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

Lyra Observations. 19/5/20.

  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Rich5567

Rich5567

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Hornsea. East Yorkshire. England. U.K

Posted 20 May 2020 - 08:49 AM

Hi all,

 

Another clear night last night, although really not getting truly dark now until around early August so only a short session.

 

Started in mid twilight with Epsilon Lyrae, nice view at 135x, and split both at 338x. Not looked at this pair for many years, nice to see again.

 

As 'darkness' fell I focused on HO 432 LYRA: B was a little lost in the glare of A, even at 17" sep.  C was more obvious at 60.5" separation. Nice views at 338x.

 

As I'd read about this system the last few days on here I had a look at STF 2349 LYRA, AB 5.3, 9.4, 204, 7.2" // AC (WAL 92) 5.3, 12.1, 314, 52.9". All seen at 270x forming a nice thin triangle of stars.

 

Another triple, STF 2352 LYRA: AB 8.0, 10.6, 287, 15.9", and AC 8.0, 10.4, 161, 210". Again a nice selection of stars forming a slim triangle. D not seen at any magnification.

 

TRA 1 LYRA: AB, 8.4. 11.9, 164, 9.4". B was faint but seen nicely at 406x, although was popping in and out of vision at times. The C companion of this system is also part of POP 16 which is In the same field.  

 

POP 16 LYRA: AC only seen. 10.8, 11,3, 279, 53". AC were obvious at 135x, B and D are beyond the scopes magnitude limit at around 13.5.

 

20 LYRA, STF 2487: AB 4.3, 8.5, 81, 28.4", and AC 4.3, 11.4, 151, 161".  A good view at 338x but nothing spectacular.

 

A nice easy one now. SHJ 289 LYRA: 8.0, 8.7, 56, 39.2". Easy at 78x, two white bright stars, wide pair.

 

The opposite end of the spectrum now with a fainter pair. HLM 19 LYRA: 11.3, 11.8, 330, 12.4". Really quite faint, took some seeing and best seen at 338x. Two faint grey points of light.

 

21 LYRA, (SHJ 292): AB 4.4, 10.1, 70, 98.9", AC 4.4, 11.1, 128, 101.3". This triple forms another nice triangle (it's been a night of triangles!!!!). A nice sight at 203x, and 'A' showed a pale orange colour.

 

 

Just as I was closing up for the night, I noticed Delta Cygni was just above my roof line, I've not seen this binary for quite some time so quick look was in order.

 

B was a tiny speck at 270x, and was best seen at 338x. Any higher than 338x caused the image to really turn poor, but nice to see again.

 

Another good night.

 

Cheers,

 

Rich.

 

 


  • gfeulner, R Botero, rcwolpert and 8 others like this

#2 flt158

flt158

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,513
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2014
  • Loc: Dublin, Republic of Ireland

Posted 20 May 2020 - 09:18 AM

Thank you for this new report, Rich.

It is a great encouragement to me personally.  

It's truly amazing how faint some of your doubles are. 

You most certainly have a very good SCT. 

Delta Cygni has been a big favourite of mine for many years. 

And Epsilon 1,2 Lyrae I have been observing since the 1970's. 

 

I do notice you didn't note any colours for STF 2349. 

What are your thoughts on that one?

But it's okay if you did not see any! waytogo.gif

 

Over year in Dublin, Ireland, our Sun is now setting at about 9.30 pm local time. mad.gif

So it's tough getting enough time to observe before the midnight clocks strikes. 

One has to be patient with doubles at this time of year. 

 

Clear skies from Aubrey.  


  • nerich and Rich5567 like this

#3 Rich5567

Rich5567

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Hornsea. East Yorkshire. England. U.K

Posted 20 May 2020 - 01:19 PM

Hi Aubrey,

 

Thank you very much. smile.gif .

