Star Hopping (Across the Universe)

[GrumpiusMaximus]

(On the starship Enterprise, under Captain Kirk).

As discussed in the 'What did you see tonight' thread, I think it's worth a discussion as to the various 'Star Hopping' strategies that we use.  As a beginner, mine seems to be just to hope for the best and point in the vague direction of the object in question - but I know that a lot of the more experienced observers here have a better handle on strategies that have been tried and tested.

What works for you?  What equipment do you use?  Do you manually star hop exclusively or do you also use GOTO, or a combination of both?  Why should be we learn to star hop?  How does light pollution play a part in this and what challenges have you found?

[Ags]

I use a cheap red dot finder and 50mm RACI finder. I have 3 telescopes and only one RDF/RACI, so I spend half my time transferring them between scopes.

I use paper charts I created (see link in my sig) as it preserves night vision better and it's less electronics. I start by sighting along the scope tube at something bright enough to be visible in my Bortle 8 skies, then get the bright thing into the RACI view with help of the RDF. Then I hop along to the actual target using my charts, which roughly show the stars I can (barely) see in the finderscope.

On holidays I might not have my books with me - then I hop using Stellarium on my phone.

Edited January 2 by Ags

[Second Time Around]

I've adapted my Starsense Explorer to fit all my scopes using a 3D printed part to fit any standard Synta finder shoe.  Go to https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4868065

I find this far easier and very much quicker than starhopping using finders, and is especially useful in urban areas where few stars are visible.  There's no problem whatsoever in getting objects within even an 0.8 degree field.

There's no need for a finder - I sold all mine and put the proceeds towards the least expensive Starsense Explorer scope, that anyway comes with a red dot finder.

The updated database of the Starsense Explorer now contains all the objects in the Sky Safari Plus app, and so will keep anyone happy for a lifetime.

I learnt to starhop 60 years ago but for me Starsense Explorer makes it obsolete.  That said, starhopping is fun, and I do (very occasionally) do so.

Edited January 2 by Second Time Around
Added Plus to Sky Safari app

[SwiMatt]

Currently, I use a mixed strategy taking place before and during the observation. Before the observation, I make sure to hop on Stellarium and verify how the object I'm looking for is supposed to look like - making the necessary adjustments in my mind to account for light pollution, as well as my limited aperture. A useful thing to try and figure out, is the general shape and superficial brightness of the object: if a galaxy is generally oval (more or less elongated, etc) and a globular cluster is round, this comes particularly useful for open clusters - are the dominant stars disposed in particular patterns? Is it loose? How big is it? Etc. I try to form an abstract idea of what I should be seeing in my 25mm eyepiece. Another thing I try to see on Stellarium is if there will be a moment in the night when the object I'm hunting will be almost dead vertical or horizontal from a bright star - which seems a bit too easy, but it served me well a couple of times.

Then, once outside, I use a star atlas to find the sky region where I should point the red dot finder at. From there, I look on the sky atlas for possible notable patterns close to the object: bright stars, but also double stars, asterisms, etc. Then... I just move the field of view trying to cover as much space from the "center" of the red dot, panning left-right, then up, left-right, then up, etc. Unfortunately I own a Mak 127 and it's only equipped for 1.25" gears, which means that even if I bought 32mm Plössl eypiece my field of view will get up to 1.1 degrees tops. Not much for searching "at random" around the red dot.

It's a rough method, and it works better and better as I get to know certain parts of the sky. For example it generally takes me 1 minute or less to find M13 or M57 because I'm very familiar with its exact position and it's in an easy configuration with bright stars around, but I have lots of troubles with objects situated in tougher bits of sky such as M27 or M81 (far from bright stars, very dim in my skies, etc).

My plan this year is to get a double socket and a RACI finder to add to the RDF to better work with the observed field of stars, as suggested by several members on this forum. And also possibly a small refractor with fast optics for those wide field views - but that will have to compete financially for a better mount to my current setup

[Elp]

Step back from the scope, identify the constellations you can see naked eye, cross reference with stellarium where I want to go, point scope at bright object looking along the length of scope adjusting azimuth then altitude, look through eyepiece, move scope up/down or left/right (not both), centre target, centre Rigel Quikfinder, hop along.

Or if I want to be quick about it, EQ, polar align, then goto and plate solve. Saves so much time, especially in LP zones.

But I'm normally doing the manual method as the other setups are imaging, so it gives me an excuse to stay outside with the equipment...

