Night away from WORK 9-5

I decided to get out tonight----the clouds weren't there for a
change----been late clouds for the past few nights here---and I just had to
bag another Messier before some of the summer ones are gone until next
year...So, I decided to go out and just hunt down M109.
It's easy to find but very hard to see. At Mag 11 and only 13 arc seconds
wide, it's dim and the light is spread over a fairly large area. But it's
located about 38 arc seconds from Phecda in the Big Dipper (Ursa Major) so
it's not hard to get in the area. At first I thought my brain was messing
with me! I could see it, even make out the shape but only with averted
vision. I thought maybe I just WANTED it to be there! So I studied it a
while---I had the trusty 120ST F/5 with my Pentax 21mm and 2X Barlow---that
put me at 57X. That's really not enough power but the seeing wasn't
great---3/5 maybe. And it wasn't that dark at 9:39 but time was short before
losing it to the trees!

So, I made notes of the star field and compared to the charts---YES! That
was it----M109. 55 million LY away...

Not for the weak. But great for the week!

Take care and CLEAR skies!

Doink

I've never had any luck with M109 even with an 8" dob under fairly dark
skies.

Hi Mean...

I think there isn't enough emphasis on learning to observe. We get aperture
fever and try to chase that great "jaw dropping" view but really, the degree
of gain from scope to scope moving up the food chain isn't that huge----I
think people need to justify spending thousands of dollars on their
telescopes so they always report great views but I have had fun at star
parties with my Orion 120mm f/5 refractor finding and showing targets to
people who couldn't find or see the same target in their equipment costing
far, far more. If you take your 8" back to M109 with a 12-14mm Eyepiece, I
guarantee you'll see it if you: 1. get the star field into your field of
view by matching it to a good chart---not a silly Telrad finder chart, but a
good chart with details---you'll know you're in the right spot. Trust
yourself if the field matches. It's an easy field to match up. That
exercise alone will enhance your ability to see more than if you bought a
bigger or better scope! 2. Leave the focuser alone. Even if it's not tack
sharp, don't touch it. You probably have a R&P focuser----there is image
shift. And it distracts the mind to focus---you'll be looking at a star to
sharpen your view and you'll miss your target. Before you go to the field
of view, pick a dim star and focus on it. Then leave the focuser alone. 3.
Allow the field to drift through your view---don't use tracking, digital
readouts or any other of that junk. Get the field of view right and let it
drift through. Repeat that several times and you'll see it....and then,
you'll be amazed and what you'll be able to see after that experience. That
exercise will greatly improve what you can see----more than just about any
improvement you can buy----to a point. Those 3 things would save most
people who get into this hobby hundreds, if not thousands of dollars trying
to buy better views. Another tip---when you take that8" out, take 2
eyepieces with you one eyepiece and a good barlow. Period. You can take
that suitcase of eyepieces out later---you'll find if you "make do" with
what you have out there, you'll force yourself to "look harder". It's like
golf---Look at those guys with every possible club----and they're still
duffers. I used to play with an old man---he was a hustler. The guy was
quite wealthy---A Fresno farmer who would go to the golf course after being
out in the fields---he'd be dirty and look a little crusty. And, he'd only
carry 3 clubs with him. Something like a 3 iron, 7 iron and a putter. He'd
linger around and then ask if he could play along when he found a nice
couple or somebody heading out alone---after a couple he'd want to play for
a buck a hole----and he'd finish the round with people each owing him
$15----3 clubs. But he always hit the ball straight. Not as far, but always
where he wanted it.


Doink


"Mean Mr Mustard" wrote in message
oups.com...
I've never had any luck with M109 even with an 8" dob under fairly dark
skies.

"Doink" wrote in message
...
Hi Mean...

... people need to justify spending thousands of dollars on their
telescopes so they always report great views

Personally, I don't need to justify spending thousands of dollars to anyone
other than myself. On the other hand, I find it is generally true that the
higher priced equipment provides what I consider to be important performance
increases over the lower priced equipment with the same basic design goals

Naglers are better than KK Widescans for example. Particularly in fast
scopes.

I suppose I should also point out that Mean Mr Mustard is one of our
resident troll type characters, and he's merely feeding your apparently
ongoing rage against the saa machine.

