I wasi going to ask who had seen the horsehead in the smallest scope, but Chuck, you blew me away - REALLY???? an 8" dynascope without filter? Should I be calling an exceeding of the Paul B unyan limit o n this one? I've heard some tall telescope tales in my time, but they often turn out to be true . Now my memory is in gear and I remember seeing the North American Nebula at Little Mountain through Dave Chamberlin's scope after a public star party. Think his scope was a 10" home made. Your not supposed to see that in a scope either - at least that is what I was told when I first got in to observing same as being told the horsehead was a photographic only object. The horse head is tough, even with filters. I would never have tried it without a filter. Visual observance of the horsehead is a rare feat, cudos to all who have pulled it off.
It was a home-made 8" and it was on the very EDGE of detectability. As I said, I'm thanking young eyes. I was what, maybe 16 at the time? And I needed Steve Jacobs there to confirm it. It was Steve Jacobs who claimed to have seen the Horsehead in his 6" Dynascope, but it wasn't at the same time as when we saw it in the 8". I'd definitely invoke Paul Bunyan on that one and I think I did at the time. Erik and I have both seen the North American Nebula with the naked-eye at SPOC, just a few years ago. It was actually easy at the time. I think atmospheric clarity might have a lot to do with it, and a total lack of any auroral activity. On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:30 PM, <jcarman6@q.com> wrote:
I wasi going to ask who had seen the horsehead in the smallest scope, but Chuck, you blew me away - REALLY???? an 8" dynascope without filter? Should I be calling an exceeding of the Paul B unyan limit o n this one? I've heard some tall telescope tales in my time, but they often turn out to be true . Now my memory is in gear and I remember seeing the North American Nebula at Little Mountain through Dave Chamberlin's scope after a public star party. Think his scope was a 10" home made. Your not supposed to see that in a scope either - at least that is what I was told when I first got in to observing same as being told the horsehead was a photographic only object.
The horse head is tough, even with filters. I would never have tried it without a filter. Visual observance of the horsehead is a rare feat, cudos to all who have pulled it off.
I wonder if there is any cross-over between the flat earthers, and the hollow earthers?
The horsehead has a number of challenges. 1st, the star near it will ruin your night vision, the times I have seen it it was found by someone else, dark adaption is the key. Sky conditions are also important, probably important not to have plaque (or was that plague) in your arteries as well.
My 6" f5 refractor frames the N American better than any scope I have looked trough. I have encountered people that mistake the "oak tree" very near by, for the horsehead. Erik It was a home-made 8" and it was on the very EDGE of detectability. As I
said, I'm thanking young eyes. I was what, maybe 16 at the time? And I needed Steve Jacobs there to confirm it.
It was Steve Jacobs who claimed to have seen the Horsehead in his 6" Dynascope, but it wasn't at the same time as when we saw it in the 8". I'd definitely invoke Paul Bunyan on that one and I think I did at the time.
Erik and I have both seen the North American Nebula with the naked-eye at SPOC, just a few years ago. It was actually easy at the time.
I think atmospheric clarity might have a lot to do with it, and a total lack of any auroral activity.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:30 PM, <jcarman6@q.com> wrote:
I wasi going to ask who had seen the horsehead in the smallest scope, but Chuck, you blew me away - REALLY???? an 8" dynascope without filter? Should I be calling an exceeding of the Paul B unyan limit o n this one? I've heard some tall telescope tales in my time, but they often turn out to be true . Now my memory is in gear and I remember seeing the North American Nebula at Little Mountain through Dave Chamberlin's scope after a public star party. Think his scope was a 10" home made. Your not supposed to see that in a scope either - at least that is what I was told when I first got in to observing same as being told the horsehead was a photographic only object.
The horse head is tough, even with filters. I would never have tried it without a filter. Visual observance of the horsehead is a rare feat, cudos to all who have pulled it off.
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
I have seen the Horsehead visually only once and it was with a Meade 8" SCT about 25 years ago. That was long before I could afford any filters. The location was in the mountains near Fish Lake, Utah and the elevation was pretty high, somewhere around 7000 to 8000 feet during late October. An observing buddy also saw it. Sky transparency and darkness were among the best I've ever experienced. I've never seen it again, even with significantly larger instruments. Fred -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@thebluezone.net Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 10:10 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Flat Earth Society
The horsehead has a number of challenges. 1st, the star near it will ruin your night vision, the times I have seen it it was found by someone else, dark adaption is the key. Sky conditions are also important, probably important not to have plaque (or was that plague) in your arteries as well.
My 6" f5 refractor frames the N American better than any scope I have looked trough. I have encountered people that mistake the "oak tree" very near by, for the horsehead. Erik It was a home-made 8" and it was on the very EDGE of detectability. As I
said, I'm thanking young eyes. I was what, maybe 16 at the time? And
I needed Steve Jacobs there to confirm it.
It was Steve Jacobs who claimed to have seen the Horsehead in his 6" Dynascope, but it wasn't at the same time as when we saw it in the 8". I'd definitely invoke Paul Bunyan on that one and I think I did at the time.
Erik and I have both seen the North American Nebula with the naked-eye
at SPOC, just a few years ago. It was actually easy at the time.
I think atmospheric clarity might have a lot to do with it, and a total lack of any auroral activity.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 10:30 PM, <jcarman6@q.com> wrote:
I wasi going to ask who had seen the horsehead in the smallest scope,
but Chuck, you blew me away - REALLY???? an 8" dynascope without filter? Should I be calling an exceeding of the Paul B unyan limit o n this one? I've heard some tall telescope tales in my time, but they often turn out to be true . Now my memory is in gear and I remember seeing the North American Nebula at Little Mountain through Dave Chamberlin's scope after a public star party. Think his scope was a 10" home made. Your not supposed to see that in a scope either - at least that is what I was told when I first got in to observing same as being told the horsehead was a photographic only object.
The horse head is tough, even with filters. I would never have tried
it without a filter. Visual observance of the horsehead is a rare feat, cudos to all who have pulled it off.
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
Erik, I've never heard of the oak tree nebula. It sounds like the flame nebula (NCG 2024) and it does look like a tree. In fact, now that I think of it, I think it resembles a tree more than a flame. If indeed this is the one you are referring to, I just might start calling it the oak tree also! The flame (or maybe the oak tree), is a relatively easy hit and it is very near Alnitak (zeta Orionis). You do need to put the bright stars (in this case Alnitak) out of the FOV, or you are right, they will overwhelm the very dim DSO's. Mat -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of erikhansen@thebluezone.net Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 12:10 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: **SPAM** Score: 7; Re: [Utah-astronomy] Flat Earth Society
The horsehead has a number of challenges. 1st, the star near it will ruin your night vision, the times I have seen it it was found by someone else, dark adaption is the key. Sky conditions are also important, probably important not to have plaque (or was that plague) in your arteries as well.
My 6" f5 refractor frames the N American better than any scope I have looked trough. I have encountered people that mistake the "oak tree" very near by, for the horsehead. Erik ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message and any included attachments are from Siemens Healthcare and are intended only for the addressee(s). The information contained herein may include trade secrets or privileged or otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you received this message in error, or have reason to believe you are not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender by e-mail with a copy to Central.SecurityOffice.Healthcare@siemens.com Thank you
The best view I have ever had of the North American Nebula was through 10x50 binoculars (no filter) at Rainbow Point last year during Alcon. The characteristic shape was very clear. With just naked eye viewing, I could see the nebula as a faint object but couldn't see what it was. When I have tried to view this object through my 10" LX90 even with an OIII filter, I get frustrated mainly, I think because the North American Nebula is so large. Fletch
I wasi going to ask who had seen the horsehead in the smallest scope, but Chuck, you blew me away - REALLY???? an 8" dynascope without filter? Should I be calling an exceeding of the Paul B unyan limit o n this one? I've heard some tall telescope tales in my time, but they often turn out to be true . Now my memory is in gear and I remember seeing the North American Nebula at Little Mountain through Dave Chamberlin's scope after a public star party. Think his scope was a 10" home made. Your not supposed to see that in a scope either - at least that is what I was told when I first got in to observing same as being told the horsehead was a photographic only object.
