My Leather Bottle

[Scooot]

It was going to be clear, so the 16" went out early, regardless of the well lit moon

I thought I'd have a look at few new targets, but this time I decided to record what I could see on a recorder phone app. The idea was good, apart from having to listen to the drone of me trying to discern the view in the eyepiece. Although hearing the crunch of my footsteps in the gravel on the tape gave it some atmosphere.

I was taken by NGC 7008. It has a double at the bottom left of the nebula which was very prominent. The nebula was clear and easy to detect with the UHC, although it was obvious it would be better on another night or indeed another place. I thought the whole thing looked like a leather drinking bottle tipped in swigging position, the type used in the desert. The double represented the collar, and the fold in it's leather made by the invisible hand of it's holder. Or a speech bubble, which is an easier way to describe it. I've since found it described as the Fetus Nebular, and it's easy to imagine why when viewing it through the eyepiece, even if I can't see the detail in its core. It's a planetary nebula about 2800 light years away and 1 light year across. My view had none of the Fetus like detail you can see in some of the stunning images online, but it was good enough & unusual enough to make me want to know more about it, despite the moonlight. It was grey of course but the bright gold and blue double at its mouth seemed to draw my eye. There was another double below, very close and slightly to the right. It was framed nicely in both the 17.3mm Delos & 13mm Ethos, with a smattering of other stars around the edge, and a couple more in the middle.

I'm definitely going to look at this again on a night with more contrast, I like unusual and strange targets, so this could become a favourite!

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

Nice report. I have spotted NGC 7008, but only with my 8" which doesn't give the level of detail you describe

[FenlandPaul]

Nice report and description. Do you think you'll carry on using the recorder app? I bought a cheap digital dictaphone earlier his year and have started to record things using that. Trouble is (apart from listening to my droning!) being concise enough that it doesn't take forever to re-listen to and make notes. I have a mammoth session from April that still isn't fully written up because The recording is so long!! I'm sure if I have the discipline to be more concise and fewer inane comments like "it really does look rather lovely" this technique would work!

Maybe I should apply the rules of Just a Minute...

[Scooot]

It didn't matter so much last night because of the moonlight but the screen was bright. If I were to use it a lot I'd slip it into my little aqapac I use for walking with a piece of rubytith.

I know what you mean about writing it up, I probably wouldn't bother with everything on a long session. At the moment, despite my best intentions, I never take any notes so I just forget what I've seen and muddle things up. I think what I'll end up doing is using it selectively, on new interesting things or anything that stands out on the night. Listening to the recording did bring it all back the next day and enabled me to visualise the night before's sights. I only recorded 4 objects last night.

My sessions hardly ever go to plan, I actually made an observing list in advance last night. See below:

The ticked items are the objects on which I recorded and wrote up.

I didn't end up looking at delta2lyr, and I can't remember whether I looked at ngc7209,a case for writing notes!

I did have a quick look at a load of familiar doubles, stars and the moon before I packed up., The seeing must have been good because the doubles were so sharp, and apart from feeling like I was blinding myself, the moon was exceptional, the smoothness of the Mare Imbrium together with its tiny craters was a view to behold.

So I think selective use of the recorder will be best for me

[FenlandPaul]

I suspect you're right on selective use. Must cut down on drivel!

I think the bright screen was the reason I opted for the dictaphone. That's what I used to use a long time ago to record meteor watches, but for that I was very much in the zone with only giving the info that was really needed (constellation, direction, shower or sporadic, magnitude, colour, time, train details etc).

By the way what app is that that you plan your observations on? Sorry if it's one of the obvious ones; I don't use any (except the ISS one and Clear Outside) so am not familiar with them.

P

[Stu]

Looks like SkySafari to me. I also use it to track what I've observed or rather than making a list in advance, I create a new observing list (or session) and add the objects I've seen to it. Great way to make a record and you can also export it as a .csv to import into other programmes to add further detail, Excel for example.

[Scooot]

Yep sky Safari, I don't always create the list before hand but it is handy doing so in advance to highlight the objects on the screen.

The recorder app is called "voice recorder' by TapMedia

[laudropb]

Very nice report and a joy to read. Thanks for posting.

[Stu]

I'd forgotten the highlight objects feature, really useful. Thanks!

[Scooot]

I'd forgotten the highlight objects feature, really useful. Thanks!

Very useful with the nexus

[Stu]

Out of interest Richard, how good are your skies at home? NELM?

If honest I have not used big sumo at home and I probably should. The resolution on globs alone should be worth it.

[Scooot]

Out of interest Richard, how good are your skies at home? NELM?

If honest I have not used big sumo at home and I probably should. The resolution on globs alone should be worth it.

I can see about 4.5 mag on a good day, occasionally most of ursa minor, but more usually not.

I use the 16" nearly all the time, the only issue I have is that the defraction spikes on the likes of vega stretch over most of the FOV and they'd look tighter with less aperture. I did have the 10" out the other day so I had a chance to compare from memory, the stars are fainter so the defraction spikes aren't so prominent which gives the impression they are tighter, but I think this is an illusion. I much prefer the bigger aperture but it's more awkward to view lower objects. Both mirrors are 1/10,maybe I wouldn't be so keen with a lesser quality mirror in the 16", but who knows. The only meaningful difference in the setup is I have to carry three pieces from the shed rather than two from the house, and I always have to tweak the collimation of the 16" whereas I don't with the OO.

[Scooot]

I had another look at this tonight without the moonlight. First with no filter, fairly faint but I could see it clearly. With averted vision I kept seeing a central star appear. With the UHC in place I couldn't see the star, but the opposite end of the bubble (bottom left of the bottle) had a much brighter glow to it.