A hypothetical question:

If one were to replace the secondary holder with a modified version capable
of being moved (powered by a radio-controlled motor), would the change in
geometry adversely affect the image?

The potential advantages are:

The main mirror could be positively locked in place without worrying about
attaining critical focus first.

The lightweight secondary could be moved precisely without danger of it
flopping around, a leadscrew and 3 linear bearings would assure this.

Plenty of room for motor/leadscrew/reduction gearing - though the secondary
housing would need to extend forwards.

The radio-controlled servo motor would not introduce diffraction artifacts
the way a wired motor would (though the Celestron Fastar seemed to cope OK),
the % obstruction would be the same.

No modifications to the standard focussing mechanism (which would still be
available).

Any thoughts?

Chris Heapy

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: [M]: RE: (M) Guider, Chris Vedeler
Next message: [M]: Guidescope Recomendations, Email address hidden
Next message in thread: [M]: RE: LX Focussing Strategy, Renato Langersek