45 replies to this topic

[12BH7]

I think the colors you saw are more a function of your eyes than they are of the telescope you used to observe them.

It would not surprise me.

[Rick-T137]

My GOTO system, for reasons unknown, only gets you to the area on planets.  Otherwise it's fine for DSO.  Both Neptune and Uranus were tiny dots. Almost star like. Neptune didn't have that typical bluish tint, but Uranus was showing a tiny tan dot.

When I observe Neptune, it appears as a dark blue dot to me. Uranus shows as almost like a cyan coloured dot, but actually shows a tiny (very tiny) disk. Hard to tell if it's actually the planetary disk or if I'm just seeing an Airy disk. But either way, both Neptune and Uranus (for me) are very noticeable when I find them (ie: they don't look like stars to me).

[Rick-T137]

Pluto is dim.  And it just looks like any dim star.  The challenge of seeing it is knowing which dim star it is.  It helps to observe on successive nights, because you will detect its movement.  If you use a planetarium program, you can learn the pattern of the stars around it and determine which is the planet.  

 

Because it is dim, you need dark skies and you need to pick a time near opposition when it is highest in your Ontario skies.

 

Some people say that Pluto is not a planet, like some people say that a thumb is not a finger.  But ask any seven year old how many fingers they have.....

I don't recall if Pluto was at opposition when I observed it, but you are correct in that I used a planetarium program (Starry Night Pro) to figure out the pattern of stars in the area. I recall sketching it out down to about mag 14, and then comparing the view over three nights and noting that one of the "stars" had moved! It was Pluto!

 

I agree that Pluto is a planet. Even the IAU says its a planet. They call it a "dwarf" planet, but that's still a planet, right? Just like a sub-compact car is still a car (or a thumb is still a finger!).

 

My kids asked me about all this Pluto malarkey back in 2006 (and I was even interviewed by the local newspapers and made the front page!) and my attitude is that it doesn't matter how we classify Pluto. It doesn't care - it just keeps going about its business. From a scientific point of view, it makes sense to classify objects in a logical manner. In that regard, I agree with Pluto being classified as a dwarf planet and more of a KBO than a member of our main planetary roster. From what I recall of reading "How I Killed Pluto and Why It Had It Coming" by Mike Brown and "Chasing New Horizons: Inside the Epic First Mission to Pluto" by Alan Stern, it really comes down to a difference in classification between planetary astronomers (Mike Brown - dwarf planet) and planetary scientists (Alan Stern - full planet).

 

Again, does Pluto care what we call it? Unlikely...

[12BH7]

When I observe Neptune, it appears as a dark blue dot to me. Uranus shows as almost like a cyan coloured dot, but actually shows a tiny (very tiny) disk. Hard to tell if it's actually the planetary disk or if I'm just seeing an Airy disk. But either way, both Neptune and Uranus (for me) are very noticeable when I find them (ie: they don't look like stars to me).

More so, they can be quickly passed by "as" stars. Yes, there's tiny disc there. But I have to be looking for it.

[NinePlanets]

When I observe Neptune,... (very tiny) disk. Hard to tell if it's actually the planetary disk or if I'm just seeing an Airy disk.

Tim the Tool Man Taylor says, "More Power!!! Arr arr arr!" 

 

Bump that scope up to 200X or more. Much better view!

[12BH7]

Last night I rechecked both Uranus and Neptune. Uranus did have that beautiful cyan coloration.  Neptune and Saturn are starting to sit in the pollution layer over Phoenix. Saturn had a brownish ting while Neptune was unremarkable.

[quilty]

Those tiny planets as Uranus and Neptune are neglible to me :-).
Really don't bother me

[ButterFly]

 

Because it is dim, you need dark skies and you need to pick a time near opposition when it is highest in your Ontario skies.

 

Pluto is too far away for opposition to do much.  It changes by 0.1 mags around opposition, as compared to any other time of year.  It goes from about 36.5 to 34.5 AU away.  

 

It being at its highest in the sky on some particular night is really all you need.  With a Dec around -23, some parts of the year, such as now, it culminates in broad daylight, so it starts low at sunset, and doesn't get much higher by sunrise, for Northern observers.  But, unlike with Mars, which is good for a few months every two years, Pluto is fine for many months every year.  From about April to about October is its prime for Northern observers, but March to November works as well.

[Dave Mitsky]

A number of years ago I observed all what were then the nine planets (I observed part of the Earth at least) over the course of the night on two occasions.

[Spikey131]

Pluto is too far away for opposition to do much.  It changes by 0.1 mags around opposition, as compared to any other time of year.  It goes from about 36.5 to 34.5 AU away.  

 

It being at its highest in the sky on some particular night is really all you need.  With a Dec around -23, some parts of the year, such as now, it culminates in broad daylight, so it starts low at sunset, and doesn't get much higher by sunrise, for Northern observers.  But, unlike with Mars, which is good for a few months every two years, Pluto is fine for many months every year.  From about April to about October is its prime for Northern observers, but March to November works as well.

Yes, of course.  What I wrote is misleading.

 

My only point was that around opposition it is higher in the southern sky, making it easier to see from Canada.

[Steve Cox]

I observed Pluto on several nights over the space of the month of September 2012 with my 6" f/8. It was easily visible with direct vision but just looked like any of the other mag14 stars in the field. Now that I've seen it I have no desire to look at it again, but it should be visible in her 8" providing your skies are dark enough. Neptune should be an easy target for her, I find it about the same difficulty as Uranus which isn't hard.

[ButterFly]

Yes, of course.  What I wrote is misleading.

 

My only point was that around opposition it is higher in the southern sky, making it easier to see from Canada.