The horse head is tough, even with filters. I would never have tried it without a filter. Visual observance of the horsehead is a rare feat, cudos to all who have pulled it off.
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
The only time I can claim to have seen the North American nebula was through an Edmund Astroscan - 4-1/4 inch bowling ball. I have seen the bright part of the Horse Head through my 12.5 inch at a star party in southern Ut. Through the 22 inch I actually have seen the indent of the dark nebula against the bright portion, but it was just an indent - a sort of semicircular indentation along one side of the nebula. Again that observation was made in southern T. I don't recall any filtration, although it may have been through a deep sky filter. I am pretty sure the 12.5 inch observation was without any filter in place.
There is no "bright part" of the Horse Head. I have never been so lucky. Sig On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com>wrote:
The only time I can claim to have seen the North American nebula was through an Edmund Astroscan - 4-1/4 inch bowling ball. I have seen the bright part of the Horse Head through my 12.5 inch at a star party in southern Ut. Through the 22 inch I actually have seen the indent of the dark nebula against the bright portion, but it was just an indent - a sort of semicircular indentation along one side of the nebula. Again that observation was made in southern T. I don't recall any filtration, although it may have been through a deep sky filter. I am pretty sure the 12.5 inch observation was without any filter in place. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
-- Siegfried
That's OK Siegfried. I've never seen a satellite go behind the moon either. ________________________________ From: Siegfried Jachmann <siegfried@jachmann.org> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Nebulosity There is no "bright part" of the Horse Head. I have never been so lucky. Sig On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Brent Watson <brentjwatson@yahoo.com>wrote:
The only time I can claim to have seen the North American nebula was through an Edmund Astroscan - 4-1/4 inch bowling ball. I have seen the bright part of the Horse Head through my 12.5 inch at a star party in southern Ut. Through the 22 inch I actually have seen the indent of the dark nebula against the bright portion, but it was just an indent - a sort of semicircular indentation along one side of the nebula. Again that observation was made in southern T. I don't recall any filtration, although it may have been through a deep sky filter. I am pretty sure the 12.5 inch observation was without any filter in place. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
-- Siegfried _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
To me, the best view of the N. America nebula is always naked-eye, but I did get some really nice views through a Russian "KGB" 3x20 binocular some years ago. I misplaced it (it's pretty small) and haven't seen that particular bino in a long time, darnit. I might have inadvertantly left it in the little pickup truck I donated to the Kidney Foundation years ago. :(
I'm also pretty sure that even very low levels of airglow (also called nightglow) can have more of a negative impact on some really dim nebulae than most people think. It might not even otherwise be noticeable at the darkest of sites that the typical amateur frequents.
Just wait until you finish for Rich Field 5" or 6" Jaegers.
To me, the best view of the N. America nebula is always naked-eye, but I
did get some really nice views through a Russian "KGB" 3x20 binocular some years ago. I misplaced it (it's pretty small) and haven't seen that particular bino in a long time, darnit. I might have inadvertantly left it in the little pickup truck I donated to the Kidney Foundation years ago. :( _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
I have the tube for the 5" on-hand, but now you've got me salivating for the 6"... On Feb 22, 2012 4:20 PM, <erikhansen@thebluezone.net> wrote:
Just wait until you finish for Rich Field 5" or 6" Jaegers.
