The telescope does, indeed, track. However, it is a VISUAL telescope, designed to be looked through. It does not photograph....But thank you for your interest! You are all welcome to come and LOOK THROUGH it!
It's a dobsonian mounting which is not appropriate for astrophotography...that's a low cost design proper only for observation. Because of the Earth's rotation, you got to have some equipment to follow its movement so pics don't come up as a shit blurred thing. Hope this clarifies.
Glenn Joy actually planets you need very short exposures, as short as your camera supports. Talking about microseconds here. So yeah planets are definitely doable with Dobson‘s , but you‘d need thousands of those short exposures to get a good quality picture and that‘s where automatically tracked telescopes come in handy
Undoubtedly incredible interest in astronomy. It seems to be all too common that youtube videos that either review telescopes or cover the building of telescopes, do not show the images that are captured by the telescopes. At 70 inches, you can only imagine what he should be able to see.....
This telescope seems to be a strictly visual telescope so it doesn't seem suitable for imaging. However, I am sure the views through the eyepiece would be out of this world.
@@kishascape So true. People even told me astrophotography without a coma corrector on newtons doesnt work, well it works. Its just one thing: you better dont show "how good" it works since the corners of the images look pretty ugly. Same with a refractor without its fitting corrector, but these visual problems are even worse without corrector. Hell, Astrobiscuit even made astrophotography with binoculars and a smartphone... its a pretty poor result, but i guess there is anyways not much to expect from the beginning. But its partially true... have you ever tried a dobson mount for astrophotography? Trust me, it doesnt work, at least not if you plan longer exposures than something like 1 second or less... And even "cheap" EQ mounts with maxxed out load arent really good for astrophotography (personal experience with a 500$ 2nd hand telescope on a "cheap" EQ3-2)
1:37 I was shown a 17.5" mirror and a secondary mirror. I was an amateur and I built a scope for the the mirrors and it worked (after a bit of adjusting). And I knew basically nothing about telescopes, so it's true what he said. But you still have to be able to build stuff. But it's mostly straight forward.
There were Estate Telescopes in the 1800s. Rich people had open top small buildings made around a large cast iron tube and suspended it from chains to control the tilt and steer it somewhat and just used the earths rotation to point it. Just like this but far bigger.
I'm only going to say this ONE MORE TIME. This is an OBSERVATIONAL telescope. It is NOT designed for photography. The best you could do is put a cell phone up to the eyepiece and try to take a photo. And even this would not yield any desirable results. Photographic telescopes require tracking and special CCD adapters.
@@mastro4065 So it has tracking but Dobsonians make it difficult for it to be tracked accurately enough for photography? I can see how our eyes are very forgiving - as long as its relatively centered we're happy. Not so for photography?
@be quieter ....yea...you actually summed up Dobsonian astrophotography pretty well. It can certainly be done.. But for visual observing, for which my telescope was designed, the parameters are much more relaxed. In fact, with my desire to allow as many people to look through it, I often don’t even properly initialize the tracking system. I prefer to not fiddle and fuss around while people are waiting to observe through it. Even roughly aligned with magic marker lines drawn on the cement pad where the telescope is placed, is adequate. Objects stay reasonably centered, while many people to look through it. And then I give people the hand paddle, and let them recenter the object for themselves! All good fun!
Please tell me this gent has a CZcams channel or a website? Or,,,let me guess,,,,the government probably shut him down or controls what he puts out right.
Станислав Горгаз ...Thank you for your interest. Ironically, It was because of the Cold War, this monstrosity even exists...swords into ploughshares. I am so grateful we can now communicate, like this, on CZcams, rather than fear each other....Thank you so much for your kind words...best wishes, my friend in Siberia!
@@keithwaites9991 There are two reflecting telescopes on Mt. Wilson, a 60" and a 100". Both had plate glass mirrors, originally with a silver coating, later they were aluminized.
@@scharkalvin thanks for the info. Funnily enough many years ago I was quite a keen amateur astronomer and I probably knew that then. Anyway I stand by my earlier apology for my error. take care and stay safe
Justwantahover ....If you build it...they will come! The Salt Lake Astronomical Society was good enough to set wheels in motion to get my monstrosity a home...a wonderful building to house it when not in use, and the telescope rolls out on a pallet jack (what, did a truck driver have something to do with this idea?) onto an observing pad, for public use. Many thnx to these outstanding people! Ad astra per aspera.
Awesome telescope, I'd like to see some imagery from it. But this was an extremely shitty news segment. The person who did the editing should be fired hahaha
@@justadbeer Hi, Not this one. I did a 8 inch about 10 years ago, it ended up triple the price compared to commercial ones. Especially finding and sending it for aluminizing. So for 14 inch I bought all the optics.
