#9 NGC Life List

     In my very first post earlier this month I talked about astronomers who work their way methodically through object lists, often to the detriment of the object.  A quick glance, a note or two, maybe a quick sketch and then they are off to the next object.  All well and fine if you are looking at 14th magnitude galaxies, but if your list is packed with the brightest deep sky gems, what is the hurry?  400 top objects could well last your entire life.

     To make certain that I never finish my life list, or run out of options on any given clear night, I chose the NGC list a long time ago as my main deep sky emphasis.  I will not pass a Collinder or Berkeley cluster without a look, but my longest viewing time is spent on the NGC list.  In a lifetime of observing I have only seen about 630 of them, averaging just over one per observing session (last night I logged two new ones).  I really need to ramp that up a wee bit if I want to see all available from my latitude before I die.

     The new edition of Uranometria 2000 claims that more than 30,000 non-stellar objects are on its charts.  That's over 22,000 more than are in the NGC list.  Good grief.  Makes me kind of thankful that I am not overly obsessed.  Of those 30,000 objects, nearly 26,000 of them are galaxies.  Which means that nearly 5 in 6 non-stellar objects viewable in the night sky with amateur scopes are galaxies.  Most of those are pretty faint, too.  Here is the breakdown, as reported on the atlas' back cover:

     25,883 galaxies

     671 galaxy clusters (Abell)

     14 star clouds

     1,613 open clusters, including those in the Magellanic Clouds

     170 globular clusters

     355 bright nebulae

     367 dark nebulae

     1,145 planetary nebulae

     260 radio sources

     35 x-ray sources

     I remember being very surprised when I first learned how many galaxies were available to amateur astronomers (all the ones listed in Uranometria are mag. 15 or brighter).  I mean that I was very surprised.  Growing up loving the Milky Way area and all of its clusters and nebulae, it was easy to conclude that clusters of stars far outnumber galaxies.  That, to say the least, was an erroneous conclusion.  If one decides to choose the NGC for a life list, one must be prepared to see some galaxies.  I don't just mean the ones in the Messier catalogue, either.

     Finding and doing justice to galaxies requires the very finest of dark skies.  I used to be able to pick off 12th mag. galaxies from my back deck with my 8" scope.  Light pollution has increased so much in my area that this is now quite impossible.  I did snag one last night with the 12", but if I want to do a decent job of observing in Leo this spring, I have to be prepared to travel with the scope.  This brings on an interesting conundrum.  I also had a preliminary look last night at M 65 and M 66, bright galaxies in Leo.  Compared to faint little eg 2894 viewed previously, they were pretty darn impressive.  So, do I observe the brighter galaxies from my home, saving the fainter ones for country skies?  Though this is a feasible plan, I try to imagine what eg 2894 might look like from a dark sky.  If I can even see it from home, then it might just be that much more impressive from a dark sky.  Should I save all my faint objects for darker skies?  What about M 65 and M 66?    Of the two, M 65 was less bright but it was really huge after viewing it for a few moments.  M 66 was quite bright, and I could probably have used up to 300x without any loss of brightness.  However, what would these objects look like from a really dark sky site?

     One solution to this problem, which I'm certain many of us face all too often, is to keep notes and report on the brighter ones as seen from home suburban skies, but also return to them in dark skies and enjoy a quick peek.  eg 2894 seemed to have a little cluster of very faint stars superimposed over it, only barely resolvable at high power with averted vision.  Was there a stellar core?  Couldn't really tell.  But the elongated galaxy could be seen in behind the star field, best at 150x in the 12".  I know I want another look in darker skies, resolving those faint stars more easily and perhaps seeing some detail in the galaxy itself.

    Whereas fainter galaxies pose severe problems for suburban viewers, objects such as clusters and nebulae, especially planetary (I also enjoyed good views of pn 2346 in Monoceros last night), do not pose significant problems.  And double star work can carry on quite well, too, often even during full moon nights.  However, I am determined to do as much deep sky work in the darkest skies I can reach.  I've been spoiled by my northern Ontario early years of observing.  Another time I will talk about my nearby observing options, and how they may best be used.  Until then, I hope you enjoy a clear sky night or two.

