Re: MEMO to Meade: How to write an honest news release

From: CLT (not_at_thisaddress)
Date: 02/02/05 

Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 19:17:33 -0800

> Didn't you release an F14.6 mak cass with an aspheric primary. Was
> this a true Mak Cass Or did you just call it that?

A Mak Cass is a "true" Mak Cass with a spherical or aspheric primary.

> Is my latest design a true Pfund or should I come up with some other
> name for it? Andersonian perhaps? Maybe inverted Newtonian works
> better.
> Nomenclature is trivial.

Really? So if you need four-way bypass and the surgeon only bypasses three
blockages, you are happy as long as he calls it a four-way? I suspect you
might feel a little bit cheated!

:-)

Let's face it, words are how we communicate. If we blur their meaning, we
blur our ability to accurately communicate. At the end, when a word means
all things, it means nothing.

No one at Meade has come up with a new design. The SCT design has always had
a range of surfaces. They have merely picked one spot in that range and
called it an RCX, which is fine. But they have also claimed it is a type of
R-C, which it is not. And if the definition of R-C is deemed so trivial that
it can be stretched to include this SCT, it loses all meaning. By the same
stretch process, the definition of apo can include the achros that sell for
a fraction of the price. So, by your logic, we now call them apos
("nomenclature is trivial") and we can now charge apo prices for them. Of
course, that hasn't quite yet worked, but there have been those who made
money selling achros as "semi-apos."

BTW, nice segue into an ad for your products. I went and had a look. I
suppose as long as people realize the limited size of the fully illuminated
FOV, it is fine. It seems that a small secondary and low profile focuser
accomplish the same with a lighter tube and one less element. At the 16"
size, you will make up some ground because the newt will need to have enough
separation from the diagonal to traverse the radius of the tube while you
only have to go back to a diagonal. But eliminating a flat larger than the
primary means a better price, or more money to spend on better surface
accuracy for your primary.

I did have some questions though. You wrote, "You can understand my
reluctance to simply quote a specific number. The optics in my telescopes
are hand made by Barry Arnold to be atmosphere limited. This means the
optics will not be the weak link of your equipment."

"Atmosphere limited" I like that. But what exactly does "atmosphere limited"
mean? If nomenclature is trivial, what is the surface accuracy in nontrivial
terms? Saying, "the optics will not be the weak link" really doesn't say
anything.

You also wrote: "Like all other hand made telescopes it is qualitatively
perfect. In a star test it will show the same faults as any quality
telescope."

What is "qualitatively perfect"?

Are we talking comparison to a fine apo for figure? A Zambuto mirror? A
commercial SCT made during the Halley comet era? The spheroidal mirrors
regularly sold as paraboloids? All of those scopes are advertised as
"quality." So I'm not sure what you mean. As you can see, if terms are
trivial, your own ad can no longer communicate any information

We need words to have specific meaning if what we write is to mean anything
in particular.

You wrote, "There is no direct comparison to any other telescope. The "APO
replacement" category is the best fit for this telescope. The only other
generally available designs in this category are the Maksutov Newtonians,
Maksutov cassegrains, and Dall Kirkhams. All these designs are touted as
"nearly as good for a fifth the price.""

Again, if the nomenclature is trivial, your writing has no meaning.

You wrote, "My design is the only one in this category specifically designed
for planetary viewing and, in this regard, it does have a slight edge over
all other designs given the low obstruction and absence of spider veins.
When it comes to low power deep sky viewing it will perform like any other
equal size telescope less one percent light gathering power.

With that tiny illuminated FOV, it is not going to keep up with other scopes
at "low power [wide field] deep sky viewing." That is fine if people
understand that. But again, with trivial nomenclature, you cannot
communicate.

Clear Skies

Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon?
Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/

Are you interested in understanding optics?
Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ATM_Optics_Software/

************************************

> It would be insane if we had to come up with a
> new name for very single little modification to a design.
> You, Meade, and I all did the same thing: we began with a proven design
> then made what in our minds was an advance too trivial to deserve its
> own name. In the minds of others it may be a different story.
> Ian Anderson
> www.customopticalsystems.com

Relevant Pages

  • Re: New MEADE scope: RCX400 RITCHEY-CHRETIEN
    ... 2002 Meade's engineers set out to design a telescope ... After carefully evaulating the merits of every telescope design, ... MULTI-PORT CONTROL PANELS ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Meade Jan 3rd announcement
    ... 2002 Meade?s engineers set out to design a telescope ... After carefully evaulating the merits of every telescope design, ... spikes that degrade image contrast and resolution. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Meade RCX telescope design - Is it based on the Palomar 60-inch?
    ... the true optical nature of the Meade RCX telescope design. ... design a variation of the Palomar 60-inch RC Cass, ... Palomar 60-inch telescope then being built, and I took pains to read his ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: New 10" Newtonian Telescope Being Created
    ... telescope, then you know nothing of the subject matter. ... patents are granted "they" will come to you. ... e) Other inventors are much too secretive and ... f) You don't need a computer to design a telescope. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Something aside from high priced camera telephotos
    ... are designed to give good performance at infinity focus. ... As you move away from infinity, the APO performance will ... degrade faster than camera lenses. ... the design, something you will never find on a camera lens, at least ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
Loading