scarp15

I think that if for guests, perhaps a copy of Turn Left at Orion might be useful as a reference guide to have, people staying can refer then to seasonal objects and visual expectations. Telescope as mentioned above, something quite sturdy such as 6" dobsonian with a low power, quite wide field eyepiece attached. But this would need something like a rigel quikfinder attached, unless a goto model. Perhaps a laminated A4 sheet with some basic instructions and good point concerning do not look at the sun, maybe a sticker on the telescope and mentioned at the bottom of the instructions sheet. Perhaps additionally, a good pair of hand held binoculars.

Perhaps you could draw inspiration from Mel Bartels highly specialised 6" F2.8 as a template for a project. Here is an image and a link. https://www.bbastrodesigns.com/Herschels Ghosts.html

Hi, yes it is possible, but can be a lot of effort, depending upon what you anticipate taking. My passion is backpacking and unlike stargazing, is not nearly so weather dependent, merging the two and my quest to attain the best dark sky became something to relish. My backpacking set-up is light weight. For combining with astronomy, I have gone out for a one night rather than multi night trips and of course attempted to go when the forecast is promising over a new moon. Not that this has happened very often with covid and everything, although I look forward to a winter trip. Regarding kit, the first time and the most practical was to take along my 16x70 binoculars and a monopod. I'd planned to trek a few miles onto a small hill upon the England, Scotland border and to primarily seek summer dark nebulae. The hardest thing about that trip was that I wasn't sure about a water source, if it would be dry and lumbered up quite a quantity of water. On the walk back I ditched my pack, to climb a nearby hill, becoming more than than just about stargazing. The second time I returned to the same location, but a different camp ground and took along my refractor, also with a good flowing water source fairly close by. I took a TV-85, which was just manageable and shouldered a Berlebach Report tripod. Nor did I hold back on eyepieces taking some very chunky low powered, which filtered were used on diffuse nebulae such as the California and Barnard's Loop. Formerly I had owned a TV-76 which would have been a bit more suitable, but the extra light grasp of the 85mm was welcome. The walk in on this trip was just over a couple of miles or so on a rough path so not too hard going. For me it makes sense, since I can get to some remote and truly dark skies (I always take a sky quality meter) and slip into the tent afterwards, the trip and location inspired by the potential to go stargazing. With the exception perhaps of the Lunt binoculars, for going as light as possible, everything taken is just my standard kit. I do include a small table - Cascade Wild ultralight folding table and a camping foldable stool. Eyepieces are stored in neoprene camera lens bags. To sum up a small dob i.e. Skywatcher heritage could be a good option, also a compact rich field refractor and light weight compact tripod or else 11x or 15x70 binoculars / monopod ought be feasible. Would be interesting to hear of your thoughts, how you get on. Here is a medley of pictures.

Exquisite capture and composition.

The other thing I do is always set the scope / dob up onto a mat, serves a few purposes but might just mitigate some condensation rising from the ground.

As quite unanimously mentioned, tube caps off and with front end of tube slightly tilted downward, at least for a time. If set up prior to using for an extended period, I will return the caps, but leave the tube level / front end pointed downwards slightly. This is just to prevent any chance of condensation build up or any breezes that blow in dust participles (or chance of possible drifting smoke). Also have fans on mine, but never use.

This is how I first encountered NGC 7635; Bubble Nebula in Cassiopeia. I just completely stumbled upon it and didn't know what I was looking at, at first having been searching for a planetary and so had an O-III filter installed fortunately. Goto would had spoilt the surprise.

Yep National Parks, there is a campaign currently that the Scottish Parliament (now in collaboration with the Greens) to look at declaring a new national park in Scotland; Galloway & Dumfries is one of the contenders. Merging dark sky park status with national park status can only be a good thing.

Cracking report John, I'd read your report last night and actually had this quite vivid dream about moving to some remote hilly dark sky place, prompted probably by this. Small wide field aperture, is very satisfying under those circumstances.

A perfect serene scene Gerry vividly portrayed. I actually had a dream last night that we'd moved to a remote place on higher ground, across the road, there was a hilly ridge to the south with a dusting of snow along the top and I explored the back yard for the best place to locate the telescope and I knew that I would see the Milky Way from the back garden. Forgotten about until I read your report.

