From: someone@anywheret.net   
      
   "JimD"  wrote in message news:2016102410490338051-email@nowherecom...   
      
   > Oh, and I bought a small ( 114 mm ) reflecting, Newtonian,  telescope on   
   > the trip.  Dad lives in a town with a small university, and someone   
   > dropped this thing off at the local resell shop. Broken tripod, missing   
   > eyepieces.  I got it cheap, $5.  Ha. They barely knew what it was.   
      
   Five bucks for that? Incredible!!!   
   A 4.5". How long is it? About 3'? That'd make it an f/8 general purpose   
   scope - lunar, planetary, and some stellar deep sky.   
   Cool in any case ;)   
      
   > Fixing the tripod was easy.   
      
   It's probably just an alt-azimuth type mount...better with an equatorial!   
      
   > As to the missing the eyepieces, people steal those, or lose them.  No   
   > biggie, I have the Meade " mate " to this scope, a 500 or 600 mm   
   > refractor, I can't remember right now. The same eyepieces from it work.   
      
   What's the  diameter of the refractor's objective? Now those get Very   
   expensive very quickly, like anything over 2".   
      
   > Took the 114  apart last evening, cleaned the mirror. That's risky, it's a   
   > 4.5 inch diameter front surface aluminum mirror. Very thick, about 3/4   
   > inch, nice mirror, dusty but in great shape. No scratches or surface   
   > corrosion. It needed cleaned tho, so I risk it with a camel hair brush and   
   > some cotton balls and cleaner spray.  Turned out great.   
      
   There shouldn’t be any risk doing it that way at all.   
      
   > Very clear image of distant tree lines as a test. Just as dark set in last   
   > night, so did cloud cover. Ah, man.  And the moon didn't " rise here until   
   > 12:43 am. Broken clouds by then, but I was long asleep :-)   
      
   Aren't any but clear skies a total BUMMER?   
      
   > This telescope doesn't have as much magnification as my others, but being   
   > a reflector, is has a bright clear image, free of chromatic aberations.   
      
   Bright, clear, and not much magnification - sounds like it might possibly be   
   a deep sky scope, so-called 'rich field' low f ratio.   
      
   > Have I ever mentioned I like stargazing :-)    Saturn really does have   
   > rings. It's a beautiful, almost religious thing to look at that stuff.   
      
      
   Jim   
      
   Another amateur astronomer ;)   
   I've been one since around the age of 6 whenever I get the chance -  i.e.   
   when I have  access to a decent scope...I still want a Mead LX-200, even   
   though they're f/10, they still do a great job with deep sky objects,   
   particularly the 14" model...but I'll have to be making all kinds of money   
   to afford it :(   
   And a nice "light bucket" 'rich field' f/4.5 Dobsonian scope would be nice   
   too...but I like equatorial, slow motion, and clock drive capability on any   
   scope ;)   
      
   Ouisie   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)