Mars Opposition Eve

October 12th, 2020, 11:10 p.m. local time

Preparation, prior session notes, favorable whether, and a little luck all contributed to what I believe is my best Mars capture yet.

Knowing the forecast for the following evening was suspect at best, I decided to try photographing Mars.  It had been cloudy and raining in the afternoon, but almost miraculously cleared by 6 p.m.  The only true issue was the dampness in the air, and I was worried this would impact overall image quality, due to moisture on the primary mirror.  The sky was clear and, importantly, the wind was non-existent.

I leveraged my Mars imaging experience from the weekend, and chose, based on that session and my notes from Mars’s last opposition, to use ISO 800 and exposure 1/200.  Late into my session videos, as I was continually refocusing after sets of three to four videos each, I accidentally changed the exposure for one set to 1/160.  This set, combined with great focus, yielded the best of the lot.  All but one set was very good, but this, I think, turned out excellent.

Summary of my equipment, settings, and software used:

  • Telescope: Dobsonian reflector 254mm / 10″ (homemade)
  • Camera: Canon EOS Rebel SL3
  • Barlow: TeleVue Powermate x5 1.25″
  • Filter: Baader Neodymium 1.25″
  • Canon T ring and adapter
  • Relevant camera settings:
    • ISO 800
    • Exposure: 160
    • HD video at 60fps
    • Created from three videos of about 25s each, best 25-35% of frames
  • Software for post-processing:
    • PIPP
    • Autostakkert
    • Registax 6
    • PaintShop Pro for minor touch-ups

First Look at Mars in 2020

October 6th, 2020, 11:50 p.m. local time

Consider this a trial run for Mars’s opposition next week.  I had not imaged everyone’s favorite red planet since its last opposition ~18 months ago.  Fortunately, everything still seemed in order, including the planet itself.  Telescope, camera, and all supporting equipment worked as intended.  I used my documented ISO and exposure settings from 2018.  Judging from the result, they worked well, and should be sufficient for Mars over the next week or so.

Mars is extraordinarily difficult to focus, at least from my Dobsonian.  For comparison, Jupiter is relatively easy, as all I need to do is crank up the ISO and exposure, then fine focus until I have sharp dots for the smallest of the Galilean moons.  Saturn doesn’t have this benefit, though its unique shape, with the gaps between the rings and planet, offer a serviceable guide.

There are no guideposts when focusing on the Martian disc, which is either near circular or oval.  Its two moons are far too small to be picked up by a backyard telescope.  So my focus on Mars is always going to be about as “best guess” as guesses go.  It’s also why I continually refocus and take at least three to four separate sets of videos.

Summary of my equipment, settings, and software used:

  • Telescope: Dobsonian reflector 254mm / 10″ (homemade)
  • Camera: Canon EOS Rebel SL3
  • Barlow: TeleVue Powermate x5 1.25″
  • Filter: Baader Neodymium 1.25″
  • Canon T ring and adapter
  • Relevant camera settings:
    • ISO 800
    • Exposure: 200
    • HD video at 60fps
    • Created from three videos of about 25s each, best 25-35% of frames
  • Software for post-processing:
    • PIPP
    • Autostakkert
    • Registax 6
    • PaintShop Pro for minor touch-ups

Still Looking at Saturn

October 6th, 2020, 9:09 p.m. local time

Shortly after my Jupiter imaging on the 6th, I easily turned my attention to Saturn.  A splattering of clouds arrived though, so after my first image set, I took a break (knowing the forecast was clear skies all night).  Thirty minutes later and I was back at the telescope.

The four sets I took of Saturn were not as good as many of my prior sessions, but one set was serviceable enough to post.  Like Jupiter, Saturn is now smaller through the telescope than it was mid-Summer.  But you can still make out the major cloud bands and inner and outer rings.  My favorite part of these Saturn images is always the planet’s shadow on the back of the rings.  For whatever reason, I enjoy that that immense shadow is made from the same Sun that makes all of our terrestrial shadows on Earth.

As with Jupiter, I now rely heavily on my paper log book for all my prior ISO and exposure settings.  Flipping the pages back a few months, sometimes years, helps immensely and saves time at the telescope, so I can focus primarily on, well, focus.

