Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Double Stars For Small Telescopes By Sissy Haas

  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#1 cwilson

cwilson

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2012
  • Loc: SW Oklahoma

Posted 29 September 2016 - 12:40 PM

Is this a good reference to use while observing? I've never really gotten into double star, but now that I have a 4" refractor I'd like to give double stars a shot.



#2 John_G

John_G

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 710
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2010

Posted 29 September 2016 - 01:01 PM

I don't know about the book but go ahead and start looking at the AL double star list and decide if you want to buy the book for more background.

 

https://www.astrolea...ar/dblstar2.pdf


Edited by John_G, 29 September 2016 - 01:01 PM.

  • cwilson, Joe1950 and bsae06 like this

#3 Richard O'Neill

Richard O'Neill

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,295
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2014

Posted 29 September 2016 - 01:03 PM

https://www.amazon.c...customerReviews


  • cwilson and Joe1950 like this

#4 Dave R

Dave R

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 83
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2013

Posted 29 September 2016 - 01:15 PM

It is a great book. It is broken down by constellation. I have been using it the past couple of nights as a reference for double stars. I highly recommend this book.
  • John Gauvreau, cwilson, Far Star and 1 other like this

#5 MrG

MrG

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 423
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2016

Posted 29 September 2016 - 01:36 PM

It's a great book for helping you get into things a little deeper.  The sky offers so much, but it's easy to just glance by much of it.  The only thing I'd note is that the book is not enough - you need to be able to find the stars, whether by charts, goto, or whatever.

 

G


  • cwilson and Far Star like this

#6 cildastun

cildastun

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 175
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2012
  • Loc: Oxford, UK

Posted 29 September 2016 - 02:28 PM

It's a great book for helping you get into things a little deeper.  The sky offers so much, but it's easy to just glance by much of it.  The only thing I'd note is that the book is not enough - you need to be able to find the stars, whether by charts, goto, or whatever.

 

G

Yes, charts would be helpful. I love the enthusiasm in the book though!

 

Chris


  • cwilson and Far Star like this

#7 MrG

MrG

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 423
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2016

Posted 29 September 2016 - 02:42 PM

Absolutely - in fact anyone who starts into this book is setting upon a great adventure.  Few take the time to really look at all they can - they look at the major sights, and that's it.  Once you go through this book, you can find others which are similar regarding other objects, planetary nebulae, galaxies, whatever.  The adventure is never ending once you take the time to go in-depth.

 

G


  • Astrojensen, cwilson, Far Star and 1 other like this

#8 desertstars

desertstars

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 44,990
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2003
  • Loc: Tucson, AZ

Posted 29 September 2016 - 03:55 PM

Double Stars For Small Telescopes by Sissy Haas paired with the Cambridge Double Star Atlas by Bruce MacEvoy and Wil Tirion...

 

You can't go wrong with that combination.


  • Carl Kolchak, John Gauvreau, ngc6352 and 6 others like this

#9 cwilson

cwilson

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2012
  • Loc: SW Oklahoma

Posted 29 September 2016 - 06:01 PM

Double Stars For Small Telescopes by Sissy Haas paired with the Cambridge Double Star Atlas by Bruce MacEvoy and Wil Tirion...

 

You can't go wrong with that combination.

Thanks to all for the input! I think I will get both!


  • desertstars, Stellarfire and MrG like this

#10 flt158

flt158

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,208
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2014
  • Loc: Dublin, Republic of Ireland

Posted 30 September 2016 - 09:46 AM

Sissy Haas and Guide 8 CD are a perfect combination for me every clear night. 

 

Aubrey.


  • cwilson likes this

#11 drollere

drollere

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,328
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2010
  • Loc: sebastopol, california

Posted 04 October 2016 - 11:37 AM

i agree, the sissy haas volume is a handsome "labor of love", and it's less "information rich" than CDSA2, which for some readers will be a plus.

 

personally i regret the haas entire emphasis on visual appearance and star color. this is a perennial enjoyment of double star observing, no doubt, but haas pushes it to the point where it seems as if the whole object of double star observing is to make connoisseur discriminations among the hues of LED lights.

 

the other point is that haas labels some stars as either "optical" or "binary" (physical), while leaving others unlabeled. in my own audit of the book i found her "optical" labels were applied with about equal probability to both optical and physical systems, and about 10% of the "binary" systems were optical.


