never looked through one.
        > Justnever had the opportunity. But my goal is to have a large
        > telescope that
        > is good for visual yet that will work well for imaging too. My
        > primaryinterest is imaging. I know "big scope" and "imaging" can
        > be at odds
        > because of the long focal length of the big telescopes. But I see
        > many fine
        > images made with big scopes so I know its possible to do and
        > therefore I
        > figure with patience I can learn to do it too.
        >
        >
        >
        > After giving it much thought, I decided I'd like to purchase a
        > really good
        > GEM. I felt a good mount would go a long way towards making the
        > imagingeasier. Also, if I purchase a good mount right up front
        > then I may not need
        > to ever buy a different one. Whereas, I could see swapping out
        > OTAs once
        > in awhile as my needs or technology changes.
        >
        >
        >
        > I built a 10x10 observatory with an explora-dome and with an 8x8
        > warmingroom attached. I have a 12" concrete pier upon which I'll
        > be installing a
        > steel pier. The mount I chose is the Paramount ME. Its supposed
        > to be very
        > accurate, reliable, and lends itself well to remote operation.
        >
        >
        >
        > I have not decided on an OTA. I hear a lot of good things about
        > the optics
        > on the RCX400 and I'm very interested in learning more about this
        > scope even
        > though it won't work with my GEM. The question I asked about
        > putting the
        > RCX400 on a GEM was more out of curiosity than anything.
        > Although, if it
        > were possible to convert the RCX400 to work on a GEM other then
        > the MAX then
        > it opens some doors and I think would make one really terrific
        > setup. If
        > someone were to build a kit, that might be an opportunity for
        > someone to
        > make some money.
        >
        >
        >
        > I also looked at the LX200R. This is the OTA I am most likely to
        > purchase.
        >
        >
        >
        > My goal with an OTA, though, is to get one that simply works
        > correctly right
        > out of the box. By that I mean I don't want to have to buy one
        > and send it
        > back 2 or 3 times (which I hear is common with Mead) until it works
        > properly. I don't mind having to make fine tuning adjustments,
        > but I don't
        > want to have to deal with issues due to design problems or
        > manufacturing/ quality control issues if I can avoid it.
        >
        >
        >
        > I looked at the RCOS brand of scopes too but they are very pricey.
        >
        >
        >
        > Right now I'm doing a lot of reading and asking a lot of
        > questions. Do you
        > have an RCX400 now and if so how does it compare to the Tak E160 for
        > imaging? I was looking at the Tak BRC-250 and it looked like it
        > might be a
        > good scope. I don't seem to find many people talking about the
        larger
        > Takahashi scopes though. Maybe I'm just looking in the wrong places?
        >
        >
        >
        > Thanks,
        >
        >
        >
        > Dave
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > From: RCX400@yahoogroups. com [mailto:RCX400@yahoogroups. com] On
        > Behalf Of
        > Dean S
        > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 5:43 PM
        > To: RCX400@yahoogroups. com
        > Subject: Re: [RCX400] Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?
        >
        >
        >
        > Hi Dave,
        >
        >
        >
        > I don't suppose anyone really knows yet how complicated it would
        > be. I have
        > not heard of anyone doing it yet, but you could be the first :) I
        > wouldthink the electronics are a bit more inter-linked than we
        > think, Dick, Doc
        > Clay?
        >
        >
        >
        > I can think of several options for OTA's that will give very good
        > results.I am thinking you want to image since the RCX mount is
        > fine for visual, and
        > some imaging if you are willing to tweak it and work at it. I
        > gave up on my
        > 12" LX200gps after several years, even though I was starting to
        > get decent
        > results.
        >
        >
        >
        > There are several nice fast astrographs on the market now that