If you have been following along and/or know what’s up in the sky right now, you can guess the subject of my next post. 🙂

Summary of my equipment, settings, and software used:

  • Telescope: Dobsonian reflector 254mm / 10″ (homemade)
  • Camera: Canon EOS Rebel SL3
  • Barlow: TeleVue Powermate x5 1.25″
  • Filter: Baader Neodymium 1.25″
  • Canon T ring and adapter
  • Relevant camera settings:
    • ISO 1600
    • Exposure: 30
    • HD video at 60fps
    • Created from three videos of about 25s each, best 25-35% of frames
  • Software for post-processing:
    • PIPP
    • Autostakkert
    • Registax 6
    • PaintShop Pro for minor touch-ups

Final Look at Jupiter in 2020

October 6th, 2020, 8:20 p.m. local time

As the title implies, this was likely my final closeup attempt of Jupiter for the year.  The planet is noticeably smaller than it was at opposition three months ago.  It is also now lower in the sky, making it more difficult for me to photograph.

But I will continue to observe Jupiter, as it remains close to Saturn as they move towards their December conjunction.

Summary of my equipment, settings, and software used:

  • Telescope: Dobsonian reflector 254mm / 10″ (homemade)
  • Camera: Canon EOS Rebel SL3
  • Barlow: TeleVue Powermate x5 1.25″
  • Filter: Baader Neodymium 1.25″
  • Canon T ring and adapter
  • Relevant camera settings:
    • ISO 800
    • Exposure: 40
    • HD video at 60fps
    • Created from three videos of about 25s each, best 25-35% of frames
  • Software for post-processing:
    • PIPP
    • Autostakkert
    • Registax 6
    • PaintShop Pro for minor touch-ups

My Hunt for Pluto, Part II: The False Star

Figure 2.1: My sketch of the area surrounding Pluto on September 14th, 2017.

“I really want to try to find Pluto again one more time this season…If I do get a chance, I will post a follow-up next month.” – Me, August 29th

With the Moon safely out of the way and a clear sky opportunity available, last week I resumed my quest to find Pluto.  Much of this post relies on information from my first attempt last month, and so I will be referring to that post frequently.

Recall that I leveraged the easily recognized “teapot” asterism in the constellation Sagittarius to star hop over to the approximate location of Pluto.  The main anchor star in the area of Pluto, both last month and now, is Albaldah.  Albaldah and a few nearby neighbors are the last stars I can see unaided.  So targeting Albaldah with my telescope was the first order of business.

The journey past Albaldah was guided with the help of both the Stellarium app on my tablet as well as my prior post.  I should note here that the “app” version of Stellarium is far less detailed than the PC version when investigating such faint objects in small spaces.  Further, based on my two observation sessions, I now believe there is an error in the PC Stellarium map, which I will explain in a moment.

Using the same 2″ Q70 eyepiece as last month, I quickly found HIP 94372, the 6.35 magnitude “mini-anchor” star near Pluto visible only with my telescope.  From HIP 94372 I located the 8th-magnitude star pattern I nicknamed k-lambda, assuring that I was in the correct vicinity.

At this point I was aggressively looking at the images from my prior blog post, the Stellarium app, and my telescope eyepiece.  I decided early on that it would be best to switch to a higher magnification than the 2″ eyepiece allowed, so I changed to my 1.25″ 14.5mm Planetary.  This eyepiece illuminated a much clearer view around HIP 94372.

Then I began sketching, referring to Stellarium only to assure that I was still in the location I wanted to be and drawing at the correct perspective size.  In my drawing above (Figure 2.1) it is difficult to see which stars are faint and which were really faint to the point that averted vision was necessary to see them.  The three stars I labeled as #1, #2, and #3 were the brightest, forming a triangle.  The three arcs were the approximate boundaries of the eyepiece.

With my sketch partially done, I had to make an assumption – that the small star close to HIP 94372, identified only by the Stellarium PC version, does not exist.  This probably threw me off last month, at least a bit, in determining if I truly had seen Pluto.  It is listed at magnitude 9.10, which should be easily visible, especially at the higher magnification I was now using with the 14.5mm eyepiece.  A 9.10 star should only be slightly dimmer than k-lambda, as well as the three stars forming the main triangle in my sketch.  And the few stars I drew around HIP 94372 are extremely faint, well past magnitude 9.  So either this star does not exist or its magnitude is incorrect in Stellarium.

Figure 2.2: Is this star really there?

Returning to the Pluto hunt, I knew it should be located within the three-star triangle I sketched.  In the figure below from Stellarium, I edited out the false star, as well as flipped the image to correspond to what I drew at the telescope that night.  Pluto is represented as a very, very tiny dot:

Figure 2.3: Pluto and surrounding stars as shown by Stellarium for September14th, 2017.