Mapman Mike

#8 My Previous Telescope

      I mention in my intro to this site that I have had considerable experience observing the skies with a telescope.  Most of that was done with my previous telescope, the one with which I have logged the most hours.  Here is the original promo sheet that I got with it.  I was fortunate in that I was able to use the instrument spring, summer and fall in northern Ontario under pristine dark skies for many years.  That scope could pull almost any object out of a dark sky, and served me very well for over 30 years.  I recently sold it to help finance my upgrade to a 12" Dob.  The Edmund 8" was a thing of beauty, and I instantly fell in love with it at the Toronto shop where it was set up.  I was in university in 1978 and barely had a spare nickel to my name.  Student grants and loans saved my life back then, and I didn't mind cutting back drastically on food and beer for awhile to help pay for this.

     To date I have logged 540 formal observations, encountering over 660 NGC/IC objects, hundreds of variable stars, thousands of double and multiple stars, and many objects not listed as NGC.  Quite a few of the observed objects have been sketched, and if I am able to I will soon begin to share some of these remarkable past observations.  Scanning a sheet of black paper containing stars and galaxies drawn and painted on it is a new experience for me, and early results are not promising.

     The first time I got to use the 8" in a dark sky I thought I would lose my mind.  There were stars among stars among stars, and the background just seemed to resolve forever and ever.  My family had a cottage on Lake Penage, west of Sudbury, Ontario.  I had observed there for years with the smaller telescope I had previous to the Edmund.  Naked eye 7th magnitude stars were routine on a good night.  Spring galaxies soon fell one after another to the mighty 8" mirror, as did summer globulars, open clusters, and nebulae.  Star charts for amateurs had just recently graduated from Norton to the more comprehensive ones of  Will Tirion.  I was seeing many faint objects not even plotted on their maps!

     Alas, the 8" had its flaws.  The extreme tension required to hold the mount in place depended on a simple turnbuckle, which frequently stripped suddenly.  The telescope could fall over when that happened, and did on more than one occasion.  Plenty of spare buckles were always on hand.  The 40mm finder-scope was not the greatest, and the main focuser was considerably less than perfect.  Balancing the scope was tricky, and when a large eyepiece was plunked down, things went astray quickly.  The tube had to be loosened and repositioned when changing sky positions (and rebalanced).  But it had a working clock drive for most of its illustrious career, and that really enabled drawing at the eyepiece, as well as meditative viewing.  My wife would sometimes sketch for 30 minutes without ever requiring me to re-center the object.

     It was decently equipped for astrophotography, but other than some lunar and planetary work I was never interested in that aspect of astronomy (another subject for a future blog).  As I have been an avid photographer since the age of 13, this might seem somewhat perplexing.  Parting with the Edmund scope was not as hard as I expected.  I had it up for sale for about a week last fall.  There were no nibbles and I had just made up my mind to upgrade it with a better finder and focuser, and forego purchasing a new 12."  Then along came a buyer, who took it after one look (it is awful pretty).

     I am eager to revisit some objects logged with the 8" scope, now available to me with the 12", but I will mostly go on to different sights with the new one.  In my next post I will talk about those objects and why I gave this blog the name that I did.  Hope you come back.

Mapman Mike

#7 Planning Update

     Nothing like cloudy weather to get a lot of observing planning done!  I have a large number of fresh pages ready to go for Leo, should skies ever clear.  I observe from Essex County, Ontario, Canada.  We are surrounded by vast lakes that greatly influence the skies.  It is thus a very humid region, and weather is difficult to predict.  I came out from a concert in Detroit last Saturday night and it was completely clear.  However, a vast cloud bank could be seen sitting to the southeast.  Yup, that was my cloud bank.  By the time I arrived home in the extreme west of my county (right up against the Detroit River) it was completely overcast.  Clear in Detroit; cloudy in Essex County, Canada.  I will devote a future blog to detailing my nearby observing locations (I have five options).  I'll try not to depress you with how many cloudy nights we get.

