RAT NOTES - 18" F4.3 Starmaster / Zambuto Dob - 10/1/03 - Pt 1

RAT NOTES - 18" F4.3 Starmaster / Zambuto Dob - 10/1/03 - Pt 1

7000 feet
40 deg N
40 to 50 deg F
9:00 PM to 1:00 AM

Seeing: good to very good
Transparency: mag 6

Hi folks,

Well, it been a long time since I posted and I've got a lot to get down, so
let's get started. I didn't log a single observation between 6/8, 2003 and
9/26, 2003, amazing. I blame it all on Mars and the Tak FS-152. The summer
melted into countless sessions with both. I didn't even make a drawing or a
sketch. Nowadays I find my inadequate sketches bothersome, cumbersome,
inadequate in light of the fantastic work being done by today's digital
imaging. Perhaps my view will change, or perhaps I will one day simply acquire
a digital camera.

Sure, it is often stated that by sketching a person can get a better look at
what is really going on. Perhaps I agree that a person **can** do a better job
of internalizing by using sketching as a tool, but this doesn't necessarily
mean that they always **will**. My observations of Mars are very highly
detailed and clearly etched in my memory so that one day they might fade and I
might begin again. At any rate, I for one shall remember this opposition as
being the best that I have ever seen. I can only hope to have such a chance as
this again in my life.

Anyway, one of the main reasons I took up this hobby (and dropped the home
music studio recording) was that everything in my life seems to be geared to
producing something, and I wanted a hobby that had no end product. Pure
enjoyment. So I have lately allowed this to be the driving force behind my
pursuit of the ideal of amateur astronomy; if I love it I do it, if I don't,
well, then, I don't. So here we are producing again, with these, notes, but
they do bring me some enjoyment, so for the time being, here they are.

I will list a couple of nights mixed in together. The reason being that I have
had some great nights this past week, and had a chance to use a couple of
different instruments in addition to the 18", so some comparisons will be
interesting and in order.

The last couple of sessions have been DSO sessions using the 18" F4.3
Starmaster and 10" F6 Starsplitter. I have been spending a good amount of time
get both more and "re" acquainted with M31 and M33, as well as revisiting some
old sights.

Another small aside he For a couple of years I have been obsessed with
creating some sort of observing list to guide me through my pursuit. Containing
in the neighborhood of 650 objects, I must have printed it out 10 times by now.
If I put them all together I have probably already observed them all by now.
But then I come across another publication, such as the book "The Universe From
Your Backyard", or a new, better suited, bright star atlas such as the
"Cambridge Star Atlas", and my observing list is suddenly inadequate. Well,
I've had about enough of that and am getting back to where I started which is
Skiff and Tirion's "Bright Star Atlas". I have come, at least for now, to the
conclusion that if I ever gain enough familiarity with the 300 plus objects
there (plus the others that I know of and frequent), then perhaps it will be
time then to expand my horizons. I came to this conclusion while searching for
45 minutes with the 18" for a galaxy listed in the Cambridge Atlas that, once
found, failed woefully to impress me. I wasted half an observing session
chasing down a faint fuzzy when fully a dozen splendid objects beckoned from
HRA 20 and 21on Chart 8 of my familiar and simple star atlas. I think there are
probably enough showpiece objects to keep an observer such as myself
entertained for a lifetime, so, we shall see. BTW, I do very much enjoy reading
"The Universe From Your Backyard" on cloudy nights, it highlights many of the
objects that I enjoy observing, and the insights related do amplify my
enjoyment while actually observing them. But the list is going away, I think,
and for now I am just taking out the charts.

I keep looking at the effort of rolling out the 18" compared to bringing out a
smaller scope, and asking myself if it is really worth it. Last night I timed
operations, because it seems to me that it takes an inordinately long time to
set up the big scope compared to the smaller ones. All in all I had set the
scope up, removed the wheelbarrow handles, taken out the lock screw, removed
the mirror cover, drug out an observing chair, a table and a six-foot ladder.
This operation took five minutes. Dressing for the cold, taking out eyepieces,
books, charts, log, radio and power supply took another five minutes after the
initial set up for cool down was complete. Collimation takes about a minute.
Putting everything away took a little less than 10 minutes.

