Re: so called new approach to design doublet APOs. ;>)

From: Tom Davis (tdavis11_at_carolina.rr.com)
Date: 11/22/04 

Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 01:27:25 GMT

"Jan Owen" <janowen1z@cox.net> wrote in message
news:WKaod.125491$cJ3.79076@fed1read06...
> And this is all going to get fixed during out lifetimes???
>
Jan,

There is nothing to fix. Five scopes passed an interferometer test. What
more do you want? This scope has no relationship to the Burgess 1026.
The 1026 could not be fixed, because every one of the objectives sold
were substandard, even the stopped down prototype. First thing I did
with this scope was pull the rear baffle and test for vignetting afterwards.
None. The interferometer test was done with no baffles involved. The
1026s were not tested in anything approaching this way. Bill has learned
much about doing QA on scopes. The manufacturer of the lenses is
also doing QA. None of the lenses they provided Bill were substandard,
even the one that Bill's telescope tube manufacturer broke the front
element on. All that happened was a mistake by William Optics in
assembling the objective on this tube. This was not done in their
plant, and this can't happen again as every objective from that point
forward is being assembled, collimated, and tested in the optical plant.

Just to make this point crystal clear again, the 1026 had the objectives
made by another optical manufacturer, with nowhere near the expertise,
equipment, or quality of optical materials as the 92 fluorite manufacturer.
I can attest to the quality of what I have and any statements that the
following shipping scopes will be substandard is nothing more than
an unsubstantiated accusation. So far, the manufacturer has been
five for five, or batted 1.000. Not even one 1026 passed muster to
a degree Bill was satisfied with. Since the scopes have gone to production,
the only way someone like yourself will be satisfied is if the entire
production batch turns out OK, but then will not the statements be
made that they were good because they were the first batch? If
China can produce 80ED and 100ED scopes that prople are happy
with, just maybe they can do this scope as well. As with any product,
people will need to buy it for this to be known. But what I get here is
don't even discuss the performance of the first scope.

In a word, it already has been fixed. I have the proof in my hands.
If anyone gets a bad scope, they will have a return option, or a repair
option. If that is not good enough, might be best to not consider one.

Thanks, Tom Davis

Relevant Pages

  • Re: so called new approach to design doublet APOs. ;>)
    ... Back are not now talking about scopes and other products they might have ... Bill asked me to post a review of it. ... not having proper objectives to replace them with. ... >> even the one that Bill's telescope tube manufacturer broke the front ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: so called new approach to design doublet APOs. ;>)
    ... their scopes have not been delivered yet...). ... > The 1026 could not be fixed, because every one of the objectives sold ... > even the one that Bill's telescope tube manufacturer broke the front ... > production batch turns out OK, but then will not the statements be ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Celestron 11" Mirror Lock/Crayford Focuser
    ... > scopes, and the manufacturer couldn't tell me if it would fit a Nexstar11. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: AO Spencer Polarizing Microscopes
    ... Although there is more than one type of polarizing microscope, ... used for mineral analysis, and not incident-light metallurgical scopes, ... Objectives for polarizing work need to be strain-free, ... I don't know what the Smith-Baker option was. ...
    (sci.techniques.microscopy)
  • Re: AO Spencer Polarizing Microscopes
    ... Did AO/Spencer have specific eyepiece and objectives for polarizing ... Those scopes closely resemble my B&L petrographic scope of ... When it comes to literature on older microscopes, ...
    (sci.techniques.microscopy)