plaice3 wrote: 
Good enough for the likes of me.

If you want to find new comets or track the Mars rover the optics aren't good enough. If you just want to check out craters on the moon or admire Jupiter's fall colors it's fine. Birdwatching or checking your zero...it's a bit of overkill.

It isn't as heavy and sturdy as one of the big reflectors so it won't be as stable. You have to peer thru the eyepiece in a straight line. Focusing is awkward due to stick-slip (no knobs, just slide the tubes like a pirate). But it's dirt cheap and if you get a taste for stargazing you won't be that far behind buying a "real" telescope. If you don't...well, you didn't spend much. It's a good first step if you're on a (very) tight budget or need to fit it into a knapsack—all folded up it's 22.25" (565mm) long and weighs...maybe half a kilo. The tripod will be bigger in every dimension.

This is pretty interesting.  I'll have to research more later, but it works well enough for casual observation?

 Lazy8 wrote: 

 oldslabsides wrote: 
I'm with oldslabsides.  Orion sells some pretty decent Dobsonians at decent prices; I'm not sure about shipping to the UK, though.  The Dobsonian mount is quite solid, and easy to use...unless you're observing right at the zenith.  It's altazimuth, meaning that you can't track by rotating on one axis, but so what?  IMO, it's mostly a concern at really high powers, over 100x.

Durability?  The only way a child could really wreck it is if he created a truly serious gouge on one of the mirrors, most likely by dropping something on one.  Even then, bear in mind that the shadow of the holder for the secondary, diagonal mirror on the large primary is the equivalent of a gouge.  In fact, it's recommended that you "deface" the center of the primary mirror with a black dot and white paper reinforcement ring so you can line up the optics better.   The job of lining up, or collimating, the optics, is probably best left to an adult, though it's not terribly difficult to get it to an acceptable level.

You've got to be a little careful, though...for one thing, some brands in the past have had have trouble reaching focus, due to inconsistencies in mirror focal length wrt. distance to the focuser.  Others, Bushnell I believe, used a ridiculously large holder for the secondary mirror.  Others neglected ventilation of the mirror so it's difficult to reach all important thermal stability.  The last time I looked, the Orions didn't have any of these problems. Hopefully, there are recent reviews in Sky and Telescope. 

My heart is with the DIYers making their scopes from plans or kits, but unless you grind your own mirror, the cost advantage isn't huge.  However, it is a good way to really become familiar with a telescope.  Plus, you can do it right.  Also, a DIY scope can result in a rock solid mounting, especially if you overbuild with 3/4" thick plywood. 

As far as I'm concerned, aperture is paramount.  I wouldn't consider anything below 4 1/4 inch. Actually if an adult is going to do all the toting, even an 8" isn't excessive.  You would, though, have to lift the 3 year old up to the eyepiece.  Not sure about a 4 1/4", though, although that has the best chance of being easy to reach for a small child. 

Then there's the question of having a go-to feature or not.  As far as I'm concerned it's just extra money to spend on a telescope.  I think it's sort of fun to use the traditional finder (including the Telrad and similar) and track objects down.

Some objects, such as M42 in Orion, are rather easy to find (it's the center "star" in Orion's sword).  And Jupiter is still up at night - as far as I'm concerned, Jupiter is the king of celestial objects, offering a wonderful variety of surface features and interactions with its moons, such as shadow transits.   

Reflectors make better telescopes than refractors (like the Galileoscope) but they are also a much bigger investment in either money or time. They are bigger and heavier too. If you just want to try astronomy (or like me, were too cheap to buy a spotting scope to take to the range) a refractor makes a better starting point. If you decide standing around on cold clear nights waiting for the object you want to see to rise above the overly-lit urban horizon isn't for you you haven't sunk a fortune into the hobby.

You can't beat the price of the Galileoscope (even tho you're paying two) and you get the warm fuzzy of donating one to some worthy village somewhere. Bummer about delivery; I waited 6 months for mine since I ordered before their first shipment. If your recipient can handle an IOU then it still might work. Otherwise there are all kinds of refracting 'scopes for sale in even sturdier packages.

 Lazy8 wrote: 
Got a piece of crap "Galileo-style" telescope sitting on our coffee table right now. Gonna wait until we can afford a good Celestron:



THEN we'll be doing some backyard astronomy! 

 MrsHobieJoe wrote: 
Try a Dobsonian.  They're available in a a wide range of sizes and prices and are pretty bullet proof.  I'm sure there are plans, kits and parts a-plenty via google as well.

 Lazy8 wrote: 

 MrsHobieJoe wrote: 
One of these. Good cause, and it's not a bad 'scope either. You build it from a kit.

A regular photo tripod works fine with it.

Anyone got any telescope recommendations?

HJ and the kids have asked for one for Christmas.  Must be totally indestructible in order to withstand our 3 year old.

 Zep wrote: 
  WOW!!

Space Weather News for Nov. 18, 2009
http://spaceweather.com

FIREBALLS AND METEORS:  As forecasters predicted, the Leonid meteor shower peaked during the late hours of Nov. 17th, favoring sky watchers in Asia with an outburst of 100+ meteors per hour.  Just as the outburst was dying down, an even bigger event took place over the western USA. Something hit Earth's atmosphere and exploded with an energy equivalent of 0.5 to 1 kiloton of TNT.  Witnesses in Colorado, Utah, Idaho and elsewhere say the fireball "turned night into day" and "shook the ground" when it exploded just after midnight Mountain Standard Time. Researchers who are analyzing infrasound recordings of the blast say the fireball was not a Leonid.  It was probably a small asteroid, now scattered in fragments across the countryside.  Efforts are underway to measure the trajectory of the asteroid and guide meteorite recovery efforts.

 jadewahoo wrote:   Zep wrote:  Both!

 jadewahoo wrote: 
Nice shot.

Until I saw it, I was wondering if the Dipper was standing vertically, or the photographer.

Well, despite my hour and a half viewing a spectacular Leonid meteor shower in the wee hours this morning, I was unable to actually capture one by camera. But I did get this nice photo of the Big Dipper standing vertically.

They were supposed to be good earlyish in the evening last night.  We sat out on the deck for an hour and only saw one good one and a couple little ones. 

http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/space/11/16/nasa.leonid.meteors/index.html

 Xeric wrote: 
Well, I was out there for about a half hour, and only saw ONE big meteor. But I also saw three deer walk by in the dark and linger in our backyard. Magical stuff. Glad I stayed up.

Are the meteors supposed to be even better tomorrow? I hope it's clear again then, and I'll try one more time.

 duchamp wrote: 
Yes—but more betta at 1 or 2 a.m. than nine p.m.  Which is why I won't see it, either.

 dionysius wrote: 
If I'd gone outside, the only stars I'd have seen would have been the ones swirling around my head after getting conked by an flying red alder limb.

I looked about nine or so last night, (CDST) but didn 't see anything but a beautiful brilliant sky.  Isn't  it on tonight, too?

I saw a BIG meteor looking towards the east last night at about 9 pm — a long, bright fall, north to south, right around Orion's belt.  That was earlier than than predicted so I don't know if it was an early comer or a coincidence.  My ancient, beloved Lab woke me up at 4 am to go out, and I saw a few faint ones then, too.  Good enough, though!

 dionysius wrote: