77 replies to this topic

[ccate]

The double Albireo, is easy-ish to find as the head of the swan in the middle of the triangle.

It was my first wow double, with the contrasting blue and gold stars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albireo

And while you're there, find the Coathanger... its a fun one, looking like its name.

[newbeeDavid]

I looked up a light pollution chart and it places my back yard as Bortle 5, half hour drive Bortle 4, are there other #'s that tell me what to watch for? I try look up MCD/mm squared and I get McDonalds Mc Flurry, I assume brightness and artificial brightness play into what I should be looking for in best viewing but again I hit an area of information I have no clue about, reading more again.

[newbeeDavid]

m 81and m 82 are in my n eastern sky which is the better visual for my back yard, m 31 isn't a good view it would be over a street light above the house so that's out for backyard viewing, never mind that we have had poor skies for 2 weeks with weather, even ready to get some solar views (if the day is clear), going to dig out my bird jones celestron 137 mm that has a solar filter probably fine for sun spots or just sun viewing have only used it for that once, wasn't easy. That also solves the light pollution issue it's just getting alignment by shadow vs using a finder. 

[Dave Mitsky]

I looked up a light pollution chart and it places my back yard as Bortle 5, half hour drive Bortle 4, are there other #'s that tell me what to watch for? I try look up MCD/mm squared and I get McDonalds Mc Flurry, I assume brightness and artificial brightness play into what I should be looking for in best viewing but again I hit an area of information I have no clue about, reading more again.

Keep in mind that the data on light pollution maps can be misleading.

[epee]

Andromeda is my grandsons next wanted target he's upset about losing Saturn til the fall his next favorite is Jupiter and it's moons.

Galaxies are like big game hunting; take a large bore into the wild places.

 

That said, you can see the Andromeda Galaxy with binoculars from your backyard. It will look like a gray smudge.

 

With your 8", in your backyard, it will look like a larger gray smudge.

 

From a dark area it will look like an island universe...

[newbeeDavid]

I am sure the light pollution maps are for a reference, especially since the date is 2015 and not current, but it does give an approximate idea of the general area not specific spots I am sure with all the possible variable that it's a reasonable reference anyway.

 

Just checked Stellarium and the angle probably puts m 31 just out of viewable range, I have to play the limited sky and what is in that sky to pick targets, there are a good # of clusters that I see on the list that are in my viewing angle, orion is about as far to the low western sky and the big dipper is about my northern limit Jupiter is probably just making itself out of my overhead view.

[Spile]

Star hopping is the only way to find dim fuzzies as far as I am concerned. The darker the skies the better so if I can’t see the milky way or the moon is up I don’t bother. This is how I go about it https://astro.catshi...ng-dim-objects/

[newbeeDavid]

you hit a very important point that I haven't thought about, the upside down left right inversion, here I am plotting my maps on Stellarium yet not thinking inversion, well that just threw a wrench into my searching. I am pretty good at left right when viewing easy to find objects, but it's like any other habit it needs to be acquired and practiced to become habit, I am not there yet so area searching using stars and constellations will be my best starting point and maybe go beyond a starting point.

[Dave Mitsky]

I am sure the light pollution maps are for a reference, especially since the date is 2015 and not current, but it does give an approximate idea of the general area not specific spots I am sure with all the possible variable that it's a reasonable reference anyway.

 

Just checked Stellarium and the angle probably puts m 31 just out of viewable range, I have to play the limited sky and what is in that sky to pick targets, there are a good # of clusters that I see on the list that are in my viewing angle, orion is about as far to the low western sky and the big dipper is about my northern limit Jupiter is probably just making itself out of my overhead view.

The latest version of the World Atlas of the Artificial Night Sky Brightness incorporates satellite data from 2022.

https://djlorenz.git...tronomy/lp2022/

There are a number of caveats involved with translating this to a local area, however.

[Jon Isaacs]

you hit a very important point that I haven't thought about, the upside down left right inversion, here I am plotting my maps on Stellarium yet not thinking inversion, well that just threw a wrench into my searching. I am pretty good at left right when viewing easy to find objects, but it's like any other habit it needs to be acquired and practiced to become habit, I am not there yet so area searching using stars and constellations will be my best starting point and maybe go beyond a starting point.

 

For Star Hopping, I use a Red Dot Finder, Rigel or Telrad to get me to a nearby bright star and the a 50 mm RACI (Right Angle Correct Image) finder to do the actual star hopping. For my charts I use SkySafari plus or pro.

 

Another method I use sometimes is combining  star hopping with a digital level. The digital level has a magnetic base the sticks to the Dob and provides an altitude reading accurate to +/- 0.2°. 

 

I set the altitude of the object using SkySafari and then star hop for the azimuth, it can be crude, I then slowly sweep to find the object.

 

I use this one. It's $20, has white numbers on black so I can put some red film over the screen to protect my night vision.

 

https://www.amazon.c...39488012&sr=8-8

 

Jon

[newbeeDavid]

I have replaced all the red dot finders with 8x50 or 9x60 RACI's my neck doesn't like the twist and bend method so I replaced them, that was first, I like the idea of learning the sky so observation is my app for DSO's, finding them will be tough but has more value in being able to locate and zero in without phone or computer apps, they have their place but here and learning I feel is a  handicap. Teaching an eight year old with an electronic handicap to start  is a recipe for lazy, and not  doing the work with the best computer, his brain, once knowledge is acquired then the Apps become different, knowing they are wrong is the biggest benefit, setup must be right for the app to have a clue, being able to setup blind folded is the best app.

[joehudock]

If you can find the stars for star hopping its a lot easier (at least for me) if you have a cell phone and use an app like astrohopper or polar scope sky align pro to find galaxies, star clusters and nebula. Astrohopper is free and sky align is almost free ($3.99). Either one is easier and way faster than pure star hopping. With either these apps or star hopping the more you do it the better you get and for me I got better, faster with those two apps. But then these are not Stellarium. But I do use Stellarium with the apps to keep the stars sorted out.

[newbeeDavid]

This string is loaded with learning information however I believe we are straying into to many topics, locating DSO's with star charts was the initial direction, I learned some interesting facts that should help considerably, and some that are extremely important, Now if the snow would stop coming in the northeast that would help by allowing us some time to apply these suggestions. I am concerned if light pollution will allow a view of Andromeda, or if I need to see if m 81 and 82 can be found. I think those are my best chance at galaxies from this location.

[Dave Mitsky]

While I am an experienced star-hopper, there are a number of methods other than star-hopping to locate celestial objects without using a go-to telescope or digital setting circle device.  These include using a digital inclinometer or altitude degree indicator and an azimuth degree circle or the AstroHopper open-source web application.

https://www.cloudyni...azimuth circle

https://artyom-beili...trohopper.html 

 

https://artyom-beili....io/manual.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BrentKnight]

When I star-hop, I use a pair of 10x50 binoculars that give me a 6.5° field of view.  I pair these binoculars with SkySafari and a green laser pointer (GLP) attached to the telescope.  I use SkySafari with a correct orientation Scope Display of the same size.  It's pretty easy to pick out the correct binocular field where your chosen target lies, and once you have it located, you can just move the scope until the beam of the laser points directly at it.

 

You can do the star-hop with paper charts, but with SkySafari it's very easy to switch from the binocular FoV to the correctly oriented and sized telescope/eyepiece FoV.  This is still learning the sky, but it lets you take advantage of the technology available to make the task easier.

 

One advantage of paper charts is that they can give you a better overall view of the area you are exploring.  A good method is to bring out the phone app along with your paper charts of choice.

[newbeeDavid]

I have a digital angle finder but to get exact zero is a crap shoot unless a bubble level is a close enough reference  azimuth is still presently a compass I assume that if I was looking down the block it's one thing but light years is another so without adding accuracy and even with the phone it is only as accurate as gyro capabilities and calibration allow. Without trying it's my guess. Still feel learning the sky needs to come firs,t unfortunately old eyes have a disability to start.

Edited by newbeeDavid, 13 February 2025 - 11:02 PM.

