I don’t have time to search for this answer.
Some *sshole just called our local talk station and said his buddy has a telescope so powerful that he saw astronauts actually doing manuvers outside their capsule at some nebulous time in the past. This sounds like such a total crock to me!
Would even something as powerful as the Palomar(or something more modern) telescope show something this small? Am I just too skeptical?
The biggest problem won’t be the resolution of the scope (although that will be a big problem), but the speed at which the astronauts will be moving. Things in low earth orbit aren’t just sitting there, they’re traveling fast enough to travel completely around the earth in 90 minutes. With a magnification high enough to see individual astronauts, the scene would flash past his telescope too quickly for him to actually see anything. Unless the telescope was set up with a tracking system specifically designed, which I doubt in this case.
This would work if the astronauts were in geosynchronous orbit, as an object in geosynchronous orbit always holds the same position relative to a position of the surface of the earth. That is, if we ever sent any astronauts into geosynchronous orbit, which we haven’t.
Samclem, I think you’re too skeptical. Remember, the Shuttle is only 150 miles up or so.
Have a look at this, which I got from Meade’s web site:
Now, a 12" telescope is pretty big for an amateur scope, but some well-heeled amateurs have scopes as big as 16". I think you’d have to have an exceptionally clear night and stable atmosphere, but it seems to be within the realm of possibility.
Tracking the shuttle is no big deal. Radio Amateurs have been tracking and using LEO satellites for decades. And there ARE hobbyists out there who specialize in tracking and imaging near-earth objects.
The space station and space shuttle are easily resolved by an eight inch telescope. An astronaut on a spacewalk would probably show up as a single bright pixel at the same scale.
Squink It would appear from your link that an 8" hand manuvered telescope couldn’t offer an observer a clear picture of the space station, much less a picture of an astronaut. I do appreciate your work, though.
Sam Stone Your link is helpful. I doubt that this guy had a 12" scope, but I will find out.
I think I’ll choose poster #1’s answer, so far. AndrewL Knowing the crackpot host on the show, and the loonies that flock to him, I think the guy would be lucky to have a 4" scope. And your comments about synchronization cinched it for me. Sam Stone could be right, but, in this case, I doubt the level of sophistication.
I don’t know if this’ll help, but many years ago I was aware (probably by means of radio) that the Space Shuttle would be visible and tracking across Houston at some ungodly hour like 4:00 AM or so. And I got out on my roof with my (I think) 10X (Grandad’s artillery set) binoculars and picked it up (they had nav lights on). Somebody can probably research how long they might have been visible, but memory seems to indicate they were visible for over a minute, and it seemed I could actually make out parts of the craft.
I’m pretty sure I wasn’t trackin’ the Southwest redeye.
Heck, I once met a fellow who had a 17 inch, computer-guided scope. Admittedly, that’s the extreme high end of amateur astronomy, but such a scope could certainly capture an individual astronaut. Note that the APOD caption pointed out that most of the blurring was due to imperfect tracking, which could be eliminated with a computerized scope, and also take a closer look at just how much detail there is in that picture. Note too that the human eye is capable of more resolution than most instruments.
Maybe this radio show has its share of idiots, but that doesn’t preclude the possibility of a few dedicated hobbyists being in the audience.
As an amateur astronomer, I agree with the 1st posted reply by AndrewL. Tracking this puppy, yet alone trying to spot it in the finderscope, would be a nightmare. And, the higher the power, the smaller the field of view - so you better be able to compensate for the relative motion!
Yes, large scopes have clock drives, but this is to compensate for the earth’s rotation. Unless the space shuttle (or whatever) is in a geosynchronous orbit, which it is not, you have a snowball’s chance in Equador trying to observe!
I think the deep-space Messier (or NGC) objects would be better targets for these larger scopes - and their users! 
Keep looking up,
Not just feasible, $50 online!
From the Autostar Computer Controller Instruction Manual
The controller was $50 online at Ritz Camera (the URL was too long to parse). Presumably you need a capable telescope drive to go with it.