Hello all,
I got into astronomy using a equatorial fork mounted 12.5" f/5 Newtonian permanently mounted in a dome. I always enjoyed that instrument and found it very comfortable to use with its rotating solid tube. You don't see many fork mounted Newts however in the 12-18" aperture range. What is the reason for this? Is the equitorial fork mount inferior to a German or split ring equatorial on some level?
My MAIN question is however whether there's any reason a good fork couldn't be made of wood instead of welded steel plate. As a woodworker I'm always approaching ATM projects from a wood rather than metal perspective. I have CNC capability and my intuition tells me I could easily produce a baltic birch fork that would be interally braced, harmonically dead, and plenty strong enough. At least for visual purposes (maybe flexure or wood movement would be more of a concern for long exposure photography), would this seem to be an economical basis for a permanently installed tracking Newtonian?
Thanks,
Dan
I got into astronomy using a equatorial fork mounted 12.5" f/5 Newtonian permanently mounted in a dome. I always enjoyed that instrument and found it very comfortable to use with its rotating solid tube. You don't see many fork mounted Newts however in the 12-18" aperture range. What is the reason for this? Is the equitorial fork mount inferior to a German or split ring equatorial on some level?
My MAIN question is however whether there's any reason a good fork couldn't be made of wood instead of welded steel plate. As a woodworker I'm always approaching ATM projects from a wood rather than metal perspective. I have CNC capability and my intuition tells me I could easily produce a baltic birch fork that would be interally braced, harmonically dead, and plenty strong enough. At least for visual purposes (maybe flexure or wood movement would be more of a concern for long exposure photography), would this seem to be an economical basis for a permanently installed tracking Newtonian?
Thanks,
Dan
