When the original 'LSF' expired at the end of 1989, I found a newer 'LSF' and made a Xerox copy of the 'PP-G' and taped it on, but it too was well into the time period listings.

So I bought two, and did not get the full value of four years use, for even one!

What I am ranting about is the Company that makes these things could sell updated charts that could be attached to the back, or they could post the latest chart on the Internet, and the users could print it out themselves on label paper.

Or are we supposed to buy a half outdated star chart, every two years, (because that is what you received, or what was in the store) and throw away the old one?

I teach Scouts astronomy and plenty of other skills, and can't afford to replace otherwise perfectly good teaching aids all the time.

unfortunately, murphy's law dictates that all new telescopes must be accompanied by rain and clouds.

mark? i thank you for the kind comments. i got a lot of scathing remarks because many people felt the C65 was substandard. personally, i enjoyed the heck out of the little guy and i thought it performed above and beyond the call for what an average toy costs… so i deeply appreciate knowing that others have also found satisfaction.

(and yes, more small and inexpensive telescope reviews are on the way – but first i have to figure out how to be nice about one that made me incredibly frustrated.)

i'm thinking if perhaps i review a rain gauge… or how to study atmospheric phenomena… do you think that will help? look at it this way – you're getting a class A view of the M zero!

This particular book might not be the best for every single person out there – just like the C65 isn't the world's best small spotter scope… But if a few dollars here and there teaches you how to begin and inspires you to want more then it's time and money well spent.

The reward for Universe Today is knowing we've been able to give our readers information they can use and make their own judgements from!