Bands of Saturn. How many of them can be counted (really!) with 7" scope?

(Dan Chaffee) wrote in message ...
On 17 Jan 2004 12:12:15 -0800, (ValeryD)
wrote:

One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted
in a 7" APO at 175x(only!).
I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter
only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no
zones seen).

If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some
zones should be not wider, than 1/2"!

Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many
bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-)


The most I've ever seen with the ring tilt obscuring the majority of
one of the hemispheres is five--counting the polar cap. I drew it
back a couple of years ago using a 9.6" newtonian. Five can plainly
be seen on this drawing, where I tried to reproduce the bands' actual
contrast as seen through the eyepiece.

http://community.webshots.com/photo/...12021722sTdEvG

Seeing was P6-7; good, but not good enough for the Enke gap :-(

Dan C.

Hi,

I almost always get confused when somebody speaks of "bands" seen on a
planet's disk. I usually use terms like belts and zones.

Currently, I have 2 scopes that are optically good and show fine
detail and contrast on nights with good seeing. My scope's apertues
are 6" and 9.6".

Like Dan's drawing shows I find that to see the type belt and zone
detail that Dan's Saturn drawing renders with certainty, the
magnification range had to be at roughly 300x-450x. 350x or higher
being ideal. Same goes for finer ring details and SPR features.

Still, sometimes when observing I still get very surprised by the
amount of detail I can discern that others may not. With other
talented people's support, Dan's among them, I took to drawing rather
than verbally describing everything. In other words, I typically see
Saturn with 4 to 6 belts separated by zones.

Thanks, Sol Robbins

"Mike Spooner" wrote in message news:c85b01afe4d802ee764ce8f302a3bd15.12996@mygat e.mailgate.org...
Hi Valery,

Last night I had decent seeing and counted 4 dark bands not including
the polar area detail. Two of the bands were very subtle and not visible
except when the seeing was settled down. I also did not concentrate on
the polar region (it was cold enough here without thinking of polar
stuff). I used a 4mm Radian at 341x with 0.82mm exit pupil and a 17%
diametrical obstruction for the best view. If the lighter zones were
also counted then the total number would approach those listed I guess.
I searched for but did not see the Encke gap but I've found that my eyes
need close to 500x for me to pick it up if the seeing allows. I don't
often observe the planets at 175x when looking for maximum details as it
just is not enough magnification for my tastes. I know several folks who
feel that I overdo the magnification but I just go with what works for
my eyes. I haven't used the Hubble (too short to reach the eyepiece g)
but the pictures are pretty. Of course I don't know what you should
believe - it's hard enough for me to keep my own life straight so you're
on your own I guess.
Best in the New Year,
--Mike Spooner

Mike!

On the Hubble image (which Chuck Taylor mentioned) I counted only 14 bands,
include light ones. Look at that image and imagine how this guy TP was able
to see 12 zones on merely 17" disk, which is not fully seen and exclude
2 polar regions. This mean, that if zones are equal in wideness, then they
should be not wider, than 1". And their contrast MUCH less, than Enke division.

In any case, looking on Hubble picture, one should conclude, that Enke division
is MUCH more contrast and MUCH easier to detect, than some low contrast narrow
zones.

All in all, I consider such reports with seeing 12 zones on Saturn globe,
at 175x through 7" instrument as a plain BS.


V.D.

"Mike Spooner" wrote in message news:c85b01afe4d802ee764ce8f302a3bd15.12996@mygat e.mailgate.org...
Hi Valery,

Last night I had decent seeing and counted 4 dark bands not including
the polar area detail. Two of the bands were very subtle and not visible
except when the seeing was settled down. I also did not concentrate on
the polar region (it was cold enough here without thinking of polar
stuff). I used a 4mm Radian at 341x with 0.82mm exit pupil and a 17%
diametrical obstruction for the best view. If the lighter zones were
also counted then the total number would approach those listed I guess.
I searched for but did not see the Encke gap but I've found that my eyes
need close to 500x for me to pick it up if the seeing allows. I don't
often observe the planets at 175x when looking for maximum details as it
just is not enough magnification for my tastes. I know several folks who
feel that I overdo the magnification but I just go with what works for
my eyes. I haven't used the Hubble (too short to reach the eyepiece g)
but the pictures are pretty. Of course I don't know what you should
believe - it's hard enough for me to keep my own life straight so you're
on your own I guess.
Best in the New Year,
--Mike Spooner

Mike!

