Things are looking up

Gone, but never forgotten, thank you (Sir) Patrick.

2018-05-02T22:06:00.002+01:00

In this post I talk about a man who has inspired many to take up the hobby of astronomy, (Sir) Patrick Moore was an icon, a self-taught astronomer whose passion for the science shone through. I had the great pleasure of meeting him when he gave a talk at a local venue, and it is a moment I will always remember and look back on with great pride. I’ve met a couple of “famous” people, Tom Baker and Elizabeth Sladen were high on the list, but my encounter with (Sir) Patrick is the real high point. He was a very warm and friendly man who clearly enjoyed meeting fellow astronomers.

He was giving a talk about the existence of extra-terrestrial life, during the first half of the evening he said that he did believe that we are not alone in the galaxy, but he did not believe that we have, as yet, been visited by beings from other worlds. Throughout the first half, the talk was illustrated with various “photographs” of extra-terrestrial craft, (Sir) Patrick stated that he had no doubt at all that each one of the images was either an outright fake or simply some mundane terrestrial object photographed poorly.

After the interval (Sir) Patrick returned to the stage and opened the floor to a Q&A session. Feeling brave I raised my hand and he pointed to me, invited me to stand, and asked what my question was. It went something like this; “Sir Patrick, considering the hundreds, if not thousands, of photographs and “eyewitness” reports, do you think it’s possible that one or more of those images could be a genuine extra-terrestrial vehicle?” (Sir) Patrick paused momentarily, clearly contemplating the intelligence behind my question, he then broke into a broad, mischievous grin, looked straight at me and said; “Young man, have you ever seen an alien spacecraft?” I replied “No Sir Patrick, I haven’t!” To this he replied, still smiling; “Then sit down and shut up!” he then laughed and told me and the rest of the audience that he had no doubt at all that there is no possible way that Earth has played host to visitors from beyond our Solar System. Now this makes him sound like a crotchety old curmudgeon who had nothing but contempt for my question. However, the expression on his face gave a completely opposite view. There was humour and warmth in his expression and the tone of his voice, no malice or disdain at all. Other people I know who were fortunate enough to not only meet him but spend a good amount of time with him tell of the exact same warm and welcoming nature.

He was controversial and, from time to time, caused the viewing masses to write to the BBC complaining that he’d expressed his opinion, but, I feel that the Nation admired and respected him. He made astronomy accessible to the masses, for many years the monthly instalment of The Sky at Night was very much looked forward to.

Sir Patrick also shared his passion for astronomy with a list, we do love a list you know.

Every amateur astronomer recognises the M11, M20 & M31 designations because this trio of deep sky objects are found on the list of 18^th century comet hunter Charles Messier.

M11 is the wild duck cluster in Scutum, M20 is the Triffid Nebula in Sagittarius and M31 is the Andromeda Galaxy. But what if we replaced the M with a C?

Would you recognise C11, C20 and C31? These three objects are also well known, but perhaps not by these designations.

The C stands for Caldwell, or more precisely Caldwell-Moore, the full name of Sir Patrick Moore. When he needed to place an identifying letter by each for the numbered objects on his list he couldn’t use M because it had already been taken, so he chose the next best thing.

In case you were wondering, C11 is the bubble nebula in Cassiopeia, C20 is the North America Nebula in Cygnus and C31 is the Flaming Star Nebula in Auriga.

Sir Patrick wrote his list in 1995 as a tour of deep sky objects similar to Messier’s, but where Messier limited his list to objects that can be observed from the latitude of Paris, Sir Patrick expanded his candidates to those ranging from High northern latitudes to low southern latitudes. This somewhat evens the score between Northern and Southern hemisphere observers because 34 Caldwell objects can’t be observed from Paris’s latitude and 5 others never rise more than 3° above the southern horizon there.

Included in this “can’t be observed from Paris” group are fantastic objects such as the tarantula Nebula C103, the Coal Sack C99 and the two of the best clusters in the sky, 47 Tucanae C106 and Omega Centauri C80.

The other difference is that where Messier listed objects for comet hunters to avoid, (Sir) Patrick’s list was intended as a list of fine, observable deep sky objects.

When the Caldwell Catalogue was first published in the December 1995 issue of Sky and Telescope, some amateur astronomers weren’t at all happy:

“How dare he!”

“Many of these objects have names!”

My reaction was a little different, why didn’t I think of that? The Kalon Catalogue, now that has a nice ring to it, don’t you think?

Whatever your opinion may be, the Caldwell Catalogue contains 109 great Deep Sky objects to observe.

