That's some really nice work.
I've got to be honest, however, and say that I think you only MAY have captured A/2017 U1. What I mean is that I can see other objects in that frame that are probably nothing more than noise and which appear much like what you've identified as A/2017 U1. Thus, can you really be 100% certain that you've actually captured your target object? How certain are you to its exact location?
I don't know, maybe you are relying on more than just the visual appearance that is given by this single image. I kind of went through a similar process when I imaged (maybe) nine of Saturn's moons in a single frame, where I couldn't be absolutely certain that I'd captured the moon Phoebe. Phoebe by itself isn't that difficult (magnitude 17), but it's fairly hard to capture something that faint when you also want to record Saturn's inner moons using the same scope, camera, and exposure (the last being the truly limiting factor). After a fair amount of additional work (determining the precise location, checking two different sequences of exposures) I finally decided that I probably HAD recorded Phoebe.
So, I wonder, do you have any other way to confirm that what you've identified is actually A/2017 U1? I can't say that it is NOT, and given that the location is accurate it looks quite probable that you've recorded it, but I don't think I could claim 100% certainty.
Edited by james7ca, 21 November 2017 - 06:31 AM.