Messier 26 - Globular or Open?

[AndyWB]

Okay, the question is pretty much in the title. When I thought I looked at it, it looked clearly like an open cluster. Sky Pocket Atlas shows it as being open. However, Astronomy Now for August and "Eyes on the Sky" on Youtube both called it globular.

Is the maybe one of those Messier objects that people aren't entirely sure what it referred to? Or did both just happen to make the same mistake?

[cantab]

Quick search seems to indicate it's definitely an open cluster; there are some where it's been debated whether it was a rich open cluster or a poor globular, but M26 isn't one of them. So it looks like a mistake. Maybe either one referred to the other or both referenced the same wrong source?

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I spotted this one a couple of times in the last weeks, and it is certainly an open cluster. My Star Atlas 2000.0, Stellarium, Carte du Ciel and the Messier list all agree. The estimated age is "merely" 89 million years, more than two orders of magnitude below that of globulars. M11 nearby almost has the appearance of a globular in binoculars, but in my 8" it clearly shows up as a dense open cluster.

[AndyWB]

I spotted this one a couple of times in the last weeks, and it is certainly an open cluster. My Star Atlas 2000.0, Stellarium, Carte du Ciel and the Messier list all agree. The estimated age is "merely" 89 million years, more than two orders of magnitude below that of globulars. M11 nearby almost has the appearance of a globular in binoculars, but in my 8" it clearly shows up as a dense open cluster.

Yeah, all my books showed the same - that it was open - and it looked that way to me! I mean, a couple of things I've looked at looked a bit borderline - M71 (which I gather there is a debate on), M11 as you say, and M4 (but maybe only 'cos I could resolve bits of it, rather than it being all fuzzy). But M26 - it looked pretty clear to me.

Glad it's not me going mad! Same incorrect source sounds likely, to be honest. Stellarium shows it as an OC too.