Lesser Known Clusters In Cygnus

[cloudsweeper]

Used the ST120 for wide-angle hunting.  Arcturus and Vega appeared about 10.20, then several more stars in the EP (but not to the naked eye).

From Sadr I hopped to re-visit open cluster NGC 6910.  Its three main stars were later enhanced by a pretty, tight chain of fainter ones completing its Y shape, and looking better at x33.

Next, open cluster Cr (Collinder) 419, which was just a loose array.  It has (as far as I could see) rightly been described as "not very impressive".

Cygnus clouded over, so I swung to Saturn, low in the south, and Titan was also clearly visible.

The near-full Moon then emerged from behind a house to the east, and took up half the FOV at x60.  A beautiful yet blindingly bright image, yielding scant detail, so back to Cygnus.

Located P Cyg, then on to open cluster Be (Berk or Berkeley) 86.  This was roughly between a miniature Taurus head including P Cyg, and the immediately recognisable M29 Cooling Tower open cluster.  Be 86 was again not much to look at - a loose array, with many faint stars, described as a young cluster which had not been much studied until quite recently.

According to the Pocket Sky Atlas, there are other lesser-known open clusters in the region such as Bas (Basel) 6, and Bi (Biur or Biurakan) 2, and while it is instructive to track and view such objects, I suppose it is to be expected that the more appealing targets fall into the better-known catalogues!

Doug.

[scarp15]

Interesting and descriptive account Doug, Cygnus abounds with open clusters, that fall into different categories. A worth while topic to highlight as the clusters do get overshadowed by the attraction of the famous nebulae hunts. As you describe great for a rich field scope and perhaps for when there is an ascending moon. If that's OK to include to gain a holistic overview, here are a couple of previous threads on the subject contributed by Nick and Piero.

 

 

[Paz]

Thanks for posting, I haven't yet had a look at Cygnus this summer but this has pushed it up my list!

[Piero]

Very nice reading mate! 

[Dave In Vermont]

This is the sort of revelations that I truly love to hear about! The lesser-known denizens and their esoteric charms.

Very good stuff - thanks!

Dave

[alan potts]

Nice report Doug, I did this group with the exact same book last year, with the 18 inch and it's lowest power there really are quite a few stars around that area, moon needs to be tucked up in bed though.

[FenlandPaul]

Great report from off the beaten track. That part of the sky is chock full of interesting stuff.

[DeepSkyBagger]

Some of these obscure catalogues of clusters can be a red herring. Many of the supposed clusters are nothing more than asterisms, and some are re-catalogued objects that are already known. It takes proper motion studies to determine whether they are truly clusters or not. Still, they're interesting to track down and see if you can make out what the catalogue-makers were getting at.

For example:

Basel 6 - Observed 08/08/2016 - There is a triangular patch of 20 - 30 stars here, which looks very much like a cluster, but the position in my planetarium software (Guide 9.1) is just to the north west of this, where nothing other than faint background stars can be seen. I identified the triangular cluster I saw as NGC 6874. Checking 'Star Clusters' by Archinal & Hynes confirmed that Basel 6 is an erroneous re-listing of NGC 6874, with a slightly incorrect position.

Biurakan 2 - Observed 30/07/2016 - Guide gives the overall magnitude of this cluster as 6.3, but the magnitude of the brightest star as 16. Obviously, this makes no sense. Nevertheless, there is a fairly obvious grouping of stars here, centred on a lovely bright double star, about magnitude 8 or 9 (HD 191566). There are about 20 stars in the 20' field. Immediately to the east of the double is a group of half a dozen equal magnitude stars (magnitude 11-12). This would appear to be a true open cluster.

You see - you win some, you lose some!

[cloudsweeper]

1 hour ago, DeepSkyBagger said:

Some of these obscure catalogues of clusters can be a red herring. Many of the supposed clusters are nothing more than asterisms, and some are re-catalogued objects that are already known. It takes proper motion studies to determine whether they are truly clusters or not. Still, they're interesting to track down and see if you can make out what the catalogue-makers were getting at.

 

They are indeed, so whatever they are, it's always a "win"!

Doug.

[DeepSkyBagger]

It's also interesting to note how errors can be repeated and compounded. I see from the scan of the Pocket Sky Atlas that NGC 6874 is not labelled, but 'Basel 6' is. That's just wrong. The same error occurs on the Uranometria map of the area, where the cluster is marked as 'Bas 6'. Looking carefully at it, Uranometria is also using the incorrect, Basel, position, and although the scale is small, the same error in position occurs on the Pocket Sky Atlas.

It just goes to show that checking sources is still important, because even now, not everything is where you're told it is, and not everything is what you're told it is...

<Creeps off to a background of mysterious music...> 

[cloudsweeper]

15 minutes ago, DeepSkyBagger said:

It's also interesting to note how errors can be repeated and compounded. I see from the scan of the Pocket Sky Atlas that NGC 6874 is not labelled, but 'Basel 6' is. That's just wrong. The same error occurs on the Uranometria map of the area, where the cluster is marked as 'Bas 6'. Looking carefully at it, Uranometria is also using the incorrect, Basel, position, and although the scale is small, the same error in position occurs on the Pocket Sky Atlas.

It just goes to show that checking sources is still important, because even now, not everything is where you're told it is, and not everything is what you're told it is...

<Creeps off to a background of mysterious music...> 

OK, think I'll just stick with the Moon from now on!  Unless you know something I don't........!

Doug.

[Stu]

57 minutes ago, cloudsweeper said:

OK, think I'll just stick with the Moon from now on!  Unless you know something I don't........!

Doug.

Don't go doing that Doug!

I enjoyed reading your report, keep them coming!! I'm sure these clusters will be a little more dramatic when we get some decent darkness back, Cygnus in late summer/early autumn is one of my favourite targets all year.

[cloudsweeper]

6 minutes ago, Stu said:

Don't go doing that Doug!

I enjoyed reading your report, keep them coming!! I'm sure these clusters will be a little more dramatic when we get some decent darkness back, Cygnus in late summer/early autumn is one of my favourite targets all year.

Many thanks, Stu - I like to keep the contributions going in spite of the light sky (when you can see it through the clouds, that is)!

Doug.

[DeepSkyBagger]

1 hour ago, cloudsweeper said:

OK, think I'll just stick with the Moon from now on!  Unless you know something I don't........!

Doug.

Nah! Keep digging at those obscure objects - it's SOooo much more interesting!