PIER-14 Patchick-Strottner-Drechsler 9 - the TITAN NEBULA

My only comment would be to check in the FOV whether it suits with or without the reducer in P14

The only reason I mention is that they are using a longer focal length telescope with a much smaller `Sony 814 sensor and it may get lost on the FOV P14 has at present

Steve

That sounds exciting and will probably become a centre of attention for some more advanced astrophotographers in the coming months. 

Have only had a short time to assess this and believe a couple of points may need addressing. The integration time used in the image referred to is enormous and we may end up with very little to see using pier 14 with a much shorter integration time. I think we'd need to consider a minimum of 60 hours. The object is massive so an ideal candidate for this pier I think Steve.

The main issue is that to do this justice we as a syndicate would be sacrificing a lot of time on what could turn out to be a disappointment.

Just a suggestion after doing a few calculations on the back of a postage stamp.

The new pier 11 with that 200mm f2 lens working at f2. 8, whilst not giving a particularly high resolution, about 3.9 arc seconds /pixel, would require about 2/3 rds the integration time of the featured image, that's an enormous 80 hours or so but ought to be comparable in all but resolution. When the new pier is set up roboscopes might consider a one off project where any syndicate member could pay an amount to be determined to share in the data to cover some of the lost revenue. I'm sure Steve would cover his back with a no refund policy just in case. 

By the time pier 11 is setup I'm sure we'll have seen a few more images and then can make a more educated guess at the integration times needed. 

Just a thought. 

Cheers,

Ray 

It's 1.5º overall I think Ray and Pier 14 is about 5º across from memory

More of an issue is the filters fitted to P14 are HA 7nm & OIII 8nm and this object is a little rarefied to say the least, so it may benefit from tighter band passes in my opinion?

The new the widefield will be 3nm and the Epsilon 160 may also be

Steve

You are correct. the object is 1 degree and the current P14 is 5.
P14 at native might be OK for the nebula, as we still have a lot of megapixels to crop (and only use the best field at the center).

I do agree 7nm is not optimal for this target. Maybe I should collect some data using my own scopes to see If this is doable.

You are correct. the object is 1 degree and the current P14 is 5.
P14 at native might be OK for the nebula, as we still have a lot of megapixels to crop (and only use the best field at the center).

I do agree 7nm is not optimal for this target. Maybe I should collect some data using my own scopes to see If this is doable.

We have just added the target to Pier-10 as a special as it's fitted with 5nm Astrodon's and quite a fast system at F/3.3. I will report back on how that performs

It should give syndicate members a better idea of required integration times

Seems a sensible approach. Otherwise, it is a lot of integration that could be very disappointing.

If Steve wouldn't mind sharing the coordinates he's using, I'll submit a test, Oxygen only first, job to pier 3. There is a reasonable chance that we'll get that back a bit sooner than Steve's. The 128 hours might take a while to collect, unless of course Steve is able to get access to the data part way through, to see how it's progressing. 

If Steve wouldn't mind sharing the coordinates he's using, I'll submit a test, Oxygen only first, job to pier 3. There is a reasonable chance that we'll get that back a bit sooner than Steve's. The 128 hours might take a while to collect, unless of course Steve is able to get access to the data part way through, to see how it's progressing. 

Afternoon

They are on the page on Astrobin

https://www.astrobin.com/2hxz9g/

I may be able to share once I get a better idea myself of how the data collection is going

HTH

Steve

Steve, 

That does help. I hadn't quite appreciated how much larger it is than the fov of pier 3, and so have decided it would not be worth pursuing.

It'll be most helpful though if you would update us occasionally with progress. Just my opinion but pier 14 with its fov would give a more interesting view given a bit of a crop, and the nebula a bit of welcome breathing space. 

Cheers, 

Ray 

Steve, 

That does help. I hadn't quite appreciated how much larger it is than the fov of pier 3, and so have decided it would not be worth pursuing.

It'll be most helpful though if you would update us occasionally with progress. Just my opinion but pier 14 with its fov would give a more interesting view given a bit of a crop, and the nebula a bit of welcome breathing space. 

Cheers, 

Ray 

Yes Ray, its 1º or so across so not small

My suggestion as it happens was not to try to do the whole thing, I had chosen an interesting portion that was quite photogenic in its own right. I am a big fan of framing interesting parts rather than the whole

Rather like Kirk Douglas was a handsome man but his chin was interesting enough on it's own LOL

On that not I still have some other interesting objects for Pier-3 for you to enjoy. I am having a blast picking cool objects that are not the norm I have to say

In that case Steve all the more reason not to clog pier 3 up with an experimentation. Looking forward to some 'interesting' choices, and hopefully not too challenging. 

Do you have some obsession with dimples? Each to our own I guess.

Cheers, 

Ray 

Dare I mention Cindy Crawford's mole....

Is there a name for this unusual hobby of yours Steve? 

Is that "hobby" or Vice?

Maybe an idea to do this object with several setups simultaneously.
For example the two Takahashi Epsilons (180mm and the 160mm), pier 14, and the Canon 200mm.
Then you collect much data in a relatively short period of time.
PixInsight can handle the differences in imagescales.
If you do also 2 pane mosaics then pier 3, 10 and 13 can also be used in the data aquisition of this beautifull but notoriously difficult object.

Mike as altruistic as I am, I do still have to pay the bills,

Whilst I enjoy your enthusiasm, just remember from time to time I have to be paid in order to keep the lights on LOL

A very poor Englishman called Steve

On that note, I am happy to pay for the data

As am I and do not mind helping out and sharing where ever we can

Like you all, I love interesting projects. I just have to juggle resources as well I am sad to say

On to the Titan then....

First impressions although the sky has not been the best - The titan is dim and I mean dim, P10 F/3.3 in HA 300s binned 2x2 it barely shows up on a single sub and this is a sensitive fast setup. Seriously its almost imperceptible on a single sub!

I think it will need all of the 100hrs and then some, it's a massive project I would say

Steve