[Sunshine]

A red dot finder like the tried and tested Telrad has been my method for decades. Lately with the invention of the Starsense phone module my object searches have been a revelation! Starsense module on my starsense explorer has been absolutely amazing. Never have I been able to so accurately find and see so many objects in one night, and it just works night after night without a hitch, amazing experience.

[GrumpiusMaximus]

4 hours ago, Second Time Around said:

I've adapted my Starsense Explorer to fit all my scopes using a 3D printed part to fit any standard Synta finder shoe.  Go to https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4868065

I find this far easier and very much quicker than starhopping using finders, and is especially useful in urban areas where few stars are visible.  There's no problem whatsoever in getting objects within even an 0.8 degree field.

There's no need for a finder - I sold all mine and put the proceeds towards the least expensive Starsense Explorer scope, that anyway comes with a red dot finder.

The updated database of the Starsense Explorer now contains all the objects in the Sky Safari Plus app, and so will keep anyone happy for a lifetime.

I learnt to starhop 60 years ago but for me Starsense Explorer makes it obsolete.  That said, starhopping is fun, and I do (very occasionally) do so.

I've just noticed you're a SEKAS member, so you must be local to me.

There's a point here that I'd like to get some opinion on.  Essentially, do you personally think it's important to learn to manually star hop the 'old-fashioned' way in complement to using automation (like Starsense Explorer) or do you fully advocate for just using aids?  Is manual star-hopping 'obsolete' in your view?

I'm of the view that both are useful and whilst there are no absolutes, learning to manually star hop would be advantageous in my position.  For the record, I'm in Aylesham which is increasingly light polluted and I have a restricted view, so 'learning the sky' by manually star-hopping would help me plan my sessions better as I'd have a realistic idea of what is visible.  In an unrestricted sky, I don't see this being as important.

I suppose it's mainly frustration on my part that I end up looking at a very limited number of objects due to my lack of practice.  The solution is simple - practice more - but I think there's joy to be had in learning the sky manually if you're a beginner like myself.  With that said, I'd never be snobbish about another using electronic aids because enjoyment of a hobby is enjoyment of a hobby, regardless of how that is fulfilled by the individual.

[John]

I use RACI optical finders with my refractors and a similar finder plus an illuminated reticule finder with dobsonians.

I generally use a combination of Stellarium and / or printed star charts to locate targets where I either don't know, or can't recall, the precise location.

Sometimes a low power, wide field, eyepiece in the scope is used for the final stages of hopping with particularly faint or obscure targets.

I often work out my own "star hop" pathways for more obscure targets. Generally these involve visualising the location of a target relative to readily visible stars. Unofficial asterisms (eg: triangles, rhomboids etc) help with this as does thinking along the lines of "2/3rds of the way between star A and star B, and down a little", that sort of thing.

Certain parts of the sky are much better for me because of rather cluttered horizons and some large conifers bordering our property so I often have to be patient to allow a prospective target to rise into the clear area of sky. 

I know the position of a decent range of targets by heart now. As the seasons pass though I do sometimes need to refresh my memory for the initial viewing of a target that season. 

I can find my way around the principle constellations / brighter stars of each season now which helps with star hopping and observing planning.

My target location improved a lot with the acquisition many years back of the Sky & Telescope Pocket Sky Atlas which I found that worked well with my finders. During the months that followed the arrival of that little publication, my DSO hauls increased markedly 🙂

I always try and end a session on an "easy find" rather than a frustrating and fruitless search. That way, my motivation to observe again ASAP stays strong.

Edited January 2 by John

[Stu]

I normally use either a TelRad or Rigel Quickfinder to get in the right starting place, and then a RACI of some description, normally 10x60 to do the hopping. Sometimes I will just use a widefield eyepiece in the scope and not bother with a finder.

Key to everything for me though is SkySafari. I know that phones can and do affect your night vision, but to be honest most of my observing is done in places where other sources of light affect me at least as much, so the benefit of using SkySafari outweighs the negatives. If I were observing in Mag 21 plus skies I would think differently. I have actually bought an e-ink tablet which can be set to very low, or no backlight so I will start to use this more as the weather improves. Another benefit is that my brain seems to work better with white stars on black, rather than the negative you normally get with printed maps.