On the Hubble image (which Chuck Taylor mentioned) I counted only 14 bands,
include light ones. Look at that image and imagine how this guy TP was able
to see 12 zones on merely 17" disk, which is not fully seen and exclude
2 polar regions. This mean, that if zones are equal in wideness, then they
should be not wider, than 1". And their contrast MUCH less, than Enke division.

In any case, looking on Hubble picture, one should conclude, that Enke division
is MUCH more contrast and MUCH easier to detect, than some low contrast narrow
zones.

All in all, I consider such reports with seeing 12 zones on Saturn globe,
at 175x through 7" instrument as a plain BS.


V.D.

"Mike Spooner" wrote in message news:c85b01afe4d802ee764ce8f302a3bd15.12996@mygat e.mailgate.org...
Hi Valery,

Last night I had decent seeing and counted 4 dark bands not including
the polar area detail. Two of the bands were very subtle and not visible
except when the seeing was settled down. I also did not concentrate on
the polar region (it was cold enough here without thinking of polar
stuff). I used a 4mm Radian at 341x with 0.82mm exit pupil and a 17%
diametrical obstruction for the best view. If the lighter zones were
also counted then the total number would approach those listed I guess.
I searched for but did not see the Encke gap but I've found that my eyes
need close to 500x for me to pick it up if the seeing allows. I don't
often observe the planets at 175x when looking for maximum details as it
just is not enough magnification for my tastes. I know several folks who
feel that I overdo the magnification but I just go with what works for
my eyes. I haven't used the Hubble (too short to reach the eyepiece g)
but the pictures are pretty. Of course I don't know what you should
believe - it's hard enough for me to keep my own life straight so you're
on your own I guess.
Best in the New Year,
--Mike Spooner

Mike!

On the Hubble image (which Chuck Taylor mentioned) I counted only 14 bands,
include light ones. Look at that image and imagine how this guy TP was able
to see 12 zones on merely 17" disk, which is not fully seen and exclude
2 polar regions. This mean, that if zones are equal in wideness, then they
should be not wider, than 1". And their contrast MUCH less, than Enke division.

In any case, looking on Hubble picture, one should conclude, that Enke division
is MUCH more contrast and MUCH easier to detect, than some low contrast narrow
zones.

All in all, I consider such reports with seeing 12 zones on Saturn globe,
at 175x through 7" instrument as a plain BS.


V.D.

"Mike Spooner" wrote in message news:c85b01afe4d802ee764ce8f302a3bd15.12996@mygat e.mailgate.org...
Hi Valery,

Last night I had decent seeing and counted 4 dark bands not including
the polar area detail. Two of the bands were very subtle and not visible
except when the seeing was settled down. I also did not concentrate on
the polar region (it was cold enough here without thinking of polar
stuff). I used a 4mm Radian at 341x with 0.82mm exit pupil and a 17%
diametrical obstruction for the best view. If the lighter zones were
also counted then the total number would approach those listed I guess.
I searched for but did not see the Encke gap but I've found that my eyes
need close to 500x for me to pick it up if the seeing allows. I don't
often observe the planets at 175x when looking for maximum details as it
just is not enough magnification for my tastes. I know several folks who
feel that I overdo the magnification but I just go with what works for
my eyes. I haven't used the Hubble (too short to reach the eyepiece g)
but the pictures are pretty. Of course I don't know what you should
believe - it's hard enough for me to keep my own life straight so you're
on your own I guess.
Best in the New Year,
--Mike Spooner

Mike!