I want a quick technical examination of that monster. Saw the finder scopes mounted on the base but never saw where the eyepiece is. Is it 30' in the air? That primary has to be a challenge to keep clean! Love the builders 'Einstein' look at the end of the vid. Obsession gets it done.
Looks like a folded Newtonian with secondary and tertiary mirrors, so it only needs an 8' or 10' stepladder. I believe he has a cover to protect the mirror when not in use. What I like most is the ultralight truss and cable optical tube assembly. (OTA).
In older times such ingenious individuals used to be called" inventors" today we didn't use that word rather use "Amature" which for me is not a good word. The great inventor Tom Eddison was not litrate in the field of electricity, likewise the humble George Westinghouse. But they shape the way we live today. This person building a working telescope which could be adopted by many others for me he is not amature he is an inventor. He have ideas about how telescope works just like the old inventors. Translating and validatibg his work in scientific methods will be left for the scientists and engineers. Great job buddy, I am sure you succeeded in one of your bucket list of life.
Structural fitter with welding experience cud. Being a structural fitter is easy, just get hired at a local construction site or at a port. Ive know 17 yr old high school drop outs that build oil rig platforms for breakfast. So, anyone can do it.
If somebody knows him read this message. Please ask him to share his experience of telescope building and night sky experience with his telescope. It will be helpful for other amateur Astronomers.
Building a scope is straight forward (if you buy the mirrors, that is). You have to know the focal length and measure the distances of the mirrors accurately. I made one and had to move the secondary mirror and rack&pinion a bit to make if focus, but it was no problem. I never built one before and except for the small mistake it was easy. I built the two mirror cells as well out of wood, steel and aluminium and it worked fine. It was a 17.5" dob. I made the tube out of cardboard sheep dip canisters stuck together and painted and reinforced by a thick plywood top end flange. And the stand was made of thick plywood and some steel.
Interesting nobody mentioned the other 2 mirrors, aswell as the secondary and the 90° angle for the visual back... Only the secondary is already bigger in diameter than the focal range of my 150mm newton.
Not true. I've looked through 30-36" telescopes. Aperture isn't a limiting factor to atmospheric distortion otherwise the largest terrestrial telescopes which are much larger than this would be worthless. The limiting factor on a clear night for any telescope is the disturbance in the air currents overhead. That's why most large telescopes are used at higher altitudes to reduce the amount of disturbance by rising above it.
soteeres Daskas ...thnx, I did sort of design it to give it a steampunk, Jules Verne, Austin Powers, Salvador Dali, even “bad” sci-fi movie look! Thnx for noticing!
i know nothing abouz telescopes but i know that there needs to be a mirror. can it be just a normal mirror that hangs on the wall in our bathroom? But perfectly round ofc. Or is it a different special type of mirror?
@Justwantahover ...due to atmospheric distortion, it is only practical to use approximately a 38 mm eyepiece. This telescope, as with any Earth-based telescope without adaptive optics, is at the mercy of the steadiness of the atmosphere (seeing).
@@mastro4065 And the other limit for visual astronomy tends to be our own eyes imperfections. If my calculations are correct and based on an F/D of 5 (common for most Dobsonians), your eyepiece would yield a x250 magnification...with a tremendous 8mm exit pupil ! I've red many lectures stating that a so big exit pupil was not suitable for planetary viewing, due to eye spherical aberrations that would blur the image. That explains why most telescopes dedicated to planetary viewing turn to 200 / 8" aperture, more or so. Because they tend to be the perfect match between the atmosphere and our eyes performance.
OK, I understand that we unfortunately cannot experience the views from our sofas. But can you please tell me what to google, to understand what this telescope can do? (for those of us who know nothing about telescopes) Someone mentioned 400x? So, is it a close approximation to google image search, "moon 400x magnification"? Or, Jupiter, Saturn, etc. Congrats to Clements- what an inspiration.
Don't need a barlow! Imagine the mag with a 10 mm eyepiece on this scope. It would be great for planets cos of the long focal length that would give the planets the mag that they desperately need! Jupiter would be like a grapefruit size (at apparent desk viewing distance). And Saturn would be like an orange with 8" diameter rings (and as sharp as buggery).
@Justwantahover ...nice thought, but the Earth’s atmosphere would completely blur the image....I use a 38 mm eyepiece...images are crisp and stable on most night of observing at this magnification.
@@mastro4065 But if you use a lower mag eyepiece you can still get clear images of planets , the image will all of a sudden snap into clarity for a few seconds as the atmos clears.
@@TasmanianTigerGrrr....any lower magnification, and the secondary obstruction shadow becomes objectionable....38 mm eyepiece is the “sweet spot”...for proper magnification...