I set the app to show the same orientation and field of view circle as either the finder or scope, and set the limiting magnitude of the stars shown to match what I’m seeing. It then becomes trivially easy to hop from your starting star, just by matching patterns as you go. You can zoom out to see that you are heading in the right direction still and then back in again. Almost feels like cheating, but I’ve found some good stuff using this method, including from under quite light polluted skies where few stars are visible with the naked eye. So long as you can find a starting star you are in with a chance.

[Zermelo]

When I started off, I had a small scope on a manual mount. I found it very useful then to learn something about the sky by doing everything manually. I star hopped using a combination of Telrad and 30mm optical finder, which worked well in my Bortle 4 skies, unless the moon interfered.

When I got a goto mount, and especially when I paired it with SkySafari, I no longer bothered star hopping. I rarely need the Telrad now; I either use the goto, or else manually slew while watching the scope direction on Skysafari. The goto isn't perfect, so I still need to do the last bit by eye, in a 9x50 RACI. So I still get plenty of practice matching starfields, judging directions and distances.

I personally don't miss the fully manual process. Some prefer the chase as much as the conclusion, I prefer to maximize my observing time under the unpredictable UK skies.

[lunator]

If I am using my EQ6 is use the handset. For the 200mm dob I use the method I have always used which is very similar to John's method. I some,times use a star atlas but more frequently use Sky Safari. 

I will usually start with a bright star and see if my target is in line with another brightish star. I often use triangular asterisms to 'point the way' or 2 fairly bright stars. I will multiple the distance between  the stars e.g. 3x the distance and then up or down a bit. One word of warning is sky safari can be slightly inaccurate if you are looking for faint doubles. 

Cheers

Ian

[Mr Spock]

So, my target is Σ2870 in Cepheus. My scope is my 4" and at 8.85 + 9.64 at 5.5" it's a good, if faint target for the 4". 

For a finder I'm using my 42mm LVW which gives 3.7° which is the circle marked on the chart (note: chart is reversed to match the scope)

I start out at the nearest bright star, or 'visible' asterism. I say visible because I rarely get visual here below mag 4.0 to 4.5. In this case the asterism containing δ Cep. I point my RDF at that the centre of that area, then view it through the 4" and 42mm eyepiece.

I can see there's a line of stars going up from ζ, so ζ is my next target.

I then move up to the line of stars.

At this point I can see where Σ2870 is, so I centre on that.

I can now increase magnification until I get a split. Most likely my 7mm Nirvana for x106.

From there I can star hop to other doubles using the same method.

 

In reality I'd probably have started off with stars closer to the asterism! But this is just an example of how I star hop. Naturally I'm quite proficient at this now, so I probably make it sound easy 

 

[Paz]

I use a 0x finder to get the target in the field of view of a 6x or 9x right angled finder and get dead on from that.

I started out with 9x50 right angled finders but eventually changed to mostly using 6x30 for the lighter weight and wider field of view.

I'll use a right angled finder whose orientation matches the diagonal I have in the scope, which is usially a mirror but sometimes raci.

I will observe a mix of targets I already know, many of which I can get to without needing a map, plus new things. However a few strategies have evolved from trial and error...

- I rarely have long observing lists, as they generally result in disappointment. I rarely have more than a few new targets in a session.

- I generally plan new targets near to each other or otherwise ensure they are going to be doable star hoos and not a demoralising struggle... I find one target and the next one is often going to be in my finder field of view or close to it.

I don't think you have to spend time finding things manually to learn the sky, it's a hobby so you get to choose how youu want to enjoy it. It can help you learn but so can go to, just in a different way.

I've had sessions star hopping where all I learned was how much of a pain star hopping can be sometimes, but that's how I do it,  and after 10 years I don't feel any desire to change. The flip side is the sense of achievement when you find something that was tough, plus the fact that to me the sky is a mixture of well known well trodden paths interspersed with unfamiliar and unknown places that I might get to explore some day.

Edit... just to add, I use sky safari in the field, not paper maps.

Edited January 2 by Paz

[Second Time Around]

3 hours ago, GrumpiusMaximus said:

I've just noticed you're a SEKAS member, so you must be local to me.

There's a point here that I'd like to get some opinion on.  Essentially, do you personally think it's important to learn to manually star hop the 'old-fashioned' way in complement to using automation (like Starsense Explorer) or do you fully advocate for just using aids?  Is manual star-hopping 'obsolete' in your view?