 

As my main observing until recently was in the field of variables I suppose I became used to really pushing the scope to see how faint I could go. When you have a 20 arc second chart with stars down to say mag 14 or so, you know exactly where any faint stars are, and in knowing where to exactly look you can sometimes tease them out.  Often its just a brief glimpse but most times I can see and hold the star for a few seconds to confirm it's really there. And of course a VS chart has the stars magnitude labelled too.

 

The 8" will go down to around mag  13.0 ish on a decent night. I don't know if the SCT is 'any good' or not. Its old and gets a lot of use and it is my remaining scope after I sold the 20".frown.gif .

 

Yes it was good to see Epsilon Lyrae, and Delta Cygni again. Old favourites. 

 

With regard to STF 2749, I don't really notice colours at alllol.gif unless they are striking or obvious, so no change there thenlaugh.gif . If I recall correctly the stars where 'white'. With a hint of grey.

 

Your local sunset is the same as mine, we are about the same latitude, draw a line from Dublin straight across the sea into England and at the other end it falls just below the River Humber, I'm around 20 miles north of that. At midnight last night it wasn't truly dark, so I'm thinking maybe brighter targets until August.

 

Thanks for the kind words mate.

 

Rich.waytogo.gif


  • R Botero, flt158 and nerich like this

#4 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 20 May 2020 - 05:15 PM

Hi Rich!
Another fine report! I have to give you a round of applause for your continued zeal for taking on those difficult systems. So…when I come across these lists, I am driven to check my image archive…and in your case, look for systems that have given you some special challenges. The first observation that caught my eye was STF 2352 and your comment…”D not seen at any magnification! So I thought…was I able to capture it given that its mag. 12.81 was at the threshold of my imaging setup and exposure  parameters. Sure enough, with a little stretch of the image, the “D” companion came into clear view.

The other system that caught my eye was HO 432. As soon as I reviewed my raw image, I knew something was amiss. Given my experience with STF 2352 moments before, and seeing that HO 432B had a magnitude of 12.90…not very different from the 12.81 for WAL 93D, I figured with a similar data stretch of the image, should render a similar result. Even before the stretch, I also noted that at mag. 11.50, HO 432C should have been easily resolved even before a stretch…but it wasn’t. I had to do a rather heavy stretch to get anything on the B & C. So off to Aladin I go…call up the NOMAD survey and see what we have for Vmags.
I have added a cropped view of my heavily stretched image as well as a screen shot from the DSS image available within Aladin that is cropped to closely match my image. I have also added the actual NOMAD data…stars and data have been numbered to assist navigating the information/images.

What the NOMAD data is telling me is that the magnitude for “C” is 13.38, and if we compare the B & C components in my image, B appears to be slightly dimmer.  So Rich…is there any chance that you may have mistaken the components? I think the WDS data is faulty and I will add HO 432 to my list for acquiring new photometry…if someone doesn’t get to it first.

 

It would be interesting to have some additional observation of HO 432 to tell the story better. Any takers?? grin.gif

 

Cheers, Chris.

Attached Thumbnails

  • HO 432-7578-CROP-ID.jpg
  • HO 432-Aladin Image-ID.jpg

  • flt158, nerich and Rich5567 like this

#5 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 20 May 2020 - 05:16 PM

The Remainder of that previous post:

Attached Thumbnails

  • HO 432-NOMAD-Notes.jpg
  • STF 2352-7622-pt-ns-ID.jpg

  • flt158 and Rich5567 like this

#6 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 20 May 2020 - 05:27 PM

Hi All!

I see that the NOMAD data lines, some how got reordered prior to me doing the screen capture.

 

Here is the correct numbering!!

 

Cheers, Chris

Attached Thumbnails

  • HO 432-NOMAD-Notes2.jpg


#7 Rich5567

Rich5567

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Hornsea. East Yorkshire. England. U.K

Posted 21 May 2020 - 12:42 PM

 

What the NOMAD data is telling me is that the magnitude for “C” is 13.38, and if we compare the B & C components in my image, B appears to be slightly dimmer.  So Rich…is there any chance that you may have mistaken the components? I think the WDS data is faulty and I will add HO 432 to my list for acquiring new photometry…if someone doesn’t get to it first.