This scope may be a DOB in the mount, but that says nothing of the optics. There does not seem to be an observing site off a diagonal at the top of the structure thus it is not a classic Newtonian optic path using a parabolic mirror. If it has a parabolic mirror there is probably a camera or video recorder at the prime focal point, if this imager is on a de-rotator it can do fine imaging. If there is a mirror at the to it might be a Cassegrain style light path. Whatever it is the owner/operator probably does not put an eye piece in and look. I could be wrong and would love to know.
@Jonleonard Cassidy ....thank you for your interest! This is a folded Newtonian design, where the focuser assembly is not too high above the ground. This telescope is used exclusively for direct, visual observation....Open to the public! Pleas come and look through it! .....Mike Clements
+szaki I'm a window cleaner and cleaning two-story house outside windows requires a ladder. Go up the ladder and take off the flyscreen and go down the ladder to put it on the ground to clean it (if I chuck it, it could get damaged). Now up the ladder to clean the window, and down the ladder to get the screen, then up the ladder to put it on and down the ladder. Now we have ONE window cleaned.
Due to the way this telescope was designed, ladder height is minimal, only about 10 or so feet up at the highest, and many objects can be viewed while standing flat-footed even for average-height people.
I have a redcat 51 (51mm aperture) and a celestron edge 11 (280mm aperture) and I paid over $10,000 for those with the mounts. When I figured in all the other associated peripheral and support equipment it's closer to $20,000. I'm going to pour a slab with 2 piers, power, and an automated roll-off roof for a 10'x16' observatory building in my backyard this spring. Prob about another $10,000 for that. Wondered what he paid for just the 6' lens let alone the rest of the apparatus. Must be some sweet images!! CS! 🌠🌟
Anybody could build it kf we got a super large mirror from ..where :p sorta.. it is difficult even getting a 12 or a 14" since no one does mirroring of glass any more
I ground and polished a 16 inch mirror and built the tube and box in the 90s...after it was said and done I'd been better off just buying a new one...i might have saved a few bucks but not worth it IMO.
The secondary mirror is huge, don't think it works that well cuz of that. And ppl should stop complaining about space pictures, you can't get that good images with a dobsonian telescope.
Adio Aurel ....Keep in mind it is a RATIO of primary-secondary size.. Huge primary=huge secondary. With this variation of design of the Newtonian telescope, it is similar in percentage of obstruction to a conventional Schmidt Cassegrain design. Thnx for your interest!
Yeah, it should look great. The ring is bright in average size telescopes. It must be really colourful through that. I wonder how the fainter moons of Saturn look through this. Enceladus and Mimus are hard to see at all with an 8 inch scope. I wonder if he can see the separation of Pluto and Charon with it.
Size matters. What an amateur astronomer can enjoy more than the direct view of celestial objects through a fine telescope with his (her) eyes? And he is the only one who sees it, photons after the long journey on the way exclusively sent right into your eye. If you want to see photos make a wish to Santa Claus for a pictorial called "The 100 best pigtures made by Hubble" or similar.
And what do they put near the focal point? An American flag flapping away causing air turbulence.. Everything in America seems to have a flag stuck on it.
so what ....I saw another video on this very same guy, and they didn't show what he can see through the thing either, I'd like to think he gets spectacular views of space, but since they didn't show us anything, I have to assume it shows nothing, that it's just for show,
Exactly what i was thinking, i wonder what quality it is too. In any case imagine the pictures you could get if you motorise this. Amazing. When do you hit diminishing returns though? I have a 6" and 8" and there is quite a difference between them. Never looked through anything like a 10 or a 16. DO you know?
I have heard diminishing returns starts at like 10-12inches. The diminishing returns are due to atmospheric distortion, which can be corrected in a couple ways one of which is with long exposure and some software, but for that he will need some motors and software... I admit if I could afford it I would do this too. After seeing Saturn through an approximately 4ft diam telescope in my college astronomy class I am in absolute love. Alas I must settle with my 8", which honestly does a fantastic job too.
I got a 12" and it's better than an 8" that I had before. That 70" would be great quality cos it would have cost a lot (being such a professional intended application) and he would have got it cheap.
I had a 8" cassegrain and I whipped up a "barlow" out of old lenses and a towel roll tube. lol I had Jupiter like a grapefruit size (at apparent desk viewing distance). And Saturn was like an orange with 8" diameter rings! lol So my 8" also did a fantastic job. Imagine seeing this in the 70", that is if I can do what I did with an 8". Imagine how good it would be with the 70". And "seeing" must have been excellent that night when I made my "barlow". Of course the image was a bit "smokey" but still really sharp for a home hacked barlow and for like 1000 x mag. lol The "seeing" obviously still plays the biggest part (which is mostly really crap for planets, viewed from near the coast). But that time the "seeing" definitely wasn't crap! lol And the motor drive on my C8 was so good that (with my "barlow') Saturn was still in view (@ 1000 x) after like leaving it for like a hour or so. lol My C8 did a fantastic job. Maybe $2,000 is expensive but the VALUE is there, that's for sure (when you think how expensive the professional scopes are). The small scopes obviously are a lot better than we think (when the "seeing" is good, that is).
