Sponsored By:

Subject: Re: [M]: LX200 Lunar Tracking
From: Ric L Ecker
Reply To: mapug@shore.net
Date: Mon Feb 23 07:41:59 1998


On Mon, 23 Feb 1998 21:18:32 -0500 Dave Bair <hdbair@sun-link.com>
writes:
>Bob Elliott wrote:
>>
>> At 01:46 PM 2/22/98 -0500,Dave Bair wrote:
>> Knowing that information, has anyone ever attempted to
>> >calculate the tracking frequency based on lunar orbital data for
>any
>> >given time?

>I understand what you're saying but that isn't really what I was
>getting
>at. I agree the exposures are far too short to show any tracking
>error
>during the exposure, but over the length of a entire session of high
>power lunar imaging, the moon does creep out of the field of view
>while
>taking those 10 to 20 images unless your frequency of tracking is dead
>on and thats what I'm trying to get at. This may sound relatively
>useless to alot of people but if you're trying to take alot of high
>power images of a single feature on the moon, time slips away and
>unless
>your tracking frequency is right on the money, your beloved lunar
>feature slips away with the time! }:-(
>

I don't think it would be a problem even with bad tracking on the Moon.
The need for precision tracking on the Moon would be able to high
precision track, this might be usful for other things but photos and
images wouldn't be one of them even at extreme resolution with point
source accuracies. Maybe someone could come up with a good reason to
have a varible tracking on the nights trek of the Moon. Perhaps Video or
motion pictures even a eclipse normal tracking would handle the Moon at
high power. IMHO {:-)

ric
curator of the Willard Observatory
San Marcos, California
216 xt images at:
http://members.aol.com/rlecker/optas.html

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]