Swithin StCleeve

Your Messier album is in a lot better nick than mine! Glad you're pleased. I've ordered the first Burnhams book from recommendations on this thread, it's not arrived yet. I'm pleased to say it looks quite chunky from your photograph!

Am, that'll explain why the M1 is called the Crab Nebula, but the others aren't. I've also just realised this version of Stellarium I'm using is different to the old one with the names - it's on a different laptop. Thanks, that's great, I can figure it out from there. Brilliant!

Thanks. I have tried that and it doesn't put the labels I remember on. The Crab Nebula, for example, is labeled, but not the clusters I mentioned.

I used to have the DSO name labels on Stellarium, now they're gone, (for example, looking in Taurus I used to have labels like 'The Poor Man's Double Cluster', 'The Pirate Moon Cluster' etc), now I just have the NGC numbers. I know some people don't like these 'slang' names for objects, and I often think they're silly, but they do at least help you remember the objects. I've looked in the settings and I can't see how to turn them back on Can anyone help?

I used a 4.5 inch Tasco back in the 90's and I've still got my observation book from back then. I read some of it recently and was quite impressed with what I got to see with that scope. I saw most of the Messier objects from my parent's back garden back then.

Brilliant! This is what I was hoping when I saw there were copies on sale so cheap. It's an excellent resource for the observer which can be picked up for the price of a pint. I've used mine lpads of times over the years. I know the images are out-dated by modern standards, but they're really useful when comparing what you actually see. On some of the images, the nebula or galaxy in the photo is hardly discernable, just like in real life when you're at the eyepiece!

I used to sketch a lot more than I do now. Yesterday I found my observation book from the 90's, and most new (as in seen for the first time) objects I sketched. These days, I tend to write up observation reports and put them on line. Which is fine, but I'm thinking I should start sketching again more methodically. Some of the sketches on here (like the ones on this thread) are superb.

Just that cover makes me want it!

One more book that I've loved for over thirty years (gulp!) is Kenneth Glyn Jones' Messiers Nebulae & Star Clusters. I got this in 1991, and it was the most expensive book I ever bought. I'm pretty sure it was over £30 even back then. I've seen in for a lot less since, second hand. So it's not one of those books that's become collectable. It's a very good companion to the O'Meara Messier book. The Jones book has much of the history of the objects, with quotes and sketches from early descriptions of the objects, by Messier and other notable astronomers from history. It's a superb reference book, and if anyone can find a copy cheap I'd snap it up. I must have fifty books in my 'observing' bookcase, and if I had to whittle it down to five, this would still be there without a doubt. Mine's rather shabby now.

I bought the Messier Album (Mallas/Kreimer) only recently, and I agree, it's superb. The great thing about buying these older books second hand, is you don't feel so wary of taking them out observing. My Messier Album only cost a few quid, and I keep it in my observation case, along with the red light torches, other maps, notebooks and pens and pencils etc. This is something I wouldn't do with the O'Meara books, which cost me over £30 each and I'd worry about getting them wet or damaged. I've often thought of buying a second Messier Album lounge bookcase, so can pick them up so cheap. I think the Messier Album entries were originally serialised in the 70's in a US magazine (either Astronomy or Sky and Telescope?). Following recommendations on this thread, I've ordered a second hand copy of the first Burnhams Celestial Handbook, (it was £7.00). Looking forward to getting that one.

That's a lovely drawing. Next time I look at M78 I'll look for that extra 'bit' of nebula away from the main concentration. The stars lighting up the nebula is really noticeable in that drawing too.

Thanks for the responses folks. I hope you like the book Fozzy, and I hope you got it cheap as chips. It doesn't include every Messier object, just most of them, but it does include a lot of NGC objects too. I have three O'Meara books, and they are wonderful. The ones I don't have are the one on southern skies, which I'm not bothered about, but I also don't have Hidden Treasures, which is out of print. I don't want to buy a (quite pricey) copy of that in case it gets a second edition like The Messier Objects and Caldwell Objects books did. I'd love to know if they're planning one.

