Hi Phil-
Yep, the imagers don't generally need to worry. A buddy tried pretty hard to
ruin several shots by positioning the lased beam pretty near coincident to
the field of interest to no real effect.
But I do find improper use of the things given the setting to be damned
annoying. I enjoy kicking back and doing some naked-eye observing when I'm
out and the light show put on by folks doesn't really improve the night sky-
I can see those thing from a pretty good distance down the line when my
field isn't restricted by anything other than my beard. I'd peg that
distance at around a hundred feet under most atmospheric conditions I've
been around but I don't have any empirical tests to back up my supposition.
I won one of those green lasers at the first SSP and I use if for outreach
and to piss off obnoxious kids who don't care how far sound carries. But I'm
with Bob on this one- the visual distraction isn't overrated for me at all.
I'd be inclined to find the person using one as a finder pretty quickly.
Regards,
Bill Dean
-----Original Message-----
From: sf-bay-tac-bounces@No-Spam [mailto:sf-bay-tac-bounces@No-Spam] On
Behalf Of P T Chambers
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 6:23 PM
To: The Astronomy Connection
Subject: Re: [TAC] Green Laser Ptr as a Finder -- NOT
Hi Guys
This has been mangled on list before. As a result, we ran some tests out
in the field. Turns out that you cant see the shaft if you are more than
a few feet to one side. As I remember, the imagers were worried about it
too.
So, the main reason not to do it is that green lasers are power hungary
and do not have a long "on" life like red ones. So, you will overheat it,
wear it out, and use batteries like they were peanuts.
But the visual and ccd factor is vastly overrated.
---------
Phil Chambers [ptchamb@No-Spam] (S.F. Bay Area - Calif. USA)
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, John wrote:
> Bob, I'll second that emotion. I picture an otherwise dark observing site
> crisscrossed by shafts of green light - not the experience I hope for when
> observing. And in addition to the hazards you mentioned, there is the
> remote but real potential for encountering a low flying aircraft and (at
the
> very least) distracting its pilot.
>
> I've seen posts on other lists about using laser pointers as finders, and
> it's high time to voice the contrarian opinion. Thanks, Bob.
>
> John
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Jardine" <rljtac@No-Spam>
> To: "The Astronomy Connection" <sf-bay-tac@No-Spam>
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 12:28 PM
> Subject: [TAC] Green Laser Ptr as a Finder -- NOT
>
>
> > Hi TACOs,
> >
> > I'm going to apologize in advance for flaming here. And I hope I'm not
> > starting a mail war, but I think this may be a somewhat important
> > topic. So here goes...
> >
> > Flame Mode On :-)
> >
> > When I was out observing sometime last week, during one of the usual
> > equipment discussions, I overheard one person say to another one
> > something about planning to rig up a mount for his green laser pointer
> > to use it as a finder. The person shall remain nameless, both because
> > he might consider the error of his ways prior to actually performing
> > this travesty, and also because I honestly don't know who it was.
> >
> > Come on! You can't be serious, right?
> >
> > OK. I have a green laser pointer, too. And I consider it both great
> > fun and of great utility -- in its place! Which is not as a finder.
> > It is for pointing out objects to other people, and then only after
> > asking for permission from (or at least warning) those around you about
> > its use.
> >
> > And, really, what's wrong with a red-dot or other unit-power finder?
> > Is there really any more utility in the green laser version? I doubt
> > it. But I'll stand corrected if anyone can explain to me why it is
> > better.
> >
> > But I think there are two really bad things about this idea.
> >
> > One is that it could be dangerous. These GLPs are not toys. And
> > hooking one up to the telescope means that the user will be likely to
> > forget the normal precautions of not pointing the thing anywhere near
> > any person. And what happens if "the public" is present, and some
> > unsuspecting little kid walks up and puts his face in it?
> >
> > The second one is that it is a source of light pollution, and we all
> > know that we have too much of that. Maybe it is a small source, but
> > why introduce more? When used, sparingly, as a tool to point something
> > out, the added light pollution can perhaps be justified. But to put
> > the thing on a 'scope, and probably leave it turned on for long periods
> > of time, seems like the gratuitous introduction of unnecessary light.
> > Yes, that was redundant.
> >
> > Flame Mode Off :-)
> >
> > OK. I've said my piece. I'll say no more about it if I get booed down
> > or if somebody can explain to me why this is a good idea.
> >
> > Bob J.
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
> > http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
> >
>
>
>