procky1845

1 minute ago, Stu said:

I agree, that was why I assumed it was the one you sketched but in a slight different position.

Maybe I'm losing my mind, or maybe its a random spec of dust on the lens, or maybe... I should have spent a bit more time making the sketch!  

Although that does beg the question, if the star at the end of the V isn't Barnard's star, what star is it as it doesn't seem to be shown.

Just now, Stu said:

This is where SkySafari shows it at the moment, not quite where you have marked but not far off. It seems to match basically with your sketch.

Thanks Stu, I don't think the sky safari position is accurate though. I did initially compare against sky safari but the position given seems to conflict with other sources, so I just ended up even more confused!  

I'm assuming that must be where it was at some point in the past as I also noticed it doesn't move if you centre on it and then advance forward in years.

1 minute ago, gilesco said:

Wikipedia gives an idea of how it is moving:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnard's_Star

Thanks, yes I've looked at a few different sources on the web to try and work it out including Wikipedia bit still struggling.

Just now, MylesGibson said:

I don't believe it is the star you are pointing to in the sketch. There is indeed a little "V" shape of stars nearby, but it is not part of that "V". It is not in the position that Sky Safari puts it at, as it has moved since the location was last updated. You're in the FOV of it for sure, but I'm struggling to make out the locations in your sketch as the scale seems a bit off. I did take a picture of it recently as part of a long term project, so I'll have to try and dig that out!

Thanks I'd appreciate that. There's also the possibility that I've just not seen it if its fairly dim and didn't record it!

I'm thinking it could be this one maybe???...

Hi,

I was trying to locate Barnard's Star last night but struggled and so decided to do a quick sketch.

Can anybody help identify it for me? I'm not even totally confident it's in the FOV now I've looked again! 😂

Hoping there is somebody out there who is familiar with this object who can help.

Star on the right is 66 Oph for reference.

Sketch is at x37 and FOV is about 1.9deg's.

Thanks,

Lee

Hi,

A few sketches from last night 2x Mars and also one of M2.

1st Mars one was in poor seeing, 2nd was better.

M2 view was affected by heavy moonlight.

Also observed (but didn't sketch) some Hercules doubles, Uranus, Neptune and also M45 by naked eye.

Best night for a while!

Lee

Hi,

I had some issues initially with my AZ-GTi, some issues were resolved my finding the correct sequence of steps, the other and probably biggest improvement was when I upgraded the tripod. I bought the Skymax 127 with the mount and tripod as a bundle and I don't think the tripod was up to the weight. As soon soon as I upgraded the tripod to something more substantial I noticed an immediate increase in accuracy. For example, it was then possible to do a daytime alignment using the sun and easily find Venus/Mercury, something that was impossible previously.

Typical steps I go through now if I want to use go-to are:

1) Setup tripod, level and ensure pointing north (I point one tripod leg north for reference).

2) Attach mount, scope and all attachments e.g. diagonal, RDF, and also stick an eyepiece in for the weight.

3) Point the telescope north using the north facing tripod leg to gauge

4) Loosen the alt clutch and ensure the scope with all peripherals is well balanced, if not loosen the saddle and rebalance the scope, then level the scope and tighten alt clutch again.

5) Turn on the mount, connect and reset alignment in the synscan app

6) Do a north level alignment

A few things that caught me out previously:

- The aforementioned tripod issue (wasn't sturdy enough and once I realised, you could actually see the tripod slightly leaning to the side with the scope attached)

- As has been already mentioned somewhere in this thread, the head of the extension pillar needs to be properly tightened to the base of the mount, especially if you are going to adjust the azimuth manually by slackening the az knob.

- For a period I attached my old straight through finder from my 200p dob that wasn't being used anymore instead of the red dot finder, this tipped the weight over the edge for the mount with the Skymax 127, and meant that when the mount was making altitude adjustments or tracking a certain amount of error would seep in.

Now that I've been through the pain of understanding it however, it really is a great mount. There was some early frustration though.

Lee

@mikeDnight Thank you for the encouragement!

I think you might be correct about the feature in the N. I've since looked it up on the map and it does seem to be in the correct location though I've depicted it darker and probably slightly larger then I would have expected it to be from the map. That inaccuracy might just be down to the fact that it was barely perceptible to me at the time. It was a bit of a struggle to see it at all to be honest.

It's always nice to get the confirmation that what I thought I saw, I did in fact see, and its not just my eyes playing tricks on me!

Lee

Not sure what the dark patch near the top was, it was borderline visible to the extent I wasn't totally sure whether I'd seen it or not.

Had a great view of Mars last night at ~11.30pm. Best I've seen it so far this year I think. Sketch below.

I think the darker regions in the S are Mare Cimmerium, Mare Sirenum and Mare Chromium.

Could also clearly see the South Polar Cap and limb cloud at the following side of the planet.

For podcasts, my favourite is Awesome Astronomy.

I've also just started listening to the Actual Astronomy podcast which is the only one I've found so far which is about actual visual observation.

Just as an update, I went ahead and wrapped my Skymax 127 and managed to squeeze in a short observing session the night before last to try it.