Remember, again, that most of these stars are very faint.  To help gauge where Pluto might be, I imaged a micro asterism forming a dipper or serpent, which starts at the star HIP 94338:

Figure 2.4: Identifying the serpent and “bright” stars.

I could see this dipper easily at the telescope so long as I knew where HIP 94372 was.  I also knew, then, that Pluto had to be just below (actually above, but the telescope reverses the image) this dipper and between HIP 94372 and HIP 94338.

Did I actually find Pluto?  I identified, at the telescope, three possible candidates, all hard to see without averting my eye a bit.  That night while still at the telescope, I drew an arrow pointing to the one I thought was most likely.  The other two candidates were to the right, the nearest dots above and below the one pointed to by my upward sketched “likely Pluto” arrow (see Figure 2.5).

Here is my sketch again, this time with the serpent/dipper lined, the three bright stars circled in orange, and the dot most likely to be Pluto, as determined afterward by comparing to both versions of Stellarium (iPad and PC):

Figure 2.5: My sketch with the most likely candidate for Pluto circled in yellow.

The best way I can confirm/reconfirm which dot was Pluto would be to sketch the area around HIP 94372 once Pluto has moved significantly.  Unfortunately by next month (after the next Full Moon passes), Sagittarius and Pluto may be too low in the sky for me to draw again, mostly due to the impacts of light pollution as they near the horizon.  And so, true final confirmation may have to wait a good seven to nine months, as the Earth and Pluto revolve around the Sun, beckoning the dwarf planet back into our East sky by late Spring 2018.

My Hunt for Pluto!

On the evening of Friday, August 25th, 2017, I decided to take my homemade 10-inch Dobsonian out to my back deck.  The Moon was still young, so the sky would be fairly dark a few hours after sunset.  Paired with surprisingly cool August temperatures, it looked to have the makings of a great stargazing night.

It had been weeks since I last used the big “light cannon.”  A combination of summer temperatures and humidity, all sorts of nighttime bugs, and the pre-eclipse fervor put my normal telescope usage on hiatus.  I planned out what I wanted to see, leveraging Sky Map.  The star clusters in Sagittarius seemed like good targets, followed by other deep sky objects like the Ring Nebula.  And oh yeah, Pluto is in the sky, so for kicks I put it on the list as well.

I started around 10:40 p.m., after the Moon was fully set for the night.  I turned my attention first to the South and Sagittarius.  Its remaining time in the 2017 nighttime skies is fading, and it may not be practically viewable by next month from my location.  Unfortunately, I had no luck in pinpointing the several star clusters in the heart of this constellation, due to them being already low in the sky and overtaken by my local light pollution glow.

So I scratched the South star clusters off my list and decided to try Pluto next, since it was in the vicinity of Sagittarius.  I held little hope of finding Pluto, but felt the need to try anyway, as I have been wanting to for a while.  Locating a 1,400-mile long object over three billion miles away is not easy, to put it mildly.  This would be unexplored territory for me, requiring all my rudimentary stargazing experience to date as well as the power of my 10-inch reflector.

I started by locating the “teapot handle” in Sagittarius.  It is barely visible from my yard, but leveraging the brightest star in the area, Nunki, makes for finding the handle quickly.  Nunki’s apparent magnitude is 2.05, a little less than Polaris’s, to it is still within easy viewing at my location.

As of mid-2017, Pluto is above the Sagittarius teapot asterism when looking from Northern locations on Earth.  The closet bright star to Pluto is Albaldah, with an apparent magnitude of 2.89, so still easy to find.  Albaldah is directly above the teapot, as shown in Figure 1:

Figure 1: The Sagittarius “teapot handle” including star Nunki, with the Pluto guide star Albaldah above it.

Albaldah is more officially known as Pi-Sagittarii, and it forms a triangle with two other “Sgr” stars in the area, Omicron-Sagittarii and Epsilon-Sagittarii.  This triangle provides a visual cue to where Pluto should be in the August 2017 sky, to the left of the triangle, as shown in Figure 2:

Figure 2: The three Sagittarii stars and the approximate location of Pluto, circled in orange. Click to enlarge.

Assuming you are looking at the full image, you should see one brighter star within the orange circle along with two dimmer stars.  This brighter star is called HIP 94372, and with an apparent magnitude of 6.35, it is not visible to the eye.  So here is the leap from naked eye observing of the three Sagittarii stars to telescope viewing of HIP 94372.  Figure 3 below gives the Stellarium details on HIP 94372 along with an even closer view, now showing Pluto’s location on the evening of August 25th:

Figure 3: HIP 94372 with nearby stars, and Pluto on 08/25/2017. These are visible only with a telescope.

