DeepSkyBagger

What size 'scope are you using? M46 has a very prominent planetary nebula in it just north of the centre. Maybe worth a return visit with an OIII filter if conditions aren't good.

Here's an observation I made of NGC 1501 a few years ago. The notes read 'Quite large and immediately visible to direct vision even without the OIII filter. Round. With the OIII filter it appears occasionally to be darker in the middle, possibly with two voids. Very slightly elongated.' As you say, it's well worth the effort. You don't say what size instrument you were using.

Hi John. NGC 7354 is indeed a fine object. I don't have the atlas you mentioned, so I can't comment on that. I observed the planetary with a 12" reflector, like yourself, and found it to be very bright and very large. It appeared round and smooth-looking, brighter towards the middle but the central star (m16.1) was not seen. Attached is my observation.

You've already answered your own question. It sounds very much like a meteor. Some can get very bright, I saw a -6 a few months ago. The bright flash at the end is the meteor breaking up and vaporising. Even a meteor that reached -3 is probably still very small, maybe grape-sized or a little larger. You were lucky to see one that bright. I've seen maybe a dozen that bright over more than 40 years of sky-watching.

Really glad you chaps have had some clear skies this time. Circumstances conspired against me coming up this time. Perhaps a blessing in disguise - my clutch may have failed up there somewhere, towing a caravan, rather than on my drive! Hoping everything is fixed for Kelling Heath at the end of this month.

So! It's your fault! My clutch went yesterday - obviously caught some bad ju-ju from yours!

You're certainly racking up those Herschels! You might actually have seen NGC 1817, though not recognised it. You may have been looking for something a bit more 'clustery'. I observed it almost exactly six years ago (4/11/2013). Here are my notes: 'Boring cluster. Some of the brighter stars make a NW-SE chain at the W end of the cluster. Otherwise it is a loose scattering of faint stars not well separated from the background. A slightly brighter pair lies near the middle.' It doesn't stand out at all well apart from the brighter chain, and even then, that's not *that* obvious. Of course in those heady days, I really didn't know just how boring clusters could be. That was before I started observing the Dolidze clusters. Don't be tempted to go for those. It feels like punishment!

I think that's a really good idea. Maybe a sticky thread that can be added to over the years. The need for astro-friendly sites is ever more necessary.

That's great. Thanks for the info. I'm always on the lookout for good spots.

This is a good website to visit when planning holidays: https://www.campsites.co.uk/search/dark-sky-campsites

That's another good find, Wookie. Bookmarked!

They are all scanned already. It's the actual physical entities themselves I'm concerned with.

Does the Stonehough campsite have lights dotted around, like nearly all campsites? I've recently taken to asking campsite owners if they can turn lights off for me. Surprisingly often, I get a positive result.

This might seem a wee bit morbid, but I've recently been wondering what will happen to my observations, journals etc., once I shuffle off this mortal coil. I've been making observations for over forty years (and hope to make them for several more decades yet, I might add), and this all amounts to several journals and lever arch files full of my drawings of deep-sky objects. I doubt they'll mean much to any family members, so I was wondering if anyone knew of an organisation or body that would take these items and curate them for the future. This may seem trivial, but they're important to me, and represent a substantial amount of work over my life. I know it won't bother me when the time comes, but right now, I worry that my 'life's work' will simply be chucked within a few weeks of me trotting off. Anybody else worry about this sort of thing? Any ideas?

Hi Stephan, I caught the two planetaries you mention in 2014 with my 12" Newtonian (2014 was a good year for me, observing-wise). NGC 6765 - I found that it was not easily visible without the OIII filter in place. The OIII filter reveals a fairly large but dim disc. x375 shows an elongation, but the best view was obtained with the Or6mm eyepiece (x250) with the OIII filter. With this the elongation was clear and there were two tiny twinkles involved in the main section of the nebula. A fainter, detached section could be seen paralleling the main section. M 1-64 (I have it listed as PNG 064.9+15.5) - Very small and very faint. Almost stellar. Not visible without the OIII filter, and quite hard to detect even with it. Elongation was suspected. In the 4mm eyepiece (x375) without the OIII filter the object was barely visible, and appeared like a fuzzy star. After much viewing at x150, it became just visible without the filter. I haven't seen either of the two galaxies you mention - too faint for my poor skies, but I have seen other galaxies in Lyra, namely NGCs 6646, 6675, 6702, 6710, 6745 and 6792.

I got 7042 in 2014 with my 12". I found it to be very, very difficult. Usually not visible at all, and when it was, only to averted vision. It looked slightly elongated but no details were seen. I had no chance of seeing 7043 - that's a nice catch. I think our observations tally quite nicely. I also got the triangle of stars. The faintest star I recorded on this observation was magnitude 13.5.

There is no nebulosity that you could see through a 130 Newt in the same field as (or even close to) M22. M22 itself is a big, bright globular, by far the brightest in that region. The nearest nebulosity to M22 that you could have seen is M8 - again very bright, but over 7 degrees away to the west. You will see no galaxies in Sagittarius as you are looking through the densest part of our own galaxy in that direction.

I observed all those galaxies a couple of years ago. Pegasus is a real galaxy-rich area. My observations were made with a 12" Newtonian under pretty poor conditions (VZM 4.9). NGC 7611 - Just a very dim, grey, oval patch. Slightly elongated and maybe very slightly brighter in the middle. Tiny, tiny twinkles very close to the galaxy as if there are very faint stars involved. (In fact there are - mag 14.5+). NGC 7612 - Fairly difficult but quite certain, at least with averted vision. Round with a brighter middle. NGC 7619 - Fairly faint but still visible to direct vision. Small, round and brighter in the middle. Very like its neighbour NGC 7626. NGC 7623 - A tiny, dim little oval nebulous patch. Not easy to see but occasionally there for direct vision. Apparently of uniform brightness. NGC 7626 - Not difficult but better with averted vision. Small and round with a clearly brighter middle. NGC 7631 - This took a lot of staring at and around before I was sure. Very, very difficult. Just a very occasional glimpse of a tiny grey disc. No elongation seen, no central brightening seen.

Nick, Where do you get this name 'Bogardus' from? Only two stars in Auriga have 'official' IAU names, alpha (Capella) and beta (Menkalinan). SIMBAD lists an unofficial name for theta, but it's 'Mahasim' not 'Bogardus'. I don't use lesser-known star names, I think Bayer designations are less ambiguous. Patrick