My thinking is along the same lines as Chip Louie.
But will add that you must consider the Human Element in your quest for perfection.
One graph does not an average make. It takes many motions to find an average.
At the degree of accuracy we hope to attain, I'm of the opinion any Human contact can throw off the data you are seeking.
Maybe you are being a wee bit too critical?
That said, I know I got more out of my AVX than most would due to my background in Electrical/Mechanical work.
But my AVX was a well defined POS, in comparison to my Losmandy mount.
And I never expected my AVX to live up to the hype. But it was my first climbing axe to scale the learning curve to Astro Imaging.
And from the 4 years of anxiety and failure it gave me to learn from, I'm very glad to be rid of it, and the Asian business model, and lack of engineering.
But it was not the first silk purse I had made from a sow's ear.
I know how just being in the proximity of my mount can affect it's results. Let alone being in contact with it, such as swinging the arc for polar testing.
From my own experience, Polar Alignment it important, but is in fact a mere starting point. And not worthy of the criticality you have been made to place on it.
It is a preliminary setting, a starting point. From which the mount learns the locations of other Stars to build a model of the night skies at the precise time we are using our mounts, and at the precise location we are at on this gob of mud called Earth.
When we select "Align", we are setting the precise location the targeted Star is at at that moment, and setting coordinates for the Gemini Computer to reference. And Polar Alignment is only a beginning point.
Not the end all, be all, to the entire rhapsody of the evening.
I applaud your desire for accuracy, but question your experience to attain the accuracies you appear to be demanding.
Go beyond the desire for perfect Polar Alignment. Get into your Alignment, or Modeling in Losmandy terms, and build a Model, sans Human Contact, and see how close the stars become as more are added. (Now there is where I chose to obsess. I will target as many as it takes until they are landing as close to dead center as is practical. Key here is as close, not dead centered.)? ;^)?
When I begin, I always give PA a check, then move right into my Model building for that session, at that moment in time, and currant location in relation to the night sky. I never dwell on PA, just a check, and on with it.
Then the rest of the Aligning gives the coordinates for the accuracy to bring your objects close to the center of your instrument. Key word here is close, not exact.
When I hear someone say "Perfect", I know they are BSing me. Because Perfect is a goal that is unobtainable.
In this sport, we get really, really, close. Aiming our telescopes as never before was possible. But don't look for perfection.
After all, we are at the bottom of a pond looking up through the atmosphere.
So enjoy, don't obsess.
--
SonnyE
(I suggest viewed in full screen)
