Sunday, May 06, 2007


Who Says Rod Ain’t a Dob Kinda Guy?

Maybe “Dobsonian kinda guy” is too strong. Fact is, I like telescopes. All telescopes—well most of ‘em, outside the Walmart horrors. But, I like some scopes better than others; that’s why they call me “Mr. SCT.” I do, however, admit that no scope or scope design is perfect. Right tool for the job, muchachos.

OK, I ain’t gonna beat around the dad-gummed bush no more. Y’all are sitting down aincha? Your Old Uncle Rod owns a dobsonian.

For various reasons, round about 1993, Unk found himself as close to scopeless as he’s been over the last forty years. The reasons for that would just bore you. Suffice to say all that was left was my 4.25-inch Palomar Junior, Rod’s second telescope, which had come his way back in ‘65. That and a homebrew Dobbie with a 6-inch Parks primary were it. No SCTs.  Nuttin' else, honey.

In a way, that was not a bad thing. Minimalist visual astronomy, seeing how much you can do with how little, can be fun and can, for sure, build your observing skills. Not just that, either; the observations I did with two small reflectors scope during this period were the beginning of what would become The Urban Astronomer’s Guide a decade-and-a-half later. But, Jeez Louise, 4-inches is 4-inches and 6-inches is 6-inches. I was soon wondering what was the most horsepower I could pickup for less than a grand?

I could have financed a bottom of the line 8-inch SCT, maybe a Meade 2080, but after buying all the little doo-dads needed to make a CAT useable in the field—dewshields, drive correctors, batteries—all the things I foolishly let walk out the door with the Plus, my derned budget would be busted beyond salvation. And in the wake of a recent divorce, I just didn't feel I could spend the money.

It was then that my eye fell on the latest Astronomy Magazine, on one of Meade’s famous/infamous two-page ad spreads. This one was for a new line of dobsonians they were calling “StarFinders.” These scopes were causing quite a stir amongst amateurs, since this was the first time a big-time scope company was offering dobs. Oh, Coulter had been selling its plebian Odyssey Dobsonians for a while, and, on the other end of the market, there were small, semi-custom outfits like Starsplitter selling to those with the cash to spend on big guns. But where were dobsonians for you and me? Where was the middle ground? Meade’s entry into the market meant someone was finally mass producing dobs at those always popular popular prices, and, also, we hoped, perhaps offering a bit more than Coulter quality.

Scope hungry as I was, hungry as a starving weasel, it seemed a no-brainer. Order up a Meade 12.5-inch dob. I figgered that was as big as I and my Hyundai hatchback could handle—the 16-inch appeared to be in the “water heater” class. I’d then begin saving my pennies for an LX200 or an Ultima 8.

I had no illusions. I knew this would be a Spartan scope, a thing of cardboard and particle board. If I’d had fun with six simple inches, though, surely I could have some fun with twelve simple inches, no matter how minimalist. I ran to the phone one golden Saturday morning in April and ordered a StarFinder 12, which the nice man at Astronomics informed me would be drop-shipped from Meade “soon.”

We all know what “soon” means in the telescope business, and it was no different back then. I was occupied enough that I didn’t worry much about it, however. For one thing, I’d glommed onto another dob, a Coulter 8-inch f/7, which the company was selling for the insane price of $239.00. I simply couldn’t pass up a working scope for that little money. Even more amazingly, Coulter, known for some of the longest waits in the biz, delivered the scope in one piece (more or less) almost immediately.

Not that I used the Coulter a whole-whole lot. The evening of the day I ordered the Meade was my first date with Miss Dorothy. I was seeing stars, alright, but I didn’t need a scope to see ‘em. I did get the Odyssey 8 out one night for Miss D’s first “star party,” a public outreach for the Boy Scouts, but that was almost it. There were a few trips to the club dark site, but my suddenly active social life and the typically horrible Possum Swamp summer weather limited observing of any kind.