Regarding the object selection relative to Messier’s list, Sir Patrick slightly reduced the numbers in certain categories while increasing others. So, the number of star clusters, both open and globular, and galaxies was reduced, but the number of nebulae was increased. Only four planetary nebulae made Messier’s list, but Sir Patrick placed 13 in the Caldwell Catalogue. Likewise, he increased the number of bright nebulae from 5 to 12.

Sir Patrick also distributed his objects more widely across the sky. Sagittarius and Virgo, which have 15 and 11 Messier objects respectively, have only one Caldwell object each. Perhaps he thought that most of the great objects in those constellations were taken. In fact, you’ll find more Messier objects per constellation than Caldwell objects. Cassiopeia, Centaurus and Cygnus each contain six Caldwell objects, the most found in any constellation. Fifty of the 88 constellations contain Caldwell objects, as opposed to 34 that contain Messier objects.

Sir Patrick numbered the objects in his catalogue by declination. He started in the most northern part of the sky with C1, an open cluster in Cepheus, and ended near the south celestial pole with C109, a planetary nebula in Chamaeleon.

Sir Patrick’s final stipulation was that all of the Caldwell objects be observable with a 4-inch telescope from a dark location. many of the objects on the list are visible in binoculars, and some can even be seen with the unaided eye. Others are more difficult to see, although they can be glimpsed through a 4-inch telescope, a larger telescope brings out their subtle details.

I don’t think that Sir Patrick was trying to upstage or out-do Messier, I feel that his list was developed to compliment the Messier list, and to present a bit of a challenge to those who had completed a Messier Marathon. There are some very faint objects on the list and these will certainly challenge a 4-inch scope, is it possible that those who were openly against the idea of Sir Patrick's list were simply concerned that their kit or skill level simply wasn’t up to the challenge?

Of course, living at 51° north there are many of the Caldwell objects that I’ll never observe. Oh well, maybe I should start work On the Kalon Catalogue, I wonder what I should have as K1?

As with the Messier list, I’ve included a link to download a complete Caldwell Catalogue, the list is organised by magnitude, brightest to faintest. Objects below magnitude +5 are visible to the naked eye under a clear dark sky. Objects between +5 & +7 are potentially observable with binoculars of at least 10 x 50 under the same sky conditions.

Caldwell Catalogue

It’s the only marathon I could ever do!

2018-05-02T19:27:00.001+01:00

One word I rarely use is “marathon”, firstly because I’m not really a sport fan, the only time I’m ever likely to run is if there were a Tiger chasing me, and secondly because they’re now called “Snickers”. A stupid idea if you ask me, but you didn’t, so I’ll get back on track.

Despite astronomy involving lots of standing still looking through a telescope, we do have a couple of marathons that we take part in. The foremost of these is The Messier Marathon, it’s not really a speed thing, a Messier Marathon can take up to a year to complete, depending on the weather. It is, however, a great way of honing your skills, and pushing your kit to its limits.

So, what is a Messier Marathon? And why Messier?

It all began in 1774, Charles Messier published a list of forty-five Deep Sky Objects. Despite its popularity with astronomers today, Messiers’ list wasn’t compiled as a list of interesting observational targets, it was actually a list of objects to avoid.

Messier was a comet chaser, in the night sky comets appear as fuzzy grey patches against the sky. The problem for Messier was that Deep Sky Objects (DSO’s) also appear as fuzzy grey patches against the sky. Messier started to compile a list of “Fuzzy Grey Objects” that other comet chasers could avoid. By 1781 the list had grown to 103 DSO’s that comet chasers could avoid.

Between 1921 and 1966 a further seven objects were added to the list, bringing The Messier Catalogue to 110 deep sky objects. By this time the list had become popular with amateur astronomers. Not because they wanted to avoid those objects, more because the list included some of the brightest and most spectacular objects that could be observed with a small telescope. Messier used a 3-inch refractor, advancements in lens and mirror manufacture means that a telescope of similar size will provide a much greater reward, indeed a high proportion of the Messier objects can be observed with a good pair of binoculars of at least 10x50.

The problem for me is the latitude I live at, 51° North, when Messier was creating his list of “not comets” he was living in Paris, the latitude is 48° 58 minutes North. That’s a difference in latitude of around 3° as the crow flies that’s about 163 miles.

This means that some of the objects that are closer to the celestial equator don’t get very high in the sky for me and they can be quite tricky to observe. Some of the objects are seasonal. The objects cover a wide range of magnitude, from +1.45 to as faint as +11.5. The list features a variety of objects from clusters, nebulae and galaxies. Only one object on the list, M73, is a small group of four stars. Messier believed he could see a nebulous cloud around the stars, better telescopes have since shown he was mistaken.