I'm of the view that both are useful and whilst there are no absolutes, learning to manually star hop would be advantageous in my position.  For the record, I'm in Aylesham which is increasingly light polluted and I have a restricted view, so 'learning the sky' by manually star-hopping would help me plan my sessions better as I'd have a realistic idea of what is visible.  In an unrestricted sky, I don't see this being as important.

I suppose it's mainly frustration on my part that I end up looking at a very limited number of objects due to my lack of practice.  The solution is simple - practice more - but I think there's joy to be had in learning the sky manually if you're a beginner like myself.  With that said, I'd never be snobbish about another using electronic aids because enjoyment of a hobby is enjoyment of a hobby, regardless of how that is fulfilled by the individual.

I don't think there's a "right" answer, just what's right for an individual.

I should correct what I posted before as I do occasionally use 1 finder.  That's an Askar 180 camera lens that can be converted to visual use with interchangeable eyepieces.  For instance, together with a 20mm/70 degree crosshair eyepiece from Svbony this gives me a 9x40 finder with an approx 7.75 degree field.

However, as I said I hardly use it, instead preferring Starsense Explorer.  The main reason is that, due to poor health, my observing sessions now have to be short.  Starsense Explorer allows me to see many more objects in these short sessions.

I came back to astronomy just a few years ago (hence Second Time Around).  Luckily I remembered all the constellations plus the position of quite a few of the bright DSOs.

I still sometimes enjoy "the thrill of the chase", but for me Starsense Explorer is by far the best option. So it doesn't make starhopping totally obsolete for me or indeed anyone else.

However, I think that the main reason that so many beginners give up is the frustration of not being able to find objects.  Starsense Explorer solves that very nicely indeed, plus it tells them either on screen (or even verbally) about many of the brighter objects. 

It's also quicker than Go-To and, as I mentioned before, can easily and cheaply be moved from scope to scope.

Additionally, unlike Go-To, Starsense Explorer can be moved around the observing site without the need for realignment.

Also, with Starsense Explorer you still see a lot of the intervening sky between objects and the area around the objects themselves.  Unlike Go-To  you can go as quickly or slowly as you want.  So there's still an element of learning and discovery.

New technology in any field often takes time to be fully accepted.  I'm normally as guilty as anyone of this.  However, I truly think that Starsense Explorer really is game changing.

Edited January 2 by Second Time Around
Paragraph added about moving around.

[John]

18 minutes ago, Second Time Around said:

I don't think there's a "right" answer, just what's right for an individual........

.............However, I think that the main reason that so many beginners give up is the frustration of not being able to find objects...... 

Two nails hit very firmly on the head there Steve 

Hopefully the variety of approaches shared in this thread will help folks new to observing find a way that works for them 🙂

Edited January 2 by John

[Second Time Around]

I've just added the following to my last post. 

Additionally, unlike Go-To, Starsense Explorer can be moved around the observing site without the need for realignment.

[GrumpiusMaximus]

Thank you all so much for your valuable contributions.  It's great to see all of the methods discussed without anybody getting 'ideological' about it and this is definitely giving me food for thought.  I hope others are getting as much value from your combined contributions, it's brilliant being able to draw from such a wealth of experiences.

[Nicola Fletcher]

I’ve found that over the years I’ve moved further away from GoTo and other aids and now I really enjoy star hopping and finding things manually. I have wasted clear nights getting frustrated with a mount that won’t align or other gadgets that don’t behave. With 3 and 4” refractors, I now just use a red dot finder (one with a series of concentric circles) and a low power EP to find things. I’m attempting to do the same with my new 12” dob but I’m not sure yet how successful that will be! I might end up with a Nexus DSC or similar, but to be honest I’d prefer to keep things as simple as possible.

I like to use the instructions in TLAO, Cosmic Challenge by Philip Harrington (a really fantastic book) and websites such as http://themcdonalds.net/notes-on-finding-dsos/. Otherwise I use a star atlas (Sky and Telescope Pocket Star Atlas or Interstellarum) or SkySafari, but I plan the session indoors beforehand and sometimes draw out my own map of where the object is which I take outside. I tend to plan sessions around particular constellations or areas of the sky which I think makes things easier.

I observe in good Bortle 4 skies (just one area of light pollution to the North) so it’s easy to star hop from the RDF but I can imagine a proper finder might help in light polluted areas. Personally I find them very hard to use without a RDF to get me close to the general area. 

[badhex]

I use similar methods to quite a few other on this thread. I don't currently use any motorised mounts, though I have done before. 