After several nights of again comparing scopes, I must say that the effort is
definitely worth it; the views in the 18" at times border on astounding. I am
truly, in this respect, addicted to aperture. It would be nice to find a way to
more easily attach and detach the wheelbarrow handles, but for now I will
continue to observe half of my objects while standing on the bottom step of a
ladder. The only real drawback I have in my neck of the woods is that when the
snow hits, I am only able to maintain a small vestige of civilization outside
my house; a small observing deck, around which the snow at times is piled as
high as six feet, and there is simply not room to maneuver such a large scope
well. It will be brought out for the obligatory annual review of Orion' mighty
sword, and I do hope to do a better job this year of observing the region of
Monoceros, as I always promise myself. But, I suspect that the 10" will be more
the order of the day for DSO observing during the dead of winter. The winter is
quite possibly my favorite time of year to observe. But then this is perhaps
the third great Fall observing season in a row, the long processions of clear
starry nights are endearing and satisfying, so my sentiments on that may be
changing.



M31 - NGC 224 - The Andromeda Galaxy - SG - AND - I recently purchased a pair
of Celestron SkyMaster 15x70 Binoculars. They are my first foray into big
binoculars, and quite fortunately will likely be my last. I say that because I
am delighted with their performance and they rather exactly fill the niche that
I have asked them to. I don't observe by looking up very well (my neck doesn't
like it), and I find the utility of mounting binos for a prime observing
instrument to be usually superceded by simply using a telescope (just my
personal view), so for me a binocular is a hand held instrument, suitable to
both standing quick looks and lawn chair reclined forays into deep space. I was
impressed by the fact that this pair comes in at three pounds and boasts a
4-degree field of view. I haven't mounted them yet on a tripod, so I couldn't
really give you a critical assessment of the optics (for $89 bucks delivered,
why would I), but for the purpose of hand holding they are ideal. I do lift
weights a couple of days a week, so the upper body strength is probably above
average (but surely not by much), and I found the first night that leisurely
observing the heavens using them that I was able to hold out for forty five
minutes before my arms ached enough to give up. There are tricks to use for
steadiness, which I eagerly employ. Some nights, my arms get tired faster, but
I figure its good for me anyway, I will probably get stronger using them.

First light of course had to be M31. I had just finished observing it on
previous nights through the 18" and 10" Dobs. In the 18" there is that fabulous
double dust lane wrapping around the front just below the core. Several HIII
regions glow brightly, M110, and M32 nearly fit in the same low power field of
view. (It's raining now, which is why I'm typing instead of looking. The reason
it is raining is because I received today a new Televue 31 mm Nagler to replace
the 35 Panoptic I've been using for years. I figure the smaller exit pupil will
make a better finder, and maybe M31, M110 and M32 might just all fit into one
darker, wider field. I had a chance to look through one with a TEC 140 F7 Apo
refractor last month at the M31 group and the view was one of the best that I
have ever seen). Anyway, M31's companions are quite bright; M32 small and
intense, bright core with small, bright, evenly illuminated round halo, like a
big fuzzy star. M110 (NGC 205), is fairly large and quite diffuse. Taken all
together, a breathtaking sight. Add to this two other galaxies;

NGC 185 - G - CAS and
NGC 147 - G - CAS

which, along with M33, fantastically turn out to be yet more members of our
local group, the whole area just becomes all the more fascinating.

NGC 185 is the brighter of the two, but nothing visually to write home about.
It seemed surprisingly faint in the 18" until I saw it in the 10" - Large and
faint with a condensed core.

NGC 147 is even fainter and more diffuse. Damn near difficult to see,
particularly in the 10", it's just so spread out. It lies within an eyepiece or
so fov of NGC 185. As mentioned earlier, while these are interesting objects to
observer, the real fascination lies in their close proximity. Nice to see and
recognize some of the neighbors.

Neither of the above were immediately visible in the 15x70's. (I say
immediately because that is about how much time I spend determining if an
object is going to be fun to view in them). But through the big binos the M31 /
110 / 32 complex was simply amazing. Here is what it is: When you get a chance
to look at it just right, it really becomes part of the background and you can
see so plainly and profoundly that it really is in outer space, out there, in
**that** direction. Don't get me wrong, of course we all know that we are
peering into outer space, it is just that when you frame it just right it
suddenly takes on a "realness" that isn't always there, at least for me. At
times it is difficult for me to put space objects in a proper perspective. Even
as it is, M31 still seemed somehow too close, knowing intellectually that it is
actually too far distant to even comprehend. But I still sensed that for a
moment I was able to perceive M31 as it really **is**, and if anyone is
wondering; it was well worth the 89 bucks. Think of the Worlds, the Beings, the
Civilizations that have risen and then simply vanished in all the immense sea
of time that the light that we are seeing has had to cross to arrive here, now.
The overriding visual impression I got from observing M31 with the big binos,
was the inescapable sense of distance, gap, void bridged. And M31 does lie
**behind** the stars. It is our neighbor, inconceivably distant, yet so clearly
our neighbor.