And we didn't saw a single picture!
It doesn't have a tracking mount. That would add another two "0"s to the price of it, which this guy doesn't have.
Guardian Observer lol
No , we didn't see any ...
See*
The telescope does, indeed, track. However, it is a VISUAL telescope, designed to be looked through. It does not photograph....But thank you for your interest! You are all welcome to come and LOOK THROUGH it!
How about showing us a picture of a planet trough it? Na, no one wants to see that on the news...
It's a dobsonian mounting which is not appropriate for astrophotography...that's a low cost design proper only for observation. Because of the Earth's rotation, you got to have some equipment to follow its movement so pics don't come up as a shit blurred thing. Hope this clarifies.
@@augusto3645 With a mirror like that you don't need that long exposures, it should be possible to make pretty good pictures of planets.
@@forton615 Yes like 2-4 seconds with that much light gathering power!
Glenn Joy actually planets you need very short exposures, as short as your camera supports. Talking about microseconds here. So yeah planets are definitely doable with Dobson‘s , but you‘d need thousands of those short exposures to get a good quality picture and that‘s where automatically tracked telescopes come in handy
@@augusto3645 THere's no way something that big doesn't have motors on it.
1- A Truck Driver
2- A Star Gazer
3= Sweeeeeet
Very Nice, Very Nice
Pete Sterk ...Thank you for those kind words!
"Anyone can do it". Building a telescope as an amateur is actually very very very hard
making the primary is hard, the rest is fairly easy actually
@@insightfulgarbage Exactly. Most kits already have the mirror made for you so all you have to do is put the tubes and sticks together.
the mirror is the hard bit
Hard doesn't mean you can't do it, it just means it's going to take long
Not really.
Undoubtedly incredible interest in astronomy. It seems to be all too common that youtube videos that either review telescopes or cover the building of telescopes, do not show the images that are captured by the telescopes. At 70 inches, you can only imagine what he should be able to see.....
This telescope seems to be a strictly visual telescope so it doesn't seem suitable for imaging. However, I am sure the views through the eyepiece would be out of this world.
@@AbdurAstro Wrong, any scope can easily be used if you know what you're doing. Most people just don't care about doing imaging though.
@@kishascape So true.
People even told me astrophotography without a coma corrector on newtons doesnt work, well it works.
Its just one thing: you better dont show "how good" it works since the corners of the images look pretty ugly. Same with a refractor without its fitting corrector, but these visual problems are even worse without corrector.
Hell, Astrobiscuit even made astrophotography with binoculars and a smartphone... its a pretty poor result, but i guess there is anyways not much to expect from the beginning.
But its partially true... have you ever tried a dobson mount for astrophotography? Trust me, it doesnt work, at least not if you plan longer exposures than something like 1 second or less...
And even "cheap" EQ mounts with maxxed out load arent really good for astrophotography (personal experience with a 500$ 2nd hand telescope on a "cheap" EQ3-2)
1:37 I was shown a 17.5" mirror and a secondary mirror. I was an amateur and I built a scope for the the mirrors and it worked (after a bit of adjusting). And I knew basically nothing about telescopes, so it's true what he said. But you still have to be able to build stuff. But it's mostly straight forward.
There were Estate Telescopes in the 1800s. Rich people had open top small buildings made around a large cast iron tube and suspended it from chains to control the tilt and steer it somewhat and just used the earths rotation to point it. Just like this but far bigger.
No one:
This guy: Right
I'm only going to say this ONE MORE TIME. This is an OBSERVATIONAL telescope. It is NOT designed for photography. The best you could do is put a cell phone up to the eyepiece and try to take a photo. And even this would not yield any desirable results. Photographic telescopes require tracking and special CCD adapters.
El Grande ....Thnx for that! Telescope now has tracking, but is still only intended for looking through.
@@mastro4065 So it has tracking but Dobsonians make it difficult for it to be tracked accurately enough for photography? I can see how our eyes are very forgiving - as long as its relatively centered we're happy. Not so for photography?
@be quieter ....yea...you actually summed up Dobsonian astrophotography pretty well. It can certainly be done.. But for visual observing, for which my telescope was designed, the parameters are much more relaxed. In fact, with my desire to allow as many people to look through it, I often don’t even properly initialize the tracking system. I prefer to not fiddle and fuss around while people are waiting to observe through it. Even roughly aligned with magic marker lines drawn on the cement pad where the telescope is placed, is adequate. Objects stay reasonably centered, while many people to look through it. And then I give people the hand paddle, and let them recenter the object for themselves! All good fun!