  • cwilson and Far Star like this

#12 cwilson

cwilson

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2012
  • Loc: SW Oklahoma

Posted 04 October 2016 - 11:43 AM

i agree, the sissy haas volume is a handsome "labor of love", and it's less "information rich" than CDSA2, which for some readers will be a plus.

 

personally i regret the haas entire emphasis on visual appearance and star color. this is a perennial enjoyment of double star observing, no doubt, but haas pushes it to the point where it seems as if the whole object of double star observing is to make connoisseur discriminations among the hues of LED lights.

 

the other point is that haas labels some stars as either "optical" or "binary" (physical), while leaving others unlabeled. in my own audit of the book i found her "optical" labels were applied with about equal probability to both optical and physical systems, and about 10% of the "binary" systems were optical.

While I enjoy observing both, I find I'm a bit more fascinated by the true binary systems. Something about visualizing what they must look like from a relatively "nearby" location. I find other stars interesting as well, like the massive O types out there fusing their fuel at an enormous rate, red giants and so on.


  • Far Star likes this

#13 Reid W

Reid W

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 838
  • Joined: 06 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Shreveport, LA

Posted 04 October 2016 - 08:33 PM

CW-

 

Try Mu Cygni.  It's separation is 1.7"  

 

http://stars.astro.i.../sow/mucyg.html

 

I got a strong notch (figure 8)  with my 90 last night- haven't tried with my 103 yet.  

 

This is one of the pairs she needs more data for. What's the smallest aperture to split this pair? 


  • cwilson, MrG and Rustler46 like this

#14 cwilson

cwilson

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2012
  • Loc: SW Oklahoma

Posted 05 October 2016 - 12:30 PM

CW-

 

Try Mu Cygni.  It's separation is 1.7"  

 

http://stars.astro.i.../sow/mucyg.html

 

I got a strong notch (figure 8)  with my 90 last night- haven't tried with my 103 yet.  

 

This is one of the pairs she needs more data for. What's the smallest aperture to split this pair? 

I'll give that one a try the next time out. The weather here seems to be improving with more clear days, but still with average at best seeing.



#15 Reid W

Reid W

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 838
  • Joined: 06 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Shreveport, LA

Posted 05 October 2016 - 09:39 PM

Ok-  just finished Mu Cygni with the 103.  Now, the humidity has come way up since yesterday.

 

Yesterday, with the 90 I got a hard notch at 202x using a 4mm ortho.

 

Today with the 103 I did not see the notch at 198x using the same 4mm ortho-  With a TV 10.5/3x barlow at 226x the pair improved- much better than a notch, but no certain black between the pair.  With a TV 8/3x barlow at 297x I got a clean separation.  No doubt.  

 

For fun, *we all do that right?* I tried the 4mm ortho and the 3x barlow.  Yep- a .17mm exit pupil at  600x, I observed 2 clean balls. 

 

I'm disappointed that I did not try magnifications between 200 and 300 with the 90 yesterday.  Perhaps another time. 


Edited by Reid W, 05 October 2016 - 09:41 PM.

  • eros312, Charles B. and Rustler46 like this

#16 drollere

drollere

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,328
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2010
  • Loc: sebastopol, california

Posted 10 October 2016 - 11:14 PM

While I enjoy observing both, I find I'm a bit more fascinated by the true binary systems. Something about visualizing what they must look like from a relatively "nearby" location. I find other stars interesting as well, like the massive O types out there fusing their fuel at an enormous rate, red giants and so on.

 

bob argyle has been using CDSA2 to observe and micrometrically measure double stars with the Innes refractor at johannesburg and ended his email to me with "I can therefore wholeheartedly recommend the [CDSA2] atlas for anyone wanting to observe THE double stars of interest."

 

so i guess the three of us are aficionados of "THE double stars of interest."

 

an important feature of the CDSA2 is that, by looking *only* at high probability physical systems, you develop a better visual understanding of what physical systems actually look like. i hoped for this kind of effect in devising the atlas and announced it in the first paragraph of the introduction, but didn't know for sure would work out until i actually began working through the lists.


  • cwilson, Far Star and CameronLars like this

#17 cwilson

cwilson

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 567
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2012
  • Loc: SW Oklahoma

Posted 11 October 2016 - 12:31 PM

 

 

While I enjoy observing both, I find I'm a bit more fascinated by the true binary systems. Something about visualizing what they must look like from a relatively "nearby" location. I find other stars interesting as well, like the massive O types out there fusing their fuel at an enormous rate, red giants and so on.