     Today, however, I am only here to announce my completion of the herculean task of preparing notes for observing the constellation Leo in depth.  I have the specs on 460 objects written down on paper and lightly marked in pencil on the atlas, with 360 of them being NGC galaxies (I skipped most of the IC galaxies for now, and all of the other even fainter ones from different catalogues).  The other objects to be observed are double stars, variables or just plain  stars.  As I do not yet know the limits of my 12" mirror at my suburban location (I'm certain that in a dark sky in New Mexico there would be no limits), I am prepared to track down all of the NGC within Leo.  I may get to see 30% of them, or even less.  Maybe I'll see them all.  It's something I do not yet know.  Leo is high enough that I should be looking at the best part of my viewable sky.  Anyway, time will tell just how far I will get with spring plans.  I would love to hear from someone who has observed a lot in Leo, so if you are out there kindly message me.  Theoretically, every object I jotted down (I have 32 pages ready to be filled with exciting notes and sketches) should be viewable in my instrument.   Lucky for me I have a good friend nearby with a 22" Dob, just in case there are one or two I can't find with my instrument.  Something like "Copeland's Septet" should be an awesome galaxy group to see in a 22" Dob.  Are you listening, Randy?

     I came across another interesting named feature on the Uranometria charts for Leo.  Ever heard of the "Frosty Leo Nebula?"  Can't wait to see that one.  Reminds me of the "Red Rectangle" in Monoceros, which I am still hoping to see before the season passes.  Has anyone seen either of these?  Please share if you have.

     So, how many clear nights will it take me to see the 460 planned objects in Leo?  Good question.  I try to set up my observing pages so that one page approximates what I can search for and possibly see in one night (remember that I will have a different constellation awaiting for later in the night--I will soon prepare Lyra).  With 32 pages of Leo objects awaiting, I will thus need about 32 nights of clear, dark skies to finish this project.  If I am lucky, I will get 5 nights per season to observe, so I might get almost 1/6th of the way through Leo this year.  If I am very lucky, I might score as high as 8 pages/nights (average 14 objects per page).  Remember that I am not in a rush to finish this.  I may still be observing in Leo when I die!  I hope to carefully observe every chosen object, especially the 5 Messier objects within Leo.  A few other large, bright galaxies also await, and I know I will see some wonderful double stars, as well as many incidental stars of note.  I am partial to very orange stars, but almost any colour will do.  I do not spend a long time on very faint galaxies, unless there is something of particular interest.  I love edge-on ones, and can look at those for quite some time.  I am also excited at seeing several galaxies within the same field of view in my eyepiece--that is always quite a rush!

     As soon as I actually begin Leo, I will report back.

Mapman Mike

#6 My Telescope, Part 2

The fully assembled Orion XX12i, ready for first light.

     As much fun as it was to unpack and assemble the scope, getting it outside at night was the moment I was awaiting.  First light turned into a star party, as I chose to set up on a neighbour's farm.  Randy, Deb and I were the only ones present who had ever looked through a telescope.  We had five others present, and they got quite a show.  I had no idea how to use a Dob, so Randy did the honours, pointing the mirror at showpiece after showpiece.  I was pleased with the views I got (when it was my turn), and knew good things were in store.  The newbie astronomers were blown away by the views they had of the double double in Lyra, Albireo, the Ring Nebula, and various gloriously resolved globular clusters.

     To compensate for losing my equatorial mount, I had ordered a scope with "push to" capability.  It is not a "go to."  You have to physically move the scope from object to object.  A quick and easy two star alignment is required, and then, after following the arrows on the small keypad computer, "voila," the requested object appears in the eyepiece.  As I was convinced that star hopping would prove too difficult, I was planning on using the computer option to navigate the sky.

     I was wrong on the star hopping.  Turns out it is pretty easy after all (see my entries on planning an observing session).  I usually use the computer (which runs on a single 9-volt battery) to get started, then switch to my tried and true method of star hopping.  The scope itself handles like a dream.  It is perfectly balanced at all times and with any eyepiece, something I could never brag about with the old equatorial scope.  Movement of the tube is so smooth that zig-zagging seems like straight motion.  The precision of the 2-speed focusser is one of its best features.

     The best part of owning this scope is its portability.  I can set it up myself in the field in 15 minutes and be ready to observe.  This includes aligning the finderscope, which must be done each time.  Getting the computer up and running with the two-star alignment takes less than 2 minutes, and getting to the first object of the session requires less than a minute after that.  Taking things apart in the dark is easy, and from observing the night's last object to driving off in my vehicle all packed up takes fifteen minutes.