@@mastro4065 man you're so awesome
@Robotron Sage.....thank you so much for those kind words!
I met the owner of this telescope this weekend. A real gentleman!
El Grande did he make full documentation for his telescope? Do he have a website? I'm very curious. Great works!
I have some help about telescope...
Did you see Saturn through it?
What about pictures
Please tell me this gent has a CZcams channel or a website? Or,,,let me guess,,,,the government probably shut him down or controls what he puts out right.
Awesome work sir two thumbs up!
Teuku Syahrani ...Thank you for your positive comment!
2 times thumbs up = no like
Holy crap!!! That is freggin awesome!!!
Who makes a complete report about the largest amatuer telescope in the world and SHOWS ZERO IMAGES from the scope????? WTF???
This scope is not designed to take photos!
"show me the money" I'd love to see some astrophotography from this beast.
Awesome!!!
really awesome machine! respect from siberia!
Станислав Горгаз ...Thank you for your interest. Ironically, It was because of the Cold War, this monstrosity even exists...swords into ploughshares. I am so grateful we can now communicate, like this, on CZcams, rather than fear each other....Thank you so much for your kind words...best wishes, my friend in Siberia!
@@mastro4065 :-)
I would video record moon with ultra violet fillters and high speed 4k recording. What a telescope ,what a telescope.
That's larger than the original Mt. Wilson reflector, which at one time was the largest telescope in the world.
I thought Mt. Wilson was 100"
Unless that 100" was a later mirror, in which case I apologise
@@keithwaites9991 There are two reflecting telescopes on Mt. Wilson, a 60" and a 100". Both had plate glass mirrors, originally with a silver coating, later they were aluminized.
@@scharkalvin thanks for the info. Funnily enough many years ago I was quite a keen amateur astronomer and I probably knew that then. Anyway I stand by my earlier apology for my error. take care and stay safe
Make a big building to put it in with a big dome and call it the Clements Observatory.
Justwantahover ....If you build it...they will come! The Salt Lake Astronomical Society was good enough to set wheels in motion to get my monstrosity a home...a wonderful building to house it when not in use, and the telescope rolls out on a pallet jack (what, did a truck driver have something to do with this idea?) onto an observing pad, for public use. Many thnx to these outstanding people! Ad astra per aspera.
OK I gotta ask, where did you buy this mirror? Acme Inc?
Awesome project.
give this man an engineering degree
I wonder how much he paid for the mirror :)
I think around 500.000$
@@savtheastroguy a 1 meter telescope costs about that much. no way this is 500k. probably much more actually.
@@td6935 a 1 meter telescope costs about that much. no way this is 500k. probably much more actually
@@jeremytheimer7443 propably but he was getting it from someone who sold it for scrap so who knows
@@savtheastroguy who in the right mind would sell a mirror this big like scrap tho
Awesome telescope, I'd like to see some imagery from it. But this was an extremely shitty news segment. The person who did the editing should be fired hahaha
EXCELLENT, FASCINATING dedication and love for Work and the Cosmos.
brahim119 ....Many thanks.
Jobs only half done, without any photos of the cosmos.
Where are the pics man
He has to invent a buck Rogers jet pack so he can fly up to the eye piece first.
now where did i leave my laser collimator? dang!
I'm thinking about having a home observatory fitted in my attic 💙🌝
That's my dream also.
Awesome 👏!!
Dude looks like Will Ferrel
statikreg ...I have heard that!
Totally COOL!!
LikeOnATree ...Thank you!
And I got a "crazy scientist" reputation from my neighbors after building only a 14 inch dob?! O_o
People are hard to impress in America :))
Even building a 14" is impressive. Did you grind your own mirror?
@@justadbeer Hi, Not this one. I did a 8 inch about 10 years ago, it ended up triple the price compared to commercial ones. Especially finding and sending it for aluminizing.
So for 14 inch I bought all the optics.
@@denispol79 - lol, isn't that the way it always goes. It's hard to beat today's prices, but I would like to try grinding at least one in my lifetime.
Awesome
This is pretty darn awesome, though I imagine a mirror like that would be quite expensive...
kain5056 ....Thank you for your interest, yea, it took me a lot of trips (I am a truck driver) to pay for it!!!
@@mastro4065 Awesome work!
@@zapfanzapfan ...... thank you 🙏 so much for your kind words!
It was sitting around in a warehouse next to the Holy Grail.
I want a quick technical examination of that monster. Saw the finder scopes mounted on the base but never saw where the eyepiece is. Is it 30' in the air? That primary has to be a challenge to keep clean! Love the builders 'Einstein' look at the end of the vid. Obsession gets it done.