To me, the best view of the N. America nebula is always naked-eye, but I
did get some really nice views through a Russian "KGB" 3x20 binocular some years ago. I misplaced it (it's pretty small) and haven't seen that particular bino in a long time, darnit. I might have inadvertantly left it in the little pickup truck I donated to the Kidney Foundation years ago. :( _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
I have seen the N.A. nebula through a variety of telescopes. Probably the best view was last September at Lakeside with Joe Bauman. The conditions were pretty much the best they get and it was not difficult at all with my 16" dob, with and without a filter. My daughter's 8" f4 ball scope is a fantastic instrument for the N.A. nebula as the FOV is very large with a low power eyepiece. The method that works well for such large nebulae, is to "slide" into them. In other words, get in the general vicinity of the object and then move the scope towards the nebula. Once you notice the sky becoming a bit brighter, you're in the nebula. This method also works well for perceiving just how large the Andromeda galaxy is. For that one, start with the bright inner region (what most observers consider the galaxy) and move outwards, when you think you've gotten to black sky again, move farther out and then move back in and pay attention to where the sky starts getting brighter. It is amazing how large that galaxy really is when you do this. Mat -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Brent Watson Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 2:51 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: **SPAM** Score: 6; [Utah-astronomy] Nebulosity The only time I can claim to have seen the North American nebula was through an Edmund Astroscan - 4-1/4 inch bowling ball. I have seen the bright part of the Horse Head through my 12.5 inch at a star party in southern Ut. Through the 22 inch I actually have seen the indent of the dark nebula against the bright portion, but it was just an indent - a sort of semicircular indentation along one side of the nebula. Again that observation was made in southern T. I don't recall any filtration, although it may have been through a deep sky filter. I am pretty sure the 12.5 inch observation was without any filter in place. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options". ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message and any included attachments are from Siemens Healthcare and are intended only for the addressee(s). The information contained herein may include trade secrets or privileged or otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you received this message in error, or have reason to believe you are not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender by e-mail with a copy to Central.SecurityOffice.Healthcare@siemens.com Thank you
Can't wait to get out there again, Mat! Thanks, Joe ________________________________ From: "Hutchings, Mat (H USA)" <mat.hutchings@siemens.com> To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy@mailman.xmission.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 1:12 PM Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Nebulosity I have seen the N.A. nebula through a variety of telescopes. Probably the best view was last September at Lakeside with Joe Bauman. The conditions were pretty much the best they get and it was not difficult at all with my 16" dob, with and without a filter. My daughter's 8" f4 ball scope is a fantastic instrument for the N.A. nebula as the FOV is very large with a low power eyepiece. The method that works well for such large nebulae, is to "slide" into them. In other words, get in the general vicinity of the object and then move the scope towards the nebula. Once you notice the sky becoming a bit brighter, you're in the nebula. This method also works well for perceiving just how large the Andromeda galaxy is. For that one, start with the bright inner region (what most observers consider the galaxy) and move outwards, when you think you've gotten to black sky again, move farther out and then move back in and pay attention to where the sky starts getting brighter. It is amazing how large that galaxy really is when you do this. Mat -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Brent Watson Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 2:51 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: **SPAM** Score: 6; [Utah-astronomy] Nebulosity The only time I can claim to have seen the North American nebula was through an Edmund Astroscan - 4-1/4 inch bowling ball. I have seen the bright part of the Horse Head through my 12.5 inch at a star party in southern Ut. Through the 22 inch I actually have seen the indent of the dark nebula against the bright portion, but it was just an indent - a sort of semicircular indentation along one side of the nebula. Again that observation was made in southern T. I don't recall any filtration, although it may have been through a deep sky filter. I am pretty sure the 12.5 inch observation was without any filter in place. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options". ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This message and any included attachments are from Siemens Healthcare and are intended only for the addressee(s). The information contained herein may include trade secrets or privileged or otherwise confidential information. Unauthorized review, forwarding, printing, copying, distributing, or using such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you received this message in error, or have reason to believe you are not authorized to receive it, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender by e-mail with a copy to Central.SecurityOffice.Healthcare@siemens.com Thank you _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
Another thing about the Horsehead- it is very small. I think some people might have been able to detect it but as Erik noted, they had bright stars in the field and used too low of a magnification. This is a good case for an old-style eyepiece without a humongous field of view, and fewer light-absorbing elements.