During an observation session last week, I spent quite a bit of time getting confused by M78. I'm an old-fashioned observer and enjoy finding stuff using maps and knowledge of the night sky rather than electronics, but the downside of that is you can sometimes find yourself wondering if you're in the right part of the sky. Something the 'go-to' gang don't have to worry about. Anyway, I'm telling you this because once again, an old book which I've used many, many, times came to the rescue. The book is The Cambridge Deep Sky Album by newton/Teece. I bloody love this book and have used it again and again and only last week it came through again and solved my M78 problem. Please excuse this picture of my tatty, stained and dew-warped copy. It was published in 1983, and its great strength is it features 'homemade' photographs of Messier and NGC deep-sky objects, using the tech of the time, which is obviously less impressive than now. But that is actually the strength of the book, because the images are pretty much mirror what you see through the eyepiece. To give you an example, if you google M78 you get some stunning images.... Lovely shot, but it wasn't what I saw. In my observations notes and sketches, I'd written a description of two stars, with what looked like nebulosity on one side of the two stars. I looked on Stellarium and M78 didn't appear to be what I saw either. When I looked in my Cambridge Deep Sky Atlas later, I saw this. An exact replica of what I saw in the eyepice. Brilliant! And to give you another example, anyone that's spent time looking at M81 and M82 through the eyepiece will appreciate this shot from the same book, as a really nice representation of what you can see through the scope if you're lucky to have dark skies and an overhead high Ursa Major. I remember well when Turn Left at Orion came out. That was one of the first books I'd seen that told it like it is, and gave you a real idea of what you can see through an eyepiece. To me, the Cambridge Deep-Sky Album is an observer's classic book in the same way Turn Left at Orion is, (I still have my 1st edition of TLAO and dream of getting it signed by the author one day). I see that you can get copies of the Cambridge Deep-Sky Album for a few quid with free postage on-line, (I'm not selling one, I just looked out of interest), and I'd encourage anyone here who uses a dob and is a 'maps not apps' observer like me to hunt one out, and for the price of a pint, you'll have a book a guarantee you'll return to. What are your favourite books on observing? I don't mean mapbooks, I mean books about observing, that you still use perhaps years after buying them. Some of these books that some would view as outdated, are actually essential tools for the observer.

So I did a bit of looking around and found I was looking at M78 all the time. 'Two stars in a nebulous haze' is exactly what it'd look like through a small scope. My last notes on M78 didn't mention the two stars, so I was looking for just nebula. I confused myself, (it's not uncommon).

The 10" mirror dob last night , (I've put an observation report in the obs reports section). That Dark Star dob is thirty years old abd still goinng strong! edit - just realised you can see M41 in the photo, just about.

This is why I like my 32mm or 38mm eyepieces. They give me a nice wide view, I rarely go for more power unless it's for planetary observing. The two clusters can fit into one field of view nicely with the 38mm e/p. I wonder if I've ever had an observing session without visiting the double cluster? I doubt it.

Thanks. Last night I was thinking I should take the dob to the Elan Valley, which is a two hour drive from here. I've observed there before, but only in the summer. It'd be worth a trip just to navigate Orion under a truly dark sky I think. I see you're in Wiltshire - I've seen some pretty amazing dark skies in the Vale of Pewsey. Fantastic place.

