This one could be tricky!

[Stu]

I was searching for Melotte 111 on SkySafari when I came across NGC111. The description seems to imply it might be hard to find! ?

[iapa]

Friday night looks to be clear all night - so, maybe one of us could find it and prove it does exist?

[Moonshane]

I get a lot of them in light polluted Stockport!

[Moonshane]

Perhaps the sea monster swallowed it!

[xtreemchaos]

cor that seams like a hard one Stu,goodluck and hope you find it.charl. 

[Knight of Clear Skies]

Intriguing, I found this article online with a few more details (you have to scroll down quite a bit).

Quote

Historical Information: Per Dreyer, NGC 111 (Leavenworth list II (#281), 1860 RA 00 19 30±, NPD 93 24.0) is "very faint, small, round, a little brighter middle, 8.5 magnitude star 36 sec west and 2 arcmin north (? = 5100)". The position precesses to RA 00 26 39.3, Dec -02 37 28, but there is nothing there, no star in the appropriate position, and no one has found anything matching the observation. The note "(? = 5100)" suggests that Dreyer wondered whether the object was GC 5100 (= NGC 113), but that also has no star in the appropriate position, and is not believed to be the object supposedly observed by Leavenworth. In such a situation it sometimes helps to use the original observation, even though Leavenworth's statement that the right ascension is doubtful doesn't inspire much confidence in his original position. Precessing Leavenworth's 1890 position yields a modern position RA 00 26 37.3, Dec -02 37 27 (whence the position listed above), which is essentially the same as Dreyer's "rounded-off" value, so there is still no way to identify what Leavenworth observed. Per Corwin, it is possible that a search along the declination circle may lead to a rediscovery, but since he was unable to find anything suitable within 5 degrees of Leavenworth's position, NGC 111 will probably always be listed as lost or nonexistent.

 

[Starlight 1]

I was looking for ngc 11 late last year ,by the time I move shed to  see West it had gone, so yes look like a tricky one as well.

 

[Stu]

29 minutes ago, iapa said:

Friday night looks to be clear all night - so, maybe one of us could find it and prove it does exist?

I think it will have to wait until later in the year, not well positioned currently

[iapa]

Someone else can't find it:

Per Dreyer, NGC 111 (Leavenworth list II (#281), 1860 RA 00 19 30±, NPD 93 24.0) is "very faint, small, round, a little brighter middle, 8.5 magnitude star 36 sec west and 2 arcmin north (? = 5100)". The position precesses to RA 00 26 39.3, Dec -02 37 28, but there is nothing there, no star in the appropriate position, and no one has found anything matching the observation. The note "(? = 5100)" suggests that Dreyer wondered whether the object was GC 5100 (= NGC 113), but that also has no star in the appropriate position, and is not believed to be the object supposedly observed by Leavenworth. In such a situation it sometimes helps to use the original observation, even though Leavenworth's statement that the right ascension is doubtful doesn't inspire much confidence in his original position. Precessing Leavenworth's 1890 position yields a modern position RA 00 26 37.3, Dec -02 37 27 (whence the position listed above), which is essentially the same as Dreyer's "rounded-off" value, so there is still no way to identify what Leavenworth observed. Per Corwin, it is possible that a search along the declination circle may lead to a rediscovery, but since he was unable to find anything suitable within 5 degrees of Leavenworth's position, NGC 111 will probably always be listed as lost or non-existent.

Taken from http://cseligman.com/text/atlas/ngc1.htm#111, website of Professor of Astronomy & Author Courtney Seligman

[psamathe]

TheSkyX says

Quote

Object Name: NGC 111
Object Type: Other NGC
RA (Topocentric): 00h 27m 27.159s 
Dec (Topocentric): -02d 32' 12.629" 
RA (2000.0): 00h 26m 38.300s 
Dec (2000.0): -02d 37' 30.000" 
Azimuth: 355d 54' 57" 
Altitude: -39d 59' 40" 
Major Axis: 0.0
Minor Axis: 0.0
Axis Position Angle:   0d 00' 
Magnitude: unknown
Rise Time: 04:35
Transit Time: 10:24
Set Time: 16:14
Hour Angle: 11h 47m 29s 
Air Mass: (below horizon)
Source Catalog: Revised NGC
Constellation: CET
Date: 06/05/2016
Time: 22:09 DST
Constellation: Cetus
Constellation (Abbrev.): Cet
Screen X: 626.50
Screen Y: 471.50
Sidereal Time: 12:15
Julian Date: 2457515.38169262
Click Distance: 2.0000
Frame Size (arcmins): 0.0000
Catalog Number: 111
Celestial Type: 19
NGC/IC: 0
Catalog: 1
Constellation Number: 20

 

[Guest]

Look here http://haroldcorwin.net/ngcic/

for stories about NGC/IC objects and also here http://www.klima-luft.de/steinicke/steuer/start_e.htm

for hsitoricalinformation on the NGC

 

Owen

 

[acey]

There are plenty of non-existent NGCs; one or two even have nicknames, e.g. Baxendell's Unphotographable Nebula (NGC 7008). The non-existent NGC 1990 was inadvertently included in the second Herschel 400 list and some people claim to have seen it, there's even a spurious photo of it on Wikipedia. I had a look for it and saw nothing.