 

bob argyle has been using CDSA2 to observe and micrometrically measure double stars with the Innes refractor at johannesburg and ended his email to me with "I can therefore wholeheartedly recommend the [CDSA2] atlas for anyone wanting to observe THE double stars of interest."

 

so i guess the three of us are aficionados of "THE double stars of interest."

 

an important feature of the CDSA2 is that, by looking *only* at high probability physical systems, you develop a better visual understanding of what physical systems actually look like. i hoped for this kind of effect in devising the atlas and announced it in the first paragraph of the introduction, but didn't know for sure would work out until i actually began working through the lists.

 

Just ordered a copy! :)



#18 daveCollins

daveCollins

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 850
  • Joined: 06 May 2011
  • Loc: Washington DC

Posted 12 October 2016 - 12:17 PM

I have Sissy's book but don't use it anymore. I also have some other books that don't get used.

 

Cambridge Double Star Atlas by Bruce MacEvoy (CDSA2) has changed my observing more than any other reference. The difference between this atlas and Sissy's is night and day to me. CDSA2 has a layout that simply works for me. It has opened a world of observing that I was unaware of. After getting used to CDSA2, I went back to Sissy's book and it just didn't work at all for me. Obviously others have a different perspective on this and I am just sharing my own feelings.

 

I observe primarily from my balcony in DC and can only see a somewhat small window of the sky. With CDSA2 I can map out a structure for a nights observing which works with my alt/az window. I have to use Sky Safari in order to filter my azimuth and elevation. Using just these two sources, I have an entire structure around which to add planets, asteroids and other objects.

 

Not only is CDSA superior for me in terms of organization, but the supplementary information is well thought out and useful for me in setting perspective. Finally, I value knowing whether a double is a related binary or only visual. It makes a difference to me.

 

After Ceres last night, I finished with my last target from CDSA2 and it turned out to be one of the most impressive binaries that I have observed. It was 84 Ceti (+5.76 and +9.68 at 3.7" from DC and a high thin veil of clouds). The secondary was impossibly small next to its companion and the pair was impressive. This was with a TOA 150 and average seeing.


Edited by daveCollins, 12 October 2016 - 12:20 PM.

  • Stellarfire likes this

#19 MP173

MP173

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 958
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2015

Posted 12 October 2016 - 01:51 PM

Dave Collins:

I agree with you on your assessment of CDSA2. I received both that and the Interstellerum Deep Sky Atlas (iDSA) for holiday presents and both are now essential in my pursuits...both from a planning aspect and execution.

 

FWIW...I observe from a suburban location (not as bad as WDC), but still with more light pollution than I would like.  I use a 90mmETXRA on a patio table.  Thus, I am limited by light pollution and aperature.  CDSA2 allows me to screen the doubles based on the ability to resolve and gives me a decent star chart for a macro look.  I use the iDSA for star hopping to pinpoint exactly where to go.  A great combo which has replaced Sky Atlas 2000.0 which had no information other than the symbol for doubles.

 

I am further refining these great tools by working on a notebook of constellations, listing the doubles which are within reach (I have difficulty resolving less than 4" of separation and am limiting to 9.5 magnitude).  To that constellation list, I will also add DSO such as open clusters, globulars, etc. which are also within reach.

 

The CDSA2 is a great tool.

 

Ed


  • Stellarfire likes this

#20 drollere

drollere

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,328
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2010
  • Loc: sebastopol, california

Posted 23 October 2016 - 01:24 PM

i'm very pleased with the kind remarks about CDSA2, considering how much work went into it and how rapidly it was developed to deadline.

 

that said, the haas volume is in my view a labor of love and, like CDSA2 and CDSA1, represents a particular point of view (although not my point of view) in double star astronomy. i'm all in favor of more books, and a wider awareness of what is available to the amateur astronomer. the improvement in astronomy references over the past several decades has been truly remarkable, led in part by advances in astronomy and in commercial instruments, but also in the expertise of the audience.


  • Bonco and John Gauvreau like this

#21 Magnus Ahrling

Magnus Ahrling

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 283
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2014
  • Loc: Visby, Sweden 57:30N.