 

It would be interesting to have some additional observation of HO 432 to tell the story better. Any takers?? grin.gif

 

Cheers, Chris.

Hi Chris,

 

Well I took quick look at my sketch for HO 432, and it matches your picture, I have the stars 2, 4 and 6 as you have labelled them, with four been the 'C' component.  

 

I have 'C' at Mv 11.5. That's according to StelDop. Theta 42, Rho 60.5". B was Mv 12.9, again as far as SD is concerned.

 

Rich


Edited by Rich5567, 21 May 2020 - 12:42 PM.


#8 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 21 May 2020 - 05:01 PM

Hi Rich!

I guess that settles that...so you were pretty much at the limits of your scope. As you said, the glare certainly wasn't helping but I suspect if you had an occultation strip in your eyepiece, the fact that "B" appears dimmer than "C", you would likely not have picked up B. The NOMAD survey had no data for "B". At the AB separation, I would have thought that the survey camera would have picked up something. A final question, your views of "C", were they with averted vision...I am guessing they were. Bottom line, some great observing skills...well done!!

 

Cheers, Chris.



#9 Rich5567

Rich5567

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Hornsea. East Yorkshire. England. U.K

Posted 22 May 2020 - 08:09 AM

Hi Chris,

 

Regarding seeing 'C', I saw the star with direct vision, it was quite obvious at 135x, 11.5 magnitude is not really a problem on most nights. I know from observing variables and using charts (which as you probably know have the mags labelled) that I can reach down to around 13.0mv on a really good dark clear night. I've recorded variables at 13.3 with the 8", and averted vision, and I know I've seen that star when my observation is compared to other observers that night.

 

Looking through my variable records (over twenty years worth) when using the 8" SCT I've regularly been down to around magnitude 12.5 - 13.0.   As an example, V1316 Cygni, I recorded as  < 13.3, that was the faintest star in that FOV I could discern with this scope, so I got down to 13.3 that night.

 

I really think that observing faint variables all these years has helped me to see as faint as I possibly can. When I had the 20", I was looking at variables and deep sky, and I saw some really faint objects with that, stars down to 16.0.

 

Also I have fairly dark skies, I have heard people on this forum remark that they can barely see the seven main stars of Ursa Major, and cannot make out the rest of the constellation hardly at all, I can see the entire constellation, and all the stars in Ursa Minor no problem most nights, so my skies are good when the clouds and mist stay away.

 

I'm rambling again. I don't know anyone who is into astronomy in my circle of friends so I don't get to 'talk' about it much!.

 

Thanks for the kind words, much appreciated.waytogo.gif .

 

Rich.


  • flt158 and nerich like this

#10 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 22 May 2020 - 01:49 PM

Hi Rich!

I believe you...really I do!! Something still is not quite right...my imaging has provided me with very good estimations, but between the WDS/SD value for "C" of 11.50 and what my image is telling me which is supported by both the UCAC4 and NOMAD surveys having Vmags of 13.38 for "C", I am at a loss. I will definitely work with my co-author to acquire some new photometry. It will be the only way to put this one to bed. 

 

It sounds that when conditions at your location are good, they are really good. We have been experiencing every increasing poorer skies...lots of particulates in the air. There was a time when winters guaranteed excellent conditions, but now it seems that we have a continuous frozen fog...a laser is the give away. That is why I tend to do more imaging...the poorer conditions don't have as much impact on the imaging. Have a great week-end!

 

Cheers, Chris.


  • Rich5567 likes this

#11 Rich5567

Rich5567

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Hornsea. East Yorkshire. England. U.K

Posted 22 May 2020 - 02:23 PM

Chris,

 

Is there a chance that 'C' is a variable?. Many of the variables I used to observe where of the NSV (New Suspect Variable) type.

 

Maybe have to return to this one.

 

Cheers.

 

Rich.