I swore that I glimpsed a dust lane while hand holding the binos, and then it
was gone, and I haven't got it back yet. I intend to keep trying. NGC 205 is a
nice faint galaxy and M32 is a faint fuzzy star - Nice.

M33 - NGC 598 - G - TRI - For me the Pinwheel Galaxy lies between being a
ridiculous spectacle and a challenge object. It is Huge - obvious spiral
structure, but so difficult and tantalizing to make out. Dark rifts, and at one
edge, a bright emission nebula (NGC 604?), small and paisley shaped. Face on,
it is another one of those objects that begs more questions than it answers.
Both M33 and M31 seem to be very dependant on sky transparency. The backyard
is pretty good. M33 is also a very nice object in the 15x70's, as are most of
the brighter objects on my list. The first night out with them I managed to
pick off The Big Smoke Ring, M3, M15, and some other M's, the double cluster,
but the best objects of all were two:

NGC 7000 - The North America Nebula - EN - CYG is visible in all of its
splendor, without filters.
It really does look like North America, as opposed to bits of North America,
when I look at it through a large telescope.

The Pleiades were the best that I have ever seen them, ever.

I wonder if I will be finally able to log the California Nebula.

NGC 7662 - Blue Snowball - PN - AND - A pretty easy star hop away from M31 -
this one is another great large aperture object - stands up very well to high
magnification, and looks like, well, a blue snowball. The edges are quite
fuzzy. I'm still working on finding it in the big binos.

NGC 752 - OC - AND - While this cluster is quite coarse and not particularly
impressive as an OC in either the 18" or the 10" scopes, it is a veritable
spectacle in the 15x70's, a large number of stars residing in a well-detached
and obvious grouping. Well condensed, too - good object. I need to have another
look at it.

NGC 891 - G - AND - I am assuming that this is yet another member of the local
group. It makes a pretty good showing in the 18". After using first the 18",
then the 10" and then coming back out with the 18" on the same objects I can
definitely say that the increased aperture is of considerable benefit. This Big
Streak of a thing boasts an excellent dark rift cutting down its center - Very
Large, Very Nice.

TBC

rat
~( );

email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address

Rat wrote:

snip
Think of the Worlds, the Beings, the
Civilizations that have risen and then simply vanished in all the immense
sea
of time that the light that we are seeing has had to cross to arrive here,
now.
unsnip


Rat,

Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words.
Sometimes a word is worth a thousand pictures.
Sometimes a thought is worth both of the above.
This is one of those thoughts.

Thanks for it,


Martin

"Ratboy99" wrote in message
...

I've had about enough of that and am getting back to where I started which
is
Skiff and Tirion's "Bright Star Atlas".

I'm with you. I've got a bunch of computer generated lists from DS2002, as
well as NSOG and SA2000. I've even imported to Excel and sorted the NGC-MAX
database by constellation, but recently I've discovered the beauty of the
simplicity of the BSA. It has lists on the left page and the maps on the
opposing right. IIRC, it's somewhere in the vicinity of an 11" x 14" book of
maybe 30 pages or so. Real thin, and easily held in the lap while seated at
the eyepiece.

Cheesy cover, but very good content. This is one case where you really can't
judge the book by its cover.

Stephen Paul
Shirley, MA

t (Ratboy99) wrote in message ...
RAT NOTES - 18" F4.3 Starmaster / Zambuto Dob - 10/1/03 - Pt 1


I keep looking at the effort of rolling out the 18" compared to bringing out a
smaller scope, and asking myself if it is really worth it. Last night I timed
operations, because it seems to me that it takes an inordinately long time to
set up the big scope compared to the smaller ones. All in all I had set the
scope up, removed the wheelbarrow handles, taken out the lock screw, removed
the mirror cover, drug out an observing chair, a table and a six-foot ladder.
This operation took five minutes. Dressing for the cold, taking out eyepieces,
books, charts, log, radio and power supply took another five minutes after the
initial set up for cool down was complete. Collimation takes about a minute.
Putting everything away took a little less than 10 minutes.

I have a Starmaster ELT 11", with wheelbarrow handles. If you find a
faster way to unscrew them, I'd love to hear it. I keep thinking
maybe there might exist screws that would fit, with larger knobs on
the end, so that one turn of the knob would turn the screw more times.
If you understand what I mean :-).

As far as dragging everything out, since I bought a rolling tool cart,
it's been much easier. I found a great one with good wheels, and a
drawer, at a nice height. My eyepiece case goes on the top shelf,
with red flashlights, and a couple of atlases, etc. The drawer is
actually deep enough that you could put foam in, and put eyepieces
directly in that.

