From: "Shane LaPierre" 
To: atm{at}shore.net
Reply-To: "Shane LaPierre" 


No criticism meant at all, but one thing that has caught my attention
everytime I consider redesigning my 20" is that it's difficult to shed
the mass.

My current 20" has a 50 lb mirror, and I was only able to shed about
20 lbs from the OTA itself when considering a minimalist design (my current
OTA weights in at 121 lbs.).  I have not found the benefits of shedding 15%
to 20% of the weight to pay for the features I have come to appreciate in
the typical mirror box, truss, secondary cage alt-az.  Some of these
benefits include simplicity of design and construction, rugged housing of
the components, protection from the environment during observing and maybe
a few others. Anyway, these are simply my priorities, but I have always
felt underwhelmed at the end result of a minimalist telescope that weights
in at only slightly less than the current modern Dobsonian.  I certainly
see better results in using ultra-thin mirrors.... but that seems to bring
up a new set of issues in the 1/2 meter class.

On another note I haven't posted here in a while because I don't get to ATM
too often.  I think this coming weekends visit to Stellafane has me primed
a little more :)  I will post pictures after the event at my website below.

Shane LaPierre
http://www.ct-astronomer.com


>From: "Mel Bartels" 
>Reply-To: "Mel Bartels" 
>To: 
>Subject: ATM new minimalist 16 inch with sliding focuser
>Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 23:24:14 -0700
>
>
>http://monroe.ca.campusgrid.net/home/Classroom+Pages/Mathematics/Mr.+Martinez/
Telescope.html
>
>Ron Martinez' 16 inch
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5