#12 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 22 May 2020 - 06:38 PM

Hi Rich!

My guess...highly unlikely. That is a 2 magnitude range. I would suspect with that kind of variability, it would have been duly recorded in the records. I am not very familiar with AAVSO website, so trying to access information on this particular star would be a real adventure. I'll keep you abreast on what we find. I am presently putting together a list of systems that I suspect need updating with regards to magnitudes. Once I get all my data together, I will turn it over to my contact and he will obtain new photometry using one of the remote telescopes. Once he has the new Vmags., we will prepare a report and submit to the JDSO for review. This will likely be a few months away, but I will let you know when it happens.

Cheers, Chris.


  • Rich5567 likes this

#13 Rich5567

Rich5567

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Hornsea. East Yorkshire. England. U.K

Posted 23 May 2020 - 05:57 AM

Yes I suppose your right, although it's surprising how many new suspects are discovered by amateur sky surveys. 

 

I'd be interested to see the results of the photometry, yes please keep me informed.

 

I'm 99% sure I've not mistaken the components, but no one is infallible so you never know.

 

Rich.


  • c2m2t likes this

#14 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 23 May 2020 - 06:11 AM

Hi Rich!

I am going to make a point of observing it on my next observing night. If the magnitude of C is indeed around 11.50, I should have no difficulty seeing it with my WO 132 FLT. Now that I have the issue of pinched optics resolved...fingerscrossed.gif fingerscrossed.gif fingerscrossed.gif ...some observing time is in order.grin.gif 

 

Cheers, Chris.


  • nerich and Rich5567 like this

#15 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 23 May 2020 - 11:27 PM

Hi Rich!

As good fortune would have it...after a long day of choring around the house in the heat...I had enough in the tank to get a good look at HO 432...a very easy find being very close to Vega. Here is what I observed. As per my numbered image above, stars numbered 1, 3, 4 and 5 were seen intermittently with averted vision. In terms of how they held up with averted vision, here is how they lined up with first numbered star holding the best and the last numbered star holding the least...drum roll please... 5, 4, 1 and 3. Now here is the kicker. When looking at the NOMAD Vmags. for these stars, the ordering from best held at averted to least held is exactly opposite to the Vmags for these stars. In other words, the brightest star held the least and the dimmest of the four stars held best with averted vision. I won't even attempt an explanation...except that it is likely the inadequacies of the human eye to make these kind of distinctions at these magnitudes.

 

While I was in the neighbourhood, I decided to have a look at Epsilon 1&2 Lyra. This actually was the first time that I had a beautifully clean split of these pairs and after looking up the data in Stelle Doppie, I was made aware of the multitude of components/systems tied in with this notorious double double. As it turns out, the E & F components presented themselves with about the same averted challenge as experienced with HO 432. A bit surprisingly, F & G are almost a magnitude brighter when I look up their Vmags in the UCAC4 data. Hmmm....!! 

 

Observations were made with a WO 132 FLT, F7  refractor and a 5mm TV Radian eyepiece providing a magnification of ~180x. Conditions were quite good. Rich...if you can work it into your schedule, another look at this one might be instructive. Still needs some new photometry...for sure!!

 

Cheers, Chris.


  • flt158, nerich and Rich5567 like this

#16 Rich5567

Rich5567

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Hornsea. East Yorkshire. England. U.K

Posted 24 May 2020 - 04:32 AM

Hi Chris,

 

Okay, I shall make this system my first target on the next clear night which should be hopefully tomorrow according to the forecast.

 

Tonight is a no-go due to it been our 30th anniversary, so to keep the Mrs happy I promised I would not observer this Sundayfrown.gif , and its supposed to be clear tonight, typical.

So I shall do a careful observation of Ho 432 next session, and do as you have done by ranking the visibility in order.

 

Cheers,

 

Rich.


  • flt158, nerich and c2m2t like this

#17 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 24 May 2020 - 07:01 AM

Hi Rich!