The odd thing about Messier’s list is that there’s no order to it, the objects aren’t listed in the order they were discovered, some were known long before the existence of the list. Every single object on the list is a spectacular object and a great many, if not all, of them are much favoured by astro-photographers.

Messier passed away on April 12 1817 at the age of 86, he has left a legacy that will endure for years to come, a list that will inspire and encourage astronomers of all ages, and experience to get out and observe.

I’ve provided a link for a complete Messier list and a list that is tailored for binoculars, objects on the binocular list are listed in order of magnitude from brightest to faintest.

Messier Binocular list

Messier Catalogue

If you're familiar with the Messier Catalogue, please feel free to comment with your favourite object. If you have images of any of the objects, perhaps you could submit them for display on the gallery page. You will be credited for your image.

Eye to the Telescope

2018-05-02T00:39:00.000+01:00

A good “entry level” telescope is a Newtonian reflector. They are a simple design and relatively low priced for the size of mirror you’ll get for your money – ideal if you’re just starting out.

150 PDS Newtonian Reflector

A Newtonian reflector with a 6-inch mirror will give you good views of the brighter galaxies and nebulae and should also perform well when you train it on the Moon and planets.

120 ED Refractor

But what about the other types of telescope? Refractors are perhaps the most familiar designs. They use a series of lenses to bring what you’re looking at to focus at the eyepiece end of the tube and are great for observing the Moon or relatively bright star clusters.

8 inch Dobsonian Reflector

There’s also the Dobsonian, which is a type of reflector that has a simple mount and because of that, often has a much larger mirror for its price. As this collects more light it will let you see dimmer objects, so it’s a great choice if you want to see faint galaxies and nebulae.

127 Maksutov Cassegrain (Catadioptric)

Finally, there are the catadioptric telescopes that use a combination of corrector lenses and mirrors. Their compact size makes them relatively portable and their high focal ratios mean that they’re ideal for lunar and planetary observing.

How much money should I spend?

A good Newtonian on a sturdy equatorial mount costs around £300 in the UK, while a good refractor costs around £360. A 6-inch Dobsonian can cost as little as £210. What’s most important is that you buy from a well-respected astronomical dealer.

Avoid the cheap, poor-quality models you sometimes see in mail order catalogues or in high street stores.

Don’t be fished in by the stunning visuals either in adverts or on the box, every Telescope manufacturer is guilty of this. They cover the box in stunning images from the Hubble Space Telescope, beginners can be disappointed that they can’t see the blues, pinks and purple in the Orion Nebula, so the kit ends up on Ebay, or even worse, in the loft.

As this blog progresses you’ll see that I refer to certain objects as “Fuzzy Grey Blobs” or Fuzzy Patches” in particular those objects on the Messier catalogue (more on that later)

Most telescopes will have one or two eyepieces included in the price. They come in two standard barrel sizes to fit into the telescope focuser – 2-inch or 1.25-inch – and have several optical designs such as Plössl, Nagler or orthoscopic.

The number on the eyepiece is its focal length, measured in millimetres. The smaller the number, the greater the magnification it will give when used.

Two good quality eyepieces with a small (10mm) and a larger (20-40mm) focal length will provide you with a decent range of magnifications to get you started. Only buy eyepieces that have quality glass lenses, because sub-standard glass or plastic lenses will almost always disappoint.

The other thing to watch out for is if your potential new telescope is “Bragging” about its magnification, this is generally a, very poor, indication of the ‘scope potential magnification. This is how much it would magnify an object if you were using a very short focal length eyepiece with a very high Barlow lens, A Barlow lens is an eyepiece that has an open end for an eyepiece to be attached to the Barlow lens. The front of the Barlow lens goes into the eyepiece socket on your telescope. Barlow lenses usually have a mark on them which indicates the “power” of the Barlow, this is generally X2 or X3. Because a Barlow lens alters the magnification of an eyepiece, having a Barlow lens effectively doubles the number of eyepieces you have. (5 eyepieces and a 2x Barlow = 10 eyepieces)

To work out the magnification divide the focal length of the ‘scope by the focal length of the eyepiece.

Using my 6-inch Newtonian with a 25mm eyepiece as an example: 750÷25=30 x magnification, if I add a 2x Barlow then I get 60 x, a 3x Barlow will give 90x. However, this last result is utterly ridiculous and I really would bother with it unless I was wanting to view the moon or a planet. Realistically this much magnification is way over the top.

