The Sky at Night - The End

[bm1980]

Just signed.

Ben

[faulksy]

I agree this months was great best for a while, people in work even mentioned it and said they realy enjoyed it, I think Brecon caught there eye  

[Space Cowboy]

I recorded last nights episode and watched it this morning.  Must admit my gut feeling was that I wouldn't miss it if it was taken off air.  It seemed so rushed.  The "what to see this month" section didn't really cover a lot, and some of the explanations to the questions left a lot to be desired.  Like Jnb mentioned I much preferred the old format where one major subject dominating the  program, often with a specialist being "interviewed" by SPM outlining some discovery, and then a reasonably detailed look at the current night sky for that month, and then a further section covering a more laymen approach to observing something linked to the main theme.  You know the format, something like the lead scientist behind a mars rover program discussing some new find or what's hoped to be discovered by the rover, then a look at the night sky, possibly showing where Mars is in the sky, and then a section on the early maps of mars by early astronomers, and how they believed civilization existed with canals etc... 

Personally,I feel that with the passing of SPM, what was special about the sky at night went with him.  It would be sad to see it come to an end, but I feel it's run its course, unless they invest in giving this a main stream slot and ( I hate to say it) someone like Prof Brian Cox to present it, but given the tight or non existent budget I can't see that happening.

Completely agree Malcolm. The true program ended with Sir Patrick. I've watched only one show since and the "Blue Peter" aspect irritated me no end.

[ronin]

The last 2 episodes have been good, cannot recall the ones previous to these. They seem to have got round to a format that works well. The upheaval was really to be expected when it had to change. in some respects the last 2 have been simpler and less people, rather like the original programs.

Now the guess work of whether it will remain in production.

[jnb]

Completely agree Malcolm. The true program ended with Sir Patrick. I've watched only one show since and the "Blue Peter" aspect irritated me no end.

Though there were duff editions when Sir Patrick presented the programme so that much has not changed. Perhaps there are now fewer one on one technical interviews and more casual star gazing articles but it's fair enough that there's a range of material and in a short half hour programme that means it's inevitable that some editions will appeal to some people and not others. But, overall, there are not many things wrong with the current programme; there might perhaps be too many presenters (how many do they have? I think it's about six isn't it?) and sometimes their answers are rather shallow and unconsidered, for example on the recent programme they had a question from someone who wanted to know what sort of  telescope they should buy and they recommended that they buy either a refractor, or a reflector, or a compound 'scope; so that was a really useful answer!

But those minor flaws aside I think it mostly fulfills its purpose.

[Macavity]

I enjoyed it. Best line went to Chris North (Hopefully correctly attributed!) but a variant on:

"Buy a BOOK, a Starchart..." etc. But perhaps a really novel idea to some? [teasing]

Question... answer... question... answer...Can go on forever, with but slow progress and mutual frustration? 

No great "reader" here (Nor ever fan of chalk and talk "skool") but read and re-read m'Astronomy Books.

[SniffTheGlove]

Having just watched the last episode there is a bit of much of the same theme starting to show up of lets get some complete novices from a local society and ask the same things about what are they looking at. The sspace surgery is poor like JNB said about what type of scope to get and they list all the major types. The a question about AP and it really was a poor answer with no technical substance. I know they (ie the BBC) will not allow product placement so they can not really provide great answers to question that relate to products or which products to by to which product is best which is a same. What Pete could of done for the AP question was to say give an actual demo of how to do AP just he has done in his AP series in the S@N magazine.

Anyway I do hope they don't go with this "lets get another society with novices and ask the same questions of what are you looking at tonight?" theme for future episodes else I will not be watching it, they need to do what they did with SPM was there of getting some scientist/astronomer to discuss the technical merits of what the astro news is of the last month ie discuss what are the first x pages of news in the S@N magazine followed by visits to observatories giving details of the scope and what they do for their observing, discuss future space projects and a shot what to observe in the next month. Basically a TV version of the magazine.