Looks like a folded Newtonian with secondary and tertiary mirrors, so it only needs an 8' or 10' stepladder. I believe he has a cover to protect the mirror when not in use. What I like most is the ultralight truss and cable optical tube assembly. (OTA).
It would have been nice to add a little sizzle to the steak and tell us what he could see through it.
In older times such ingenious individuals used to be called" inventors" today we didn't use that word rather use "Amature" which for me is not a good word. The great inventor Tom Eddison was not litrate in the field of electricity, likewise the humble George Westinghouse. But they shape the way we live today. This person building a working telescope which could be adopted by many others for me he is not amature he is an inventor. He have ideas about how telescope works just like the old inventors. Translating and validatibg his work in scientific methods will be left for the scientists and engineers. Great job buddy, I am sure you succeeded in one of your bucket list of life.
Now u need a super dome to house that beast!!!
Michael Selz .....Done deal!...thnx to the Salt Lake Astronomical Society, and other generous, wonderful people!
Aperture fever is serious hahaha.
Hay..! Where's the pictures..?
this scope is for visual observing only ... Is a Donsonian mount, no equatorial mount nedded for astrophotography
We cant all build this, LOOK AT THIS FUCKING THING :D
Amazing guy
Structural fitter with welding experience cud. Being a structural fitter is easy, just get hired at a local construction site or at a port. Ive know 17 yr old high school drop outs that build oil rig platforms for breakfast. So, anyone can do it.
If I had the money I would send a telescope of my own into space.
If somebody knows him read this message. Please ask him to share his experience of telescope building and night sky experience with his telescope. It will be helpful for other amateur Astronomers.
Building a scope is straight forward (if you buy the mirrors, that is). You have to know the focal length and measure the distances of the mirrors accurately. I made one and had to move the secondary mirror and rack&pinion a bit to make if focus, but it was no problem. I never built one before and except for the small mistake it was easy. I built the two mirror cells as well out of wood, steel and aluminium and it worked fine. It was a 17.5" dob. I made the tube out of cardboard sheep dip canisters stuck together and painted and reinforced by a thick plywood top end flange. And the stand was made of thick plywood and some steel.
it doesnt work because the mirror isnt built for/like that
Twinkling star .....thank you for expressing interest...I will do my best to share!
@@kidpog3d101 It's a parabolic mirror, the f ratio might be a bit short for a telescope but other than that, of course it will work.
He died
Interesting nobody mentioned the other 2 mirrors, aswell as the secondary and the 90° angle for the visual back...
Only the secondary is already bigger in diameter than the focal range of my 150mm newton.
good on you sir.Any chance of seeing some results?
Kevin Deemster Nope. Atmospheric distortion will be a huge problem with such a big mirror. That's why they put these things in space u know...
Not true. I've looked through 30-36" telescopes. Aperture isn't a limiting factor to atmospheric distortion otherwise the largest terrestrial telescopes which are much larger than this would be worthless. The limiting factor on a clear night for any telescope is the disturbance in the air currents overhead. That's why most large telescopes are used at higher altitudes to reduce the amount of disturbance by rising above it.
mycarolinaskies Good point. But why didn't they show pictures then?
Because it is a Dobsonian. They do not track accurately so images are blurred.
Dobsonian telescopes are built for visual only.
man watch you could see with that
kudos to this man, this is what i would do, i am only working on one that is as tall as a life guard's chair
looks like a vilians lazer. i like it!
soteeres Daskas ...thnx, I did sort of design it to give it a steampunk, Jules Verne, Austin Powers, Salvador Dali, even “bad” sci-fi movie look! Thnx for noticing!
How about some pictures of WHAT he can see with it? Even just short exposures.
LMFAOOO i swear to god this seems like smth straight from "The Onion"
i know nothing abouz telescopes but i know that there needs to be a mirror. can it be just a normal mirror that hangs on the wall in our bathroom? But perfectly round ofc. Or is it a different special type of mirror?
Right!
RIGHT!
anyone know where i can buy a 71 inch mirror?
my dream is to have a telescope mirror
i think i just found my hero.
dome_ke .......Thank you so much for those flattering words!
Do it, live it up. Admire you , buddy
Carbide Jones ....Many thanks!
What would Saturn look like through that with a 10mm eyepiece?
@Justwantahover ...due to atmospheric distortion, it is only practical to use approximately a 38 mm eyepiece. This telescope, as with any Earth-based telescope without adaptive optics, is at the mercy of the steadiness of the atmosphere (seeing).
I have a 4.5mm Morpheus eyepiece he could borrow if I can deliver it personally
@@knightclan4....way too much magnification, but thnx for the offer!
you will need sunglasses…
@@mastro4065
And the other limit for visual astronomy tends to be our own eyes imperfections.
If my calculations are correct and based on an F/D of 5 (common for most Dobsonians), your eyepiece would yield a x250 magnification...with a tremendous 8mm exit pupil !
