PIER-14 Possible target - Blue Dragon in Cepheus

Very interested !

Nicolas 

Dear "old_eyes",

I think this is a super idea, and I fully support this project.  Given the RASA8's FoV, we are good with a single frame. Göran used 124x300s with the IDAS filter. What would this mean for Ha and O-III? Should we use Ha:90x300s and O-III:120x300s?

Cheers

Manuel

Dear "old_eyes",

I think this is a super idea, and I fully support this project.  Given the RASA8's FoV, we are good with a single frame. Göran used 124x300s with the IDAS filter. What would this mean for Ha and O-III? Should we use Ha:90x300s and O-III:120x300s?

Cheers

Manuel

 

Manuel, 

Comparing Göran's RASA 8 with the FSQ 106 - F2 vs F3.6. He has roughly three times the photon flux going through his optics (if I have my calculations correct). On the other hand, his ASI 2600MC is only recording Ha on 1/4 the pixels. Not sure how he is processing the O3, but it could be spread across 2 or 3 pixels depending on whether he junks the blue channel as too noisy. Plus, there will be some losses due to having both IDAS filter and Bayer filter.

So, it is probably FSQ106 better for Ha, RASA better for O3.

I think we should do double the O3 compared to Ha, and maybe cut back the overall exposure so we can see how we are doing (since we don't see intermediate data). We can then add additional exposure if required.

How about 60 x 300s Ha and 120 x 300s O3. That gives a total exposure of 15 hours.

I have the coordinates of the centre of Göran's image, but I need to get my head around the camera orientation to check framing.

Let me know if you agree with the suggestion for the number of subs.

old_eyes

... I do agree with your choices for ha and O-III.

Regarding the camera orientation in Göran's image: 104° with a FoV of 2.43deg and 2.6arcsec/px. I checked it by PlateSolving with ASTAP.

Do we then need two panes? Something like this?

Pane,       RA,         DEC,      Angle,          Overlap
Center,  00 10 26,  72 55 43, 0.00,            40%
Pane 1, 00 10 26,  73 37 07,  0.00,            40%
Pane 2, 00 10 26,  72 14 19,  0.00,            40%

Cheers

Manuel

... I do agree with your choices for ha and O-III.

Regarding the camera orientation in Göran's image: 104° with a FoV of 2.43deg and 2.6arcsec/px. I checked it by PlateSolving with ASTAP.

 

Do we then need two panes? Something like this?

Pane,       RA,         DEC,      Angle,          Overlap
Center,  00 10 26,  72 55 43, 0.00,            40%
Pane 1, 00 10 26,  73 37 07,  0.00,            40%
Pane 2, 00 10 26,  72 14 19,  0.00,            40%

Cheers

Manuel

Thanks for checking Manuel. I should have thought of using ASTAP when ImageSolver failed! 

Göran's camera is almost orthogonal to ours, so I fear you are right. From my measurements on the image, it won't quite fit in across the narrow dimension of our chip. It might just, but there would be no margin for error.

So, it is either take a chance or a mosaic. I think I agree with you, a mosaic is safer. The target spends about 19 hours in 24 above the 25 degree horizon limit at Roboscopes, will always be far away from the Moon and we are doing it in narrowband, so we should be able to find the observing time.

I did a quick check on your coordinates in Telescopius using NGC 40 as the target (actual target was not in the database) and got:

Center, 00hr 13' 01",  72º 31' 21"
Pane 1, 00hr 13' 21", 73º 13' 27"
Pane 2, 00hr 12' 42", 71º 49' 15"

So pretty close. Note the subtle shift in RA because we are at 2 degrees on our camera.

Would you submit the job as you have the coordinates?

old_eyes

Hi guys,

In total agreement with what has been decided upon. and also that only a mosaic would do it justice.

It was after I noticed the nebula NGC40 shown in the screenshot that I started searching my disks for an image I thought I might have. This target was submitted on pier 3 by Mike last year. I wasn't particularly impressed by my result as I took it that ngc40 was the main target. As a very tiny planetary there's nothing to see, and you wouldn't guess its name, the Bow Tie nebula, from my image. Anyway, for what its worth I have put it into the Gallery with all the relevant data should you be curious.

Cheers,

Ray

Hi guys,

In total agreement with what has been decided upon. and also that only a mosaic would do it justice.

It was after I noticed the nebula NGC40 shown in the screenshot that I started searching my disks for an image I thought I might have. This target was submitted on pier 3 by Mike last year. I wasn't particularly impressed by my result as I took it that ngc40 was the main target. As a very tiny planetary there's nothing to see, and you wouldn't guess its name, the Bow Tie nebula, from my image. Anyway, for what its worth I have put it into the Gallery with all the relevant data should you be curious.

Cheers,

Ray

You got it Ray! So it is not that hard to capture. But the FOV just not quite big enough to see the overall shape.

... I do agree with your choices for ha and O-III.

Regarding the camera orientation in Göran's image: 104° with a FoV of 2.43deg and 2.6arcsec/px. I checked it by PlateSolving with ASTAP.

 

Do we then need two panes? Something like this?

Pane,       RA,         DEC,      Angle,          Overlap
Center,  00 10 26,  72 55 43, 0.00,            40%
Pane 1, 00 10 26,  73 37 07,  0.00,            40%
Pane 2, 00 10 26,  72 14 19,  0.00,            40%

Cheers

Manuel

Thanks for checking Manuel. I should have thought of using ASTAP when ImageSolver failed! 

Göran's camera is almost orthogonal to ours, so I fear you are right. From my measurements on the image, it won't quite fit in across the narrow dimension of our chip. It might just, but there would be no margin for error.

So, it is either take a chance or a mosaic. I think I agree with you, a mosaic is safer. The target spends about 19 hours in 24 above the 25 degree horizon limit at Roboscopes, will always be far away from the Moon and we are doing it in narrowband, so we should be able to find the observing time.

I did a quick check on your coordinates in Telescopius using NGC 40 as the target (actual target was not in the database) and got:

Center, 00hr 13' 01",  72º 31' 21"
Pane 1, 00hr 13' 21", 73º 13' 27"
Pane 2, 00hr 12' 42", 71º 49' 15"

So pretty close. Note the subtle shift in RA because we are at 2 degrees on our camera.

Would you submit the job as you have the coordinates?

old_eyes

... OK, no worries, I'll take care of it today.

Cheers

Manuel

Hi guys,

In total agreement with what has been decided upon. and also that only a mosaic would do it justice.

It was after I noticed the nebula NGC40 shown in the screenshot that I started searching my disks for an image I thought I might have. This target was submitted on pier 3 by Mike last year. I wasn't particularly impressed by my result as I took it that ngc40 was the main target. As a very tiny planetary there's nothing to see, and you wouldn't guess its name, the Bow Tie nebula, from my image. Anyway, for what its worth I have put it into the Gallery with all the relevant data should you be curious.

Cheers,

Ray

Many thanks Ray! This is good information.

All the best

Manuel