        > look very
        > nice, including the Tak E180. I have the Tak E160 that was
        > replaced by the
        > 180. Then of course you could look at the 'real' RC scopes but
        > they are
        > still very $$$.
        >
        >
        >
        > My concern would be if you did remove the OTA, and then had
        electronic
        > problems, it could be a big problem later on. But it will only be
        > a matter
        > of time before it is done. To me the MaxMount will be a nice deal
        > once it
        > is out a while and the kinks worked out. But again I bet the
        > scope and
        > mount controls are not easy to separate.
        >
        >
        >
        > Again, Doc Clay is the only one I know that has one so far.
        >
        >
        >
        > Good luck if you try it.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        >
        > From: Dave Beckstrom <mailto:dbeck@atving. com>
        >
        > To: RCX400@yahoogroups. <mailto:RCX400@yahoogroups. com> com
        >
        > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 5:05 PM
        >
        > Subject: RE: [RCX400] Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?
        >
        >
        >
        > Dean,
        >
        >
        >
        > I've seen photos of the MaxMount and I have heard that it has the
        > electronics separately.
        >
        >
        >
        > But assuming one already had a good GEM, I was wondering if its
        > possible to
        > make the conversion?
        >
        >
        >
        > It wouldn't cost anything to pull the electronics out of the Meade
        > mount and
        > place them into a homemade box. I assume there isn't much more
        > than a panel
        > with a circuit board behind it?
        >
        >
        >
        > I don't have an RCX400 so I don't know what all would be involved
        > or if it
        > would be so complicated that the question is totally stupid!
        >
        >
        >
        > Besides the LX200R, what OTA would you recommend that has optics
        > comparableor better than the RCX400?
        >
        >
        >
        > Thanks,
        >
        >
        > Dave
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        >
        > From: RCX400@yahoogroups. com [mailto:RCX400@yahoogroups. com] On
        > Behalf Of
        > Dean S
        > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 3:50 PM
        > To: RCX400@yahoogroups. com
        > Subject: Re: [RCX400] Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?
        >
        >
        >
        > Have you seen the Meade MaxMount??
        >
        > Otherwise it does not make much economic sense to do this. If you
        > already
        > have the quality mount then there are many good quality OTA's you
        > could buy
        > for the money and have a system the is known to work.
        >
        > Dean
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Dave Beckstrom" <dbeck@atving. <mailto:dbeck% 40atving. com>
        com>
        > To: <RCX400@yahoogroups . <mailto:RCX400% 40yahoogroups. com> com>
        > Sent: Friday, December 29, 2006 3:00 PM
        > Subject: [RCX400] Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?
        >
        > > Hi all,
        > >
        > > I just joined the list. I don't yet own any telescope but I've
        > been doing
        > > a
        > > lot of reading and asking a lot of questions.
        > >
        > > I was wondering if anyone has attempted, or plans to attempt, to
        > mount an
        > > RCX400 on a GEM? I understand the only thing preventing that is the
        > > electronics built into the forks or mount? If that is the case,
        > wouldn't
        > > it
        > > be possible to duplicate the electronics in a separate and
        > portable
        > > package
        > > or to move them?
        > >
        > > Dave
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > --
        > > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
        > > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.0/609 - Release Date:
        > 12/29/2006
        > > 4:48 PM
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > size=2 width="100%" align=center>
        >
        > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
        > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.0/609 - Release Date:
        > 12/29/20064: 48 PM
        >
        >
        >
        >