I've red many lectures stating that a so big exit pupil was not suitable for planetary viewing, due to eye spherical aberrations that would blur the image.
That explains why most telescopes dedicated to planetary viewing turn to 200 / 8" aperture, more or so. Because they tend to be the perfect match between the atmosphere and our eyes performance.
His guide scope probably has it's own guide scope... lmao
I wonder what the field of view is at low magnification?
Damn...how do you collimate this thing....
OK, I understand that we unfortunately cannot experience the views from our sofas.
But can you please tell me what to google, to understand what this telescope can do? (for those of us who know nothing about telescopes)
Someone mentioned 400x? So, is it a close approximation to google image search, "moon 400x magnification"?
Or, Jupiter, Saturn, etc.
Congrats to Clements- what an inspiration.
Now you can finally see half of your mama
What!
Megatron builds a telescope.
That is so coo[video ends]
Fucking badass!
Don't need a barlow! Imagine the mag with a 10 mm eyepiece on this scope. It would be great for planets cos of the long focal length that would give the planets the mag that they desperately need! Jupiter would be like a grapefruit size (at apparent desk viewing distance). And Saturn would be like an orange with 8" diameter rings (and as sharp as buggery).
@Justwantahover ...nice thought, but the Earth’s atmosphere would completely blur the image....I use a 38 mm eyepiece...images are crisp and stable on most night of observing at this magnification.
The seeing conditions will almost never be good enough to take advantage of it though!
@@mastro4065 But if you use a lower mag eyepiece you can still get clear images of planets , the image will all of a sudden snap into clarity for a few seconds as the atmos clears.
@@TasmanianTigerGrrr....any lower magnification, and the secondary obstruction shadow becomes objectionable....38 mm eyepiece is the “sweet spot”...for proper magnification...
How can you follow the stars with that? that's the point. You'll need a very good motor
'아무나 만들 수 있다' ㅋㅋㅋㅋㅋ 1.8미터 웅장하네요
This scope may be a DOB in the mount, but that says nothing of the optics. There does not seem to be an observing site off a diagonal at the top of the structure thus it is not a classic Newtonian optic path using a parabolic mirror. If it has a parabolic mirror there is probably a camera or video recorder at the prime focal point, if this imager is on a de-rotator it can do fine imaging. If there is a mirror at the to it might be a Cassegrain style light path. Whatever it is the owner/operator probably does not put an eye piece in and look. I could be wrong and would love to know.
@Jonleonard Cassidy ....thank you for your interest! This is a folded Newtonian design, where the focuser assembly is not too high above the ground. This telescope is used exclusively for direct, visual observation....Open to the public! Pleas come and look through it! .....Mike Clements
Hail to the master!
Jim Nunya ....Thank you so much! Those are kind words! I am flattered, and blushing!
RIGHT
Show time!
Up the ladder , down the ladder! LOL!
Lots of fun! )o:
A small worry for such a view of Jupiter that would be like the size of a grapefruit (and as sharp as buggery).
My knees hurt just thinking about it. I have a 22" and it is work going up and down the ladder all night.
+szaki
I'm a window cleaner and cleaning two-story house outside windows requires a ladder. Go up the ladder and take off the flyscreen and go down the ladder to put it on the ground to clean it (if I chuck it, it could get damaged). Now up the ladder to clean the window, and down the ladder to get the screen, then up the ladder to put it on and down the ladder. Now we have ONE window cleaned.
Due to the way this telescope was designed, ladder height is minimal, only about 10 or so feet up at the highest, and many objects can be viewed while standing flat-footed even for average-height people.
I have a redcat 51 (51mm aperture) and a celestron edge 11 (280mm aperture) and I paid over $10,000 for those with the mounts. When I figured in all the other associated peripheral and support equipment it's closer to $20,000. I'm going to pour a slab with 2 piers, power, and an automated roll-off roof for a 10'x16' observatory building in my backyard this spring. Prob about another $10,000 for that.
Wondered what he paid for just the 6' lens let alone the rest of the apparatus. Must be some sweet images!! CS! 🌠🌟
Government Surplus prices hopefully.
good work, but having the mirror exposed to the elements like that makes me nervous.
It's covered when not in use, and gets re-silvered every 2-3 months when used actively. It's not like a normal aluminized telescope mirror.
That mirror was exposed to the Russians, until McGyver with his duct tape and wire put it into a dobsonian..
Matthias Nott ....I like that!
Show us some pics of Jupiter,Saturn DSO etc
Boy, I'd look at the horsehead with that.
Does he have a channel?
Can you see the moon with this?
Uh yeah.
What is his diameter ? 70 inches ?
I suppose more than 50", some astronomers have telescopes near this diameter.