[areyoukiddingme]

I find that taking note of the constellation, and then drawing the marker stars you know you can see, and then putting in the location of the galaxy help. You could do this with 2-3 targets, committed to memory.

 

Then when you go outside and get dark adapted you won't need to go back-and-forth with the bright computer screen.

 

Then it's just a matter of using a finder--laser, red dot, or target like a telrad--all work about equally well. Your aim is to use a lowish power to get in the neighborhood of your target, and then hopefully get a detection. Then it's time to go in with a higher power.

 

Starting with relatively bright targets like M81/82 is a good idea. If it's sufficiently late, I'd also try for M51. All are pretty easy to find blundering about if it is dark enough and you've had a good amount of time to dark adapt.

[areyoukiddingme]

And I should add, it's a good idea to temper your expectations. Seeing the structure and perhaps dust lane in M82 would be good goals. Just seeing these objects with hints of structure is an accomplishment that most people will never get to experience.

[Freezout]

I understand you don’t want off-topic subjects but it’s important to realize that even with the best star hopping technique, you won’t see the galaxies properly if you have lights around you. So the first advice is to bring son and telescope to a place without street lights etc.
Also I completely agree with WillR that if you show M42 (extremely easy to find) to your son , he won’t be angry that you made an off-topic with a DSO that isn’t a galaxy!

Edited by Freezout, 14 February 2025 - 01:00 AM.

[Jon Isaacs]

I have a digital angle finder but to get exact zero is a crap shoot unless a bubble level is a close enough reference

 

 

The digital levels I have are factory calibrated and more accurate than most bubble levels.  There can be an error if the optical axis of the scope is not parallel to the mechanical axis but  I have not found that to be a problem.  And you can always calibrate the offset by aligning the scope on a bright star and then noting the digital level reading and the altutude of the Star in SkySafari, Stellarium etc,

 

Jon

[Nankins]

Start by looking at the brightest galaxies - in a light polluted area even they can look like nothing more than very faint grey ghosts.  Look for galaxies when they are at their highest in the sky on a moonless night - ie M31 in the evening in December.  Visit a dark sky site if you can - you will see a lot more.  Also try to observe when the skies are at their calmest possible - you have no clue how much this does for observing until you have experienced both bad atmosphere conditions and excellent conditions.  Also look in the spring (April-May)  - the Virgo Cluster and other nearby clusters are most visible during this time, it's not super cold, and you don't have to star-hop - just point and pan carefully.  

 

If you are at a dark sky site (darker than B5 usually), you can have some fun with the Virgo Cluster galaxies because many of the brightest ones will have visible characteristics such as dark spots (dusty areas - a good example is the Black Eye Galaxy), lines that flit in and out of view (M63 - a flocculent spiral galaxy with a ton of visible texture), and for some, bright cores that outshine the rest of the galaxy (M77 - not in the Virgo Cluster - a fall object - but fun nonetheless because despite how faint everyone says it is, the core is so bright it looks like a fat Milky Way star).  

 

If you get a chance to head south some day, the Sculptor Galaxy is a must see.  Even from IN, where it is very very low in the atmospheric and light pollution muck from the south, it can still be visible in an 8x50 finderscope if you know where to look.  This is a large galaxy with a lot of dark structure and is highly mottled.  In my opinion only M31 and M33 can beat it for visible structure. It's long, too.  

 

If you would like to find a galaxy that is technically harder to see but super easy to put in your telescope's view, look for the so-called Ghost of Mirach.  Mirach is one of the main stars in Perseus and is surrounded by the Mirach Association open cluster - visible to the naked eye by the way. The galaxy is small and looks like reflection from the star - but it's not.  What helps with this one is it is super close to a bright star, but not so close that it gets overwhelmed by the starlight.  

 

And be aware that the apparent magnitude of most galaxies doesn't match the calculated magnitude.  This has to do with how diffuse the light is.  