I made a wrapping thats all one piece of insulation and has holes for the dovetail and finder shoe bracket and is held in place by velcro (so its easily removable if needed). Its effectively double wrapped around the tube with a single piece that hinges over the back (again held in place by velcro).

To test it I took the scope straight outdoors and set it up which took about 15 minutes and then started observing immediately. Didn't notice any particular seeing issues introduced by bringing the scope straight out of the house as I would have seen previously, and the seeing held consistently at the same level for the full hour I was out. Tested initially on a couple of bright stars, and then went on to look at some DSO's, mainly Planetary Nebulae and Open Clusters as there was quite a bit of thin cloud about.

The real test will be when I take it out to do some planetary observing but that wasn't an option the other night, it was more of a chance clearing amongst the endless clouds we're seeing in the UK at the moment so just went from the back garden.

Keen to see how it performs when I get the chance though!

(I'm not a fan of the imitation space telescope look though, if it hadn't been so promising after the first test it would probably already be in the bin  )

Lee

Would be interested to see an after post to see what sort of impact its had! We have one at the front of our house which is quite bright and I've considered contacting the council before. I tend to observe from the back garden predominantly so haven't bothered yet.

How have people found is the best way to attach the reflectix to the scope?

I have a Skymax 127 that I'm considering this for. 

Also do you cover the end with the visual back as well or just around the tube?

Turn Left at Orion is a fantastic starter book.

The S&T Pocket Sky Atlas has just been updated for a second version so would expect it will be more readily available again now. Would highly recommend this as well, bought my copy 6 years ago when I first started and still use it every night observing.

I have Interstellarum as well, but the PSA is the more used because it's such a convenient size. Interstellarum is amazing but I tend to only use it in the field where I need lower detail than the PSA affords but that's relatively infrequent.

Thanks, thats useful.

So would I be correct then in thinking that preceding is always the same direction as celestial west and following is always the same direction as celestial east? 

In other words it has no bearing on which way the planet is rotating, its about direction of travel through the sky. I ask the question as Mars spins one way and Venus spins the other but based on my assumption above preceding for both would be in the same direction i.e. celestial west.

Like I say, I've always used red.

I was just interested to know if there is actually any benefit from using white over red for colour perception as I had read. If that was the case I could see that it might help pick out certain features you might otherwise miss, although even if true I suspect using a selection of coloured filters would achieve the same result.

Thanks anyway.

Ha ha, this could be the big money maker I've been looking for!

Hi,

I read somewhere recently (don't remember where) that it's actually more beneficial when observing the planets to use a white light torch. I think the logic was something about retaining your colour perception and because the planets are bright anyway you're not losing out from dark adaptation 

I have always used a red light torch for everything so this came as a bit of a suprise to me. I just wondered what others thoughts were on this, is there any truth to it, and what do other people use specifically for planetary.

Thanks,

Lee

I just use one of these (https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B00290KWWA/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_LTboFbWF5HAP1) and note which measurement matches the FOV for each eyepiece. Doesn't blow away easily if the wind picks up and if you add new EPs to your collection you've probably already got a circle that matches it.

So, I'm now a bit confused.

My understanding for some time has been that the moon and the planets as perceived by a normal unmodified view (i.e. disregarding changes in orientation/flipped images due to telescopes) imagined against a compass would be N at top, E to the right, S at bottom, W to the left, but when just looking at the night sky the celestial E and W are reversed, so N at top, W at the right, S at the bottom, E to the left (and I understand why that is).

I've just been reading a book that suggests that E and W on the Sun are akin to the celestial E and W (so the opposite of the planets and moon).

• Firstly, is this correct?
• Secondly, is it just the Sun that is different to the planets which otherwise follow the first convention (N,E,S,W) or are there further oddities that I am unaware of? i.e. does this differ on a planet by planet basis as well?

Any help appreciated! I thought I understood this but clearly not!

Hello,

Quick question, what is the correct terminology for describing the location of solar features.

For example do the terms preceding and following have any meaning with the Sun? Or East and West? Or something else?

Thanks,

Lee

7 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

I agree it is often quite difficult to interpret maps of Mars and relate the markings to the real life view through the telescope. For that reason I decided to make maps of my own based on observations I made at the eyepiece, rather than having to struggle along trying to flip images in my mind. Also, the view at the eyepiece is often far different from that of the maps.  My first map was drawn in 2003 using a 5" refractor.but I didn't use a diagonal so it's south at the top. Mars back then was 25 arc seconds and high in the sky, and I made all my observations using a 7mm Nagler giving 148X. If I remember rightly it took 20 sketches of Mars to enable me to complete it. The southern hemisphere was tilted towards us back then just as it is this year. My 2016 map took 36 observations to complete and shows the northern hemisphere in more detail than the 2003 map. I've also made a number of Mars globe's to help with identifying features as seen through the telescope.

Below is the 2003 map showing south top, followed by one of my Mars globe's from the 2016 apparition showing north top e/w reversed.

Wow, the detail on your maps and the globe are amazing. I've never even heard of people making their own globes before, very impressive!