I have the mini-eq and motor, and I am very happy with it for the price.
This is a photo I took with it of the Orion Nebula.
You can see some star trail, partially due to the mount and partially due to my shoddy alignment, but it is light years ahead of just using a tripod.
40 sec. f5.6 1600 iso 250 mm (404 mm effective)
Orion mini-eq with motorized drive
Canon EOS Xsi
55-250 EFS with image stabilization
While the Aptera is more efficient than the Tesla, the S uses about 1/2 the energy per mile the Prius does. This is usually compared on a "well to wheel" basis that includes wasted energy in the generation/transportation of the fuel.
Tesla has a page on this stat.
http://www.teslamotors.com/efficiency/well_to_wheel.php
The Certification process for composite airframes has higher structural requirements than for aluminum airframes to address most of the concerns raised here. The requirements include testing the materials at high temperatures after being saturated with moisture (FAR part 25.603). The result is that even in the worst conditions, the composite airframe is as strong as a comparable aluminum airframe. In normal operations the carbon 787 will be significantly stronger than its aluminum brethren.
Slashdot Mirror
linkfail Orion Nebula
I have the mini-eq and motor, and I am very happy with it for the price. This is a photo I took with it of the Orion Nebula. You can see some star trail, partially due to the mount and partially due to my shoddy alignment, but it is light years ahead of just using a tripod. 40 sec. f5.6 1600 iso 250 mm (404 mm effective) Orion mini-eq with motorized drive Canon EOS Xsi 55-250 EFS with image stabilization
That is a lot of voting machines...
Another source for flyby times for the ISS and more. Plus, no java required. http://www.heavens-above.com/
While the Aptera is more efficient than the Tesla, the S uses about 1/2 the energy per mile the Prius does. This is usually compared on a "well to wheel" basis that includes wasted energy in the generation/transportation of the fuel. Tesla has a page on this stat. http://www.teslamotors.com/efficiency/well_to_wheel.php
The Certification process for composite airframes has higher structural requirements than for aluminum airframes to address most of the concerns raised here. The requirements include testing the materials at high temperatures after being saturated with moisture (FAR part 25.603). The result is that even in the worst conditions, the composite airframe is as strong as a comparable aluminum airframe. In normal operations the carbon 787 will be significantly stronger than its aluminum brethren.