Observing the NAN

[rockystar]

I've been reading a bit recently about the North American Nebula (NGC 7000), and now that Cygnus is popping back into the sky, I want to have a look.

So questions:

• Can I see it from my back garden (NELM ~4.5 in good conditions, however, as summer has arrived and Astro Darkness time = 0, this is probably reduced), or is a dark sky a must for this object?
• Do I need to a low powered or mid-range eyepiece (looks like it will be far too big for any kind of high power) - I have a 14mm 76º and 24mm 82º.
• Will any filters help? I have an Oiii and UHC, but they are both 1.25" and so won't fit the 24mm.

I think I was in the right area the other night, but there was no sign of it.

Cheers

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

You will need very low power, and a very wide FOV. NGC 7000 is much bigger than the full moon, and it is easy to look straight through it. My first views of the NAN were with fairly cheap 15x70 bins from a fairly dark site. Curiously. it was the dark "Bay of Mexico" that gave the position of the nebula away, rather than the main bulk of the nebula. My C8 with the Nagler 31T5 can only see a little bit of it. My 80mm F/6 triplet with the same EP, or the LVW42mm shows it MUCH better, framing it and the Pelican nicely. A UHC filter helps a lot, I am not sure OIII would work. If you have 10x50 or 15x70 bins, I would try those first. Some allow you to insert a 1.25" filter, which should help

[Stu]

It's a lovely object, but dark, and in particular, transparent skies are needed to see it. I spent years trying for it before I got the right conditions  and kit but have now seen it on quite a few occasions. I have had consecutive nights of similar darkness where one night it has been invisible and the next it was lovely; the difference was the transparency.

My best views have been with widefield four inch scopes, with a 31mm Nagler giving 3.5 or more degrees of sky. Best was possibly with a Televue Genesis f5 under a dark Dorset sky. I cannot recall which gives best results, a UHC or OIII but a filter is almost always better in my experience. That's probably not the case under a mag 6 sky, but 5.5 is probably the best I normally get.

[Stu]

You might find this thread of interest....

 

[YKSE]

Agree with the above coments.

• in mag 4.5 sky, you'll be seeing the bay area at best, even with UHC or OIII filters. Dark site is the key.
•  Low power is best, not aperture, I used 40mm AERO in 80ED, it framed both NAN and Pelican buautifully, UHC showed more extention, while OIII showed better contrast.

 

 

[estwing]

just hold the OIII filter up to your eye if your skies are dark enough....cant get lower power than that!

[Stu]

Just now, estwing said:

just hold the OIII filter up to your eye if your skies are dark enough....cant get lower power than that!

Tried that a number of times and never had any luck!

[estwing]

Heard of it being done...and was very dubious until I did it at Elan last month with Steve...kinda cool really 

[swamp thing]

9 minutes ago, Stu said:

Tried that a number of times and never had any luck!

Your not trying hard enough then
Seriously though, the trick is to cup your hands around the filter so they become like a sight tube. It is actually easy to see this way and rewards you with the best view of all. If you can see it in your frac you can certainly see it with just your eye alone.

[Stu]

5 minutes ago, swamp thing said:

Your not trying hard enough then
Seriously though, the trick is to cup your hands around the filter so they become like a sight tube. It is actually easy to see this way and rewards you with the best view of all. If you can see it in your frac you can certainly see it with just your eye alone.

Cheers Steve, I'll give that a go. I do love the view in a frac though, pretty spectacular

[rockystar]

Sounding like more justification for the investment in a frac

 

[YKSE]

16 minutes ago, swamp thing said:

Your not trying hard enough then
Seriously though, the trick is to cup your hands around the filter so they become like a sight tube. It is actually easy to see this way and rewards you with the best view of all. If you can see it in your frac you can certainly see it with just your eye alone.

Good idea Steve. I'll give it a go with a 2" barrel  or extension tube as sight tube

[scarp15]

Late Summer, when Cygnus is riding high is the time to go NAN hunting, very much looking forward to this period, dark site essential. I'v had some great views with my 14" but the best view of this nebula so far have been with my 8" dob and I too would like to try with my frac.

[rockystar]

2 minutes ago, scarp15 said:

Late Summer, when Cygnus is riding high is the time to go NAN hunting, very much looking forward to this period, dark site essential. I'v had some great views with my 14" but the best view of this nebula so far have been with my 8" dob and I too would like to try with my frac.

