Yes, I guess I did. I was under the assumption (oops) that he was doing a
polar alignment, in which case, I believe my statements still hold true. If
you throw a real alignment out the window, and adjust the mount/wedge to
point directly at any star when the Dec is set to 90, then, Yes, it 'should'
remain centered as you spin the scope in RA.

With this in mind, I think that the person who mentioned mirror flop as a
possible culprit may have a pretty good answer, in addition to the fact that
things may be out of alignment fork-wise.

Thanks for the clarification!

Anthony J. Kroes
Green Bay, WI


> -----Original Message-----
> Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 7:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [M]: RE: Orthoganality, yet again..
>
>
> I think Anthony missed the point here. Anything that you
> center in the
> eyepiece should not move from that point when the scope is moved in RA, IF
> the DEC is set at 90 degrees (ie the OTA is parallel to the long
> axis of the
> forks (as in polar alignment)), IF it is truly centered and the OTA is
> centered in its mount. The latitude on the wedge could be set anywhere. I
> used to verify that the OTA on my ETX was truly aimed at Polaris and
> parallel with the fork arms using this method
>
>
>

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: Re: [M]: LX200 start up position N or S, Martin Nicholson
Next message: [M]: Re: Re: Mars too bright, messier27
Previous message in thread: [M]: Re: RE: Orthoganality, yet again.., John N. Kujawa