The highest is gets is about the same at all times of the year, because its dec doesn't change very much.  What changes is the time that that happens.  Around opposition, that's around true local midnight.  When it transits at 5AM, it's just as high in the sky as when it does so around true local midnight.  If it transits at 9AM, that's a problem.

 

From Yellowknife, on 5/20/24, it's about five degrees up (the highest it gets) at around 5AM. On 7/25/24, it's about five degrees up (the highest it gets) at around 1AM.  On 9/18/24, it's about five degrees up (the highest it gets) at around 9PM.  These are all true times, so adjust for daylight savings as needed.

 

Realistically, Pluto is in opposition in July.  However, Yellowknife is so high up in latitude, civil twilight never ends May through July.  It will be a whole lot easier to observe something that low and that dim when it is actually dark!  And again, it's easiest when it is at its highest.  Waiting until late September is a much better way to go for Pluto from Yellowknife, because Astronomical twilight starts later and ends earlier.

 

The same thing applies to Ontario, except the nights of all twilight are much fewer, if any.  Try to calculate astronomical twilight for whichever part of Canada you find yourself in.  The darkest it gets is a real concern for high Northern (or Southern) observers.  Pluto is dim, doesn't change magnitude much, and doesn't transit at very different altitudes above the horizon, for any given location.  But, the time at which that transit occurs changes over the course of the year.  Mind the daylight savings time when calculating.

[triplemon]

9 planets ?
Planet Nine is not discovered yet.

If you know amateur radio and the DXCC, that 9th Planet is like having a deleted country on your list. Beyond the reach of anyone but a true OM.

Back on topic, I've seen Pluto in 10 to 28 inch scopes. I'd dare to say, maybe short of the 10incher the hardest part is that verification as mentioned by many to truly proove to yourself it was really "that one".
Which makes it such a unique and fun challenge, no instant gratification.

Edited by triplemon, 22 January 2025 - 11:43 PM.

[Lentini]

Despite everyone saying how easy Pluto is in small scopes, I found it very challenging in my 12.5” from Spruce Knob. I had to spend a lot of time with averted vision in the star field of similar magnitude stars before I was confident I wasn’t imagining it. 

[triplemon]

I'm not saying its easy in anything under say 18inch these days.
Just needing to see it multiple nights in a row made it harder than just finding some star of that magnitude.
Anything within 2 or even 3 magnitudes of any one telescopes theoretical limits is not just point the scope and there it is, any given cloudless night.

Edited by triplemon, 23 January 2025 - 12:13 PM.

[Rick-T137]

Despite everyone saying how easy Pluto is in small scopes, I found it very challenging in my 12.5” from Spruce Knob. I had to spend a lot of time with averted vision in the star field of similar magnitude stars before I was confident I wasn’t imagining it. 

When I spotted Pluto in 2001, it was at mag 13.7 which was well within the grasp of my 10" Dob. Now, Pluto is mag 14.4 which would be more difficult, but I'd think it would still be an easy acquisition in a 10 or 12 inch telescope. In theory that would be still on the threshold of my 8" SCT (limiting mag 14.7) but of course a lot of it depends on the transparency of your observing site and Pluto's altitude in your local skies. In 2001 I believe it was much higher than it is now.

[Redbetter]

Pluto is still very doable with a 10" if it is not too low in the sky, which could be a factor for you in central Ontario.  My son first observed it with his 10" about 8 years ago, and it only took him a few minutes to track it down using the S&T chart once I explained how it worked.  I have seen it several times in recent years with a 110ED, only missed on it once when conditions were poor. 

 

An 8" shouldn't be a problem in good conditions for an experienced observer with good eyes, but it depends on how deep a person's TLM (telescopic limiting magnitude) is.  Part of that is employing sufficient power, which is dependent on the seeing.  I have used an 8" mask on my 20" Dob and a 6" mask on it as well, back in 2016.  

 

The main problem is having a good chart to locate it among the multitude of similar magnitude field stars.  Sky & Telescope publishes one each summer.  Last year's chart had some track label errors in a short stretch that happened to coincide with my observations, but I was still able to work out where Pluto actually was after two observations.

[Allan Wade]

I remember trying for a while back in the 1980's to see Pluto in my 4.5" newtonian, but never confirmed it. Fast forward to my 12"dob and that was pretty easy under city skies. I have observed it at my astro property in the 5" refractor and 5" binoscope, though it was tougher in the binoscope because of all the light loss through the system.

 

I spent years trying to see Charon in the 32". The seeing conditions were rarely good enough to use the magnification needed to seperate Pluto and Charon. But it was interesting watching Pluto move through the star field from night to night.

[Spile]

I too see (or imagine if don’t believe me) a hint of blue when I observe Neptune, similar to Uranus but of without the disc.

[Dave Mitsky]

When the seeing is very good, I'll observe Neptune (and hopefully Triton) at 462x using the Naylor Observatory's 17" classical Cassegrain.  Neptune is clearly a disk at that magnification.
 

https://skyandtelesc...triton-tracker/

[Napp]

Five or six years ago a friend and I tracked down Pluto with his 10 inch Newtonian.   He found the general area and then we used Sky Safari Pro to zero in on it.  I had loaded the Gaia database down to mag 16 so we increased magnification to just over 200X and ruled out all the stars in the field until only one was left that did not match any of the visible stars. 

 

A couple years or so ago all the planets and the moon were in the morning sky.  I took my 15X70 Oberwerk LW's to the beach and observed all.  Of course that did not include Pluto.    Luckily, Neptune was at the end of a small hockey stick asterism of faint stars and fairly easy to identify.  Mercury kept me in suspense as it did not pop into view above a layer of clouds over the horizon until just before sunrise.