Congratulations on your 30th anniversary! Working on 41 myself. My wife has little understanding for the thrill of the star chase. I know of just a few that appreciate the learning and satisfaction that we amateur astronomers acquire from the activity. I have only one astronomy friend whose wife enthusiastically joins him on our trips to dark skies. She is rare and always a welcomed participant. As I always declare to Suzanne...it keeps me out of the bars and away from the remotes. lol.gif

 

Have a great day the two of you!!

 

Cheers, Chris.


  • flt158, nerich and Rich5567 like this

#18 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 24 May 2020 - 07:45 AM

Hi Rich!

One other item that I forgot to mention....you asked about variability. Well...the primary is described as an eruptive variable in Sky Safari with a magnitude range of 7.90 to 8.70. No mention of the companions. I am curious as to where it is in the cycle right now!

 

Cheers, Chris.


  • Rich5567 likes this

#19 nerich

nerich

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 392
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Greensboro, NC

Posted 24 May 2020 - 09:27 AM

Hi Rich!

Congratulations on your 30th anniversary! Working on 41 myself. My wife has little understanding for the thrill of the star chase. I know of just a few that appreciate the learning and satisfaction that we amateur astronomers acquire from the activity. I have only one astronomy friend whose wife enthusiastically joins him on our trips to dark skies. She is rare and always a welcomed participant. As I always declare to Suzanne...it keeps me out of the bars and away from the remotes. lol.gif

 

Have a great day the two of you!!

 

Cheers, Chris.

My wife has spent some nights at the telescope with me, and she really honestly enjoys most of what we see. But she doesn't get my fascination with double stars. "Two dots," she says, whenever I show her one of my favorites. 


  • flt158, c2m2t and Rich5567 like this

#20 Rich5567

Rich5567

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 71
  • Joined: 18 Apr 2020
  • Loc: Hornsea. East Yorkshire. England. U.K

Posted 25 May 2020 - 06:40 AM

Hi Chris,

 

I managed to get out last night, and my first port of call was HO 432.

 

Using your image and numbering system I did as you have by ranking the most visible first, to the faintest seen.

 

You had 5,4,1, and 3.

 

I had 2 visible first, then 6, then 5, and 3, 1 with averted vision, and held them after a few minutes of trying.

 

I mentioned in my original post that 'C' was obvious at 135x, and quite plain at 203x.

 

The companion C was barely seen tonight!. I could just make out with averted vision a speck where C should be, so I did see it, but it was much fainter than my previous observation. That was using 270x and 338x. Seeing was fair to moderate.

 

I have in my notes from last night: C at 406x with averted vision. Held after a few minutes, but not obvious.

 

Now of course I could have made a mistake the first time, but my eyepiece sketch matches your images (and StelDop) perfectly. C last night was nowhere near 11.5 as listed, and it must have being nearer to 13.0 as that is my limit, and this was just about visible.

 

C was nearer to number 1 in your image in magnitude.

 

So the upshot is your image matches my observation, but C is much fainter than my previous attempt and is nearer to what you said.

 

So I don't know what to think.

 

Rich.


  • c2m2t likes this

#21 c2m2t

c2m2t

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 03 Oct 2017
  • Loc: Pembroke, Ont.

Posted 25 May 2020 - 07:54 AM

Hi Rich!

Well...that observation was informative. I am going to make sure I do a few more sessions with HO 432. I didn't have a Barlow with me two nights ago, so 180x was the best I could do. I must have been whipped that evening...I would never not go back into the house to grab the right gear. I am curious to see what more magnification will provide. Conditions for you must have been quite good that first night, if you felt you saw "C" relatively well. Your 8" SCT should show better than my 5 inch apo refractor, and in my case it was at my telescopes limits...seeing was very steady, transperancy was good. 

 

Bottom line...I think it is safe to say the 11.50 magnitude is off, significantly. Hopefully we can get some new photometry in the next few months.

 

Cheers, Chris.


  • Rich5567 likes this


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