     The scope came with three eyepieces and a 2x shorty Barlow lens.  The 25mm 1 1/4" Epic 11 ED is actually quite good, giving excellent colour results.  The outside areas of the field are blurry, however.  The 10 mm eyepiece is adequate for now, a mid-range Plossl.  I have already split some mighty close double stars with it.  The 2" eyepiece is very basic, but I like it nonetheless.  It gives 43x, meaning that most of the large clusters fit inside nicely.  However, I mostly use the 25mm (60x/120x) and the 10 mm (150x and 300x), as well as a number of my older eyepieces I had used with the previous scope.  I recently ordered another Epic 11, this time a 15mm which will give me 100x/200x.

     Having used the scope since October 2012, I am now totally comfortable with it and contemplating a long trip, taking it somewhere with a really dark sky.  Below is a link to the scope on the Orion website, if you want a closer look at the stats.  I have no trouble recommending it to anyone looking to bump up from a 6" or 8".  If you already have a 10" and are looking to bump up, then I recommend the 14".  Had I known what I know now about portability, I would have purchased the 14."  The 16" is portable, too, but too much scope for me right now.  Maybe someday. 

Mapman Mike

 http://www.telescope.com/Telescopes/Dobsonian-Telescopes/IntelliScope-Dobsonians/Orion-SkyQuest-XX12i-Dobsonian-Telescope-Shroud-amp-Case-Set/pc/1/c/12/sc/27/p/102024.uts



#5 My Telescope, Part 1

     I have two scopes, actually, but I will talk about the main one today.  After using an equatorial 8" reflector for over 30 years of observing (more to come on that topic), I decided it was time to upgrade.  I made the decision about five years ago, finally getting around to making the purchase last September (2012).  I wanted something notably larger in aperture, so I was not going to get an equatorial mount.  I had put off owning a Dobsonian scope for years, as I preferred star hopping with the equatorial.  North was north, south was south, east was east and west was west.  Period.  None of this zigzag nonsense for me.  Until now.

     The scope had to be portable, within reason.  I own two VWs, and it had to fit in either the Golf hatchback or the Tiguan.  I had to be able to lift all the parts and assemble them myself, sometimes in the dark.  I was looking at a 14" or a 12", eventually deciding on the 12".  Had I known just how portable and easy to assemble the Orion telescopes were, I would have chosen the 14".

     So I am the proud owner of the Orion Skyquest XX12i Dobsonian Telescope.  I also got the shroud, which covers things from the main mirror tube up to the secondary assembly.  It helps keep out stray light and blowing dust.  And I purchased the storage bags to pack everything for traveling.  All in all, a pretty good deal.

     It arrived in three boxes, and one fine Saturday afternoon my wife, best friend and I got down to work setting it up.

Christmas in September!  Deb opens Box #1.  First came the great unpacking project, using a long checklist to make certain each part had arrived.  According to the instructions (below), some assembly was required.

Despite the rather intimidating diagram, putting the base together wasn't all that difficult.  Once the base is assembled, it stays assembled.  It fits nicely into the back of either of our vehicles.

Phase One was to put the Dobsonian base together.  Though this posed few difficulties, adding the "push to" components was tricky, not helped overly by the instructions.  A few phone calls to the Orion help line on a Saturday afternoon helped us get the results we needed.

Phase One is nearly complete!  Because of some problems adding the push-to components, it took a couple of hours.

 The completion of Phase One was a suitable time for a coffee and tea break.  Mapman Mike triumphantly holds onto the assembled base.  Randy seems relieved.  First light cannot be far off now!

Unwrapping the 12" mirror was an exciting moment.  How often does one get to see a brand new telescope mirror suddenly appear in one's home?

     The mirror came with a free blemish (not the central dot, which is for mirror alignment purposes).  Randy patiently removed a small, sticky spot, carefully using wet and then dry Q Tips.  Afterwards, the mirror was as good as new.  The rest of the assembly was easy.  The entire project took about 5 hours, including unpacking and itemizing everything.  Needless to say it was cloudy that night (and for many nights afterwards (and since).

Continued in Part 2...



