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.

kerrylewis

Horsehead visually?

Recommended Posts

I love this thread. Visual astronomy at it's very, very best!

It helps with my Root Cause Failure Analysis of my early attempts back in the late 70's :D

At the time I spent literally hours looking for the Horse  with my 60mm refractor through my bedroom window and the glare of the mercury vapour street light right outside!

Perhaps I'll fare better with the SkyWatcher 250PDS from my dark sky site....

Keep up the good work!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You ought to have some good chances Paul from your dark Cumbrian site, have you got a filter?

I like the point made concerning observing faint objects rather than i.e. bright globular's prior to attempting the H.H. I think that this principle ought to apply to any target that would benefit from the application of a H-beta filter. At my most recent dark sky session, I intentionally spent time searching for dim galaxies before using the H-beta filter to observe the California. I was additionally assisted by a club colleague, familiar with the California. However once detected it became quite clear as to what to look at, as well as what to expect in terms of visualising faint nebula with this filter. Now that I have seen the California I can with confidence and provided that transparency is good,  return to this subject independently. I expect that to a degree, it will be the same with the H.H after the initial and certain detection.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly do look at the more interesting targets visually - After "cheating" with video astronomy.

I might invest in a flip mirror - To remove the (distinct!) possibility of looking in the wrong place. ;)

A lot of objects are (rather surprisingly) not absolutely "parameterised" in terms of magnitude etc.

Learning "the brighter area around the horsehead has a surface brightness +19.3"(!) intrigues...

I am moved to try to correct my astigmatism with a DIOPTRXTM lens, now I have a decent optical

prescription. The attention of certain leading visual astronomers to lifestyle and hyperventilation

techniques must challenge if not amuse. I think I'll pass on any Hyperbaric chamber for now tho'!  :p

Edited by Macavity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was an easy (lol) target last night in my scope, still not visible in my mates 12" dob though. Visible in a range of eyepieces at 01:30.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I waited for the moon to set and gave this a try last night to. I could 'see' the Flame and I could read the star patterns, but could not with any conviction say that I saw the HH, I was using a 25mm plossl, 20mm and 26mm nagler and 14" dob. SQM reading was approx 20.8. I had much more success though refining my observation ability in following the length of the California with my H-beta filter. I was going to give it another try but had grown tired firstly waiting for the moon to set and repeatedly removing the ice off my telrad.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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