Hardest/toughest moon targets....

[Doc]

Just wondering what is the hardest/toughest moon target thats possible to observe in a large scope.

Catena Timocharis as a challenging object for the larger telescopes and according to the Virtual Moon Atlas this subject needs an aperture of at least 500mm.

Is there anymore.......

[Talitha]

Not sure if there's a list anywhere but what the heck, aim for the impossible.. try for Ina Caldera and Rima Sheepshanks.

[Doc]

Cheers Carol will try these thats for sure.

I might even do the lunar 100. I fancy that.

[Ben Ritchie]

The lunar 100 is fun, well worth starting - frustrating to finish off, I think, because some of the harder ones have a fairly limited/infrequent (?) window of observation which requires the weather to play ball.

[Talitha]

I agree, Ben.. some of the Lunar 100 targets need specific light angles and/or favorable libration in order to be seen, and have a 4-5 hour window of opportunity each month. If the Moon is below the horizon or it's cloudy when the event occurs, you're out of luck till next time. There are also a few targets on the list which aren't very easy (read: nearly impossible, lol) to observe. But if you read all of the descriptions on the back of the Lunar 100 Card, it's easy to see that Chuck's field is geology and not visual observing.

Doc if you're serious about wanting to try for Ina Caldera, here's an image of it captured by Wes Higgins. It's the tiny indentation (about the size of a pencil eraser) on the dark flat little plateau (image center) halfway between the two main craters... it looks like the capital letter 'D' lying on its' back. Its upper left rim is shadowed, and its bottom and right side are sunlit, as is its floor. Best of luck to you.

[kniclander]

i think alan shepherd's golf ball might still be up there

[Doc]

Carol this type of observing gives me a tingling down my spine so to speak. And apart from a few DSO's I don't get that often.

It's an adventure through your lens to see something not many people see.

I saw Catena Timocharis in my 400mm scope where VMA says you need 500mm.

I have the bug and the lunar 100 seems ideal. Wish me luck.

[Talitha]

Tingle you say? If I had a 16" Dob aimed at Luna, my spine would be doin' a pretty wicked shimmy, lol.

Just off the top of my head, you can add the Plato craterlets, Vallis Alpes' rille and the vent openings on the Hortensius Domes to your list. They're not as tough as the ones already mentioned, but you might have fun looking for them.

[roberte76]

on the vma pro it gives plenty of object which require a minimum of say 200mm aperture which i have seen with my mak 127 (de gasparis rilles for example)so I reckon the seeing of a minumum 500mm min object may be possible with a 12incher? however as always someone here will tell us it ain't that easy...................

[Doc]

on the vma pro it gives plenty of object which require a minimum of say 200mm aperture which i have seen with my mak 127 (de gasparis rilles for example)so I reckon the seeing of a minumum 500mm min object may be possible with a 12incher? however as always someone here will tell us it ain't that easy...................

A lot depends on seeing. if the moon is steady and nor shimmering you can see a alot more detail.

Also your choice of eyepieces. Since buying the Ortho's I can see alot mmore detail.

[TheThing]

Also your choice of eyepieces. Since buying the Ortho's I can see alot mmore detail.

I'll second that! Since moving from Plossls to a mixture of orthos etc, I've seen loads more stuff on the moon and much more detail, mostly with the 4" refractor.

I'm slowly working my way thru the lunar 100 - don't want to finish it too quickly!