#4 Planning an Observing Session, Part 4

     So far in previous blog entries we have darted around the sky using brighter deep sky objects as our guides.  We have star-hopped in all directions from oc 2232 (or any other object of your choosing) using Method 1, not searching for anything in particular except for "what's out there."  This adds some randomness to an observing session, and can lead to little discoveries that can become your very own.  Next, using Method 2 we planned to view a series of specific objects immediately surrounding a brighter one (again, oc 2232).  There are too many observers who merely dart from one bright object to another, and I'm hoping that a few of them will learn to slow down a bit and explore beyond those irresistible bright target objects.

     Method 3 is for serious stargazers only, and requires patience and careful preparation.  My preferred method of observing is by constellation.  The whole, entire thing.  Single, variable, double and multiple stars.  NGC and a few IC objects.  Some non-NGC and non-IC objects.  The complete constellation in all its glorious detail, or as much of it as my current scope can find.  I always have one or two constellations chosen for each season, and I finally need a new spring project and one for summer.  I have began the onerous task of preparing Leo for upcoming sessions.  Since Leo has over 350 NGC objects in it (not counting IC and the other lists), I am not going to suggest that you begin with this one.  However, in future blogs I'll let you know how my planning and observing of Leo are coming along.  I've already spent about 8 hours preparing, but then there have been plenty of cloudy nights to work on it.

     I suggest beginning with a few smaller constellations, and the summer sky has some nice options.  Lacerta, Sagitta, and Vulpecula are good choices to try out Method 3 for the first time.  However, since I will be preparing Lyra soon, I will choose it as my example.  So, then, in easy steps:

     1)  Choose a constellation (Lyra).

     2) Gather your information sources.  I use Uranometria 2000, 2nd ed., revised (All Sky), and its complementary Deep Sky Field Guide.  I use Burnham's Celestial Handbook (Vol. Two required for Lyra) and Observing Handbook and Catalogue of Deep-Sky Objects, by Luginbuhl and Skiff.  I also use the internet, including the Washington Double Star Catalogue.

     3)  Decide which objects you wish to attempt.  The owner of a 6" telescope will choose differently than the owner of a 10" scope.  Burnham's lists 3 1/2 pages of double stars.  Go through the list and mark in pencil which ones you would like to view.  Several will be too faint or too close to be of much interest to any except the owners of very large telescopes.  There is also a page of variables, including one of the most famous in the sky (Beta).  I like to choose variables based on several criteria, including interest to amateurs and  colour (T Lyra is mentioned as being "very red."  That always catches my attention.)  There are 4 NGC objects listed, including 2 Messier objects.  Luginbuhl and Skiff list 6 NGC objects.  Uranometria lists 28!

     4)  Once you have decided what to view, it's time to plot them on your atlas (Uranometria).  I use a fine point mechanical pencil.  All of the NGC (28) are listed on the Uranometria charts for Lyra.  There will be other types of objects, too.  If you are only planning to see some of them, underline (in pencil) which ones you are interested in observing, or lightly circle them.  If you think writing in pencil in a star atlas is Satanic, either get over it or purchase two copies--one to keep pristine, for whatever reason, and one that will detail your on-going voyage through the heavens.  The variables and major stars will already be labeled, too.  All you have to do is add in the names of the dimmer double stars, in their correct positions.  The positions listed in Burnham's are off a bit, but after a few stars are plotted you will figure out by how much and easily match the r.a. and dec. given with the actual star on the map (you should not have to draw any actual stars--they should already be there, just unlabelled).  I also circle the name/number of any star that I will be observing.  This is a fun way to begin knowing your way around Lyra.  With the atlas marked in pencil with the objects you wish to view, you are now ready to prepare your observing list on paper.