Misc. stuff goes on the bottom shelf, and I can actually fold up the
observing chair and lay it across.

Then, the whole thing can be wheeled out at one time.

Here is the one I have:
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/cta...emnumber=45542

Anyone could probably find a similar one at a store near them.

Clear skies,
Susan

Very nice writeup with good personal observations beyond the
"normal"observations. Enjoyable.

I am in the process of looking for a 18" and the Starmaster is highest
on the list thus far... ;-)

By the way...you have discovered the joys of binocs...except for the
neck crunch and problem with hand holding them. I used to use a tripod
mount...but early in the year I got a Sky Window. The binocs mount
similar to a microscope setup and the image is viewed off of a front
surface mirror. Extremely convenient to use and no problem with the
shakes. You don't need a tripod...just set it on a small table, hood
of a car, etc. Using my 16x70 Fujis with this setup is wonderful.
Highly recommended!

Bob Berta

Subject: RAT NOTES - 18" F4.3 Starmaster / Zambuto Dob - 10/1/03 - Pt 1
From: (Susan C)
Date: 10/2/03 2:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


I keep looking at the effort of rolling out the 18" compared to bringing
out a
smaller scope, and asking myself if it is really worth it. Last night I
timed
operations, because it seems to me that it takes an inordinately long time
to
set up the big scope compared to the smaller ones. All in all I had set the
scope up, removed the wheelbarrow handles, taken out the lock screw,
removed
the mirror cover, drug out an observing chair, a table and a six-foot
ladder.
This operation took five minutes. Dressing for the cold, taking out
eyepieces,
books, charts, log, radio and power supply took another five minutes after
the
initial set up for cool down was complete. Collimation takes about a
minute.
Putting everything away took a little less than 10 minutes.

******************
A 6ft ladder for a 18" Starmaster???

I used my 18" Standing on the ground, and it was f4.5.

Chas P.

A 6ft ladder for a 18" Starmaster???

I used my 18" Standing on the ground, and it was f4.5.

Chas P.

Hi Chas, you must be quite tall. I need to be on a step when observing near the
zenith, and I get a more stable eyepiece position when I can use my hands to
help balance in the dark. I have used a single step ladder before, but I can't
hold my head steady enough to concentrate properly on what I am seeing in the
telescope. The ladder is real comfortable to use. What's even weirder is that
when I am looking at Mars, I have to use a stool at its lowest position! I have
had some back problems, and my back no longer likes getting into weird
positions, so perhaps I subconsciously put more effort than most into keeping
it erect.
rat
~( );

email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address

I have a Starmaster ELT 11", with wheelbarrow handles. If you find a
faster way to unscrew them, I'd love to hear it. I keep thinking
maybe there might exist screws that would fit, with larger knobs on
the end, so that one turn of the knob would turn the screw more times.

Hi Susan,

Yes, I do know what you are talking about. I have often considered getting
knobs with larger grips to make it easier. I have also been racking my brain
for some sort of quick detach hardware where I could just flip a camlock lever
of some sort, or perhaps have the front end of the handles slide into a
bracket, that would take away fully half of the work of set up.

rat
~( );

email: remove 'et' from .com(et) in above email address

Subject: RAT NOTES - 18" F4.3 Starmaster / Zambuto Dob - 10/1/03 - Pt 1
From: t (Ratboy99)
Date: 10/2/03 3:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


Hi Chas, you must be quite tall. I need to be on a step when observing near
the
zenith, and I get a more stable eyepiece position when I can use my hands to
help balance in the dark. I have used a single step ladder before, but I
can't
hold my head steady enough to concentrate properly on what I am seeing in the
telescope. The ladder is real comfortable to use. What's even weirder is that
when I am looking at Mars, I have to use a stool at its lowest position! I
have
had some back problems, and my back no longer likes getting into weird
positions, so perhaps I subconsciously put more effort than most into keeping
it erect.
rat
~( );
************************
I used to use a 6ft ladder for my 10" f/10.5 Newt! I would sit on the top of
ladder.

That was one long tube...

Chas P.

On 02 Oct 2003 04:24:11 GMT, Ratboy99 penned:
RAT NOTES - 18" F4.3 Starmaster / Zambuto Dob - 10/1/03 - Pt 1

Thanks, Rat. Looking forward to Pt 2. I agree that the NGC 185
and NGC 147 pair are interesting for their proximity, although
the latter requires particularly dark skies for my 6". (With a
limiting magnitude of about 5.8 from a local site near Boulder
at about your elevation I could see 185 and not 147.)

Brian Rachford