For quite a lot of the time I've actually relied mostly on a very low power EP essentially acting as a finder (Lacerta 40mm ED) when used with my two most used scopes, an F5.9 ZS73, and an F7 Starfield (well, the TS-Optics equivalent). This provides a pretty large TFOV in either scope, around 6° and 3.6° respectively. I have also set up Stellarium with the correct FOV overlays for the EP/scope combos above. I did purchase a RACI not so long ago but it's a bit of a faff to set up every time and too bulky to take away on holiday so I haven't fully got into the swing of it. 

After checking out the location on Stellarium (with Twilight app running to provide a red screen overlay), I'll find a sensibly close by bright star from a known constellation or asterism. In some cases this might be a star that forms part of a line between other stars and the target, for example.

With the 40mm in, I eyeball my bright star and point the scope roughly in the right direction, and most of the time I'm close enough that the star is in the FOV. A red dot finder does help with this and I've started using one more, but sometimes the low angle isn't ideal, plus it's simply not always possible in skies with strong LP. 

Once I've found it, I'll check Stellarium again to see which direction I need to move in, and what I should be seeing in the EP - for example if my starting star is at one edge of the FOV, what should I see at the other edge, in the direction of the target? I'm quite good at discerning patterns and reversing them in my head e.g. "at the edge of the FOV there are three stars in an elongated triangle shape" so I'll move to those and place them at the edge of the FOV, and again repeat. I usually don't have to do this more than three or four times before arriving at my target and often fewer than that, and then it's just a case of switching up EPs to my desired FL. 

[Mr Spock]

I used to have a goto mount (EQ6), but never used the goto. For me star hopping is half the fun. Just looking at star fields is a pastime on its own!

[badhex]

8 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

I used to have a goto mount (EQ6), but never used the goto. For me star hopping is half the fun. Just looking at star fields is a pastime on its own!

Also yes - this! On more than one occasion I've found something interesting in the FOV whilst star hopping which I wasn't aiming for but was interesting enough to look up. This is one big benefit of using the whole scope as the 'finder'; the extra light grasp does mean you see more stuff than you would in a finder alone. 

[glafnazur]

For many years I didn't have goto so I used to star hop or I'd use the 'point it in roughly the right direction and move the scope about until I find it' method. There was always a feeling of satisfaction finding an object manually, however over the past few years my sessions have been few and far between so I mainly use goto when I do manage to get out.

[GrumpiusMaximus]

28 minutes ago, badhex said:

Also yes - this! On more than one occasion I've found something interesting in the FOV whilst star hopping which I wasn't aiming for but was interesting enough to look up. This is one big benefit of using the whole scope as the 'finder'; the extra light grasp does mean you see more stuff than you would in a finder alone. 

I found the double cluster for the first time this way.  I was looking for something else (cannot remember what!) and desperately sweeping.  Suddenly it came into my FOV and took my breath away.  One of the reasons I want to learn to star hop, the journey is the point - not necessarily the intended destination...

[Ed in UK]

For me it's using Sky Safari 6 to plan an observing list. I usually look at Star Hops in advance either on my phone or tablet to make sure there's enough stars to guide me.

Outside with scope set up find the brightest star close as close as possible to my target and star hop using SS6 as my guide.

I found SS6 a game changer for me as I could flip and invert the display to show what I could see in the scope and adjust the magnitudes to again match the view in the EP.

I really struggled with charts and pretty much always failed to find anything I was hoping to see.

Planning is a big part of helping me and not to have too many targets to view in one night. 

I also use magazines to compile observing lists (again in SS6).

I did think at the start of taking up this hobby about paying the extra for a Goto but decided against it. For me it's better to look and learn via trial and error, more satisfaction then when you reach your target.

Owning horses, I have a number of jobs that need to be done outdoors in the dark at this time of year. I like to take a few minutes between jobs to look at the sky and become familiar with the layout of the constellations etc.  

[Bugdozer]

1 hour ago, glafnazur said:

For many years I didn't have goto so I used to star hop or I'd use the 'point it in roughly the right direction and move the scope about until I find it' method. There was always a feeling of satisfaction finding an object manually, however over the past few years my sessions have been few and far between so I mainly use goto when I do manage to get out.

It's like cooking. Sometimes you are just hungry and a microwave ready meal is better than taking half an hour making something from ingredients. Other times you want to experience the satisfaction of having made something from scratch.