[Sp@ce_d]

I enjoyed this months episode. Far more than the one at Stonehenge! The problem is our knowledge of the subject has grown exponentially since the first S@N in 1957 & we thirst for more. Yet the programme still only receives 20-30 mins airtime a month, there is no time to fit it all in.. it ends up rushed & bitty.

I miss the old style but we do need a balanced mix of scientist/astronomer interviews, updates, whats up this month. I disagree with the negative comments of involving "novices", yes.. please involve the general public.. thats most of us folks and especially involve kids. Didn't most of us start watching it as kids?  We were all novices once. Get it aired at a decent hour, give it more time and don't rush through it.. lets have quality.

The recent Exoplanets discussion on Radio 4's "In Our Time" is a very good example of quality programming. I would have loved to see that sort of stuff on S@N. That discussion alone lasted longer than an episode of S@N and going back to the general public.. seeing the reaction to John Dobsons Sidewalk Astronomer is a fascinating programme taking astronomy literally onto the streets. There's plenty of subject material and plenty of interest, most of my friends & work colleagues come and talk about the latest news in astronomy or what I'm imaging at the moment, even through they are not astronomers themselves.

[jnb]

 ... I disagree with the negative comments of involving "novices", yes.. please involve the general public.. thats most of us folks and especially involve kids. Didn't most of us start watching it as kids?  We were all novices once. .

I've nothing against involving "novices" I think you can make very good programmes based on just that idea. But their questions deserve better answers than they provide at present; don't just list all the types of telescope but mention that (to use the example I criticised earlier) cassegrains are nice and portable, but big refractors are not even though they have might have the same focal lengths. Equally don't just walk around someone else's telescope saying "what are you looking at?" instead when they say they are looking at a globular cluster go on to talk about what they are or how they can be used to work out where we are in the galaxy. Novices deserve better answers or they will always be novices.

[Doug]

All I will say is I used to watch the program with my father from about 11 years old and have watch it ever since I am now 61 year old and would be so sad if it was taken off

this program introduced me to Astronomy ,I have signed the Petition and hope the BBC take note I also understand from the web (The Telegraph)"Queen guitarist Brian May last week confirmed that plans to convert Sir Patrick's beloved West Sussex home into an astronomy centre would no longer be going ahead."

I thought all this had been arrange with Sir Patrick before his passing,I sure he would be so disappointed.

[Sp@ce_d]

I've nothing against involving "novices" I think you can make very good programmes based on just that idea. But their questions deserve better answers than they provide at present; don't just list all the types of telescope but mention that (to use the example I criticised earlier) cassegrains are nice and portable, but big refractors are not even though they have might have the same focal lengths. Equally don't just walk around someone else's telescope saying "what are you looking at?" instead when they say they are looking at a globular cluster go on to talk about what they are or how they can be used to work out where we are in the galaxy. Novices deserve better answers or they will always be novices.

Yes, exactly my point about air time. I would hope this is more a case of missing the key points in the editing choice, rather than the total sum of the actual conversation.

All I will say is I used to watch the program with my father from about 11 years old and have watch it ever since I am now 61 year old and would be so sad if it was taken off

this program introduced me to Astronomy ,I have signed the Petition and hope the BBC take note I also understand from the web (The Telegraph)"Queen guitarist Brian May last week confirmed that plans to convert Sir Patrick's beloved West Sussex home into an astronomy centre would no longer be going ahead."

I thought all this had been arrange with Sir Patrick before his passing,I sure he would be so disappointed.

Is it a done deal? http://www.brianmay.com/brian/brianssb/brianssbsep13b.html#31

[Macavity]

Is it a done deal? http://www.brianmay.com/brian/brianssb/brianssbsep13b.html#31

I suspect that is more to do with the delay in implementing the simplest wishes of the deceased

- Even among close kin, a standard WILL seems to take *ages* for the process to be resolved.

I have considered bequeathing my astro-effects to a college / astro society... Having had advanced 

warning of how my relatives (cousins) are willing to fight over stuff! Or maybe a "Viking Funeral"? 

[x6gas]

I suspect that is more to do with the delay in implementing the simplest wishes of the deceased

- Even among close kin, a standard WILL seems to take *ages* for the process to be resolved.

I have considered bequeathing my astro-effects to a college / astro society... Having had advanced 

warning of how my relatives (cousins) are willing to fight over stuff! Or maybe a "Viking Funeral"? 

And I suspect it is just woeful journalism as Brian May suggests.  The stories that the tabloid press has come up with around SPM / Brian May are sadly indicative of the sorry state of print journalism in the UK these days.

[kirkster501]

I think astronomy is such a vast subject, with so many different disciplines that interest each of us differently that it is impossible to please all the people all the time.  If they keep it general to appeal to the mass populace then the content is weak and wishy-washy for hardcore members here.  If they deep-dive a particular subject then if that subject does not appeal to you then that episode is a waste of time too.  Very tricky to get the balance right and appeal en-masse to everyone...

[Kropster]

Perhaps a 'Beginners Spot' within a programme which covers another more advanced Astronomy / Space topic would keep most of the people happy most of the time?

[Ant]

How many have signed the petition now?

[ChrisG3484]

44,536

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk now Free

[garethmob]

its a shame we didnt start a petition on the UK govts petition site!

[NeilFawcett]

Don't worry guys, the BBC have their alternative space series ready to replace S@N - http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news/a523552

[Cornelius Varley]

Interestingly the BBC did a piece on online petitions this morning. The last petition clicked on was the Sky at Night petition.

[x6gas]

Don't worry guys, the BBC have their alternative space series ready to replace S@N - http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/tv/news/a523552

Laugh out loud funny.  Thanks for sharing...

[Macavity]

Ah, would that the "Sky at Night" enjoyed the same populist / facebook appeal as:

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/oct/13/i-[removed word]-love-science-elsie-andrew

A FINE THING maybe? But sadly, unless you have a "feminist" angle or mention "Richard Dawkins"

there seems NAFF all [sorry mods!] you can do to interest the non-scientific "intelligentsia".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cui_bono 

It just FRUSTRATES me that *current* half-decent science programs can be allowed to "disappear"! 

I voted on the bloomin' "petition"... Get spammed as a result! I suspect a visit from NSA / GCHQ? lol 

Was this an entire false alarm though?

It would be nice to have support of more "media scientists" maybe.

How much do you / THEY [expletive] Love Science? Just Sayin'... 

[tenbyfifty]

Well the last episode was a nice little jolly for the presenters in the Brecon Beacons (in fact a lot of beeb documentaries these days are holidays of a lifetime for some presenters ) but how much astronomy was actually in the show? I think a whole programme at a star party is nice on one level but not what the programme should be about.

[astro mick]

We mus.nt forget,that in the early S@N programmes following Patricks death,there was a lot of negative posts on this forum about the current presenters,and the format of the show.This will not have gone unoticed by the BBC.

Now we are all saying this show must be saved,at all costs.

What a fickle lot we are.

Mick.

[x6gas]

We mus.nt forget,that in the early S@N programmes following Patricks death,there was a lot of negative posts on this forum about the current presenters,and the format of the show.This will not have gone unoticed by the BBC.

Now we are all saying this show must be saved,at all costs.

What a fickle lot we are.

Mick.

I have to say that I have been surprised by the negative comments about the show on here.  Perhaps we get what we deserve and if the BBC take the show off air then many of the SGL community won't be that bothered.  For me, though, S@N is a force for good.  I happen to really like the current presenter line-up... but even if I didn't I would support having a show on TV supporting and representing my hobby; I'd rather have ANY astronomy TV show than none at all.

Seems some on here will be happy with the none at all option.

Maybe another celebrity dancing, or anitiques, or house buying programme instead...