On the Hubble image (which Chuck Taylor mentioned) I counted only 14 bands,
include light ones. Look at that image and imagine how this guy TP was able
to see 12 zones on merely 17" disk, which is not fully seen and exclude
2 polar regions. This mean, that if zones are equal in wideness, then they
should be not wider, than 1". And their contrast MUCH less, than Enke division.

In any case, looking on Hubble picture, one should conclude, that Enke division
is MUCH more contrast and MUCH easier to detect, than some low contrast narrow
zones.

All in all, I consider such reports with seeing 12 zones on Saturn globe,
at 175x through 7" instrument as a plain BS.


V.D.

Where did the guy report **precisely** 12 bands? Or is it
your interpretation, Valery? Perhaps, it would behooves us all
and do more service to the readers by providing the link to such
a report so that we can all go read the report ourselves instead of
leaping to all sort of conclusions based on your comments, wouldn't
you say ;-)?

Thanks,
Ron B[ee]
-----------

"ValeryD" wrote in message
om...
One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted
in a 7" APO at 175x(only!).
I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter
only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no
zones seen).

If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some
zones should be not wider, than 1/2"!

Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many
bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-)


V.D.

Where did the guy report **precisely** 12 bands? Or is it
your interpretation, Valery? Perhaps, it would behooves us all
and do more service to the readers by providing the link to such
a report so that we can all go read the report ourselves instead of
leaping to all sort of conclusions based on your comments, wouldn't
you say ;-)?

Thanks,
Ron B[ee]
-----------

"ValeryD" wrote in message
om...
One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted
in a 7" APO at 175x(only!).
I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter
only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no
zones seen).

If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some
zones should be not wider, than 1/2"!

Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many
bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-)


V.D.

Where did the guy report **precisely** 12 bands? Or is it
your interpretation, Valery? Perhaps, it would behooves us all
and do more service to the readers by providing the link to such
a report so that we can all go read the report ourselves instead of
leaping to all sort of conclusions based on your comments, wouldn't
you say ;-)?

Thanks,
Ron B[ee]
-----------

"ValeryD" wrote in message
om...
One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted
in a 7" APO at 175x(only!).
I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter
only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no
zones seen).

If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some
zones should be not wider, than 1/2"!

Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many
bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-)


V.D.

Where did the guy report **precisely** 12 bands? Or is it
your interpretation, Valery? Perhaps, it would behooves us all
and do more service to the readers by providing the link to such
a report so that we can all go read the report ourselves instead of
leaping to all sort of conclusions based on your comments, wouldn't
you say ;-)?

Thanks,
Ron B[ee]
-----------

"ValeryD" wrote in message
om...
One guy reported, that 12(bands) on Saturn were counted
in a 7" APO at 175x(only!).
I can remind, that Saturn's globe typically is 17" in diameter
only. And at least 1/5 of it's globe is polar region (where no
zones seen).

If we remember, that zones are not equal in wide, then some
zones should be not wider, than 1/2"!

Should I believe to such observations? Interesting, how many
bands can be counted on Saturn globe on Hubble pictures? :-)


V.D.

"Ron B[ee]" wrote in message news:DEIOb.21295$Xq2.1177@fed1read07...
Where did the guy report **precisely** 12 bands? Or is it
your interpretation, Valery? Perhaps, it would behooves us all
and do more service to the readers by providing the link to such
a report so that we can all go read the report ourselves instead of
leaping to all sort of conclusions based on your comments, wouldn't
you say ;-)?

Thanks,
Ron B[ee]
-----------

Ron!

Do you think I can "cook" such a message??? Shame on you! :-)
OK, the link at the bottom.
And read a snip from that message.

V.D.




"I next GoTo'ed Saturn. Wow conditions were pretty good indeed, at
least an 8/10. I haven't seen Saturn this well in a long time. The
25mm came out and a TMB monocentric 8mm went in. Very crisp, the
Cassini is razor sharp. I was able to count 12 bands on the globe.
The Crepe was also visible. Saturn is just a plain old awesome sight."

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tmboptical/message/13331


V.D.