Not sure how well it would work without a tube of some sort to block light from the side. .🤔
How much magnification would something like this have?
It's not so much the magnification but the light gathering. You would get an amazing view at 300x->400x
Anybody could build it kf we got a super large mirror from ..where :p sorta.. it is difficult even getting a 12 or a 14" since no one does mirroring of glass any more
I ground and polished a 16 inch mirror and built the tube and box in the 90s...after it was said and done I'd been better off just buying a new one...i might have saved a few bucks but not worth it IMO.
Look at my great powerful telescope! Wait I said look at it not through it damnit. Grrrrrr, show some imagery
Carajos!!!!!!😱😨😨😨😰😰😰
I think this telescope is just to impress friends and neighbors otherwise we would have seen some nebula or even some ufos
Beam me up Scotty!!!
The secondary mirror is huge, don't think it works that well cuz of that.
And ppl should stop complaining about space pictures, you can't get that good images with a dobsonian telescope.
Adio Aurel ....Keep in mind it is a RATIO of primary-secondary size.. Huge primary=huge secondary. With this variation of design of the Newtonian telescope, it is similar in percentage of obstruction to a conventional Schmidt Cassegrain design. Thnx for your interest!
where are the pics of the moon?
Didn’t show a single bit of what it can see.
I want to see M57 through this telescope !!!
Karla,
you'll easily see the central star in M-57!
Yeah, it should look great. The ring is bright in average size telescopes. It must be really colourful through that. I wonder how the fainter moons of Saturn look through this. Enceladus and Mimus are hard to see at all with an 8 inch scope. I wonder if he can see the separation of Pluto and Charon with it.
Yea, M57 is a winner! Thnx for your comment!
Size matters.
What an amateur astronomer can enjoy more than the direct view of celestial objects through a fine telescope with his (her) eyes? And he is the only one who sees it, photons after the long journey on the way exclusively sent right into your eye. If you want to see photos make a wish to Santa Claus for a pictorial called "The 100 best pigtures made by Hubble" or similar.
After women, fast cars, mansions, fame, fortune, comes....a telescope, lol
Yeah what next?
Yeah they are telling the truth on the comments... No one single piece of pic :(
And what do they put near the focal point?
An American flag flapping away causing air turbulence..
Everything in America seems to have a flag stuck on it.
POV: Collimation
so what ....I saw another video on this very same guy, and they didn't show what he can see through the thing either, I'd like to think he gets spectacular views of space, but since they didn't show us anything, I have to assume it shows nothing, that it's just for show,
Tim Fremstad ...or you could come out to Stansbury Park Observatory Complex, and look through it for yourself!!
Here Italy, i have the telescope "Skywatcher heritage 130/650".......... 5 inch........................
What'd that mirror set you back? Even 8'' glass ain't cheap!
Exactly what i was thinking, i wonder what quality it is too. In any case imagine the pictures you could get if you motorise this. Amazing.
When do you hit diminishing returns though? I have a 6" and 8" and there is quite a difference between them. Never looked through anything like a 10 or a 16. DO you know?
I have heard diminishing returns starts at like 10-12inches. The diminishing returns are due to atmospheric distortion, which can be corrected in a couple ways one of which is with long exposure and some software, but for that he will need some motors and software...
I admit if I could afford it I would do this too. After seeing Saturn through an approximately 4ft diam telescope in my college astronomy class I am in absolute love. Alas I must settle with my 8", which honestly does a fantastic job too.
I got a 12" and it's better than an 8" that I had before. That 70" would be great quality cos it would have cost a lot (being such a professional intended application) and he would have got it cheap.
I had a 8" cassegrain and I whipped up a "barlow" out of old lenses and a towel roll tube. lol I had Jupiter like a grapefruit size (at apparent desk viewing distance). And Saturn was like an orange with 8" diameter rings! lol So my 8" also did a fantastic job. Imagine seeing this in the 70", that is if I can do what I did with an 8". Imagine how good it would be with the 70". And "seeing" must have been excellent that night when I made my "barlow". Of course the image was a bit "smokey" but still really sharp for a home hacked barlow and for like 1000 x mag. lol The "seeing" obviously still plays the biggest part (which is mostly really crap for planets, viewed from near the coast). But that time the "seeing" definitely wasn't crap! lol And the motor drive on my C8 was so good that (with my "barlow') Saturn was still in view (@ 1000 x) after like leaving it for like a hour or so. lol My C8 did a fantastic job. Maybe $2,000 is expensive but the VALUE is there, that's for sure (when you think how expensive the professional scopes are). The small scopes obviously are a lot better than we think (when the "seeing" is good, that is).
He should get it for free our tax dollars already payed for it. And it was used by the military I'll bet that they over payed for it.
👍👍👍👍👍
You built me up...and didn't show one image?? You gave me nerd blue balls...