Probably the most important aspect of a telescope is the aperture, the wider this is the more light is going into the ‘scope. Focal length is secondary, but still worth considering.

Go-To telescopes come with an in-built computer and handset that, once set up correctly, automatically aim the telescope and track an object. Although this is helpful, it’s probably best to get a scope without Go-To as your first-time buy.

If you aren’t familiar with using a telescope, setting up a scope without Go-To is much easier. A non-Go-To is also much cheaper and will be a gentler introduction to how telescopes work.

What really matters is your budget, a good society or a reputable retailer will be more than happy to offer you advice on your first purchase.

It is worth considering a good pair of binoculars as a first purchase. They can be reasonably priced, extremely easy to use and can also be used for terrestrial viewing..

It’s all about the base.

2018-05-01T23:29:00.000+01:00

Mounts are probably the most important bit of kit, they have to be sturdy, heavy and able to take the weight of your precious telescope, so it’s vital that you get as much information as you can before you drop your hard-earned cash on a mount. Generally, when you buy a telescope it comes with a mount, unfortunately the mount is usually just about adequate for the scope. The 6-inch Newtonian I have is generally sold with an EQ3 mount, it’s not really suitable for a telescope of that size despite Skywatchers best efforts to persuade you otherwise.

The EQ3 I have came with a 5-inch Mak and it handles that really well, if I put the 6-inch Newt on it, it struggles and even the slightest breeze will cause an object in the eyepiece to dance around like a thing possessed. A sound piece of advice is buy the heaviest mount you can afford/carry. I need a sturdy trolley for my HEQ5 but it really makes the difference.

Alt-Az mount

Mounts come in two designs, Alt-Az, short for Altitude/Azimuth, (also known as UP/DOWN LEFT/RIGHT). An Alt-az mount is probably the easiest mount to use. This type of mount does have a few drawbacks, they’re not really any good for imaging, unless it’s motorised they need constant adjustment to keep an object in the eyepiece (FOV or Field of Vision) My first astronomical telescope was on an Alt-az mount and for ease of use it was excellent, I could just set it up and go. Alt-az mounts are generally really easy to set up.

A word of advice, don’t be fooled by the type of Telescope that you can buy in a toyshop, the optics (the lenses and eyepieces) are generally made of either low grade glass at best or plastic and the mount is usually weak and flimsy. Although this blog is offering advice, you should always check with a reputable telescope dealer.

EQ mount

The equatorial mount, EQ3, EQ5 HEQ5/6, is different and more complex to use. One of its axes is tilted to your latitude, your position on the Earth north or south of the equator, and the other is parallel to the celestial equator, like Earth’s equator but in the sky.

Lattitude setting guide, this one is set to 42°

I live in the South East corner of England, my latitude is 51° north. Most EQ mounts have a dial on one side that is marked between 0° and 90° I have mine set to 51°, this is the angle of Polaris, the Pole Star, above the horizon where I live

An EQ mount moves in units of right ascension and declination, which are similar to longitude and latitude but mapped onto an imaginary sphere on the sky.

Most Newtonians come on an equatorial mount, and they’re really good for astronomy because you only need to adjust one axis, the right ascension one, to keep track of an object in the sky as it moves through the night. With an alt-az mount, you’d need to adjust both axes to keep one object in view for any longer than a few seconds.

As with the Alt-az mounts, EQ mounts have their drawbacks, they can be very heavy which means they’re not exactly portable. They need some time to set up, I prefer to set up in the day time, because of the weight issue it’s a good idea to ensure that you have everything you will need for an evening of observing. Make a list, check it twice. Check it again.

EQ mounts from the EQ3 up are ideal for imaging because of the way they “follow” an object. If you are planning to start imaging then either a motorised drive kit or Go-To kit or EQ mount is vital.

A good sturdy mount is vital to an enjoyable evening observing, your telescope must be stable and steady. Astronomy is one of the few things where size really does matter.

Hello there!

2018-05-01T22:25:00.002+01:00

Welcome to (yet another) astronomy blog, yup! It’s another blog that waffles on about how great astronomy is. Except, this one is different. Or, at least, I hope it is. There will be regular updates on what can be seen in the night sky and highlights for the month. There is also a gallery of amateur images, some of which have been captured by me, and there’s a section for those starting out in the hobby. From buying your first telescope to taking part in your first Messier marathon.

