FreeLists / az-observing / [AZ-Observing] Re: Sentinel Zip

[Jeff Hopkins <phxjeff@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Stan,

I have a 12" LX200GPS and I would never consider using it as a 
portable scope. Even the tripod is a monster and I am not a little 
guy. One reason the scope is so heavy is that the OTA is not just the 
OTA but the whole scope, forks, base, mechanical gears and 
electronics. Joe Goss usually brings a 14" Celestron CGE telescope to 
star parties and I was always amazed he could set that up quickly by 
himself. But he has a German equatorial mount for it and the OTA is 
indeed a single and separate item. Just as with your telescope that 
would break down into pieces. Imagine trying to move you whole 
telescope, OTA and drive assembly as one unit. The LX200 does not 
break down.

When I put my LX200 on the permanent mount it was all I could do to 
lift and set it on the wedge. I would not want to do that more than 
once. The biggest problem is not the weight, but how to grip and 
carry the unit. Despite coming with a tripod, I would not classify 
the 12"  LX200 as a portable telescope. Certainly there are people 
who do use it and large fork mounted SCT telescopes in a portable 
mode, but not recommended for mere mortals. My 13.1" DOB is very each 
to move, setup and take down because it all comes apart.

BTW, there are some special handles available to replace those on the 
forks that make handling the scope easier, still not easy, however. 
Those handles are not cheap but do seem to help. They are $130 for 2 
at Peterson Engineering, http://www.petersonengineering.com

Jeff

At 09:22 -0700 12/1/05, Stan Gorodenski wrote:
>George Barber wrote:
>
>>Yes, thanks Andrew!  The 12" classic is specified to weigh in at 75 pounds.
>>
>>
>
>All I can say is - Wow! I would never have guessed they weighed that
>much because my Dall-Kirkham has a heavy full thickness 2" mirror, a
>mirror mount make of steel tubing, a heavy 2"+ diameter focus tube, and
>a 3/16" thick telescope tube made of rolled fiberglass cloth. Since the
>LX200 doesn't have all these heavy features, and the tube is shorter
>than my telescope, I wonder why it is so heavy? Just a rhetorical
>question. Next time I see an LX200 I'll have to look into it some more
>(if I remember by then - it is not a high priority thought).
>Stan
>
>--
>See message header for info on list archives or unsubscribing, and please
>send personal replies to the author, not the list.

-- 
Jeff Hopkins
HPO SOFT
http://www.hposoft.com/Astro/astro.html
Hopkins Phoenix Observatory
7812 West Clayton Drive
  Phoenix, Arizona 85033-2439 U.S.A.
www.hposoft.com
--
See message header for info on list archives or unsubscribing, and please 
send personal replies to the author, not the list.