From: "Mel Bartels" 
To: 
Reply-To: "Mel Bartels" 


>>>
 I know that the surface of a Ritchey-Chretien is hyperbolic
instead of parabolic. What I'm curious about is, how much harder is a
hyperbolic surface to grind and test compared to a parabolic surface?
<<<

It is NOT a single iota harder - what is more challenging or at least
unusual is that you will have to adjust your testing to zero in on the
hyperbolic figure.  Also realize that many of us touch up the final figure
by playing with the secondary and primary playing with the figures until
the star test looks best.  I'd worry a lot more about figuring the convex
secondary of a Cassegrain...

Mel Bartels

--- BBBS/NT v4.00 MP