At this point in the observation session, I was heavily consulting Stellarium on my iPad, as there was no way to see the following-discussed stars unaided.  I leveraged my best-quality two-inch eyepiece, the 32mm Orion Q70 Wide-Field.  I post the name and link here not as an ad for Orion, but so you get a sense of the equipment used for this difficult exercise.  The Q70 is better than average as I have found that it significantly reduces the coma effect (blurriness around the edges) common in many 2″ eyepieces.  In hindsight and for next time, I should also have had at-the-ready a high-powered 1.25″ eyepiece.

To get a sense of the field-of-view through the Q70, I was able to see both Albaldah and Omicron-Stagittarii at the same time in the same eyepiece field, with each star near the edge on opposite sides.

It is important to note here that we are discussing the limits of common star map apps.  We are getting down to 10th and 14th magnitude objects, so the overall accuracy of the maps may start to get fuzzy.  I am not saying Sky Map or Stellarium are wrong, only that this exercise approaches the limits of their usefulness.  Because as I discovered, it becomes very difficult at these magnitudes to align the computer map with what you see in your telescope.

HIP 94372, at 6.35 apparent magnitude, is easily seen through a 10-inch reflector telescope.  The second-brightest star in this area is unnamed with an apparent magnitude of 9.80 (see Figure 4).  This was still very visible via the telescope but much fainter than HIP 94372.

Figure 4: Stars near Pluto, August 2017.

And so we come to the task of actually identifying Pluto.  At an apparent magnitude of over 14, is it visible at all from my Western Chicago suburban skies?  I could see, near HIP 94372, the ever-so-tiniest dot, which I assumed to be Pluto!  “Assumed to be” is key here as I cannot say for sure.  When you look at the Moon, Venus, Jupiter, Saturn, or Mars, you can say with 100% confidence what you are looking at.  But with Pluto, I am relying on approximations of a nearby bright star (Albaldah) to make even more approximations of faint star patterns seen only with a telescope.

Figure 5: Pluto’s location and details in Stellarium, August 2017.

I wanted to confirm my finding as best as I could, so I started hunting for noticeable star patterns in the area of HIP 94372 that I could recognize with the help of Stellarium.  Below and to the East I found one small set (see Figure 6).  But the “Rosetta Stone” was the pattern a little farther to the East still.  It is easily seen as a faint pattern in the telescope.  I call it “k-lambda” as I imagine it is the fusion of the letter k and Greek letter lambda in a Star Trek transporter accident. 🙂

Figure 6: Recognizable star patterns very close to Pluto in August 2017,

All of the stars in k-lambda are in the apparent magnitude range of 8.2-8.3, which make them faint but still easily seen in my telescope.  Figure 7 shows the details of one of these stars, called HIP 94784:

Figure 7: The stars of my k-lamba asterism.

Finding these stars seems easy with the hindsight of a few days.  It involved a lot of “feeling around” past Albalduh to get my bearings at the scope.  Even moderately bright stars are easy through a telescope, but going past that 6-7 apparent magnitude threshold was like walking through a forest at night with little-to-no light.

So by leveraging these two small and faint star patterns, mapped towards the “bright” faint star HIP 94372 and anchored to the naked-eye star Albaldah, I can safely say that I found the location of Pluto that evening, even if I cannot say for 100% certain that I saw Pluto itself.  See Figure 8 below for Albaldah, Pluto, and my k-lamba all in the same Stellarium image.

Figure 8: Click to enlarge.

I really want to try to find Pluto again one more time this season with the experience I now have.  Unfortunately the Moon is growing towards Full each night, which will make the evening sky too bright for such fine work over the next week and more.  I estimate the Moon should be out of the way again around September 13th.  By then, Pluto will have nudged a bit towards the West, as shown below in Figure 9.  If I do get a chance to try for Pluto one more time this year, I will post a follow-up next month.

Figure 9: Pluto’s location from Earth on September 13th, 2017.

Thanks for reading to the end!

(And yes, I did find the Ring Nebula after my Pluto trek.)

Grinding a Telescope Mirror: The Non-DIY Project

johndobson2002

John Dobson

I did not know John Dobson, nor do I know someone who knew him, but I feel like I did from all the testimonials I have read.  At the least, my telescope build is an extremely distant branch of his legacy.