One good thing about winter observing, is I can start early and get home to type up my observation notes. The bad thing about winter observing is it’s so cold that I don’t spend much time making notes or sketching whilst actually observing. So I’m relying on my memory here, (and my recorded ramblings into my phone). I arrived at the observatory 7.30 and the seeing was good I thought, crescent moon on the way down, earthshine visible. Jupiter had set already. Used my 10” reflector on a dob mount. I think this may have been the first time I’ve taken it to the observatory. I used the Telrad finder (which I love), though the misty glass problem reared its head about a hour in. I didn’t need the 10X finder tonight. Eyepieces used were 38mm or 32mm. I started by looking for M78, in Orion and I didn’t find it, but did find what looked like two stars in nebulous haze to the left of where my maps told me M78 should be. I spent quite a bit of time on this and it meant my session with a bit of frustration I’m afraid. I’ve seen M78 before, quite easily, so what was the problem tonight? I think I may have been looking at NGC 2112, and mistaken the cluster for nebulosity. More research needed on this one. The Orion nebula (M42) looked wonderful tonight. The 10” mirror really brings out so many details of the structure in the gas. I sometimes think the long exposure photographs are a quite ‘cartoony’ when you’re used to the ghostly blue hues and subtle swathes of gasses that you see in ‘real time’. I’ve sketched the nebula before now, but sketching was certainly out the question tonight, with the temperature just above freezing. I had planned on sketching the nebulosity around the individual stars in the Pleiades, and comparing them with long exposure photographs later, but it was too cold, and I just made observations. Two stars in particular seemed to display nebulosity around them – a project for a slightly warmer night. Above the Orion Nebula I stopped at Sigma Orionis, the triple star system. Whilst looking, I kept in mind what else was going on in that area I couldn’t see; the Horsehead Nebula, the Flame Nebula. These are observable with larger mirrors, (I’ve read many people with 12” mirror dobs have seen the Flame Nebula). But it’s all about location. No good expecting to see it seven miles from Wolverhampton. Leaving Orion, I looked at the great cluster in Gemini, M35. Tonight, for the first time, I took trouble to find NGC 2158, an open cluster right next to the Great Cluster. It’s there, seemingly ‘joined’ to the Great Cluster by a string of three or four stars, but like a lot of the NGC clusters, you could be forgiven for thinking of it as merely a star field. Nipping back to Taurus, I found the open clusters NGC 1617 and NGC 1807, also known as the ‘poor man’s double cluster’. This is only the second time I’ve visited these, and I think one might just be an asterism rather than a true related cluster of stars. But it’s a pleasing sight, with one cluster having a definite star shape, not unlike the Messier clusters in Auriga, though much sparser. I thought of the other, none cross-shaped cluster as looking not unlike the ‘leaping minnow’ asterism, in Auriga. I was pleased to find these, (easily found by imagining a shallow triangle from Aldebaran to Tau123, (the ‘Crab Nebula star’). I really enjoyed seeing the Crab nebula for the first time this year. So easy to find when you star-hop from the right star, which I often don’t. And it’s ridiculous I keep missing it because M1 is probably one of the most easily located deep sky objects. It looked surprisingly bright tonight - a ghost of a star - always a deep-sky treat. Two beehives next. And although Praesape (M44) was in the haze of the Wolverhampton sky-glow seven miles away, I could still see its faint haze as a naked-eye