Posts Made By: Bill Meyers

Well, you hsven't said anything libelous, so why not name him? That might produce action, or an acceptable understandable explanation.
Bill Meyers

I don't have an answer to your question (I try to standardize on Naglers) but I can answer a different question (typical of a consultant!):
Your Hardin had a two inch focuser, no? I would get a cheap wideangle eyepiece of about 32mm or more, from Rini or some similar source, to use as a finder eyepiece and for widefiled views of M24, the Veil, the Pleiades, the Beehive, etc. I use a 38 mm Rini on my f5 scopes for this purpose. (If money were no object, I would get the 31 Nagler for this purpose.)
I don't see anything wrong with your present eyepiece collection, though.
Clear skies,
Bill Meyers

Have you considered a Howie Glatter green laser finder? Easy to find things with this.
I also use digital setting circles (Sky Commander( but I don't have go-to on my scope. I don't feel the need for go-to since I have DSCs. I can find even obscure objects rather easily.
YMMV. Good luck with your quest.
Bill Meyers

Funny you should ask. I recently realized that I had never found this galaxy for myself. On April 8, 2005, in Stonelick State Park near Cincinnati, in typically hazy southern Ohio skies, I looked for it in my 11 inch Dob and couldn't find it. My notes say: M83 Not seen. Described in RASC as large and diffuse, difficult from northern latitudes. Scott found M83 for me later with the 16 inch Dob and it seemed like a star, bright center, only small faint arms seen uinder high mag. I must have been looking under too low mag and didn’t recognize it in the field.
About a week later I found it. My notes from May 10, 2005 shows that I found it, low to the horizon in the haze, visible as a dim hazy spot, with no detail seen of bars or arms, but definitely larger than the stars near it and in the right place in relation to the neighboring stars in my SA2000 chart.
I was very surprised to learn later what an impressive galaxy this is, when seen in a dark sky with a medium sized or larger scope and especially from a southern location.
Clear skies,
Bill Meyers

Discussions on collimation and collimators are usually turgid, but the one currently under weigh at Yahoo big dob group is remarkably clear and gives a good picture of what you need and what you don't need. Lots of consensus emerged.
Ciao,
Bill Meyers

Got a Starmaster 11 ELT in 6 days in June 2003 because Rick had 6 in stock, and I got the nest to last.
With another Dob scope from a different manufacturer, I waited 13 months for the Dob to be completed because of unanticipated design problems with rotating truss structures. But my check was not deposited until the socpe was indeed fully raady to ship, so it was a very classy manufacturer. Unanticipated delays should be anticipated if it is a very small operation, especially if it is only one person and the design, or the manufacturer, is new.
Bill Meyers

Well, Floyd, if you don't mind my saying so, I think that like many hobbyists, you are a perfectionist, or you wouldn't have traded your old scope for a SM 14.5 and you wouldn't have jumped at the chance to buy a ZOC 10 mirror. Indeed, that is how you got involved with starstructure in the first place.
So, I infer that you won't be happy with less than a superb scope. I would drop Starsplitter from consideration because of your communication problems, and because the scopes seem to be relatively heavy.
I agree with the suggestions of a previous poster: I recommend considering Compact Precision Telescopes. Mark Wagner will sell you a CPT in the 10 inch size which will fit your mirror perfectly. I own one at the Shingletown Star Party last year,and it is a great soope and Mark is excellent to deal with.
Or you could see if Michelle Stone of Plettstone telescopes would make you a 10 inch for your mirror using Albert Highe's design. I have seen her scopes and have talkded with her and I am impressed.
Starbuckets is another possibility. An acquaintance has the 6 inch model and likes it a lot.
There may be other possibilities as well. Good luck with your choice and let us know how it works out.
Bill Meyers

There was a lot of carping by would-be "competitors" that Carl's calculations were impossible to perform accurately without an interferometer. (No one ventured to criticixe the mirrors themselves, just the calculations.) As I understand it, Carl's reply was that there is also lots of interpretation involved when interferometric readings are taken and lots of problems with taking the readngs properly.
Also, Carl felt that some amateurs were comparing Strehl ratios of 99.1 versus 98.9 and wanting a Strehl as high as their friend's mirror, despite the fact that any Strehl over 96 is an essentially perfect mirror.
So, Carl decided to obviate the disputes and comparisons by not providing numbers.
At least, that is my understanding of the situation. Correct me if I am wrong but that is how I interpret the situation.
Rick Singmaster addresses this issue by warranting that the Zambuto mirrors in his telescopes will equal or surpass at the eyepiece any commercially available mirror of like size and focal ratio. (In other words, NASA mirrors created with ion beam technology are exempted; these cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, by the way).
You have a mirror so good that no defects can be detected by anyone at the eyepiece, an essentially perfect mirror.
It makes a splendid and valuable personal possession, a true work of craftsmanship of which you can be proud and which can be passed on as a legacy to future generations.
But its intended use is for looking at objects in the night sky.
Enjoy your scope, and clear skies to you,
Bill Meyers

Easy for me to see in a Night Sky 16" f4.5 Dob at 67x with a 27 Pan snd at 140x with a 13 Nagler Type 5 at Shingletown Star Party 2005 and was seen by many other people in 14 inch or larger scopes and probably by some people in smaller scopes. Easily found once someon told you where it was and exactly where to look. Seen with direct vision. Sky limiting mag about 7 plus on three of the five days of SSP.
Ciao,
Bill Meyers

The 31 Nagler will give almost as large an true field of view as the 41 Pan, will give a darker sky background, a vastly larger 82 degree field, and considerably more magnification and therefore more detail. Some people are bothered because they can't see the field stop (it feels like a spacewalk, the whole purpose of this eyepiece).
Before you make a decision try to look through a 31 at a starparty and compare it to the Pan 41 and 35. I own the 31 and love it but not everyone does.
Bill Meyers