Mr. Dobson is the namesake for what is commonly referred to as the Dobsonian telescope.  He did not invent this type of telescope, but instead ingeniously brought together a number of amateur telescoping making (ATM) techniques.  This compilation is a method with general designs for how to build your own Newtonian reflector on an altazimuth (up/down left/right) swivel mount.  Sometimes you see references to only the mount as the Dobsonian part, but a true Dobsonian refers to the complete package, from the mount to the tube to even hand grinding the primary mirror.

This latter part, concerning the primary mirror, is what I stumbled on conceptually at the beginning of my telescope build journey.  When you start any type of project, and especially when you undertake what we call DIY projects today, you will have many “make or buy” decisions.  How much of the project will you, personally, create from raw materials, and how much will you rely on pre-built/pre-manufactured components?

Platonically speaking, there is no such thing as a true DIY project.  I am not going to grow my own forest to harvest trees for wood, nor start a lumber company to secure the requisite labor and machinery for my platonic lumber mill.  Nor would I obtain raw silicon to fabricate my own nano logic gates for a homemade CPU.  Still, there is a generally accepted boundary for raw materials – products that are not a specific end to themselves but are intended to be reshaped and combined with other raw materials into some form of finished component.

The primary mirror of a Newtonian reflector is indeed the main component of the telescope.  Its aperture determines everything else about the telescope’s dimensions and how “powerful” the final instrument will be.  The creation of primary mirrors is a deep step into the peculiar world of optics.  Remember the Hubble Telescope’s original blunder of having the wrong curve on its mirror?  That’s optics.  Whether we are talking big or small mirrors and lenses, the universe of optics and optical creations are not really an end-consumer endeavor.  There is a level of precision required unique to that industry.

If you follow any guide on John Dobson’s telescope build strategy, you will quickly learn that construction of the primary mirror was the core task of his method.  Below is what I assume was an old VHS era documentary on Mr. Dobson’s step-by-step approach, and most of it (a little over half) is about grinding and finishing the primary mirror.

If you watch this, or follow another guide on the Internet for grinding your primary mirror, it seems to be truly a daunting task.  It is beyond hard work and effort and closer to a stint in a hard labor camp.  Why would anyone do this to themselves?

I am in no way criticizing the method John Dobson laid out.  Too often, we judge the past by our perspectives grounded in our present.  60 years ago, the nature of amateur telescope making was very different.  There were no online guides, no easily searchable list of vendors to purchase obscure products from.  If you wanted a big telescope, I’m guessing the overall costs were too prohibitive for anyone except established institutions.  If you wanted to build a nice big telescope of your own to see the universe, you had to build your own, even scavenging for your raw materials at times.  This, I surmise, was the world of John Dobson and the source motivation for what would become the Dobsonian design.

I asked myself, “could I grind my own primary mirror?”  My weak answer was…maybe.  I have completed DIY projects before, but the grinding of a primary mirror seemed beyond my need to satisfactorily say that I could build my own telescope.  There is so much more to it than just the primary mirror – the tube, the many proper measurements, the mount wood cutting, the secondary mirror’s spider, the swivel construction, to name a few.  I decided that acquisition of the primary mirror, and all the optics in general, would be a firm “buy” decision for my telescope project.

There are other reasons to refrain from a homemade primary mirror as well.  I concluded, after all the investigations I did into the task, that there is no such thing as a true homemade primary mirror.  A DIY build means you can run to your local hardware store, buy the parts, and then construct what you need in your garage or other appropriate home venue.  Construction of a primary mirror requires, as a final step, the aluminization of the mirror’s surface.  This critical step is not a home DIY task.  You would need to find an industrial optics company willing to perform the aluminization for you.  You can spend weeks of your life grinding the mirror, then be lost because you cannot find an aluminizer.  Unless you know someone, you are going to be left having to ship your precious near-finished glass to an unknown company, somewhere and at great cost, hoping it will eventually be returned as the desired finished product.  I’m not saying it couldn’t be done, but I safely believe it is too much of a risk of both effort and money, especially when you can buy a finished primary mirror relatively easily today.

I say “relatively” easily to buy a primary mirror, because even that was a challenge, although nowhere near as hard as grinding one yourself.  For what I call consumer high-range optics, it can be very hard to find a supplier for this type of work.  Only a few online merchants offer shopping-cart style access for primary mirrors, and their supplies are limited.  Many companies post that they will make custom mirrors, but usually at a high cost, or only make very large custom mirrors, like 16″ and above.