      • P. Clay Sherrod
        It also states clearly that the OTA is available for mounting on the MAX MOUNT only. Dr. Clay ... Arkansas Sky Observatories Harvard MPC/ H43 (Conway) Harvard
        Message 3 of 29 , Jan 1, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          It also states clearly that the OTA is available for mounting on the MAX MOUNT only.

          Dr. Clay
          -------------
          Arkansas Sky Observatories
          Harvard MPC/ H43 (Conway)
          Harvard MPC/ H41 (Petit Jean Mountain)
          Harvard MPC/ H45 (Petit Jean Mtn. South)
          http://www.arksky.org/


          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Darrel Moon" <moon@...>
          To: <RCX400@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, December 31, 2006 10:33 AM
          Subject: [RCX400] Re: Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?


          To all,

          OPT has the 20" RCX400 optical tube assembly listed as a stand-alone item on their web
          site and since the 16" OTA mounts on the MaxMount in the same fashion, I would guess it
          may also be available:

          http://www.optcorp.com/productList.aspx?uid=1-637-1002&pg=1

          Best regards,

          Darrel Moon
        • roywellington
          Mark, Could you use your considerable influence with Meade to get them to develop a mini-MaxMount for scopes of less than 16 inches? Pleeeeease! Otherwise, an
          Message 4 of 29 , Jan 1, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Mark,

            Could you use your considerable influence with Meade to get them to
            develop a mini-MaxMount for scopes of less than 16 inches? Pleeeeease!

            Otherwise, an enterprising mount manufacturer will need to develop a
            way to handle to Meade RCX electrical connections (which shouldn't be
            too hard) and encourage Meade to sell the RCX as an OTA.

            The fork on a wedge seems rediculously off balance, there should be a
            polar axis counterweight to keep the tripod from tipping over.

            Roy

            --- In RCX400@yahoogroups.com, "Mark de Regt" <deregt@...> wrote:
            >
            > But you're not going to get tracking with this mount like you would
            get with
            > a high end mount. It's a great scope, and a great value, but not in
            any way
            > equivalent to putting a fancy OTA atop a $12,000 mount.
            >
            > Mark de Regt
            > Redmond, Washington, USA
            > http://www.de-regt.com/Astronomy
            >
          • Mark de Regt
            Roy, I enjoyed your little joke about influence. Actually, I think that the scope on the fork is reasonably well balanced, given the quality of the tripod. I
            Message 5 of 29 , Jan 3, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Roy,

              I enjoyed your little joke about influence.

              Actually, I think that the scope on the fork is reasonably well balanced,
              given the quality of the tripod. I don't worry even a little bit about it
              falling over, and I leave it out all summer. The problem is that the whole
              mount just ins't very strong, and not machined to high tolerances. And
              there apparently typically is a lot of gunk in the gears. Which, I think,
              is par for the course in a low end mount.

              I like the RCX400 for imaging much more than the LX200, but if I were
              looking for a good value in an OTA to pop onto a good GEM, I certainly would
              consider the LX200R.

              Mark de Regt
              Redmond, Washington, USA
              http://www.de-regt.com/Astronomy


              > -----Original Message-----
              > From: RCX400@yahoogroups.com [mailto:RCX400@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of
              > roywellington
              > Sent: Monday, January 01, 2007 7:29 PM
              > To: RCX400@yahoogroups.com
              > Subject: [RCX400] Re: How good is the RCX autoguiding???
              >
              >
              > Mark,
              >
              > Could you use your considerable influence with Meade to get them to
              > develop a mini-MaxMount for scopes of less than 16 inches? Pleeeeease!
              >
              > Otherwise, an enterprising mount manufacturer will need to develop a
              > way to handle to Meade RCX electrical connections (which shouldn't be
              > too hard) and encourage Meade to sell the RCX as an OTA.
              >
              > The fork on a wedge seems rediculously off balance, there should be a
              > polar axis counterweight to keep the tripod from tipping over.
              >
              > Roy
              >
              > --- In RCX400@yahoogroups.com, "Mark de Regt" <deregt@...> wrote:
              > >
              > > But you're not going to get tracking with this mount like you would
              > get with
              > > a high end mount. It's a great scope, and a great value, but not in
              > any way
              > > equivalent to putting a fancy OTA atop a $12,000 mount.
              > >
              > > Mark de Regt
              > > Redmond, Washington, USA
              > > http://www.de-regt.com/Astronomy
              > >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
            • Darrel Moon
              Dr. Clay, Well actually it is not stated clearly: This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with MAX mounts only. Is it the Universal
              Message 6 of 29 , Jan 3, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Dr. Clay,
                 
                Well actually it is not stated clearly: 
                 
                "This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with MAX mounts only."
                 
                Is it the Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with the Maxmounts only or is it the OTA?
                 
                If it is the OTA, the line should read:
                 
                This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket and is for use with MAX mounts only.
                 