As spring aged into summer and then the days began to shorten again, I did occasionally wonder what the heck had happened to the StarFinder. But I had little time to do more than wonder idly and resolve to call the dealer “soon.” Then, finally, one day, an assortment of big boxes showed up. Dorothy wasn’t surprised; after six months with me and my astronomy club friends, she was beginning to get some idea of the virulence of amateur astronomy equipment fever.

Did I tear into those boxes? You betcha. Did I get to try the scope? No. Wouldn’t you know it? Those jokers at Meade arranged to have it arrive (it must have been intentional) the day before D. and I got married!

After the honeymoon, though, I did drag the thing into the backyard. “Drag” is right. I was dead-on correct that the monstrous white Sonotube was at the limit of what I could handle. Otherwise? Very good optics, even on the planets. Decent 50mm finder. Some of the worst Kellner eyepieces (excuse me, “Modified Achromats”) I have ever seen. A plastic 1.25-inch focuser that worked, nevertheless. Nylon bearings instead of Teflon.

Despite its rather obvious shortcomings, I had a lot of fun with the StarFinder, and have some fond memories of using "Old Betsy" with Miss Dorothy on her first star party adventures. A few minor modifications, like the replacement of the Nylon bearing pads with Teflon, made the scope work pretty well—bearably well, anyway. The telescope’s first hiatus came when the Hyundai died and I began driving Toyota Camry a Toyota Camry. I couldn’t fit the StarFinder in the Camry no matter what I did. I had also by now acquired a beautiful Ultima C8, so that big white Sonotube languished.

Until 1998 when my observing companion and ATM, Pat Rochford, convinced me to “let” him convert the 12.5 into a truss tube scope. Well, throw me into that there briar patch, Brer Rabbit! He did a beautiful job, and the Meade got a new lease on life. The primary, secondary, and finder did, anyway.

But as things heated up on the CAT scene as the 90s waned, with leap after leap in technology and dip after dip in prices, and I obtained THREE new CATs, the StarFinder once again sat unused and unloved. Oh, there was a twinge of regret occasionally. Once, dob guru Tom Clark visited Chaos Manor South and commented, “Looks like a nice scope, Rod, why don’t you use it?” I was almost shamed into dragging her out under the sky. I didn’t, though. The idea of giving up go-to for star charts and Telrads didn’t appeal. Yeah, go-to had spoiled me.

That twinge did come again, though, recently. It just seemed a shame to let a good scope with a lot of memories rot. Question was, how big would the project of restoring the StarFinder be? After 13 years, I knew the primary would likely need to be recoated. There were some sleeks, and, last time I’d looked (oh, a few years earlier) there’d been some funny-looking patches that might have been fungus. Truthfully, I expected the worst when I removed the primary cover (with tremblin’ hands, natch).

I needn’t have worried. The mirror was actually not in bad shape at all. Those sleeks were fewer and less serious than memory had made ‘em. The “fungus”? That turned out to be some minor spots of…oxidation? These areas had not grown nor spread, anyway. When I let Mssr. Rochford have a look at the mirror, he indicated he wasn’t sure what all the fuss was about. In his opinion, it didn’t really even need recoating yet. Just goes to show the proper place to store your telescopes is in the living room of your air conditioned house. It sure helps to have an understanding spouse if you plan to do that, though.

Maybe the primary didn’t absolutely need recoating, but I was determined to do this resurrection right, and sent the primary off to Spectrum Coatings (a fave of amateurs in this part of the country) to receive their top-of-the line “Max R” treatment. I also ordered a new secondary and secondary holder. The original was not bad, mind you, but at 2.6-inches it was somewhat larger than it needed to be (Meade liked to combine big secondaries and tall focusers in those days). A smaller mirror with a better coating from Astrosystems seemed like the way to go. I also ordered a secondary heater as I remembered getting awful tired of dew-zapping the secondary on humid Gulf Coast nights. Finally, I replaced the old Meade finder with one of Orion’s right-angle-correct-image models. The scope already had a Telrad mount, and the focuser, a JMI DX3, still seemed fine to me. That left only one thing. A computer.