object. In the scope, it was lovely. I looked at the ‘Little Beehive’ in Canis Major next, easily findable in bins and scope, under Sirius. I know some people don’t like some of the ‘slang’ names of these clusters, but I think it helps people to remember them. The Andromeda Galaxy was easily found, and M32. M110 was quite easily found too. M31 looks ‘end up’ tonight, and Andromeda is quite high. The outer spiral arms of M31 extended almost fully across the 32mm eyepiece tonight, (I didn’t see structure I should add, just the extended mist), and that was a better view than last Thursday, when only the central part of the galaxy was observable. M110 is an excellent barometer of sky quality I think. Invisible in the city, seen as a faint ghost tonight in rural skies not far from the city, but last October near the Long Mynd in Shropshire, M110 was a bright at M31 was tonight. Amazing skies over there. By the way, I was struck how high Capella was. Right overhead, making observation in Auriga quite tricky. Yet in the summer it’s hedge-skimming. I love the seasonal changes of the big players. Capella must have the biggest circle of all the bright stars. Almost from horizon to zenith, as seen from the UK. It almost gets boring keep writing I looked at the Perseus double cluster. But it never gets boring seeing it. Nice and high tonight and superb in contrast against the inky winter sky. A top ten telescopic sight. Ursa Major was on its tail heading towards the sky-glow of Wolverhampton, but I tried for some objects ‘in’ Ursa Major but could only find M81 and M82 (‘Bodes’ and ‘Cigar’ galaxies). I spent some time with these, using a 32mm and a 38mm eyepiece. I’ve seen more structure in them in the summer, when they’re overhead, but they’re always pleasing, and as usual, Bodes is the first one I see, with its edge-on spiral companion popping into few seconds later. Later, I looked for M101 in bins and could almost tell myself I saw it. Had my hands not have been like icicles, I’d have made a sketch to check later of the surrounding stars to corroborate my possible sighting. Last summer I saw M97 and M108 in the same field of view, (where else can you see a planetary nebula and a galaxy in the same field of view I wonder?). Tonight I didn’t find them, though consulting my maps now I think I may have been looking a little too close to Merak. It got too cold for comfort by about 8.45, my fingers and toes were numb (despite boots and double-socks), so I packed the scope away and sat in the van with the heater on and a hot drink for a while, (I’d made up a flask), then went out and did a binocular scan with my 10X50 Opticroms. I took in the chain of Auriga clusters (M36, M37 & M38) which were very bright by then, almost overhead. I looked at M31 (upended), and the Pleiades, Hyades (with Alderberan looking very ruddy in the crisp winter night, a fantastic binocular sight against the Hyades cluster). I re-visited the Beehive cluster (M44) which is better in binoculars, and I saw the Little Beehive again in Canis Major (M41). The ‘Head of Orion’ (Collinder 69) is a nice binocular object, and one that’s not talked about much, a little like the Alpha Persei Cluster. Well worth a binocular visit in the winter months. As I was driving home it struck me how high Sirius was. I pulled over and did a binocular scan of Canis Major, a constellation I’ve rarely visited. I was glad I parked up, as I was able to make a quick binocular observation of the open cluster M93, which looked like a ghostly globular through the bins, and took a little finding due to its low altitude. So a productive couple of hours. Nothing dramatically new to include in my observation book, but then I hadn’t pre-planned for new objects. I’m still a little frustrated about M78, and plan to do a little more research later today.