     5)  It is now time to prepare your observing list, the one you will take outside with you.  My Leo list will be long enough to make into a small book.  The Lyra list should be 4 or 5 pages.  Yours will depend to what depth you wish to explore the constellation, as well as the size of your mirror.  You may set up your list anyway you choose, but I recommend leaving room on the left side of the page to jot down the full object's name and any information you have about it.  Double stars will have magnitudes and separation distance, which is essential to know in the field.  I usually don't write down position angles, as I prefer to find that out myself at the eyepiece.  Variables will have their minimum and maximum brightness, and their period.  NGC objects will have sizes, magnitudes, and, for clusters, perhaps how many stars there are in it.  List the objects and their stats down the left side, saving the rest of the page for field notes.  Indicate the required chart number from your atlas, and leave diagram space on the right side for clusters, galaxies, etc.  I use a shot glass to draw blank circles on my field note sheets--bottom of the glass for smaller NGC objects, and the top end for larger ones.  I tend to begin observing a section of the constellation at a bright star or object, and star hop from there until I have seen and reported on everything in the vicinity (like Method 2, previous blog entry).  Then I go on to another location, seeing everything near it, and so on through the constellation.  If you have marked your atlas properly, you will be writing up your to-do list in the exact order you wish to peruse the constellation, and it will include a nice mix of objects..

     I currently have three constellations on the go.  Soon there will be five.  My main autumn one is Cetus; my winter ones are Lepus and Monoceros.  I am preparing a new one for spring (Leo) and summer (Lyra).  In this way, I always have hundreds of observing objects awaiting.

     Whichever method you use (Method 1, 2, 3 or a combination of them, as I do), you will soon learn to appreciate the less bright and flashy objects.  You will train your eye to see details you never thought were there.  You will gradually become knowledgeable about vast areas of the sky.  You will get to know your scope even better.  And you will still have lots of fun on cloudy nights, preparing your lists and transferring your rough notes into your official observing logbook.  If you have questions or comments, please feel free.

     In the next blog, I will talk about my newest telescope, and some of my early successes and failures with it.  Clear skies, and happy Vernal Equinox.

Mapman Mike

#3 Planning an Observing Session, Part 3

     This time I would like to talk about a second method of preparing for a night's observing.  However, a star atlas is now required, and perhaps some books describing deep sky objects, variable stars, and double stars.  I like the books put out by the Webb Society, but I mostly use the 3-volume Burnham's Celestial Handbook.  I also use "Observing Handbook and Catalogue of Deep-Sky Objects," by Luginbuhl and Skiff.  As to sky atlases, the only one to even consider for advanced amateurs is the Uranometria All-Sky Edition, 2nd Ed, revised.  For the price of a cheap eyepiece ($60), this will be the best investment you ever made.  Cloudy nights suddenly become fun with this atlas.  And it comes with free shipping. 
http://www.willbell.com/atlas/index.htm

     If you are among those who purchased the first edition, as I did, then realized the maps were all backwards and difficult to use in the field, have no fear.  Things are corrected and much better now!  And an all-in-one edition means only one volume is now needed to study Orion in depth!  Okay, now that you have ordered and received your new star atlas, you may wish to continue to read this blog entry.

     Before the 2nd edition of Uranometria came about, the following is how I used to do my 2nd Method of preparing for a session.  In a moment I will tell you a new, improved way, thanks to the new atlas format.

     1)  Pick an area of sky of interest to you.  With apologies, I will pick on oc 2232 in Monoceros once again, for reasons that should become apparent (it's a simple enough area to start with).  However, any area will do, as long as you begin somewhere you will recognize.

    2)  Without looking at any photos of objects to be observed (wait until after you have actually searched for them at the eyepiece), write down some info about the main object from one of your resources.  (oc 2232: 29'; stars mag 6--8, about a dozen).

   3)  Search on the map (chart #116 in Uranometria) for neighbouring points of interest.  Write down any info about these objects you may have.  You should notice oc 2219 to the east, oc 2250 to the west, and oc Cz 26 to the northwest.  These are within easy star-hop range of oc 2232 (see my previous blog entry).  Better yet, they are virtually undiscovered clusters.  Their obscurity may or may not be deserved.  You can decide for yourself.  The size of your mirror and the darkness of your sky will help you determine this.  A few unnamed doubles are also indicated nearby, as well as a handful of variables, including GL, V723, and IM. Don't ignore the brightest star within oc 2232 itself, which is labeled as a double star.

