Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Yes it is dirt somewhere in the optics near, but not on, the sensor. It seems to shift with the solar disk because it is casting a shadow on the sensor.
Yes it was a live feed at just before 18:30, and then another one just before 22:30. These could be a first. I had it all ready to go before 18:00, then a shower of rain came across and I had to cap the telescope, but I left the run-off roof open, as to close it I would have had to park the scope, and might not have been able to get Jupiter on the chip again in time. Fortunately the cloud moved off quickly, stuff hadn’t got too wet, and it all worked at the right time.
Yep, there’s no why that Saturn can be seen now without a telescope, low horizon and knowing precisely where to look, and obviously Neptune is totally invisible. I did a thing for the BBC news 6 & 10pm yesterday where they wanted a live image of a planet. Unfortunately they didn’t let me speak. If they had, I would have tried to inject some realism by explaining what people can really see.
Terry Pearce who runs the Amateur Telescope Makers of London club (see the Journal 2024 August edition) and the firm Vacuum Coatings (Scientific Mirrors) seems to be able to get these supplies. You can contact him via http://www.scientificmirrors.co.uk.
David
It is inconsistent and is a policy of the individual Section Directors. When I became Director of the Equipment & Techniques Section I determined that the Section Newsletter should be a service for members only. But some of the observing sections wish their publications to be open access and they take contributions from non-members. There are many, many inconsistencies in how the BAA is run!
Registax became unusably slow for me several years ago. It was not designed for images of the size that modern cameras (or even not particularly modern ones) produce. I second the recommendation of Astro Surface, which is free.
One thing I wish is that there were a viable stacking program on the Mac, as Firecapture and ZWO cameras work very well on the Mac. As it is, I transfer back to PC to use Autostakkert!.
Dear Jack,
I can probably be at Saturday Astrofest. I’ll definitely be at the BAA meeting on 18 January and can bring the mount head.
I agree the slow motion rods are not very good. I think I bought some longer flexible rods to see if they worked better, but I can’t recall if they proved effective.
David
With respect to James’s original questions, I think they were answered in this interesting discussion by Dr Mark Kidger from 2020:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYK-28E8c0AWhat struck me was his assertion that Betelgeuse will be a point of light that is as bright as the full Moon, and it will not be possible to safely look at it with the naked eye, let alone any other instrument, without heavy filtering.
I took one of these apart, but I’m not sure if I took it apart in the way you want. I was trying to improve the azimuth bearing (not really a bearing, just a screw), but it was not improvable. I discovered these mounts are mechanically of poor construction, and if yours has gone wrong it may not be worth trying to fix. I junked mine but used the legs, which are fine, as a tripod for a Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer mount. I still have the upper part, which you would be welcome to have if you want to try to use it as spare parts for yours.
Yes 4 pages of the Handbook are one sheet of A4.
I don’t know the exact maximum number of pages that can be stapled. The printer can tell us, but the other printer who quoted couldn’t do more than 100 pages, so we must be close to the limit now at 120 pages.
Thanks Nick for those tables of Uranus and Neptune data. I think exactly those would be useful to include. Central meridian longitude tables would probably occupy too many pages, and anyone involved enough in observation of these planets will know how to get these data from WinJUpos anyhow.
If it had too many more pages the Handbook could no longer be stapled as one unit of folded A4 and would have to have a glued or ‘perfect’ binding, which some would not like, as it could make it harder to keep open flat.
Thanks Paul for your congratulations to the team. They have indeed done a great job.
I quite like your suggestions re. the ‘non-traditional satellites’, but, before that, I’d recommend a better treatment of Uranus and Neptune. These are far more observed by amateurs now than they were, and we can monitor features on them. They deserve a tabulation of data similar to that for the other major planets.
David
Vice-PresidentIt’s kind of not clear from this post Andrew whether the UKRAA can pay for the time of this person (perhaps at a rate below their normal commercial rate) or if the effort would be fully voluntary. It would be easier to find someone if the former.
