Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

18 Good

About BenOak

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. As a newcomer to planets and astronomy notes, looking back I would say that when I say white/green I just mean that its a very light disc with a tinge or hint of green. On reflection, grey would be a better description.
  2. From that link: The shower originates from comet 3D/Biela whose disintegration in the mid-1800's is linked to the outbursts
  3. I've just come in from a quick hour outside after trusting ClearSkies too much once again and noticing at bed time that the 100% cloud cover I should have seen had miraculously all burnt away! Not sure how many more hours I could have squeezed in before the dew set in, anyway a quick change and I was out... Among a few other things I saw, Uranus was easily found with Bins and then my Dob. A white/green disc as clear as day and as good I have seen it with dark skies, no wind and not a twinkle to be seen! Pushing my luck I put in my 4mm and even with 300% magnification the disc was clear and obvious although it was sharper at 120%. I always look at the planets first and I wasn't disappointed again this evening.
  4. I have a Nexus 7 with Celestron Sky Portal (Free) on it. Prior to this I was taking the laptop outside with Stellarium. One particularly dew filled evening made me wonder if that was a good idea hence the switch to the Nexus Size wise, I find the 7" just right but only you can decide on that aspect.
  5. The Andromedids between Triangulum and Andromeda are active between 25 September and 6 December according to Stellarium. Could they be the source?
  6. And I've just asked Santa for a sun filter! I'm guessing that 'less activity' to someone like me who has never seen any activity will still find it interesting and amazing
  7. I have added a few new things to my list of acquisitions after this evening's foray into the garden With ClearSkies promising clear skies from 1700 and no one at home for me to worry about, a session was planned for this evening and I soon had a list of targets, some new, some old and all worked out based on what was going down first and how long I had before the moon would pop up and take centre stage. As always, the plan failed as ClearSkies was slightly optimistic. I was out at 1700 but after two hours of nothing but cloud, the last few bits finally drifted away around 1900. Undeterred, I had been trying to work through my list during those cloudy 2 hours but it was almost impossible and with the frustration growing, it was a blessing once it cleared up. Even though I then had the moon to contend with! M57 (Ring Nebula in Lyra) I managed this one as soon as I got out in what had to be the only gap in the clouds and with the moon still down it was pretty clear. Neptune - My first view of this planet and it was the culmination of an epic star hop ( I say 'an' like it didn't take multiple times and almost a good 45 minutes) from Pegasus (Markab - Biham), down to Aquarius (Sadalmelik to Ancha) and then a slow hop through the minor stars until it was found. A clear blue/grey disc, albeit very small, but clearly not a star. Ceres - Another first - my first dwarf planet - and another great star hop (after many failed attempts again) from Aries, down Pisces and then through the minor stars. Uninspiring to look at but the joy was more in what I was looking at than what I was seeing. Albiero - Not new but probably the most obvious colour difference I have seen of these two. Striking blue and gold! Not the longest of lists but due to the conditions and the time I ended up with before the dew was too much, this was probably the hardest I have had to work from an astronomy point of view. Was it worth the effort? You bet it was.
  8. Me and my son found this the other evening and even with a brighter sky due to the moon, it was a very pretty cluster. Reading through this thread has given me a list of new things to look at but it's clear that there are those that everyone seems to love. I'm a fan of any of the open clusters but Pleiades, The Double Cluster and the Beehive get visited almost every time due to their beauty. Betelgeuse, The Garnet Star, Mizar/Alcor and Algieba normally get a good looking over too because of historical importance, colours or size and then M31 and the Leo Triplet for the simple awe of seeing other galaxies millions of years in the past!
  9. Haha I'm new to this so I will bow to superior knowledge and assume it wasn't if its just not possible but damn those coincidences! This is the last time I will try and defend my viewing before I accept that it wasn't Amalthea... The telescope limiting magnitude for me works out at 14.2 for my viewing according to this site using the standard values so would it be outside of all possibility that it was Amalthea which has a magnitude of 14.1 although Stellarium has it at 15.6 at the time? - http://www.cruxis.com/scope/limitingmagnitude.htm I have included a SS from Stellarium from when I viewed it. This is exactly what I saw and matches exactly the drawing I made at the time. I even went back and checked it after I 'worked out' what it was that morning and it was gone. If you move time forward by 20 minutes it passes in front of Jupiter and vanishes. And with that final argument my dream fades. But on a different note, the shop have agreed to exchange the 2.5mm for a 4mm so definitely no more Amalthea but hopefully more Saturn Thanks for all your help everyone
  10. Hi Beka, the telescope was completely free so probably the best beginner scope I could get
  11. It may have been a star which was my initial thought but then i changed my mind. It was a clear but dull orange colour, very small and and really only visible with averted vision and when I went back to Stellarium to check what it was I'd seen it showed Amelthea exactly where the orange dot was that I saw and the 5th moon does show up when you put the lens and telescope details in ocular settings too. I even moved the max magnitude settings right down to see if any other stars popped up in the same place and there was nothing. I know that it's a very low magnitude but on the other hand it seemed too much of a coincidence, although I'm happy to say it wasn't if it's an impossibility that it could be seen.
  12. That sounds like a good idea but having to buy two lenses may be too much if the right deal isn't there. I can only agree having now found out for myself ] I've just been moon watching and the 10mm is great again. Shows up a lot of the craters and its only those that are around the 20-30km or less that don't show. I did try with the 2.5mm and it's just not clear enough to show these craters either. A bit of averted viewing and you can make a few out but I think I will have to accept defeat and look for some something with a but less magnification. Many thanks for the help
  13. I really like the 10mm considering my limited experience of looking at the objects in the sky but from a planetary point of view I do want a bit more. The reason I went for a new lens over a Barlow is because I had read that a barlow just magnifies the image you get from the telescope, where as the correct lens magnifies the light coming in. The less glass between you and the object the better and so a new lens was bought. I went for the 260x as I had read that more magnification is better for Saturn... I think then to split the difference I will look to sell/swap the 2.5mm for a 4-4.5mm. You recommend 5mm and the sticky thread recommends 3.75mm with the other posters saying that 3-3.5mm would be the absolute highest to go even with the right conditions. Does anyone know someone that is willing to buy or swap a Sky-Watcher WA Plossl 58' 2.5mm lens only used a couple of times....
  14. Hi Cornelius, the maximum 'recommended' by the manual is about 407x I think! I did read that that was a bit over the top Hi Moonshane, so 4-4.5mm would be a better option than the 3-3.5mm?
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.