I was conflicted. I didn’t want to go back to a Telrad and Sky Atlas 2000, but the Tangent digital setting circles I’d occasionally used over the years had left me way unimpressed. Move the scope to 90 degrees attitude. Be precise. Do your alignment stars. Observe the “warp factor” (misalignment figure) on the computer. Too big (nearly always was)? Start over. Accuracy? Maybe half-a-degree. If you're lucky. Pat again came to the rescue with the suggestion that I try the Sky Commander DSCs. He guaranteed I’d like this push-to setup. It (he said) had none of the aggravations of the other guys. Somewhat reluctantly, I ponied-up for a Sky Commander. What else could I do?

Last night, we put it all together at Pat’s Stargate Observatory. Oh, there was a little cut and fit involved, but mostly everything went on easily. Talk about guilty pleasure; as I got started with the “new” scope, I found I wasn’t missing my CATs at all. Well, not much, anyway. The images were at least as good as I remembered them ever being in this scope. Quite comparable to what I see in a C14. I suppose they are actually considerably better than they used to be, what with the better primary coating and the smaller secondary. That’s not what impressed me, however. What did that was the Sky Commander. I will never ever make fun of “push-to” again. Not when a Sky Commander is involved.

After a little fumbling I found the button pushes required to perform an alignment and to select objects to be intuitive (unlike the button-mashing horror of the Tangent boxes). Most importantly, though, the Sky Commander was right on. All the time. It never missed an object in a 16mm eyepiece, and almost all targets were in the field of a 7mm. What makes this amazing was that I’d done the alignment in my typical laissez faire Uncle Rod fashion. You know, “Yeah, that looks centered. Good enough for Government Work, I reckon.” Look for a complete review of the Sky Commander soon.

So the StarFinder has been gloriously returned to life. Question is, “Will I continue to use her?” I wish I could say “yes.” I think I will. I hope so. She is a sweet telescope with, as I said, a lot of memories. Thing is, though, I’m getting started with DSLR imaging. And I’ll soon have that new Powerswitch with the built in filter selector. I’ve got Nexremote working again. Don’t want to let the Stellacam sit unused either. Frankly, it looks like it will be a CAT summer. Again.

I promise y’all, I will occasionally play Dob Guy and treat Old Betsy to the starlight she so richly deserves, but she will just have to wait her turn. CATs still rule ‘round here.

Rod, I also have a Starfinder that does not see much light,
[a 16 incher] I bought it in 1994.
It no longer looks like a Meade,
The first year I split the tube into 1/3 and 2/3 sections to make moving this monster easier [?], and replaced the particle board rocker box with one made from 1- 1/2 inch plywood.
Seems that the first two years of owning such a large scope it goes out all the time, after that you take it out less and less. Most of my [real] observing involves a 40 minute drive.
But these days I only seem to take it out about once per season,
The rest of the time it's my C9.25 or my Coulter 8, or my C5, or my 4inch Televue or my............
As they say the best scope is the one you use the most..

Steve Whitehouse
Amen!For me, that "most" is still the good, old C8.

There's a lot of "copy" concerning NASA and the C5. While I didn't find a reference on one of NASA's websites I did find this on Celestron's site...and they are usually pretty reliable in this regard...I'll keep looking through NASA's material, however:

"Throughout the world, Celestron telescopes have become the “telescope of choice” for the consumer that can differentiate between brands. Major colleges and universities worldwide use Celestron telescopes in their astronomy programs. Moreover, its solid and esteemed reputation in the scientific community has reached NASA, who selected Celestron’s C5 telescope as the telescope to be taken on several space shuttle research missions."
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

stats counter Website Hit Counters