Captain Scarlet

After several failed attempts to get what seems to be the hottest property whenever it comes up in the For Sale section I caved in and coughed up new.

Plus a new USB to mount cable.

I finally brought my 12” to bear a few nights ago, Sunday I think, and My Goodness! The Eastern bit was easily evident without any filter at all, and with the Astronomik Oiii there was lots of wispy detail: I’m clearly going to have to spend time on it, weather permitting. And I now also want need a UHC.

M

Great read, thanks.

I’ve tried for the veil here in 21.8 land and cannot see a hint with my 10x50s, with or without my Astronomik oiii nestled inside an eyecup.

But with my 300p, the veil was easily detectable without filter and spectacular with, as expected I guess.

As for your 21.2 vs advertised 21.5, I’m not  surprised, the MW being so high at the moment. I find it makes easily 0.25-0.3 difference between MW at zenith vs finding a darker patch.

cheers Magnus

FINALLY I BAGGED IT.

Heritage 130p and Delite 18.2 eyepiece, plus Astronomik Oiii filter. Without the filter, just an (admittedly lovely) starfield. With the filter, WOW there it was, the Eastern section, so clear! A quick shift over to the West, and there, almost as bright, was the Western part. Very pleased. I removed the filter and, now knowing exactly where and what to look for, I could just about make out the Eastern bit. So pleasing too to get it with what is often recommended as the very first scope an aspiring observer will buy.

Clear nights forecast and dark for the next few days, I shall bring more aperture, 12", to bear.

Very pleased, Magnus

Set up for another crack at it tonight!

... oh iOS 14 won’t let me upload images ... error -200

... hmmm even got error -200 trying to upload image via separate route from a computer ...

Thanks, interesting. I clearly have the dark skies box ticked, I guess 50mm of aperture just isn't enough even with the filter, and perhaps the fact I've not seen it before means I have nothing to recognize. A bit like one's first M33: difficult to recognize at the very first attempt, but positively leaps out thereafter. All the scopes I own here in Ireland at the moment are 1500mm FL or longer, with a widest FoV of 1.6 degrees, but I am in temporary possession of a relative's SW Heritage 130p at the moment which with my 18.2 should give me nearly 1.75 degrees. I might give that a go this evening as it involves almost zero set-up.

M

I have a 1.25” Astronomik Oiii filter, which I bought off the classifieds here a while ago. Until a couple of weeks ago, I’d actually never used it. It had been suggested that I put it into one eyecup of my Leica 10x50 binoculars to see if the Veil Nebula, which I’ve never seen, would “pop out”, as some things I’d read had suggested it should. Wikipedia’s page on it says “… some argue that it can be seen without any optical aid except an O-III filter held up to the eye”. I had high hopes. The full Veil Nebula is 2.7 degrees across apparently, and my binoculars’ field of view is 6.7 degrees.

I am at a very dark sky location, 21.8+ at best, and I first tried for it a couple of weeks ago. Unfortunately although the sky was clear, a fullish Moon was up and I couldn’t notice anything.

I had another go last night. My SQM-L reading was 21.55 at the zenith, the sky was perfectly clear and the Milky Way was naked-eye-breathtaking. But of the Veil, not a sausage. Just a dimmer greenish rendition of the star-scape I could see through the other unobstructed eyepiece. Both eyes open, one eye only, fully dark-adapted, nothing revealed it. And I was looking in the right place.

Am I being unrealistic expecting to see it through a low-power 2-inch scope (as one side of a 50mm binocular is)? The night although seemingly clear was perhaps laden with moisture, might that have affected the view?

Cheers, Magnus

Nikon Prostaff 3s 8x42 , a little over budget but not much. I recently bought a pair for my neighbour as a reward for a big favour, and having looked through them I'm very impressed. I was particularly looking for as wide a view as possible for the magnification, and these were up there amongst the widest. I own several pairs of Leicas, Zeiss and top end Nikons, see my sig, and the Prostaff 3s stand up very well in their company! And the neighbour is hugely plased with them.

M

I use a and enjoy a WO 45 erect image diagonal, though it is only 1.25”. They’re around £60-70 I think. I’ve not seen anything similar for 2”.

cheers, Magnus

The hand controller alone costs around £150 to replace new, so I’d say £200 all-in is a very good price. I’ve had precisely one of these set-ups myself as well, bought from RVO a couple of years ago, and liked it very much. I’d still have it if I hadn’t been offered a free swap for a skymax 150.

cheers Magnus

On 01/09/2020 at 18:50, Gfamily said:

...

Another feature that I'm going to explore is that the SynScan app can be used with the telescope control built into the Pro or Plus versions of Sky Safari 6. This is easier done on Android I'm told,  so long as battery optimisation is switched off for the Synscan app.  On iPhones, you need to have two devices, one to have the Synscan running, and the other to have the Sky Safari running. I've not tried it myself, but the weather is looking good here for tomorrow, so that will be something i'll explore. 

...

[In red] I'm not sure this is true. A few days ago I was using a single iPhone to control my AZ-EQ6+SW WiFi adapter, with both apps working fine: SkySafari Pro and the SynScan App on the same device (iPhone 8plus).

Cheers, Magnus

He should have at least taken some trouble to get M110 into focus

21 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

No, the term draughtsman predates the engineering use of the term and is, I insist, the right one...

I will look into the word further, I won’t be able to resist, but given your insistence I’m persuaded you are right. So thank you, I reckon I’ve learned something.

Magnus

45 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

Beautiful draughtsman. She doesn't contain socks!