     What we have just done is prepare our session considerably more than with the previous method, where we only needed the location of one bright object (and no atlas) to get started.  This time we have gone target hunting, looking for specific objects near our bright starting point.  Now, one of the reasons I chose 2232 again is that despite a good star-hop search in Method 1, those three other open clusters still may not have been found.  They are faint, and at low power may be missed (if you found them using Method 1, then congratulations!).  Using Method 2, we are now searching in an exact location for specific objects, hopefully with some success.  Use neighbouring stars leading from 2232 and marked on the atlas to guide you directly.  This is called guided star hopping.

     Thus Method 2 works similarly to Method 1, but it is now required to choose an area of sky with a few other objects of interest near the main object.  If you have the right atlas, this will pose no difficulty.  Choose your area based on your sky conditions, horizon, and season.  This is how I prepare for a session using Method 2.  Now, however, I will sometimes do things differently. 

     Since the publication of the 2nd edition of Uranometria it includes, in addition to 220 star maps that show every NGC and IC object down to Mag. 15, plus every other deep sky object down to mag. 15 from other catalogues, there are 24 close-up maps at the back of the atlas.  These highlight and enlarge x2 or x3 galaxy clusters (Virgo, Coma, Hercules and others), extra rich areas of the milky way (Cygnus, Sagittarius, Scorpius, etc) and the Magellenic Clouds.  There is a lifetime of observing just within these supplemental maps!  I can't wait to get at Cygnus this summer with Charts A1 and A2, and in the spring with the Leo galaxy charts (A10, 11).  And once you see the Large Magellenic Cloud Chart and how many NGC objects reside there (a 2-page spread), you will want to book an astronomy B & B in Australia for a month.

     Next time I will detail Planning Method 3.  May you have clear skies and successful star hunting!

Mapman Mike

#2 Planning an Observing Session, Part 2

     Of my three preferred methods of planning an observing session, I will discuss them in order of simplicity, beginning with the easiest to plan.  This first method does not even require a star atlas, if you know the whereabouts of a few good objects with which to begin.  The session virtually plans itself.  The method works well beginning on any bright object, whether it be a Messier showpiece or simply a bright star.  If you have access to a good star chart, then the method can be used on just about any object or star.  I now use Uranometria Star Atlas exclusively (2nd Ed.), and own the massive two-in-one volume.  For the sake of having to start somewhere, I am going to pick an open cluster in Monoceros, but again, you could pick anything you like.

     NGC oc 2232 is bright and not a bad object with which to begin or end a night's observing.  It is well suited to small telescopes (6" and under) and medium telescopes (8" to 12").  I cannot speak for larger ones, but I suspect it would work just fine, as we are going to mostly use a low power eyepiece anyway.  Once 2232 is in the eyepiece, it is time to get the observing eye ready to work.  The cluster is a whopping 29`in size, with most of its members at mag. 6 thru 8.  Now, unless there are literally hundreds of cluster stars in front of me, I like to begin with a quick count, just to wake up the eye.  2232 is not very rich, and because of the brightness of the members it is easy to count.  If you have the atlas open to Map 116 and look at 2232 in the lower left corner, it is easy to determine which stars are within the cluster and which are without.  A group of bright stars lie just outside the border, so don`t count them.

oc 2232

STScI Digitized Sky Survey 30' x 30'

     Once you have had a look around the cluster, the next step begins (I will devote a post dedicated to more fully observing an object at a later date).  Star hopping is the tried and true way of hitch-hiking around the galaxy.  If you have a "go-to" scope and have never done much star hopping, or haven't done it in a while, you are missing much of the fun of amateur astronomy.  Through star hopping I have come across many delightful and undiscovered nooks and crannies, enjoying star chains, doubles, coloured stars, and even vast dark spaces without a single star showing.  You will discover sights probably no one has ever noticed or dwelt on before.  If I find a particularly fine spot, I mark it in pencil on the atlas so I can return to it, or tell others.  Anyway, we are going star hopping from 2232. 

     First we need to determine direction.  Allow a bright star from the cluster to drift out of the field.  With a Dob mount, that star just exited west.  North is now 90 degrees counter-clockwise.  Let`s begin by heading north from 2232.  Go far enough so that the cluster is right out of the field of view.  Now return to 2232.  Go a bit further north now, using the new stars to guide your progress.  Travel slowly and be alert for anything interesting.  Keep brief notes.  If you see something on the edge of your field of vision (a lovely orange star, for example) and veer off in that direction to center it, make certain you can retrace your steps back to 2232 without using your finderscope or "go to" computer.  When you have explored the north area for a reasonable distance, try going south.  Again, make several forays, extending your distance a bit each time, but always returning to your old friend 2232.  Next comes hopping to the east, and then to the west.  By now you should have discovered something interesting, perhaps not shown on any atlas.

