[SJAAboard] loaner program goals

[Mark Wagner]

On Tue, May 20, 2008 5:54 pm, Rob Hawley \(SJAA\) wrote:

> Once the 8" introduced me to Dobs

<snip>

> During both loans I could have been considered an intermediate.

So, you were using the 8" Dob as an "intermediate".  You likewise could have gone to a 10" Dob,
which I favor in the program.  I certainly have no problem with intermediates, or even advanced
observers borrowing one of the 8" or 10" Dobs!

<snip>

> A 12" tubed Orion would not fit in my car so that would have the opposite effect.

Correct.  But that does not mean the club needs to meet your needs.  Especially if the club's
program was specifically geared toward introducing beginners to telescopes.  I'll expand on this
more.


> Under the plan Mark set forth Saturday night and amplified in a previous message neither the
LightBridge or the 17" would have been available for me since they are not beginner scopes.

Correct.

> The program would not have served me
> even though I had been a club member for only about two years (at the time of the 17" loan)
since I was an intermediate.

Incorrect.  You could borrow an 8" or 10" Dob, and have been served by the club.  If you wanted a
22" Dob, should the club get one in order to "serve" you?


> And I would have been furious to know the club owned scopes that could have answered some
fundamental questions, but made a conscious decision that members like me did not matter.

Let's take that a bit further.  <tongue in cheek> What if I am furious that the club does not
offer a 25" Dob?  Or some refractor person wanted to borrow an 8" TMB?  Does that mean the club is
deficient, because it decides to not offer such equipment in its program?  What about a 90mm
Coronado solar scope?  Hey, I'd like to borrow a folded reflector - what???? The club won't get
one?  Insulting!</tongue in cheek>

Rob, simply put, the club cannot be everything to everyone.

> I am glad to read in Mark's most recent post that he appreciates the need for the two larger
scopes.

You have that wrong.  I support keeping the 17.5" because it was donated by a long time member and
past several-time president.  I would feel badly discarding it.  The 12.5" Lightbridge is a new
acquisition, and I am willing to have it in the program for the sole purpose of making peace, in
this process.  It does not fit my model, but I would rather be a bit flexible.  Note that I do not
support any more in these larger sizes, and if the 17.5" and 12.5" were to for some unforseen
reason, leave the program, I would not replace them.  I don't feel the club *needs* them in the
program.

My vision of the loaner scope program is simple, both in terms of its goal, and it manageability. 
Beginner type equipment, solid tube Dobs (easy to fix, and rugged), a few refractors, a few SCTs. 
Once someone finds they like a particular type of scope, there are options.  Specifically, there
are many observers in our area, and a wide range of equipment.  It is EASY to see it if you want
to.  Easy to interview the owners, view through it, etc.   Houge Park, the Peak, Coe, Montebello,
CalStar, GSSP, etc.  Lots and lots of opportunities to learn enough to make intelligent choices. 
The club does not need to have everything for everyone, so they can borrow it in order to decide. 
If a loaner scope does not fit in their car, then look to purchase a scope that does.  In the
meantime, make do with a loaner!


> Since the Albert scope is off the table I am not advocating adding any additional scopes greater
than 10".  These two cover the territory.

I agree with that.  I replied to clarify some comments you attributed to me, and to give some
examples of why I have the position I do.

Mark