Yes, it is not even a particularly modern development. I recall a Japanese 50mm refractor that I tried in a department store in the late 1970s that did not focus without the diagonal, and of course gave an upright image with the diagonal. I had read in all the astronomy books of the time (by Moore etc.) that astronomical telescopes always gave an inverted image. As this issue was not mentioned in any of the books (Moore himself seems to have never used a diagonal) I was much puzzled, as were the shop staff, and eventually I bought a Newtonian.
So, I agree, it is a detail which should be explained in specifications, but never is.
Yes this is as good a result as could be expected. The Board has been kept up to date on this by Lyn Smith and I have seen the Dundee City Council report that recommends the council provide enough funding to keep the observatory open for the next 3 years.
Another thing I note from the report is that they appear to be planning to floodlight Broughty Castle! As well as being bad for astronomy, this is particularly hard to understand as their objective was supposed to be to save money.
Members may be interested that I have just written the following letter to The Guardian:
Dear Sir,
The article by your columnist John Harris (Sunday 17 November) ‘The streetlights going out all over Britain tell a brutal story: austerity isn’t over – it’s getting worse’, linking the switching off or dimming of streetlights to ‘cash-strapped local councils… hacking down basic amenities’ is seriously misguided.
There are very good reasons for reducing the period of operation and intensity of street lighting that have nothing to do with saving money.
There is increasing evidence linking artificial lighting negatively to health. A House of Lords committee report last year called artificial light a ‘neglected pollutant’ that can ‘disrupt sleep and circadian rhythms’.
Moreover, artificial light damages ecosystems. CPRE says ‘Light pollution can disrupt the natural rhythms of wildlife, including their migration, reproduction, and feeding patterns’.
Artificial lighting throughout the hours of darkness that cannot be escaped by the population of our towns and cities leads children to grow up in ignorance of the wonder of the natural, dark, star-filled night sky, and this is a loss to our collective culture, as well as to the public understanding of science.
Finally, as we are in a climate crisis, reducing energy consumption is essential for global sustainability.
It is obvious that a certain amount of outdoor lighting is essential to our society. However, we need an evidence-led discussion about how much, where, and at what times is optimum for our wellbeing, and for nature. Local authorities having that discussion with their citizens is a good development.
Yours,
Dr David Arditti
Vice-President, British Astronomical Association
I don’t think so. Last year’s was produced by Ann Davies, but this year she is busy updating the ‘Observing Guide’ and I do not think she is doing another calendar, but I will ask her.
David Arditti
Vice-PresidentThat’s a brilliant achievement Bill, congratulations. You should write this up for the Journal, or at least a short article about it.
J. Br. Astron. Assoc., 134(5), 2024 – Commission for Dark Skies (349)
I fear the CfDS committee’s aims of forming a coalition to campaign together with other groups against the harm that excessive artificial light causes will achieve little other than for the media to lump us in with climate activists. Probably not to be recommended since action that could be deemed to have a negative economic impact carries a longer prison sentence than GBH.
I really don’t see why that would be the case. This has little to do with climate activism. Also nobody is talking about breaking the law, so I don’t see the relevance of prison sentences.
The argument that the BAA’s CfDS should co-operate with others who are campaigning to reduce artificial lighting from different perspectives seems a sound one to me. The CfDS would not lose its independence, however, nor its ability to speak on behalf of astronomers. In my experience most non-astronomers actually can understand, and do sympathise with (to some extent), the astronomical argument for limiting light pollution. They’d like it for them and their children be able to see the stars better. Combining that with arguments about protecting wildlife, preserving natural environments, and improving human health just makes it all the more powerful.
Yes, we need the government to adopt a clear policy on this. The last government had either no policy, or rather a pro-lighting one, to judge from their responses to the Lords committee report. I have no evidence whether or not the current government will take any more interest.
The CfDS recently has concentrated on trying to influence local government leaders and staff, which I think is actually the most effective use of limited campaigning resources, as those people have the ability to positively influence what actually happens on the ground even without better national policy direction.