Astronomy is a great hobby, whether you’re out on your own or with a group of like minded mates, there’s always that “first”. The first view of a particular object or observing a feature such as the Great Red Spot on Jupiter for the first time. Personally, I get great enjoyment from sharing my love of the science. Whether I’m chatting with friends or showing an inquisitive passer-by, there’s something to be said for that moment when you show someone Saturn for the first time, it’s one of the “Wow!” moments.

So, what got me started? I was a very young boy when I was given a small spotting telescope by a family friend, if I’m honest I wasn’t really sure what to do with it, the thing sat in my bedroom for a while until one night I looked out of my bedroom window, the full moon was sitting in the sky, suddenly it clicked. I took the scope out of it’s case, stood it on the window sill and pointed it roughly in the direction of the moon. The sight was glorious, even in that little 1.5-inch aperture 120mm focal length the moon was astounding, and I was hooked.

Sadly, life got in the way and although I regularly studied the night sky, learning the constellations and about the planets I didn’t do much about learning more until my mid-twenties when I bought a second-hand pair of 10x50 Helios binoculars. I knew there was more to the sky than just the stars, constellations and Solar System planets. Those binoculars gave me an insight of what was out there when I used them for the first time to view M31. I Spent a good hour viewing the Andromeda Galaxy with them for the first time.

Fast forward another 5 years when I bought my first astronomical telescope. A 3-inch aperture 900mm focal length alt-az Tasco Luminova Newtonian. My first object with that was Saturn. That little scope pulled the planet closer to me and I could clearly see the ring system and colour bands in the planets upper atmosphere. I still have that telescope, compared to my other ‘scopes it’s really not very good, but it has a special meaning for me, it was, after all, my entry into the hobby.

I have 3 main telescopes now, two Skywatchers and a Meade. My first Skywatcher is a 5-inch 1500mm Maksutov Cassegrain, the second is a 6-inch 750mm PDS Newtonian. The Meade is a, very, portable 80mm aperture 400mm focal length refractor. There’s a lot to be said for manufacturer choice, similar to the debate over apple or Android smart devices, obviously Android is the better, and for me, I like Skywatcher astro kit. Celestron and Skywatcher are both very nice, but Skywatcher seem to appeal to me, I don’t really know why. Celestron have some excellent add-on kit, WI-Fi mods, GPS pods, and they now produce a wide range of mounts that can be controlled via a Smartphone or tablet.

This brings me to the next issue about ‘scope choice, Go-To or manually pointed. There are those who feel that Go-To mounts are the lazy mans way of doing things, ideally a Go-To mount gets switched on, aligned and then you simply select an object from a list, after a short whirring and grinding the telescope is pointing at the object and all you need to do is look through the eyepiece. A manually targeted ‘scope require knowledge of the location of that elusive object and hunting it down. The more you use a manual ‘scope the better you get at finding things. The choice of mount is also very important. I was once told that the best thing to do is buy the heaviest mount that you can afford/carry, you’ll change your ‘scope more than you change your mount. My first Skywatcher mount was an EQ3 that I upgraded with a motorised drive kit. My main mount now is a very hefty HEQ5 pro SynScan, (SynScan simply means it’s Go-To)

There will be more on mounts, ‘scopes and binoculars at later dates.

The next step for me was to find a club or some sort of group that would help me learn more. This a came along when a sterling chap introduced me to what would eventually become Ashford Astronomical Society. We scared the living daylights out of the then chairman on my first visit.

Membership of the society grew and I became much more actively involved in the group, presenting talks and co hosting events. Eventually my confidence grew, not only in my presenting style but also in my knowledge of the night sky and I took on the job of presenting the monthly sky tour at the meetings, it’s affectionately referred to as “Upstares” but I’ve never really liked that title and I rarely use it in the presentations.

Two years ago, the existing Chairman and General Secretary made the choice to step down as they both wished to move on to other projects, the out going Chairman is, in fact, a rather good author and has written some sterling books. A new committee was needed and I decided to stand for the position of Assistant Chairman, a post that I am very proud of having and I am honoured that I am starting my third year in the role. I am always on the look out for new methods to introduce astronomy to the masses.

So that’s the first post for the blog, a bit meandering and long winded, but I felt the need to “introduce” myself. I don’t claim to be all knowledgeable, but I hope that readers will find the blog useful. Some of it will change regularly whilst other sections will remain the same for a while. The Gallery will be added to semi regularly, Object of the Month and the monthly sky tour will be updated um… monthly, Other bits will be changed when I find something interesting to add.

Over the next few weeks I’ll talk in detail about the different types of mounts, telescope and binoculars and what can be expected from them.

Thanks for reading, if this blog inspires you to look up then great, it’s achieved exactly what I want it to do.

Please visit again