                Considering how language is used today and that it comes from the same folks that sell an "Advanced Ritchey", when is not, one can understand the confusion.  
                 
                The OTA is a stand alone structure in that there is no permanent wiring connecting it to the mount; all connections are via unplugable cables from the declination housing assembly to the OTA. One cannot use the OTA on another mount without providing the necessary electronics needed to control and power the fans, focuser, collimator, etc. One would also have to have a declination mounting plate machined to match the Universal (sic) Sliding Bracket. However, the point is: an OTA is available without a mount.
                 
                Darrel Moon
                 
                 
              • P. Clay Sherrod
                ??? the ota is designed for use exclusively with the MAX mounting; the internal electronics depend on mating to the MAX control board. No if, ands, or buts
                Message 7 of 29 , Jan 3, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  ???
                  the ota is designed for use exclusively with the MAX mounting; the internal electronics
                  depend on mating to the MAX control board.
                  No if, ands, or buts about it.

                  Do you have an order in for one Darrel?

                  Dr. Clay
                  -------------
                  Arkansas Sky Observatories
                  Harvard MPC/ H43 (Conway)
                  Harvard MPC/ H41 (Petit Jean Mountain)
                  Harvard MPC/ H45 (Petit Jean Mtn. South)
                  http://www.arksky.org/


                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "Darrel Moon" <moon@...>
                  To: <RCX400@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 11:19 AM
                  Subject: [RCX400] Re: Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?


                  Dr. Clay,

                  Well actually it is not stated clearly:

                  "This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with MAX mounts only."

                  Is it the Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with the Maxmounts only or is it the
                  OTA?

                  If it is the OTA, the line should read:

                  This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket and is for use with MAX mounts only.

                  Considering how language is used today and that it comes from the same folks that sell
                  an "Advanced Ritchey", when is not, one can understand the confusion.

                  The OTA is a stand alone structure in that there is no permanent wiring connecting it to
                  the mount; all connections are via unplugable cables from the declination housing
                  assembly to the OTA. One cannot use the OTA on another mount without providing the
                  necessary electronics needed to control and power the fans, focuser, collimator, etc.
                  One would also have to have a declination mounting plate machined to match the Universal
                  (sic) Sliding Bracket. However, the point is: an OTA is available without a mount.

                  Darrel Moon
                • Allan Overcast
                  Dr. Clay, what 12 scope would you then recommend, and what mount? The LX200R on a GEM or something else? I am looking at upgrading (from and ETX-125EC) and
                  Message 8 of 29 , Jan 3, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dr. Clay, what 12" scope would you then recommend, and what mount?  The LX200R on a GEM or something else?  I am looking at upgrading (from and ETX-125EC) and am looking at the 12" RCX400 with a SBIG 8XME CCD, but concerned with the fork clearance and mount play.  If the forks are not very stable, is an LX200R on the GEM a better choice?
                     
                    Allan Overcast
                    Billings Montana

                    "P. Clay Sherrod" <drclay@...> wrote:
                    ???
                    the ota is designed for use exclusively with the MAX mounting; the internal electronics
                    depend on mating to the MAX control board.
                    No if, ands, or buts about it.

                    Do you have an order in for one Darrel?

                    Dr. Clay
                    ------------ -
                    Arkansas Sky Observatories
                    Harvard MPC/ H43 (Conway)
                    Harvard MPC/ H41 (Petit Jean Mountain)
                    Harvard MPC/ H45 (Petit Jean Mtn. South)
                    http://www.arksky. org/

                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: "Darrel Moon" <moon@...>
                    To: <RCX400@yahoogroups. com>
                    Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 11:19 AM
                    Subject: [RCX400] Re: Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?

                    Dr. Clay,

                    Well actually it is not stated clearly:

                    "This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with MAX mounts only."

                    Is it the Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with the Maxmounts only or is it the
                    OTA?

                    If it is the OTA, the line should read:

                    This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket and is for use with MAX mounts only.

                    Considering how language is used today and that it comes from the same folks that sell
                    an "Advanced Ritchey", when is not, one can understand the confusion.