We live in a much different world today from when John Dobson started building telescopes.  The bottom line is that, unlike most DIY projects, it is going to cost you more to build your own Dobsonian, regardless of make-vs-buy for the primary mirror, over purchasing a commercial Dobsonian or general reflector from one of the big established merchants.  So from the DIY perspective, your best route is to find one of the vendors or re-sellers of the commercial primary mirrors supplied to the Meades, Celestrons, and Orions of the market.

Who should attempt to grind their own primary mirror?  For one, masochists, and I mean this in all seriousness.  Another group that could reasonably give it a shot are those involved with any type of materials shop, from wood to metal, where building anything is just part of your routine.  And those connected to building components for the optics industry could certainly do this as well.

For the rest of us, if you really enjoy a challenge, then grinding a mirror is for you.  But for nearly all stargazers contemplating building their own telescope, I recommend purchasing all your optics, including the primary and secondary mirrors, focuser, eyepieces, and finder scopes.  Your homemade telescope will be so much more than a few specific components.  It is the journey, the knowledge you will gain, and the final satisfaction garnered from creating something far greater than the sum of its individual parts.

When I Decided to Build a Telescope

telescope-build-01

When you enjoy using your telescope to look at the night sky, you are bound, one day, to decide that you want a second telescope.  You may have “aperture fever” to gather more light, to see more.  Or you may have a reflector and want to complement it with a refractor.  Big vs. small.  Stationary vs. portable.  Sketching vs. astrophotography.  There are many reasons you will (and you will) consider having a second telescope.

Almost a year ago, I bought my first “real” telescope, a 127mm Maksutov-Cassegrain.  It is relatively small in the overall scale of telescopes, but I did not want to buy too much in case I quickly lost interest.  But I did not lose interest, and really enjoyed using it to view the Moon, Jupiter, Mars, Saturn, and the Sun (with appropriate solar filter).  I have also used it to view deep space objects like the Andromeda Galaxy, star clusters, and nebulae.  Although the latter are viewable, it is clear to me that my small 5-inch Mak-Cass is primarily intended for solar system observations.

After a few months, I decided to investigate getting a second telescope that (1) had a noticeably larger aperture and (2) would specialize in viewing deep sky objects.  I immediately understood that the most obvious trade-off would be in size and weight.  If I desire, I can take my 127mm Mak-Cas anywhere with minimal effort.  But something far bigger would likely require greater setup and planning to transport, even just from my house into my yard.

I also wanted to at least leave the door open for astrophotography.  With the Mak-Cass, I use the afocal method to take pictures.  Afocal photography is just a fancy term for holding a camera up to an eyepiece (versus the more sophisticated method of bypassing the eyepiece and using a proper T-ring or other adapter for a DSLR camera).  I have a few afocal adapters that allow me to take pictures with my smartphone; most of the pictures on this blog were taken afocally.

After reviewing the major types of telescopes, I was leaning towards a Newtonian reflector, specifically a “Dob” or Dobsonian.  I will blog about the Dob’s namesake, John Dobson, in a future post.  Reflectors in general are the most economical per size, and are intended solely for night use (since the images appear upside down, you can’t really use them for terrestrial applications).  They are also primarily intended for eyepiece viewing, versus photography, but some sort of photography method is entirely possible if you want to.

I went down the path of reviewing Dobs from the major telescope companies (there are three primary ones in the U.S.A. – Celestron, Meade, and Orion).  During my investigations into price and features, somehow I came across the idea of building a homemade telescope, from scratch.  This intrigued me, as I had built a few other projects around the house before, even though I am not a craftsman by trade nor do I have any type of workshop (except for the half of my garage that becomes a de facto workshop when I do one of these projects).

If you search online for homemade telescopes, you will see a wide range of designs and efforts.  Some look crazy.  Some are well beyond anything I would attempt.  But others seemed far more modest and manageable to execute.  After a lot more research, I decided to give it a go.  I figured that a telescope, after all, is ultimately a technology hundreds of years old, so with the right planning and designs, it should not be too difficult for anybody like me to build one.

And building a telescope, I thought, would come with a great sense of accomplishment.

So I intend to write about my telescope building experience.  I will not write a “how to” guide, as there are a number of perfectly acceptable guides on the Internet, as I will reference.  Instead of a step-by-step chronology, I plan to give insights into my efforts over the several months it took to plan and build.  When I am done, you will probably have a adequate idea anyway of how I built my 10-inch Newtonian reflector on its Dobsonian mount.

In my next telescope build post, I will discuss one of the first major decisions – whether to build or buy the primary mirror.