ALPY 200 or ALPY 330 ?

Design, construction, tuning of spectroscopes
Information and discussion about softwares (telescope remote, autoguiding, acquisition, spectral processing ...)
Post Reply
Olivier GARDE
Posts: 1243
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 6:35 am
Location: Rhône Alpes FRANCE
Contact:

ALPY 200 or ALPY 330 ?

Post by Olivier GARDE »

On the Shelyak side, we are in the process of seeing if it would be interesting (or not) to release an ALPY 200 or ALPY 300 (R=200 or R=300) and so already as a survey, could you tell me if such a spectro would be interesting.
Externally there will be no difference with a classic ALPY 600, only the grism will be different so a lower resolution than an ALPY 600, but a possibility to make much weaker target spectra.

Thank you in advance for your contribution and thanking you in advance
LHIRES III #5, LISA, e-Shel, C14, RC400 Astrosib, AP1600
http://o.garde.free.fr/astro/Spectro1/Bienvenue.html
Tom Love
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Apr 21, 2019 5:57 am

Re: ALPY 200 or ALPY 330 ?

Post by Tom Love »

At the moment the answer to the question (for me, anyway) is that I'm not sure. Obviously there is value in being able to observe fainter objects. And for early classification lower resolution is often more than adequate.

But our low resolution observations are often a mix of classification and monitoring. Again, being able to go fainter is clearly a good thing: for example, the nova found by Andrew Pearce and others a couple of weeks ago was observed by Hamish and Pete Velez for a few days after discovery, but faded rapidly, so there's no longer term monitoring (it was also a particularly difficult object to observe, to be fair). So the ability to monitor events for longer is probably useful. But it might be good to have some astrophysical guidance on how valuable such observations might be. Would that resolution give useful measurements of EW for interesting lines in fading novae, such as He II and N III, for example? Being able to follow a target for longer is only helpful if the information in the observation is astrophysically useful.

Just some thoughts for what they're worth...
-------------------------------------------------
Martinborough, New Zealand. Alpy, Lhires RC12
Jaroslaw Grzegorzek
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2022 10:53 am

Re: ALPY 200 or ALPY 330 ?

Post by Jaroslaw Grzegorzek »

I think the idea is very good. There is no such spectroscope (R~100-150) available to amateurs that would allow recording the spectra of faint objects (15-18 mag). I had to build one for myself. Claudio Balcon, a very efficient Italian supernova classifier, did the same. Robin Leadbeater had to modify his Alpy 600 (he called it Alpy 200). Also note that the most efficient professional classification system for faint objects - SEDM (Spectral Energy Distribution Machine) uses the R~100 spectroscope.
Supernovae Search and Spectroscopy
http://spectroscopy.pl
Bernard Heathcote
Posts: 84
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 10:09 am

Re: ALPY 200 or ALPY 330 ?

Post by Bernard Heathcote »

I am certainly interested in a ALPY 200, but can't, at this stage, give a firm commitment to buy one as I need to consider some other factors.
Are there any plans, if it is even possible, to allow the grism to be swapped for a different one, e.g. 200, 300 or 600?
Robin Leadbeater
Posts: 1926
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:41 pm
Contact:

Re: ALPY 200 or ALPY 330 ?

Post by Robin Leadbeater »

I have had many enquires over the years about the ALPY200 I built in 2014 specifically for supernova classification. (Note that An Alpy with a 200 l/mm grism would have a resolution with the standard 23um slit of R~130, not 200).

The grism is easy to change in the ALPY (see the poster paper on my website) so if you already have an ALPY all you need is the grism. I hope Shelyak plan to offer this as a separate component. (I do now have two core modules for the ALPY200 and 600 so I can change over quickly)

For anyone interested in what an ALPY 200 can do. I have used it for measuring some very faint objects including perhaps the most distant quasars measured by an amateur
https://britastro.org/observations/obse ... ebf4faaefe
and for officially classifying many supernovae, a first for amateurs in 2016.
https://www.wis-tns.org/search?&classifier=leadbeater

See this page on my website for details
http://www.threehillsobservatory.co.uk/ ... opy_20.htm
and this talk I gave at a BAA meeting
https://britastro.org/videos/using-low- ... coveries-2

Cheers
Robin
LHIRES III #29 ATIK314 ALPY 600/200 ATIK428 Star Analyser 100/200 C11 EQ6
http://www.threehillsobservatory.co.uk
Robin Leadbeater
Posts: 1926
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2011 4:41 pm
Contact:

Re: ALPY 200 or ALPY 330 ?

Post by Robin Leadbeater »

Jaroslaw Grzegorzek wrote:Also note that the most efficient professional classification system for faint objects - SEDM (Spectral Energy Distribution Machine) uses the R~100 spectroscope.
I started classifying supernova with the ALPY200 2 weeks before the SEDM started up :-)
https://www.wis-tns.org/object/2016bme

Cheers
Robin
LHIRES III #29 ATIK314 ALPY 600/200 ATIK428 Star Analyser 100/200 C11 EQ6
http://www.threehillsobservatory.co.uk
Jaroslaw Grzegorzek
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2022 10:53 am

Re: ALPY 200 or ALPY 330 ?

Post by Jaroslaw Grzegorzek »

Robin Leadbeater wrote: I started classifying supernova with the ALPY200 2 weeks before the SEDM started up :-)
https://www.wis-tns.org/object/2016bme
I remember, your SN 2016bme classification was inspiring for me to start classifying supernovae, not only discovering them. :)
Supernovae Search and Spectroscopy
http://spectroscopy.pl
Juan Jose Pueyo
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2020 4:35 pm

Re: ALPY 200 or ALPY 330 ?

Post by Juan Jose Pueyo »

Having previously talked several times with Robin Leadbeater on the subject of spectrographic monitoring of supernovae when they fade, and seeing that there is a push towards an Alpy 200, I would be interested in that possibility if Shelyak finally decides to build it. Juan José
Juan José Pueyo
Azara Obs.
Azara (Huesca)
Post Reply