                    The OTA is a stand alone structure in that there is no permanent wiring connecting it to
                    the mount; all connections are via unplugable cables from the declination housing
                    assembly to the OTA. One cannot use the OTA on another mount without providing the
                    necessary electronics needed to control and power the fans, focuser, collimator, etc.
                    One would also have to have a declination mounting plate machined to match the Universal
                    (sic) Sliding Bracket. However, the point is: an OTA is available without a mount.

                    Darrel Moon


                    __________________________________________________
                    Do You Yahoo!?
                    Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                    http://mail.yahoo.com

                  • P. Clay Sherrod
                    The LX200-R is an excellent alternative and frankly is more user friendly in terms of not being totally depended on electronics for focusing, collimation, etc.
                    Message 9 of 29 , Jan 3, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      The LX200-R is an excellent alternative and frankly is more user friendly in terms of
                      not being totally depended on electronics for focusing, collimation, etc. If you wanted
                      to match a good GEM with the OTA, then I would recommend the Losmandy Titan or the
                      MI-250....the latter being probably the finest in terms of astrophotography in this size
                      and class of instrument.

                      Dr. Clay
                      -------------
                      Arkansas Sky Observatories
                      Harvard MPC/ H43 (Conway)
                      Harvard MPC/ H41 (Petit Jean Mountain)
                      Harvard MPC/ H45 (Petit Jean Mtn. South)
                      http://www.arksky.org/


                      ----- Original Message -----
                      From: "Allan Overcast" <allanovercast@...>
                      To: <RCX400@yahoogroups.com>
                      Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 7:48 PM
                      Subject: Re: [RCX400] Re: Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?


                      > Dr. Clay, what 12" scope would you then recommend, and what mount? The LX200R on a
                      > GEM or something else? I am looking at upgrading (from and ETX-125EC) and am looking
                      > at the 12" RCX400 with a SBIG 8XME CCD, but concerned with the fork clearance and
                      > mount play. If the forks are not very stable, is an LX200R on the GEM a better
                      > choice?
                      >
                      > Allan Overcast
                      > Billings Montana
                      >
                      > "P. Clay Sherrod" <drclay@...> wrote:
                      > ???
                      > the ota is designed for use exclusively with the MAX mounting; the internal
                      > electronics
                      > depend on mating to the MAX control board.
                      > No if, ands, or buts about it.
                      >
                      > Do you have an order in for one Darrel?
                      >
                      > Dr. Clay
                      > -------------
                      > Arkansas Sky Observatories
                      > Harvard MPC/ H43 (Conway)
                      > Harvard MPC/ H41 (Petit Jean Mountain)
                      > Harvard MPC/ H45 (Petit Jean Mtn. South)
                      > http://www.arksky.org/
                      >
                      > ----- Original Message -----
                      > From: "Darrel Moon" <moon@...>
                      > To: <RCX400@yahoogroups.com>
                      > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 11:19 AM
                      > Subject: [RCX400] Re: Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?
                      >
                      > Dr. Clay,
                      >
                      > Well actually it is not stated clearly:
                      >
                      > "This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with MAX mounts
                      > only."
                      >
                      > Is it the Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with the Maxmounts only or is it
                      > the
                      > OTA?
                      >
                      > If it is the OTA, the line should read:
                      >
                      > This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket and is for use with MAX mounts only.
                      >
                      > Considering how language is used today and that it comes from the same folks that sell
                      > an "Advanced Ritchey", when is not, one can understand the confusion.
                      >
                      > The OTA is a stand alone structure in that there is no permanent wiring connecting it
                      > to
                      > the mount; all connections are via unplugable cables from the declination housing
                      > assembly to the OTA. One cannot use the OTA on another mount without providing the
                      > necessary electronics needed to control and power the fans, focuser, collimator, etc.
                      > One would also have to have a declination mounting plate machined to match the
                      > Universal
                      > (sic) Sliding Bracket. However, the point is: an OTA is available without a mount.
                      >
                      > Darrel Moon
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > __________________________________________________
                      > Do You Yahoo!?
                      > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                      > http://mail.yahoo.com
                    • Allan Overcast
                      Thank you for the excellent information. I will consider it in my purchasing decision. Allan in Billings MT P. Clay Sherrod wrote: The
                      Message 10 of 29 , Jan 3, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Thank you for the excellent information.  I will consider it in my purchasing decision. 
                         
                        Allan in Billings MT

                        "P. Clay Sherrod" <drclay@...> wrote:
                        The LX200-R is an excellent alternative and frankly is more user friendly in terms of
                        not being totally depended on electronics for focusing, collimation, etc. If you wanted
                        to match a good GEM with the OTA, then I would recommend the Losmandy Titan or the
                        MI-250....the latter being probably the finest in terms of astrophotography in this size
                        and class of instrument.

                        Dr. Clay
                        ------------ -
                        Arkansas Sky Observatories
                        Harvard MPC/ H43 (Conway)
                        Harvard MPC/ H41 (Petit Jean Mountain)
                        Harvard MPC/ H45 (Petit Jean Mtn. South)
                        http://www.arksky. org/

                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: "Allan Overcast" <allanovercast@ yahoo.com>
                        To: <RCX400@yahoogroups. com>
                        Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 7:48 PM
                        Subject: Re: [RCX400] Re: Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?

                        > Dr. Clay, what 12" scope would you then recommend, and what mount? The LX200R on a
                        > GEM or something else? I am looking at upgrading (from and ETX-125EC) and am looking
                        > at the 12" RCX400 with a SBIG 8XME CCD, but concerned with the fork clearance and
                        > mount play. If the forks are not very stable, is an LX200R on the GEM a better
                        > choice?
                        >
                        > Allan Overcast
                        > Billings Montana
                        >
                        > "P. Clay Sherrod" <drclay@tcworks. net> wrote:
                        > ???
                        > the ota is designed for use exclusively with the MAX mounting; the internal
                        > electronics
                        > depend on mating to the MAX control board.
                        > No if, ands, or buts about it.
                        >
                        > Do you have an order in for one Darrel?
                        >
                        > Dr. Clay
                        > ------------ -
                        > Arkansas Sky Observatories
                        > Harvard MPC/ H43 (Conway)
                        > Harvard MPC/ H41 (Petit Jean Mountain)
                        > Harvard MPC/ H45 (Petit Jean Mtn. South)
                        > http://www.arksky. org/
                        >
                        > ----- Original Message -----
                        > From: "Darrel Moon" <moon@...>
                        > To: <RCX400@yahoogroups. com>
                        > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 11:19 AM
                        > Subject: [RCX400] Re: Putting an RCX400 on a GEM?
                        >
                        > Dr. Clay,
                        >
                        > Well actually it is not stated clearly:
                        >
                        > "This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with MAX mounts
                        > only."
                        >
                        > Is it the Universal Sliding Bracket that is for use with the Maxmounts only or is it
                        > the
                        > OTA?
                        >
                        > If it is the OTA, the line should read:
                        >
                        > This OTA comes with a Universal Sliding Bracket and is for use with MAX mounts only.
                        >
                        > Considering how language is used today and that it comes from the same folks that sell
                        > an "Advanced Ritchey", when is not, one can understand the confusion.
                        >
                        > The OTA is a stand alone structure in that there is no permanent wiring connecting it
                        > to
                        > the mount; all connections are via unplugable cables from the declination housing
                        > assembly to the OTA. One cannot use the OTA on another mount without providing the
                        > necessary electronics needed to control and power the fans, focuser, collimator, etc.
                        > One would also have to have a declination mounting plate machined to match the
                        > Universal
                        > (sic) Sliding Bracket. However, the point is: an OTA is available without a mount.
                        >
                        > Darrel Moon
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > ____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
                        > Do You Yahoo!?
                        > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                        > http://mail. yahoo.com


                        __________________________________________________
                        Do You Yahoo!?
                        Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
                        http://mail.yahoo.com

                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.