Maybe a late July / August trip out then, when we get some darkness back  

[steppenwolf]

Observing isn't my main interest but the best view I ever had of the NAN was with just my eyes - what a fabulous sight if the river of the Milky Way is high in the sky and the transparency is good!

[cotterless45]

Oh yes.  I even used an empty toilet roll tube to cut out light from the glow of the Milky Way on North Skye,

Nick.

[estwing]

1 hour ago, cotterless45 said:

Oh yes.  I even used an empty toilet roll tube to cut out light from the glow of the Milky Way on North Skye,

Nick.

ahhh...but did you replace the roll?!!!

[PeterW]

The NAN is cool, I like the cactus shape dark gap between it and the pelican. Not as big as ic1396, but a good size. If you're lucky you might also see sharpless 119 or ic5068 in the same area.

the gamma Cygnus region is more extensive and complex though...

happy hunting, it's cool to look up and see this little familiar shape.

 

peterW

[RikM]

The first scope I saw the NAN with was an ST80 with a UHC and a 20mm EP. As said above, the Mexico region shows the most contrast. With a 200P you may be able to trace down the edge of this area. 

[pluton]

Hello,

So it would be better seen with a short focal refractor or with a binocular wide field?
Someone has made comparisons about it?
thank you very much
paul

[John]

My 1st views of the NA Nebula came with 15x70 binoculars on a dark night. I then realised that I was seeing parts of it with my scopes (mostly the "florida / gulf or mexico" part) but the binoculars showed it better.

 

[John]

On 20/05/2016 at 18:38, cotterless45 said:

Oh yes.  I even used an empty toilet roll tube to cut out light from the glow of the Milky Way on North Skye,

Nick.

As an alternative I wonder if Baader Fine Tuning Rings would work in place of the loo roll ?

I have 3 of the 28mm ones so by threading them together I get an 84mm long tube, a nicely blackened interior and a 2" filter thead at one end or I could position the filter between the 1st and 2nd rings or between the 2nd and 3rd. I wonder which configuration would work best - closer to the eye or further from it ?

I can use either the Lumicon O-III filter or the DGM NBP filter which are both 2" fitting.

Hmmm ...... I can see some experimenting being needed during the next dark night, which could be tonight !

[acey]

On 18/05/2016 at 15:23, rockystar said:

I've been reading a bit recently about the North American Nebula (NGC 7000), and now that Cygnus is popping back into the sky, I want to have a look.

So questions:

• Can I see it from my back garden (NELM ~4.5 in good conditions, however, as summer has arrived and Astro Darkness time = 0, this is probably reduced), or is a dark sky a must for this object?

No. Nor is it visible in daytime. You need a dark sky.

Some claim to see it naked eye, and I've had the same impression myself, but the field is very rich in stars, and I think unresolved stars are what give the naked-eye impression. With a small scope at a dark site it's unmistakeable (I've had nice views with 80mm for example). Depending which way round you see it, it can resemble the British Isles (with the Pelican Nebula as Ireland).

At this time of year, and from a lght-polluted site to boot, I'd suggest concentrating on planets (or barbecues if we're lucky). When it gets to August pick a moonless night for a dark-site trip and try for the North America Nebula with binoculars.

[pluton]

As a curiosity, what are the ideal magnification to observe are completely, this object?
and the exit pupil?
regards

paul

[RikM]

There is no single 'best' recommendation for this as so many factors come into play. Assuming you are at a very dark site, you are fully dark adapted and your pupils dilate to 7mm or so...

ASkyWatcher Explorer 150P telescope with an Explore Scientific 34mm 68° EP and a 2" Oiii filter would be the best combo I can think of. This would give you a 22x magnification, a true field of 3° and an exit pupil of 6.8mm.

You won't actually see anything like as much detail as shown here, but this image will give you an idea of the framing at the magnification and field I quoted.

My 'best' view from suburban skies is with an ST80 a Pentax XW 20mm EP and a UHC filter. This gives a 20x magnification, 3.5° true field and an exit pupil of 4mm. 

There are many other combinations and depending on your eyes and the prevailing sky/environmental conditions other parameters will give more satisfying views.