😁lly

In a different context I would’ve used the word “artist” but obviously that’s not suitable here. Draughtsman is not the right word for her though, it implies too much precision. Her works are very untidy and often large. Looked at close up they can look like nothing. But step back and the face (for that’s what she often paints) snaps into instantly recognizable focus.

8 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Why would brick wall or random slice from phone book be considered art?

You have obviously not been to any UK End-of-Year Art College shows recently. My wife, whom I would consider a beautiful drawer and painter (in both senses), did a Fine Arts degree a few years ago, and the final year show was very depressing. There was even actually a brick wall on show, but the bricks were made of lard (pig-fat).

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

You won't find many professionals in aesthetics who agree with this, however often it is repeated. If it were true, art would be impossible.

Olly

The phrase popped into my head so I couldn't resist posting it. Actually I regard it as one of those expressions that falls under the banner "PSB", or Pseudo-Profound BS. But I certainly wouldn't subordinate my own judgement of beauty to someone who might call themself an aesthetics professional. They sound like Thought Police.

2 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

I think it's a story you wrote, however! 😁

Olly

but beauty is in the eye of the beholder  

Put one of the eyepieces, the one with the largest number on it, probably 25, in the large hole in the middle of the large hexagonal shape in your first pic and secure it in place with the the two grub-screws. Not tightly though, just enough to hold the eyepiece in place. The number on the eyepiece corresponds to the focal length, in mm, of the eyepiece. The whole scope magnification is then the focal length of the main mirror, 750mm divided by the eyepiece focal length, in this case 25mm, giving you 30x magnification.

Point the open end of the main tube towards a distant object, say a tree. Look into the eyepiece and bring to focus by screwing the whole eyepiece assembly in or out.

Cheers, Magnus

I use a celestron LiFePo4 powertank, this one here, and ready for action:

1 hour ago, John said:

I can just make out the Eastern Veil nebula without a filter here tonight - very faint and indistinct - with the 12 inch dob.

My word though, with the Lumicon O-III filter it is transformed

... at what magnification? I tried a few nights ago in my bortle 3 location with 10x50 bins and an astronomik oiii nestled in one eyecup, and not a sausage, though the 80% Moon was up and I think that washed everything out.

The longest 1.25” eyepiece I have is 18.2mm, which with my 1500mm 12” will give me 82x, is that wide enough? I feel I really need a 24mm eyepiece.

M

After what has seemed like weeks with floor-to-ceiling cloud, last night was forecast clear enough for me to bother with dragging out the Berlebach Planet, AZ-EQ6 and Skymax 180. I didn't consider the 12" newt owing to the 90%+ Moon.

I also used my new Skywatcher SynScan WiFi adapter for the second time, and my God what an improvement over the normal handset! I actually quite like the handset, it just works. But the WiFi adapter in combination with SkyWaycher's SynScan Pro App (on my iPhone) is a world apart in convenience and utility. The App gives more options for Alt-Az star alignment, i.e. 3-star alignment, and choosing the alignment objects is really nice. You choose all 3 at the same time, and once chosen it then slews around to them in order. I couldn't work out initially why sometimes it was refusing to accept me telling it "I'm centred", but I quickly realised it needs the final arrow-presses to be up and right before it'll accept. Very nice indeed, I wholeheartedly recommend it. And once aligned, GoTo accuracy was the best I've ever managed. I was able to easily navigate around at nothing more than plastic RDF and 466x (2800mm focal length + delos 6mm)

Anyway, on to the observing. There were bands of thin cloud moving through, and of course the Moon was just off Full, so Planets and Doubles were my only fodder.

Jupiter and Moons was nice, but I have yet to see the GRS and anything more than the two main equatorial bands. GRS was not on show tonight anyway.

Saturn seemed better, and I imagined I had a glimpse of the Cassini Division, but only fleeting. But I saw and noted Titan and Iapetus and one of the others for my first time.

Mars was a large but wobbly disc, no useful detail on view, and by the time it got later and higher, it had its own personal belt of cloud hising its modesty.

However, Uranus and Neptune were my best views yet I think. They were each distinctly blue and green, and each distinctly a disc. very satisfying.

And of course for number 6 I just looked between my feet .

I finished off by comparing Albireo with Almach, and once again, Almach won. The blue/yellows on each of these are quite, quite beautiful though.

2am finish.

Cheers, Magnus

I’ve discovered my astronomic oiii fits and sits quite neatly inside the detachable eye cup of my 10x50 bins.

There may even be some gaps in clouds tonight so Cygnus and the Veil beckons!

Very nice read. You've reminded me to use my Oiii filter. I've had one for ages but never used it, and somehow I never remember it when I go for my quick stroll outside before bed with just binoculars. I must tie a knot in my fingers or something.

M

Superb to see such delight, I also revel in naked-eye views.

re binoculars. If you can afford to spend a bit more, I would very strongly recommend Nikon Prostaff 3s 8x42. I recently researched this area to try to find a very good pair for as little as possible to give to someone who’s done me great favour recently, and these came up trumps.

The Prostaff 3s give lovely wide field of view great sharpness and very light-touch focuser. The person I gave them to is delighted with them.

M

Also a small piece of camping mat, perhaps 60cm x 30cm, to stand on whilst observing. It's amazing how quickly your feet lose heat through the bottom of your boots, and how much your feet hurt when very cold! I went to watch the World X-Country Ski Championships in Finland in 2004-ish and my cousin suggested that trick. To test it out I tried for a few hours NOT standing on it, and he was right!

Cheers, Magnus