 

Has your son viewed astronomical objects before?  If not then you may want to add some bright nebulae like M42, M27, M57, and a few others to your viewing list.  These are all very bright, and have a lot of obvious structure.  Under the right conditions M42 has been known to appear a pale green, pale pink, and even lavender with large scopes.  It is the only DSO that can appear very colorful - some people have the ability to see it as pink with no problem.  So not only will you see the Trapezium stars, the dust within the nebula, and the difference in light output between highly active regions and less active regions (with regards to stellar birth), as well as some depth within the object, but you might also get lucky and see some color.  With smaller telescopes this is more likely to happen at low magnification, however sometimes a good binocular can gather enough light that the nebula appears bright pink (I once saw it as bright pink and white on an exceptional winter night with new binoculars).  M27 can also show a bit of color at appropriate magnification - I've seen faint blue a few times while using a filter to enhance the nebula.  The filter does affect the color some but most of the time blue isn't visible even with the filter.  M57 - you need a large scope and/or dark skies to see any color.  But the ring is incredible and it appears smoky in the middle. 

 

Also don't trust what some people say about limiting magnitude for telescopes - under a dark sky a binocular observer can find all of the Messier objects, a small telescope can observe all of the Messiers plus a lot of other objects, a 6" could reach into the 10th or 11th magnitude range, and an 8" can reach into the 12th magnitude range.  A 10" can reach into the 15th magnitude range if you try hard - Pluto tends to be 14th-15th magnitude and plenty of us here have observed it in 10" or larger scopes - I think some have gotten it in 8" scopes.  Objects fainter than 10th magnitude tend to be billed as hard, while those brighter than 9th magnitude tend to be billed as easy.  As stated earlier this is based on overall magnitude, not apparent magnitude.  There's been times where I have been unable to see much of an 8th magnitude galaxy, while the neighboring 12th magnitude dwarf galaxy was right there for the taking.  I was observing under B3 skies that night (almost B4), so that helped, but never before or since have I had a night like that - 4-5 hours of observing and I had to stop and go home but I went to town observing faint galaxies. A great example of how much difference dark skies and good atmosphere conditions can make.  

Edited by Nankins, 14 February 2025 - 11:53 AM.

[Nankins]

And I should add, it's a good idea to temper your expectations. Seeing the structure and perhaps dust lane in M82 would be good goals. Just seeing these objects with hints of structure is an accomplishment that most people will never get to experience.

If the OP wants to do this, they should start with the dust lanes and arms in M31 - a much easier thing to do and good for getting experience with details.  And an excellent indicator of high quality sky conditions if the galaxy is high enough.  There have been a few times where I didn't see the arms, and then a few days later there was a clear gap.  

[newbeeDavid]

Yes the Orion Nebula was an easy to find target but due to background lighting it wasn't exciting to him, immediately he wanted B 33 due to background lighting I knew that would be a loss, I then switched to the Pleiades and his interest sparked when I gave him info of the "seven Sisters" he was intrigued, so galaxies are just a small part of what will keep him interested. I believe binary stars, clusters and tighter views on planets also the moon will captivate his interest. Finding the interesting item once a night or even weekly I think will build the curious excitement. 

[newbeeDavid]

Thanks guys,

That gives me many options, I have to see if they fit my eastern sky constraints without travel I can drive to a B 4 area in about a half hour but cold temps and Chemo don't mix, so we will star hop in the backyard for now all the maps I have looked at give me a B 5 rating (when neighbors don't leave cars running and headlights on) and what I can see seems to support that. Some Nebulas are visible and I can get in tight with Jupiter and it's moons with a 3mm ES 52* eyepiece on my 8" dob which actually hits the upper max mag for that scope. I feel we have decent viewing conditions considering it's rural so what we can and cannot view has greater location obstacles than visual.

 I have started working on digital Alt and Az location methods  but that's in beta mode for me, and we will see if I can learn how to use stellarium's plotting #'s, doesn't seem simple with manual tracking methods. Star hopping with the grandson seems to be a more exciting method we find and view and letting him find seems to me  to be more exciting for him than letting a programed unit do the searching. 

[newbeeDavid]

Have a Meade ds 2000 Autostar that tracks well and you pick and just hit enter for targets, the telescope sucks it's a Bird Jones focusing night mare, I am sure I could adapt that to use my 114 Orion Skyquest  but again find a better interest in star hopping,