When I'm at my campsite having an observation session, I usually end the session with naked eye observing in a comfy chair, often with wine. To me, this is as essential part of the astronomy experience as looking at 'faint fuzzys' through the eyepiece. On a warm summer evening, I can almost feel like I can see the milky way move, and the feeling of the earth spinning against the backdrop of our galaxy is quite magical. Over the last few years I've seen such an upsurge in backyard astrophotography that I sometimes think that the romantic (for want of a better word) nature of physical observing is getting left behind. As nice as it is to wow your friends with great images on the internet, there's something quite primeval and organic about experiencing the night sky in person, and in real time. There's a nourishing aspect to it that's quite unexplainable.

It's a good thing to do, John but I also think it's difficult these days to get kids excited about seeing faint fuzzy stuff through telescopes when some of them have been to Disneyland and most them do computer games that give them such an instant excitement fix. Good luck with your sessions!

A local scout group got in touch with our astro society and asked us to help them with getting their astronomy badge, so John (a fellow astro council member) and I arranged an evening session this Thursday (27th Jan), at a local fishery car park, about seven miles from the city. Not exactly a dark sky site, but at least away from the city lights enough to see the constellations properly. They'd tried to see the constellations from their scout hut but the light pollution was terrible. [ I took my 10” dob, and tried to get them to arrive for 6pm as Jupiter was still in the sky, but most turned up at 6.45, after having their tea etc. The few that did turn up early got to see the planet and all four observable moons, before the planet disappeared behind a hedge. At such low altitude, only one cloud belt could be seen, and the disc wasn't sharply defined. To earn their astronomy badge, they needed to see three objects in the night sky. So we thought a nebula, a galaxy and a star cluster would be perfect. So our first stop was M42, and I checked that every scout could see the nebula, and all four stars of the trapezium clearly. I was quite pleased with the view we got, (I do most of my observing from a rural campsite so I’m used to observing under much darker skies). I could see a blue hue to the nebula, very obvious shape and ‘buffeting’ (for want of a better word) as it extended southwards in the eyepiece. I used a 38mm eyepiece for all these observations by the way. On sessions like this, you don’t have time to do hardcore observing, where you can take your time to get your eyes relaxed, and tease every last bit of detail out of your subject with long viewings. I only ever seem to find new objects when I’m on my own, and can study my maps (in peace, basically! Insert smiley here). No, this is a different kind of observing session. Next was M31, and it was a very useful object to see, because we could use it to explain how the elongated fuzz was a cloud of millions of stars two and a half million light years away. As a test of the seeing, I looked for M110, and yes, it was there. This galaxy can be quite tricky anywhere near the city, so I was pleased to see it. It’s not really dim (my book puts it at mag 8.1), but any nearby streetlights can erase it from the sky. My primary mirror needs a clean too I’m ashamed to admit, so M110 was a welcome sight. I didn’t ask the scouts to look at it as I’m sure most would find it underwhelming. I was going to show the M35 for the star cluster, but John suggested the Double Cluster in Perseus, which was a good idea. Both cluster jest about fit in the field of view. Some of the parents also looked at it, and the scout leader enjoyed the views too. He had more than a layman’s basic knowledge of astronomy, and told me later that he was interested in all sciences. I think this particular scout group are probably lucky to have this guy in charge. He made sure they were all wrapped up well and had thermos flasks of hot chocolate. We showed them the constellations, Ursa Major, Taurus, Orion, Gemini, Canis Major and Minor and told them about the hunting dogs etc. While people were talking and milling about I took in some extra deep sky objects, and did the ‘Auriga line’ of open clusters from M35 to M38, and showed them Alcor as an example of a double star. At one point, a bright meteorite streaked towards Orion’s belt, and left a dust trail. Most saw that as we were looking at Orion at the time, so that was a bonus. The clouds drifted in around 8pm, but that was okay, they’d seen their objects and the scout leader told them they’d all get their badges soon. Later, I thought how it was unfortunate that the ‘wow’ objects weren’t in the sky, as Saturn’s rings, Jupiter’s moons and the craters of the Moon are the things that can really enthuse youngsters new to astronomy. But they enjoyed what they saw, and hopefully it will have encouraged some of them to dig a little deeper into this fascinating hobby.

M33 is a real swine to find in a scope. I'm not even sure I've ever seen it in a telescope - yet under a dark sky (Bortle 4) I've easily seen it in binos. It's almost like you need two eyes to see M33! Enjoyed your report Ags.

I was near Craven Arms, about three miles out, to the west. There are quite a few good camp sites round there that have dark skies. Anywhere near the Long Mynd area, or going towards Bishops Castle is good. If you're feeling adventurous, it's only an hours drive from there to the Elan Valley, which is a true dark sky site. The Wolverhampton Astronomical Society had its first observing weekend in this area of Shropshire (at a different site) last month.

Thanks Nik. I knew the 10" was a big leap from 8", but I didn't realise it was 50% more. I wish I'd have gone to a higher power eyepiece for Saturn. Next time I will. Dione, as I say, was almost not there at all. It's like when you look at something, and your brain can play tricks and tell you that you've seen something you haven't. That's why I've decided to sketch what I see, and only later compare with any maps. Seeing a map first can put ideas in your head about what is really there.

And there's the aforementioned NGC6207 to the right, if I'm not mistaken.