Re: OR: Lunatic in Palo Alto ...

>Trouble is, I am spoiled and picky. My upgrade *to* Harvey was from
>a six-inch Newtonian, and a similarly proportionate upgrade from
>a C-14 would be to 32 or 33 inches.

Okay. That would be a real problem. However I'll point out Alvin Huey transports a 22 inch truss tube newt in a VW Beetle. He intends to carry a 28 inch f/3.3 in the very same. Close enough? I think so... and it will track. Yes it's a custom design.

Comfortable position? Okay, you can not sit. Sorry - ya got me there. But there are now 20 - 25 inch scopes that require VERY small steps. Peter Nasher just took delievery of one IIRC. Yes they are pricey.

I guess I can't address every design criteria you have. But I'll throw this out to the group, going from a 12 to 16 is an incremental increase for sure. But even then, there are objects you only suspected that are now confirmed. Going from a 12 (or 14) to a 20 (or 22) is not incremental IMO is it? Yes I know there are diminishing returns visually. From what I've seen, going from a 14 to a 20 or 22 means seeing structure in that which you did not see before. At least that is my opinion. Going from a 14 to a 20+ means seeing things, you only suspected seeing, and suspecting seeing a whole bunch more. More light through narrowband filters means more structure in PNebs.

I know you've been out to enough star parties and have use of Lick's refractor to know there the differences. Whether it fits on your logarithmic scale, only you can decide. I know with Harvey and Refractor Red you made some amazing observations. I can only guess at what you'd see if you had a 'real' telescope. :D
just kidding...

---
June 8, 2009: TAC Web Page Updated http://observers.org/TAC.cgi/Announcements/
TAC mailing list - to join, manage, or leave: http://nine.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/tac