&lt;title&gt;Very Large Optical Arrays Using Boule-Type Telescopes&lt;/title&gt;

Odgers, G. J.; Grundmann, W. A.

doi:10.1117/12.937962

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

1984

1998

Publication Types

Select...

Article1

Other1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Refractive vs Reflective Correctors

Richardson

Morbey

1984

International Astronomical Union Colloquium

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryImproved designs of refractive correctors produce excellent images with fast telescopes such as those with an F/1.5 prime focus and F/3.5 secondary focus. The fields are flat and there is compensation for the chromatic effect caused by windows. Disadvantages of such correctors are that stray light is produced at the optical surfaces, the elements must be supported at their edges, prerequisite high quality glass is available in only limited sizes, and all wavelengths are not transmitted.Reflective correctors, on the other hand, can produce diffraction limited images at all wavelengths and the mirrors can be supported across their backs as well as at their edges. Disadvantages are that the images are degraded by any substantial window (such as a detector faceplate), there is more central obstruction, and the correctors are sometimes very large and heavy.Except, perhaps, for a specialized telescope, such as one devoted to multi-object slit spectroscopy using fibres, the refractive corrector is preferable at fast foci.A good combination is a Ritchey-Chretien (R-C) telescope with refractive correctors at the fast prime and secondary foci, and a reflective corrector-magnifier for the slow infrared focus.

show abstract