From: "Russell Jocoy" 
To: tkrajci{at}san.osd.mil, georgea{at}cam.org, atm{at}shore.net
Reply-To: "Russell Jocoy" 


>From: "Tom Krajci" 
>Reply-To: "Tom Krajci" 
>To: , 
>Subject: RE: ATM Stellafane 2003 photos
>Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2003 16:42:35 +0500
>
>
> >From: georgea{at}cam.org [mailto:georgea{at}cam.org]
>
> >As a person who has actually used this scope for viewing on several
> >occasions
> >including public star parties I can say the following.
>
>Now that I try and wade through the vitriol of my initial post...my
>greatest concern is with the organizers of Stellafane, not the
>individual ATM's.
>
>I repeat that I think Stellafane, and all other big star parties, should
>seriously consider establishing testing criteria for telescope
>mechanical and optical performance that can be performed on cloudy
>nights or in daytime.  Accelerometers and artificial stars are not
>expensive or difficult for large clubs/organizations to acquire.  They
>provide an opportunity to standardize the testing process, and make it
>repeatable from telescope to telescope...and from night to night.  The
>subjective aspect of performance evaluation will be minimized to the
>maximum extent possible.
>
>This will help increase understanding in the ATM community of what
>design and fabrication features provide the best performance.
>
>There will always be competitions and judging with some, or a great deal
>of subjective evaluation...such as 'greatest innovation in design',
>etc....but think of a top fuel dragster on the quarter mile track...no
>subjective analysis required...just naked performance.
>
>And another thought came to me.  Stellafane and others could test the
>cooling performance of scopes.  Attach a temperature probe to the back
>of the main mirror in the evening, and also monitor the ambient air
>temperature.  The call of "Gentlemen...start your cooling fans" will
>echo across the observing field. ;-)  Measure how fast the mirror temp.
>approaches ambient temp.  Again, this helps take subjective judging out
>of the loop, and shows interested ATM's what works, and what does not.
>
>Tom Krajci
>Tashkent, Uzbekistan
>
>
>---
>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date: 5/19/2003
>
>




("atm{at}shore.net")

   Tom ,
    I agree, Why give out awards for telescope designs, if all you are
looking at is the design. I can make a dobsonian that looks like a corvette
stingray, but it may look like  crap through the eyepiece. Hey
don't get me wrong , I'll bet these telescopes don't only look good  but
can track asteroids...
  Thats not what was judged...   The judgement of a telescope ,should be
through the LENS,... and
the reflection from the primary if that is the system. The resolution of
the Refractor and how the croma
is controlled.  I would rather have an ugly telesope that provided great
views than a great looking
scope that gave crappy views.,  This has not been proven at this (star
Party) since the observing was
null... I'll bet that there  where scopes that could focus on a dime at one
mile but this was not tested
by the eye of the people or the judges.  Bad weather sucks and I know the
show must go on but
my 57 Chevrolet looks like downtown but the engine only has a 6 cylinder
and my wheels won't
"peel out" ... Just my take... I do not believe it is necessary
to test mirrors or lenes but a look through the eyepiece can do wonders on
determining which scope exceeds the next....
    Russ Jocoy
("atm{at}shore.net")
>

_________________________________________________________________
Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

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