[sac-forum] Re: Messier Marathon results questions

The times I've gotten M74 & M77 in twilight, I've had several star maps of
the field, down to various magnitudes. Surprisingly, I've always found M74
to the easier of the two. The star field is easy to recognize and it's an
easy star hop from Beta Arietis. Once I know where it is in relation to the
star field averted vision brings it out ever so slightly.

I use the same technique for M77. I just look for the "Star" that shouldn't
be there in the field and that would be M77's core. Tapping on the tube
certainly helps. I imagine any experienced observed knows this trick and
would avail him/herself of it's use.

While certainly a challenge this year, I see no reason to doubt Dr Aguirre's
observations. Certainly no one who turned in a list to me and asked the high
count posed no objection or doubt. Most said great job. After all the
impossible is impossible only until someone does it.

Besides, the objective of the Messier Marathon is to have fun. From the
comments I heard as I collected the Checklists, this objective was met in
spades.   

Clear Skies

Rick Tejera

Editor SACnews

Saguaro Astronomy Club

Phoenix, Arizona

www.saguaroastro.org

saguaroastro@xxxxxxx 

-----Original Message-----
From: sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of AJ Crayon
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 17:31
To: sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sac-forum] Re: Messier Marathon results questions

Tim, there are no other references by Dr. Aguirre or George Robinson on what

they did to bag this elusive object.  At least nothing more than what I've 
said earlier.  Perhaps they did try tapping the telescope tube, but there 
isn't any reference on the list nor would I expect this to be mentioned.

To your earlier reference - perhaps you saw the core of M77 and not a star. 
Quite possible.  What I'd suggest is to wait until M77 affords a better 
view, some months from now, and make an observation and see if it comes 
close to what you saw.

AJ Crayon
Phoenix, AZ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Harshaw" <rharshaw2@xxxxxxx>
To: <sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 5:17 PM
Subject: [sac-forum] Re: Messier Marathon results questions


> Tim, the only really bright star in that area IS Delta Ceti, so either 
> your
> alignment was not as tight as you thought (although your grabbing what--  
> 108
> -- M's shows it was on target), or your FOV is bigger than you thought it
> was?  There is a 9.02 mag star about 15 min NE of M77, but that was not
> bright enough to be the one Bob saw, is it??  But then you did say you 
> were
> able to "SEE" Delta-- did you mean through the EP or just with the naked
> eye, binos or a spotter?
>
> Have you ever measured your FOV diameter using the timing of a transit of 
> a
> star?
>
>
> Richard Harshaw
> Cave Creek, AZ
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:sac-forum-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Tim Jones
> Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 5:04 PM
> To: sac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [sac-forum] Re: Messier Marathon results questions
>
> Bob has updated me - it apparently wasn't Delta Ceti as Delta Ceti
> would have been out of the FOV with both eyepieces, so now I'm lost
> as to what the star was that we saw, but it was bright enough to see
> even before astronomical twilight.  Is it possible that we were
> seeing the core of M77 and not a star?  I'm now totally confused :-O.
>
> Tim
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2008, at 3:46 PM, Tim Jones wrote:
>> As an added note to our tracking, we were able to see Delta Ceti
>> for almost 10 minutes before we lost it behind the mountain.
>>
>> On Apr 11, 2008, at 3:39 PM, Tim Jones wrote:
>>
>>> I have to add my voice to the questions that have come up
>>> concerning the viewing of M77.  With two observers reporting that
>>> they visually saw M77, I am curious as to the method used and
>>> what, if any, filters were employed.  Bob and I tracked M77 with a
>>> Celestron 9.25" SCT with 36MM and 25MM Plossel eyepieces until M77
>>> was physically below the mountain and the background light
>>> continually obscured any chance of our seeing this Mag 8.9
>>> object.  Of course, our attempt at sighting M77 cost us M33... :-(
>>>
>>> I'm not trying to cast doubt on the two reported sightings, just
>>> trying to understand what we could have done differently from what
>>> we did.
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Other related posts: