37 replies to this topic

[PhilH]

Let's kick off the new year with what many consider to be one of the most difficult visual challenges in the sky. If you listen carefully, you might even hear the strains of the "Mission: Impossible" theme song playing in the background. Of all the deep-sky objects in the winter sky, none carries the mystique of the dark nebula Barnard 33, better known as the Horsehead Nebula.

Click here to view the article

[TOMDEY]

Thanks for the challenge Phil! Indeed the binocular advantage and emission line filtration. I've enjoyed it successfully that way. My most unusual sighting was at a magnification of 1x using two "double-fisted" Gen 3 Night Vision monoscopes hand-held with 12nm Ha filters screwed on over the objectives. I know that may be considered cheating --- but the experience is real time and most certainly feels presence. With that boost, the Horsehead appears as a miniscule bent notch in edge of the emission veil that "hangs down" below Alnitak. At 1x the tininess becomes the challenge. One eye is marginally invisible... but two is a definite yes! For me, true binoscopic improves both brightness and contrast perception on challenging deep sky targets.

 

PS: I just now found and ordered  Tomm Lorenzin's book, used, second printing.   Tom

[PhilH]

Tom, I don't know if I'd call that "cheating." Makes me wonder if there were those back in the 17th century who said using a telescope was cheating.

[TOMDEY]

Tom, I don't know if I'd call that "cheating." Makes me wonder if there were those back in the 17th century who said using a telescope was cheating.

Yeah... technologies and the ways we look at things morph and expand over time. Indeed, Galileo's peeking ~through the looking-glass~ came across as downright sinful back in the day... night?! And By Jove the wonderous things he discovered!    Tom

[Dave Mitsky]

I've only had a couple of opportunities to give B33 a go from an excellent dark site with my 101mm f/5.4 Tele Vue refractor.  So far I haven't been successful.
 

The smallest aperture that I have been able to log the Horsehead Nebula has been my 8" f/6 Starsplitter Tube Dob, which has a Zambuto primary mirror.  I was at one of the better "local" dark sites but it was still a very difficult observation even with the aid of an H-beta filter.

[Dave Mitsky]

The best view of B33 that I've ever had was with Tom Clark's 42" Dob from the Chiefland Astronomy Village in Florida.  The Horsehead Nebula was an easy target with that telescope.

[John O'Hara]

Not so sure about this one, Phil.  While I have access to dark desert skies this winter, and I meet the suggested aperture range, I don't own an H-beta filter.  I have OIII and narrow band, I can try, but...

[Knasal]

“Seeing it” is almost a misnomer. My distinct memory of looking at it the first time (with an H-Beta filter) was that its presence was like an absence of “space.” It was as if the whole area of the Horsehead was a hole in space, slightly darker than the surrounding field, but at the same time almost imperceptible! A friend was looking through the eyepiece after I thought I was on the correct field. I didn’t know the size of B33 in relation to my field of view, and I told him I saw “a dark thumbprint of black” at one side of the eyepiece field. He took a look and instantly said, “that’s it!” It was a somewhat strange observation and I’ve only seen it one other time since. Each time, we had excellent viewing conditions. Definitely something I try for when conditions are just right and when Orion is well placed. Thanks for the article - it brought back some good memories.

[Nightfly]

Great article Phil!

 

Bagged the HH when I received my 100mm binocular telescope.  Even at low power, it appeared as a notch in IC434, which was luminous under pristine skies. Dark Skies AND transparency AND binocular vision are key here.  No filters required.  I'll  never go back to Cyclops viewing.

 

As an aside, 2023 was strongly condensed, 2024 was quite bright and starkly jagged bifurcation noted.  The outer loop of M42 was plainly visible and detailed.  The whole complex was better than photographs in its subtleties and impressions.  Reminds you why we observe! 

[Arcticpaddler]

I finally bagged the Horsehead two winters ago through my 8-inch SCT on an excellent, dark transparent night here in northern Minnesota. I worked the field for a full half-hour, and it was at the edge of visibility--a void in the already dim IC434.

 

Funny thing is, when I finally was sure I could see it, I realized that I had actually seen it a couple years earlier without a filter on a crystalline night, but just didn't believe it lol.

Edited by Arcticpaddler, 02 January 2022 - 08:35 PM.

[Jon Isaacs]

For what it's worth:

 

I observe the horse head on a regular basis with my 16 inch and 22 inch scopes. The skies at desert transparent and range from 21.1-21.3 mpsas with times it's darker..  I see it occasionally in my 12.5 inch but it's more difficult and I use the other scopes more frequently.

 

I use an H-Beta filter and near maximum exit pupils. I'm 73 and I'm sure I've lost sensitivity but my dark adapted pupil is unusually large for someone my age so it seems I get the best view with an exit pupil around 7.8 mm.

 

Under these conditions, the nebulosity is quite bright, a white haze with the dark shadow that's the horse head quite apparent.

 

For me, I looked for it for a number of years. The key for me was spending the time to figure out exactly where it was. It's not an object that lends itself to "star hope-ing". Precise star hopping in the main eyepiece is what did it. I'm sure Phil's chart is a good one, I modified this sketch by another CN member to show what I use.

 

 

The double point almost at the horse head and the single star provides the range.

 

Jon

 

[Starman47]

Horsehead is on the list to see this year.

[Larry Carlino]

The Horsehead is indeed a difficult object.  I've found that it requires VERY dark sky to be seen.  I've been able to glimpse it from a country location with 12 and 17-inch reflectors with an H-beta filter.  Still, not very impressive.   A much better solution is using a Collins I3 image intensifier with a narrow-band H-alpha filter.  This shows the object clearly even from a semi-rural location.  It's very large and well-defined with my 28-inch Dob, and a Vixen 114mm ED reveals it as well at an effective power of 40x, though it's very small.  A 66mm ED refractor revealed just a tiny dark spot in the surrounding nebulosity but a 135mm telephoto failed to show it.

 

Larry Carlino

[rsimonis]

Shot this 10-31-21 with a 420mm ED and a qhy8lc with h-alpha. 2 frames 900s and 600s max gain.

Indeed a faint object, even at these settings little data to process. 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Sasa]

I don't have an access to excellent dark skies, I usually observe from our light polluted backyard. On those few occasions under darker skies, I made several attempts to see Horsehead nebula. The best view was so far with 100mm refractor and UHC filter. I did not see the shape of the nebula though. The nebula revealed itself only as an interruption on the eastern edge of IC434.

[Redbetter]

A UHC style filter is not a great choice for the emission nebula surrounding the HH, because the nebula lacks much in the way of OIII emissions.  This matters because UHC filter bandpass is considerably wider in order to reveal H-beta and OIII lines.  Good samples of UHC have a bandpass about twice as wide as good H-beta filters.  

 

On the other hand, a good H-beta filter is considerably narrower (about twice as narrow), reducing the general glow of any light pollution and natural airglow without damaging the emission signal.   The signal to noise ratio of the H-beta on appropriate nebulae can be about 2x as great.

[Jon Isaacs]

A UHC style filter is not a great choice for the emission nebula surrounding the HH, because the nebula lacks much in the way of OIII emissions.  This matters because UHC filter bandpass is considerably wider in order to reveal H-beta and OIII lines.  Good samples of UHC have a bandpass about twice as wide as good H-beta filters.  

 

On the other hand, a good H-beta filter is considerably narrower (about twice as narrow), reducing the general glow of any light pollution and natural airglow without damaging the emission signal.   The signal to noise ratio of the H-beta on appropriate nebulae can be about 2x as great.

 

 

I make a crude filter transmission test using my SQM meter.  An O-lll filter or H-Beta filter darkens the skyglow about 3.0 magnitudes, a UHC about 2.2-2.3. that's just about the factor of 2 one expects.

 

In moderately dark skies like mine, that's the difference in skyglow between 24.0 mpsas and 24.7 mpsas.

 

Another way to think about it, an H-Beta under magnitude 21.3 skies is like a UHC under pristine magnitude 22.0 skies.

 

I think an H-Beta filter is worth owning. I often use mine just to judge/measure the relative H-Beta content in a nebula.  If there's very little like the Veil or the Helix, that points to the O-lll filter. If I see a nebulosity with the H-Beta, that points to the UHC filter, the assumption being that there is O-lll.

 

Jon

[Sasa]

A UHC style filter is not a great choice for the emission nebula surrounding the HH, because the nebula lacks much in the way of OIII emissions.  This matters because UHC filter bandpass is considerably wider in order to reveal H-beta and OIII lines.  Good samples of UHC have a bandpass about twice as wide as good H-beta filters.  

 

On the other hand, a good H-beta filter is considerably narrower (about twice as narrow), reducing the general glow of any light pollution and natural airglow without damaging the emission signal.   The signal to noise ratio of the H-beta on appropriate nebulae can be about 2x as great.

Yes, I know. But UHC filter was the only one which I had at those times. Later on, I was trying to spot Horsehead nebula using Hbeta filter as well. Even this was from the same place and similar sized telescope (110mm refractor), I had less luck with Hbeta.

[Kayakmurf]

I've tried for 2-3 hours with a 14" sct hoping my eyes would settle in, but to no avail. I tried all the tricks including a heavy blanket over me and my scope.I read somewhere that if you can't see the flame nebula, you won't have a chance at the Horsehead.

[Jon Isaacs]

I've tried for 2-3 hours with a 14" sct hoping my eyes would settle in, but to no avail. I tried all the tricks including a heavy blanket over me and my scope.I read somewhere that if you can't see the flame nebula, you won't have a chance at the Horsehead.

 

Yes, the Flame is very bright by comparison and can be easily seen without a filter.

 

For me, the difficulty with a C-14 would be getting a large enough exit pupil though this would not be an issue for many observers.

 

How dark were your skies?

 

Were you using an H-Beta filter?

 

Jon

[Redbetter]

I've tried for 2-3 hours with a 14" sct hoping my eyes would settle in, but to no avail. I tried all the tricks including a heavy blanket over me and my scope.I read somewhere that if you can't see the flame nebula, you won't have a chance at the Horsehead.

What tricks specifically?  Because the ones that would apply to a 14" SCT would be:

• Dark, transparent sky--where are you observing?
• 2" H-beta filter
• Large exit pupil, 55 Plossl (or similar, to get a bright exit pupil in an f/11 scope.)   41 Pan might suffice, but 4mm or larger exit pupil is what I prefer for diffuse nebulae.

The flame/tank track is super easy, one that can be seen in town.  If you don't see it all, then the HH is definitely out, but seeing the flame is no indication that the HH will be visible, it is just too bright to be a useful metric for comparison with a much less intense nebula.

 

Looks like Jon just posted the same sort things while I was composing this.

[Jon Isaacs]

Red:

 

What eyepiece do you use for the horse head in your 20 inch F/5?

 

Jon

[Redbetter]

Jon,

 

I typically use the 31T5 for 81x and 6.2mm pupil.  Sometimes I am using the 26T5 for low power at 96x and 5.2mm pupil.  The HH is large enough that I haven't used the 20T5 much for it, but it is my next low power stop in 2".  For some nebulae I will work back and forth between these three eyepieces looking for the optimum balance of scale and apparent brightness of the nebulosity to see something best.  (And of course I have the 41 Pan used at times for its maximum field, but at 61x and huge 8.2mm pupil that effectively stops down the scope somewhat.)

 

And to tie this back to the 14" SCT and why I suggest the 55, I have used a 55 Plossl with the 20" stopped down to ~8" (off axis) to yield f/12.5 for 61x and ~4.4mm pupil.  This allowed me to view the HH with H-beta.  I have also used the 55 for the HH with the 127 f/15 Mak (closer to f/17 in 2" mode).  I put the exit pupil with the Mak at ~3.2mm and 39x.  That was enough with the Mak to see the notch and a bit of the shape, but weak averted vision.

[John O'Hara]

I gave it a try with my 100 mm f/9 refractor on the evening of 1/6.  It was a very good night with 9/10 transparency in the KOFA Wildlife Refuge in southwest Arizona.  I used a 40 Pentax XL yielding a 4.4 mm exit pupil and studied the field with and without an Orion UB filter.  I printed out a chart from Cartes du Ciel to match the field of my eyepiece, so I knew exactly where to look.  I suspected seeing the HH at one point but will not claim victory yet.  Perhaps an HB filter is in my future.  (In my previous post I mentioned an OIII, which was a typo, as I know this filter would not work for the HH.)

 

I have seen the HH on a few occasions at Cherry Springs State Park, but through large Dobs equipped with HB filters.   Still, I'll give it another try with the 100 ED later this month, when the moon is again absent. One interesting note, after packing up my scope later that night (actually on 1/7) at about 4:30 AM, I noted that NGC 5128 and Omega Centauri should be on the meridian.  I managed to snag both with my 8x40 Celestron Ultima binos before leaving.  I picked up the galaxy as a very faint smudge, but it was there for sure.  Omega was obvious and quite large...surprisingly so.  The binos showed a bright core with a faint halo, it was really striking.  Too bad I'd packed the scope!

[Jon Isaacs]

One interesting note, after packing up my scope later that night (actually on 1/7) at about 4:30 AM, I noted that NGC 5128 and Omega Centauri should be on the meridian.  I managed to snag both with my 8x40 Celestron Ultima binos before leaving.

 

 

On the morning of January 6th, not long before astronomical dawn, I realized Centaurus was nearly due south so I was able to catch Omega Centaurus, Centaurus A as well as NGC4945 in the 16 inch. Good views of OC and A, my first of this season.

 

NGC4945 must be an amazing from further south, it's 23.3' x 4.0' at mag 7.9 but it transits at 7.9 degrees so I just see a large, low contrast fuzz. 

 

Jon