     After switching from an equatorial mount that I used from 1978 until quite recently, to a Dobsonian mount, I used the above method to relearn and readjust to star hopping. I can now travel quite far from my beginning object and usually find my way back.  And now for the advanced version:  time to head NW, NE, SW, and SE.  This should cover a nice area of sky around your object.  How far you go depends on your inner star memory and skill level.  You should always discover something of interest, as well as gain confidence using your telescope.  You will begin to develop better visual star memory, and perhaps will remember enough to recall certain patterns while lying in bed later that night.  You have now gone beyond looking at just "the object" itself and then simply moving on to some other object.  I can spend anywhere from 15 minutes searching the field of an object, to over an hour depending on my mood and how much there is to see.  If you chose oc 2244 instead of 2232, you will see what I mean, as that is an even richer area.

     Planning three or four such objects and related field searches in a night provides a very rewarding and enriching experience.  You can plan your objects to keep up with the moving sky, too!  In this way you will always have something to see in your ideal sky area.  Keep notes of what you saw in each direction, even if there was nothing much unusual.

     Next time I will talk about a similar but slightly more advanced type of observing session, using a star atlas to prepare oneself, as well as using a map during the actual session.  Hope to see you back here.

Mapman Mike

#1 Planning an Observing Session Part 1

     Welcome to the world's newest amateur astronomy blog!  I have been a stargazer since November 1968, and have owned and used a total of six telescopes since then.  I will talk about each of them in future posts, as well as some of the sites from which I have observed.  As I am an observer and not an astro-photographer, you will not see a lot of sky photos on this site.  You will, however, have access to some of the sketches either I or my artist-wife have done at the eyepiece, mostly of deep sky objects.

     In the first few first entries, I would like to discuss observing plans.  The dark sky is a very large neighbourhood, filled with all manner of stars, clusters, nebula, and galaxies.  It can be a bit overwhelming.  Where to start?  Most of us started with the moon, the planets, and the brightest Messier objects.  I still don't think there is a better place to begin.  However, this blog is not aimed at beginners.  I am aiming at the seasoned amateur, perhaps someone who has already logged the Messier catalogue and bagged a number of objects from other lists.  This kind of activity is certainly to be encouraged, as there are many different types of objects to see, and any number of variations among them.  Even though checking off astronomy object life lists can be a good thing, there are downsides. 

     One downside is that often only the biggest and brightest objects make it to most lists.  What's wrong with that?  Nothing is wrong with it.  However, by throwing in a number of fainter and more difficult objects, those brighter ones, if saved for just the right moment, become even more impressive.  Training the eye to see fainter objects will certainly make a brighter one pop out of the eyepiece even more.  Many of my greatest accomplishments have been spotting galaxies at the very limit of my telescope's, and my eye's, ability.  Afterwards, check out M 31 again!

     'Ah,' you say, 'so you are one of those observers that only look for faint fuzzies--no thanks; not for me.'  Not true, I say.  But seeing fainter objects helps one appreciate the brighter things even more, not to mention the degree of challenge and the skills you will acquire.

     A second problem with lists is that we want to finish them.  If you are ticking off the 400 brightest Herschel objects, you are going to want to get to #400.  Again, all well and good.  Unless, perhaps, you are hoping to tick off 40 or 50 of them during the next clear night.  Sorry, but that is not observing.  That is merely using a checklist.  If you are going to only observe the best and the brightest, then the urge to race through the list should be at the very back of your mind.  Often it isn't.  Locate.  See object. Check it off.  Multiply by 400.

     A third problem is that areas of sky around the listed objects are often avoided.  What else might be nearby?  A lovely double star?  A nebula?  A rich star field?  All missed because the observer has moved on to the next object without bothering to check the surrounding field.

     So, are there any other ways of approaching the night sky?   In my next entry I would like to briefly discuss three methods I like to use.  Let me know what you think. 

Mapman Mike