Small might be subject to interpretation. The horsehead is actually larger than I was thinking it was. In wide field images compare it's size to the flame nebula (or oak tree). The horse's "neck" is easier than the smaller forehead and nose and "top knot". Since the flame and horsehead are in the same observing neighborhood, that is a good way to set size expectations. Here is a good link to a wide field view of both: http://www.newforestobservatory.com/wordpress/wp-content/gallery/nebulae /WideField_Horsehead_Area_M25C_Greg_Noel_3.jpg Also according to observing legend Barbara Wilson, when trying for the horsehead it is important to select an eyepiece that gives an appropriate exit pupil. Filters respond better with certain exit pupils. See an article that Barbara wrote that discusses this idea here: http://home.ix.netcom.com/~bwilson2/barbarasweb/MEyepiece.htm If you are serious about seeing the horsehead, this article is highly recommended. Mat -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of Chuck Hards Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 8:21 AM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Nebulosity Another thing about the Horsehead- it is very small. I think some people might have been able to detect it but as Erik noted, they had bright stars in the field and used too low of a magnification. This is a good case for an old-style eyepiece without a humongous field of view, and fewer light-absorbing elements. _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club. To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
Point ceded, it's just that it's smaller than what most people with less observing experience are expecting, especially after they nab the nearby monster M42. On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Hutchings, Mat (H USA) < mat.hutchings@siemens.com> wrote:
Small might be subject to interpretation.
Here are observing notes excerpts of one observer, concerning the visibility of the horsehead. Note the apertures used, and some sightings weren't even under pristine skies. The smallest seems to be about 6", so my 8" sighting isn't much of a feat in light of these, and I'm more inclined to believe Steve Jacobs' 6" Dynascope sighting. http://homepage.mac.com/joebergeron/horseheadobs.htm
Barnard 72, "the snake" is another challenging dark nebula.
Here are observing notes excerpts of one observer, concerning the
visibility of the horsehead. Note the apertures used, and some sightings weren't even under pristine skies. The smallest seems to be about 6", so my 8" sighting isn't much of a feat in light of these, and I'm more inclined to believe Steve Jacobs' 6" Dynascope sighting.
http://homepage.mac.com/joebergeron/horseheadobs.htm _______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
I've only seen the horsehead nebula without filters on a 20-inch (or so) scope, on three or four occasions. But Joan, I've seen and continue to see the N. American Nebula and Pelican Nebula from every dark site with a view of that part of the sky. With its size and surface brightness, instruments larger than binoculars tend to just look "through" them. They are good friends I can still see with my getting-old(er) eyesight. Kim -----Original Message----- From: utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of jcarman6@q.com Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 10:31 PM To: Utah Astronomy Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Flat Earth Society I wasi going to ask who had seen the horsehead in the smallest scope, but Chuck, you blew me away - REALLY???? an 8" dynascope without filter? Should I be calling an exceeding of the Paul B unyan limit o n this one? I've heard some tall telescope tales in my time, but they often turn out to be true . Now my memory is in gear and I remember seeing the North American Nebula at Little Mountain through Dave Chamberlin's scope after a public star party. Think his scope was a 10" home made. Your not supposed to see that in a scope either - at least that is what I was told when I first got in to observing same as being told the horsehead was a photographic only object. The horse head is tough, even with filters. I would never have tried it without a filter. Visual observance of the horsehead is a rare feat, cudos to all who have pulled it off.
participants (11)
-
Brent Watson -
Chuck Hards -
erikhansen＠thebluezone.net -
Fletcher Gross -
Fred Orrell -
Hutchings, Mat (H USA) -
jcarman6＠q.com -
Joe Bauman -
Kim -
Patrick Wiggins -
Siegfried Jachmann