James Webb Telescope

[petevasey]

Hi,folks,

I was looking for coordinates for the telescope's position,and came across this page:

https://theskylive.com/jwst-info

I'd love to know where they get their coordinates!

Anyway I decided to have a go at imaging this wonderful telescope in the hope that there is enough sunlight reflecting from the heat shield to show up as a star in an image.

I was set up to image another target with my QSI683 camera on my 4" TMB 105 refractor.  But while the Moon was up (6th Feb) I had an hour to play (I'd been out earlier).  Got 6 x 5 minute images unbinned at 5 minute intervals, and this gif is the result.  Look for the faint moving dot a little below centre.  The upper of the two bright stars is TYC 763-29-1, so you will be able to find the location in a planetarium program.

Very faint, but undoubtedly James Webb - the coordinates match those given on The Sky Live site.

I'll eventually have another go with my 10" RC - should get a brighter image.

Cheers,

Peter

[tomato]

Great  capture, I read that amateurs could still image the JWST out at L2 and you have the proof right there.👍

[gorann]

Very cool Peter, and good use of that moonlit hour!

[skyhog]

Very good Pete, I was wondering about the visual magnitude of the webb. I would imagine it would be a challenge but very pleasing to see it in the eyepiece. That's a great link. Thanks. 

[petevasey]

Thanks folks.

I've now done an overlay of the images.  ('Lighten' in Photoshop).  Hope it's of interest.

Cheers,

Peter

[petevasey]

3 hours ago, skyhog said:

Very good Pete, I was wondering about the visual magnitude of the webb. I would imagine it would be a challenge but very pleasing to see it in the eyepiece. That's a great link. Thanks. 

I've had a good look in Stellarium which goes down to 18th magnitude stars.  And I reckon the scope was even fainter - perhaps 19 or 20.  So visually you'd need a massive light bucket to stand any chance at all.  Even then the movement is so slight  (less than 2 arc-secs per minute) that you'd be hard pressed to detect it amongst the background stars.

Cheers,

Peter

[skyhog]

15 hours ago, petevasey said:

I've had a good look in Stellarium which goes down to 18th magnitude stars.  And I reckon the scope was even fainter - perhaps 19 or 20.  So visually you'd need a massive light bucket to stand any chance at all.  Even then the movement is so slight  (less than 2 arc-secs per minute) that you'd be hard pressed to detect it amongst the background stars.

Cheers,

Peter

19 or 20....pretty much forget about that then visually. 😳