Actually, I didn't ask you to justify anything. And because someone doesn't
get into these mindless debates doesn't make them a troll....

Doink


tephen Paul" wrote in message
...

"Doink" wrote in message
...
Hi Mean...

... people need to justify spending thousands of dollars on their
telescopes so they always report great views

Personally, I don't need to justify spending thousands of dollars to
anyone other than myself. On the other hand, I find it is generally true
that the higher priced equipment provides what I consider to be important
performance increases over the lower priced equipment with the same basic
design goals

Naglers are better than KK Widescans for example. Particularly in fast
scopes.

I suppose I should also point out that Mean Mr Mustard is one of our
resident troll type characters, and he's merely feeding your apparently
ongoing rage against the saa machine.

Okay then, let's put it another way.

"People" don't report great views because they need to justify spending
thousands of dollars. That's way too much of a generalization.

In regard to your general tenor, the fact that you have finally had an
epiphany of the wonder of using a small scope, hardly makes you the first,
or an expert. Your enthusiasm for using a small scope seems to be overlapped
by your disgust over the 100ED discussions. You might want to make a cleaner
break, and stop interjecting your anger into what would otherwise be
interesting, educational, and entertaining threads.

Some threads down, I also reported seeing the Veil in an 80ED with Lumicon
UHC and 24mm Panoptic eyepiece. This is an object I've had trouble with in
larger scopes over and over again in the past. So, it's not like there
aren't a bunch of us, or even a majority, who know exactly what you are
talking about.

You don't need to "dis" the group while you're at it.

That's my opinion, but I say we forgive and forget, and just move on. I'm
ready.

-Stephen

"Doink" wrote in message
...
Actually, I didn't ask you to justify anything. And because someone
doesn't get into these mindless debates doesn't make them a troll....

Doink


tephen Paul" wrote in message
...

"Doink" wrote in message
...
Hi Mean...

... people need to justify spending thousands of dollars on their
telescopes so they always report great views

Personally, I don't need to justify spending thousands of dollars to
anyone other than myself. On the other hand, I find it is generally true
that the higher priced equipment provides what I consider to be important
performance increases over the lower priced equipment with the same basic
design goals

Naglers are better than KK Widescans for example. Particularly in fast
scopes.

I suppose I should also point out that Mean Mr Mustard is one of our
resident troll type characters, and he's merely feeding your apparently
ongoing rage against the saa machine.

On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 09:49:13 -0700, Doink wrote:

If you take your 8" back to M109 with a 12-14mm Eyepiece, I
guarantee you'll see it. . .


I am going to my dark location on Mt. Pilchuck tonight and will give it a
shot with my 4 1/2 inch reflector. I believe it can be done.



--
Martin R. Howell
"Photographs From the Universe of Amateur Astronomy"
http://members.isp.com/universeofama...nomy%40isp.com

I too believe it can be done. It was discovered with less....

Doink

"Martin" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 09:49:13 -0700, Doink wrote:

If you take your 8" back to M109 with a 12-14mm Eyepiece, I
guarantee you'll see it. . .


I am going to my dark location on Mt. Pilchuck tonight and will give it a
shot with my 4 1/2 inch reflector. I believe it can be done.



--
Martin R. Howell
"Photographs From the Universe of Amateur Astronomy"
http://members.isp.com/universeofama...nomy%40isp.com

Doink wrote:
If you take your 8" back to M109 with a 12-14mm Eyepiece, I
guarantee you'll see it if you: 1. get the star field into your field of
view by matching it to a good chart---not a silly Telrad finder chart, but a
good chart with details---you'll know you're in the right spot.

One thing I don't have is a good star chart. Still using an 80s
Peterson field guide.

A good chart is worth the investment if you're planning to get serious....I
have a Harold-Borboff----GREAT chart.

Doink

"Mean Mr Mustard" wrote in message
oups.com...
Doink wrote:
If you take your 8" back to M109 with a 12-14mm Eyepiece, I
guarantee you'll see it if you: 1. get the star field into your field of
view by matching it to a good chart---not a silly Telrad finder chart,
but a
good chart with details---you'll know you're in the right spot.

One thing I don't have is a good star chart. Still using an 80s
Peterson field guide.