Great report, pretty sure the Dob Mob, such as @estwing had encountered this - Pillars of Creation, some time ago.

Yep, its deceptive - an optical illusion, the spots will be be on the outside.

Wouldn't worry about it, the coatings are quite resilient and prone to this. Just leave uncapped, use an air blower and preferably perhaps on their side (both end caps off) if possible in a warm dry dust free environment. As mentioned, in due course, consider a clean, meantime order Baader Wonder Fluid from FLO with micro cloth and as Gerry say's check out the cleaning page on the TeleVue website.

It does sound like you might not be achieving focus. That or else the seeing is just too unsteady. Also as above, take a look and see if there are any greasy marks on the glass.

I got mine used from ebay at quite a good price. I have seen them listed very occasionally on classified, but yes a bit more expensive than the plossl range.

You would like an 18.2mm DeLite should one come up on the classified.

Hi, several possibilities. First of all, your telescope has not cooled adequately allowing thermals to escape from the tube. secondly the seeing conditions, the atmosphere might be unstable, meaning that as you increase power the image becomes distorted. Are you achieving focus with this eyepiece? A focal length somewhere between the two would be very useful i.e. 14 - 15 or 16mm. Also check your collimation.

Nope, I don't believe it (at least this far north).

It might therefore become necessary to get access to the Lynds catalogue - LDN - of dark nebulae. This was published in 1962 and there are some cross overs with Barnard's much earlier catalogue. Neil @Littleguy80 I understand that you have the Barnard's catalogue, could you delve into whats specifically there featured in NGC 7000?

Its a conundrum.

The top one looks like it will be B353, which in the Sue French article is referenced as 20h 57.4m +45' 29'. However it could also be likely the Birds Nest, described as a dark oval in the Hudson Bay region - B353 embedded in its eastern border considered the 'inkiest' section. These coordinates relate this image reference Gerry to my Interstellarum Deep Sky Atlas, so certainly the Birds Nest and possibly also B353. Not certain about the other sighting, LDN 935, referenced as 20h 56.8m +43' 52', this is located at a lower point below the Gulf of Mexico. Details are in the Sue French article, here though is the map.

I met up with a friend who is a maternity nurse. Increasing numbers of young women having to give induced birth to premature babies because the mothers are quite severely ill with Covid. To compare with flu is nonsense, it ought not matter for how long common sense routine precautions should be implemented, just a pity that in England they are not mandatory any more. Other ways that sharing the experience at a star party or outreach event, will still have many virtues that have been highlighted in this thread.

It perhaps depends upon what you anticipate observing. My backyard can reveal adequately, brighter objects including M1, it becomes necessary to embark on dark sky trips to see the Milky Way, become fully dark adapted and encounter subjects that will be impossible from home. Equally objects observed from home are starkly much more defined when observed in darker skies. It becomes a balance between different perspectives and yet binoculars or a small telescope at a dark site can become very exciting to. There are a few Barnard's class patches to include on a trip out in the coming two weeks mainly within Cygnus but will have another go for B174 in Cepheus. Doesn't matter either way, I will just be pleased to get out under the Milky Way.

Nice report. The Cocoon Nebula is quite difficult and B168, the profile of the Dark Cigar, acts as a guide, leading towards this very dim fuzzy glow that constitutes the nebula, not too easy to discern amongst the inner stars. Haven't attempted it for a while, I used a H-beta filter to gain optimum contrast (still revealing the dark lane of the nebula) at low power with a 14" dob. Dark nebulae are best for late nights on a new moon phase with good transparency. They do require a distinctive mindset and skillful approach to become revealed, that maybe varies from that approaching other such challenging nebulae constitutions. Dark nebulae are being discussed in another thread and maybe this could be picked up more there. B142, B143; Barnard's E is tricky, yet when you get it, you really do get it, just as in the sketches, it is quite a eureka moment. You have to orientate your brain a little to reveal the structure within the very densely packed star field. What works for one does not work for another and seeing dark space as a nebula does require time and patience. My best encounters of Barnard's E, have been with 70x16 binoculars and a rich field refractor. Conversely, there are plenty of other dark nebula that has frustrated the hell out of me. The Helix is a nice bright and quite large subject, but as mentioned a little difficult to locate due to its placement, lacking in finder stars.

Have not ascertained quite how accurate these references are, yet here is one further chart and with some relation to the NAN.