Posted 24 October 2016 - 07:38 PM

I have had Haas book for nearly 10 years. First I used it a lot but now I find a visit to Stelle Doppie much more useful.  I don`t have the Cambridge Double Star Atlas but it sounds quite intressting. Has it  maps to help you find doubles? In that case I`ll have a word with Santa for Christmas :)

 

/Magnus 57N.


Edited by Magnus Ahrling, 24 October 2016 - 07:40 PM.


#22 wookie1965

wookie1965

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2012
  • Loc: St Helens UK

Posted 04 November 2019 - 03:06 PM

I wanted to buy Sissy Haas but it is going for silly money.

Amazon £266 from abebooks I can get a used one for £161.58.

Ridiculous prices tried looking for a PDF file cannot get one of them either unless I put my credit card details in and I am not doing that.



#23 fred1871

fred1871

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,567
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2009
  • Loc: Australia

Posted 04 November 2019 - 07:58 PM

There's no way to tell if Sky Publishing (via Sky & Telescope shop) have any copies left, because the takeover of S&T by the American Astronomical Society has led to the shop web pages being taken down, temporarily they say. When it returns it'll be possible to see what they have.

 

The Haas book seems to me a good candidate for a revised edition. It's not intended to be utterly comprehensive in the way that access to Stelle Doppie or the WDS is. Instead, a selection of "the best" and many other interesting doubles, not too faint and not ultra-close. Result of course is some folk complaining it has too much, and others seeing it as too little.

 

A new edition could correct the occasional errors, provide some updates and re-assessments of changing binaries, and remain for another decade or two as a very useful compendium of doubles from pole to pole, designed for the observer. Very sensibly, it did NOT attempt to leave out optical pairs (which could possibly eliminate Albireo, and with the Cambridge Double Star Atlas 2nd edition did eliminate the wonderful showpiece coloured pairing HJ 3945 in Canis Major, among others). There are too many uncertainties for that choice; and an observer's guide is not a purist astrophysical treatise even if all cases were accurately known; furthermore, aesthetic astronomy is fine; and the professionals still find reasons for retaining optical pairs in the lists.

 

Back to the main point. A book of the kind Haas compiled is a continuing useful guide to the more accessible doubles including the showpieces, with the benefit of observing descriptions as well as the numbers to describe the objects. Reference to binary orbits can be followed up elsewhere. Most doubles change fairly slowly; some go through periods of quick change such as Gamma Virginis in the last decade; brief notes on these can cover a good period after publication. Most of the changing pairs that are accessible to amateur scopes can have their changes usefully described in a sentence.

 

Once you provide a more comprehensive description, though still abbreviated, such as in Bob Argyle's new book An Anthology of Visual Double stars (Cambridge, 2019) there's a limit to how many doubles you can include. The Argyle book has 175, which includes some optical pairs, and some optical?/gravitational? uncertain pairs, and still runs to over 400 large pages. So it isn't intended to be what the Haas book usefully is - the backyard observer's guide to a fairly comprehensive listing of doubles to about 8th magnitude. Each book is useful for what it intends and achieves.

 

So, back to the original question - getting a copy of the Haas book - difficult at the moment given the changeover at Sky & Telescope. Will they at least reprint the book in its original form if they've run out of copies? We'll have to see.


  • npdhistory, payner, eros312 and 1 other like this

#24 The Ardent

The Ardent

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4,679
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Virginia

Posted 04 November 2019 - 08:15 PM

I’m surprised no one responded to your “wanted” ad on Cloudy Nights classifieds.

I wanted to buy Sissy Haas but it is going for silly money.
Amazon £266 from abebooks I can get a used one for £161.58.
Ridiculous prices tried looking for a PDF file cannot get one of them either unless I put my credit card details in and I am not doing that.



#25 Rustler46

Rustler46

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,201
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Coos Bay, Oregon

Posted 06 November 2019 - 01:57 AM

CW-

 

Try Mu Cygni.  It's separation is 1.7"  

 

http://stars.astro.i.../sow/mucyg.html

 

I got a strong notch (figure 8)  with my 90 last night- haven't tried with my 103 yet.  

 

This is one of the pairs she needs more data for. What's the smallest aperture to split this pair? 

Professor Kaler's monographs are always so interesting. They help us understand what we are seeing in physical terms. SkySafari includes quite a few excerpts from his writings.


Edited by Rustler46, 06 November 2019 - 01:59 AM.



CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics