TheSkySearchers

Though the forecast for the evening was for excellent transparency, I would beg to differ. I judged it at best average transparency for the location, which is okay too, but excellent would have been appreciated!

Anyway, I went out around 2000 hours and while waiting for astronomical darkness (at 2010), I located Neptune using the Pentax 10x50 binoculars. It of course was a stellar object in the binoculars, but it shined brightly at mag 7.8. and was easily identified by its position which I had plotted for 2000 hrs in Sky Tools 3.0. As is typical below is the equipment utilized for this outing:

17.5 inch f/4 dobsonian
ES 82 18mm (110x, 0.7° TFOV, 4.0mm EP)
TV Ethos 13mm (152x, 0.7° TFOV, 2.9mm EP)
Pentax XW 10mm (198x, 0.4° TFOV, 2.2mm EP)
Pentax XW 7mm (283x, 0.2° TFOV, 1.6mm EP)

References utilized were the Interstellarum Deep Sky Atlas (IDSA) and Uranometria All-Sky Atlas, as well as various specialized charts/images which I had printed out previously. I also took the following SQM-L readings taken during the outing. The first one was 10 minutes prior to astronomical darkness and the first three were influenced by the brightness of the summer Milky Way near the zenith. As one can see there was a peak around 2300 hours after which conditions dropped off slightly. Overall while these readings are decent, they are not outstanding for this location, as I’ve had as high as around 21.8 during the best conditions, but more typically around 21.5 to 21.6 is not unusual on really good nights.

2000 hrs = 21.12
2122 hrs = 21.24
2200 hrs = 21.28
2300 hrs = 21.41
0030 hrs = 21.30



Anyway, let's get started shall we? My first object for this evening was the northern challenge object for October, Messier 110 in Andromeda. This satellite galaxy of Messier 31 can be problematic for observers living in light polluted areas because of its lower surface brightness. But at the dark site it is always bright and obvious through the eyepiece.


NGC 205 / Messier 110 (Andromeda, elliptical, mag=8.1, size=21.9’x11.0’, SBr=14.0):
Easily spotting M31 with the naked eye, I quickly aimed the scope using the Rigel Quikfinder unity finder and quickly studied the larger field through the 8x50 RACI optical finder. M32 was easily spotted as a small condensed non-stellar brightness south of the core of M31. I thought perhaps I could just discern M110, but was never certain. Anyway moving to the ES 82 18mm (110x) I quickly located M110 and studied its disk.

It was extremely bright and large, stretching about halfway across the field of view in its major axis. Overall it was quite diffuse in appearance, and its core was a subtle broadly bright presence within the galactic disk. Studying it further at 152x and 198x, its light seemed to be fleetingly uneven at times, perhaps indicative of its elusive dark lanes, but could not confirm this to be the case.

G73 (Andromeda, globular cluster in M110, mag=14.9):
I next targeted the brightest globular cluster in M110 (G73), utilizing an image plotting its position about 6’ east of the galaxy’s core. Orienting myself to the field utilizing the image, I thought I caught a brief glimpse of a stellar point at the correction position at 110x and went up to 152x. I then could hold the object steadily though it changed in intensity as the seeing shifted. Using 198x it was easier as a steady yet dim (mag 14.9) stellar point at the correct position almost 1’ SSW of a mag 12.66 field star. (New)

NGC 7171 (Aquarius, barred spiral, mag=12.2, size=2.6’x1.5’, SBr=13.6):
I next moved over into western Aquarius to being my galaxy hunting for the evening. About 4.5° northeast of Delta Capricorni I located my first object. Swept up with 110x it presented a small and slightly bright homogeneous oval. Viewed with 198x it was obvious within the field. (New)

IC 1417 (Aquarius, spiral, mag=13.7, size=1.4’x0.4’, SBr=12.8):
In the same FOV as NGC 7171 and about 12’ to its northwest, I picked up this very dim small oval. It was suspected at 110x and confirmed at 198x as a small homogeneous and weak oval glow. (New)

PGC 67698 (Capricornus, lenticular, mag=14.5, size=0.6’x0.3’, SBr=12.5):
Just over the border into the celestial sea-goat, I picked up this object, which is mis-identified as NGC 7158 in both the Uranometria atlas and Sky Tools program. This error seems to come from the Revised New General Catalogue (RNGC). In reality NGC 7158 has been identified as a faint very close triple star about 9’ to the northeast of this galaxy. This very tight stellar group can appear nebulous due to the tight spacing. So while I initially thought I was observing NGC 7158 that turned out to be incorrect, and I actually observed this lenticular galaxy.

Anyway, picked up at 110x as a very dim and very small oval mote. Looking at 198x the tiny homogenous oval was seen next to a very dim 15th mag field star just off its eastern end. (New)

NGC 7218 (Aquarius, barred spiral, mag=12.0, size=2.5’x1.1’, SBr=13.0):
Working my way in the direction of the southern challenge object for October, I swept up this galaxy using 110x. It appeared as a small but somewhat bright homogeneous oval. Looking with 198x it was easy and bright dominating the FOV. It appeared slightly large to the eye and displayed a broadly brighter core area set within a diffuse halo. (New)

NGC 7293 (Aquarius, planetary nebula, mag=7.6, size=16.2’x12.3’, SBr=13.3):
After chasing a few galaxies in western Aquarius I broke off to pay a return visit to the southern challenge object for this month. Hopping down to 47 Aquarii, I swept ENE toward Upsilon Aquarii and easily picked up the famous “Helix Nebula” in the 8x50 RACI as a fairly bright and slightly out of round diffuse glow. I blinked the DGM NPB filter in front of the finder eyepiece and it really popped out of the field.

Aiming the scope I easily saw a large out of round and very bright glow at 110x without a filter. Its annular appearance was easily spotted and brighter areas along the northeastern and southwestern edges of the rim. The western end of the annulus appeared weak and the because of this the nebula put me in the mind of a horseshoe with the weaker western edge being the opening. I tried the O-III filter as well but didn’t find any substantial difference from the NPB because of its good responsiveness in the O-III range.

The mag 13.5 was very obvious and there were upwards of a dozen stars imposed upon the disk when viewed without a filter. I viewed it from 110x to 283x both with and without filters. It was nice with no filter, but using either th NPB or O-III made it pop better to the eye.

NGC 7256 (Aquarius, barred spiral, mag=13.1, size=1.4’x0.6’, SBr=12.8):
Continuing on with me Aquarius galaxy hunt, I picked up this galaxy, also listed as NGC 7254 due to a duplicate discovery. A little dim at 110x, it presented as a small evenly illuminated oval. Viewed at 198x it remained homogeneous, but was easily seen as a small oval. (New)

IC 1443 (Aquarius, elliptical, mag=12.5, size=1.5’x1.2’, SBr=13.0):
This elliptical was easily spotted at 110x as a slightly bright small round glow. It displayed a very small concentrated non-stellar core. Using 198x the core now appeared stellar, while the galaxy was slightly out of round and small. (New)

IC 1438 (Aquarius, barred spiral, mag=11.9, size=2.4’x2.1’, SBr=13.4):
About 48’ southwest of the previous galaxy I picked up my next one. At 110x I found it slightly dim and small, oval in shape and diffuse in appearance. Taking a peek at 198x it remained small but much stronger in the FOV. Its core area displayed a concentrated non-stellar brightness. (New)

IC 1439 (Aquarius, barred spiral, mag=13.7, size=1.3’x0.9’, SBr=13.7):
In the same FOV as the last object and only about 4’ to its southeast, I suspected this little dust mote. Dropping in the 10mm (198x) I confirmed its presence as a small and pretty dim homogeneous oval. (New)

IC 1435 (Aquarius, lenticular, mag=13.1, size=1.0’x0.6’, SBr=12.3):
Nearly 1° southwest of the previous pair I swept up this small lenticular. It presented as a dim homogeneous oval at 110x. Using 198x it remained a little weak visually, but still easily seen. (New)

O’Neal 14 (Aquarius, asterism, brightest star=8.2, size=27.0’x22.0’):
I noted in the IDSA this asterism nearby that I had not observed previously, so I quickly swept it up. Its dominant star is mag 8.2 HD 212772 and at 110x I noticed about 15 brighter field stars strewn across its field. The dominant pattern I saw was that of a dipper-like grouping in the eastern part of the field. The grouping was nicely detached from the general field standing out, even in the 8x50 RACI finder. (New)

NGC 7377 (Aquarius, barred lenticular, mag=11.1, size=3.0’x2.5’, SBr=13.1):
Back to the galaxy hunt, I easily spotted this small and pretty bright slightly oval glow. At 110x it displayed an intermittent stellar core. Using 198x it was quite obvious to the eye and larger as more of your fainter extensions became visible. The stellar core continued to pop in and out as seeing shifted. (New)

NGC 7392 (Aquarius, barred spiral, mag=11.9, size=2.1’x1.3’, SBr=12.8):
Another easy one at 110x as a small oval that appeared homogeneous. Using 198x it was obvious in the field and remained a diffuse, fairly bright oval. (New)

NGC 7365 (Aquarius, lenticular, mag=12.8, size=1.5’x1.0’, SBr=13.2):
Picked up at 110x this lenticular presented a small and slightly dim diffuse oval. It formed a triangle with two 11th mag field stars to its northeast and southeast. With 198x it remained a little weak in the field, and displayed an intermittent stellar core. (New)

NGC 7302 (Aquarius, lenticular, mag=12.3, size=1.8’x1.1’, SBr=12.8):
Picked up at 110x it was a small and slightly bright oval just north of a 9th mag field star. An intermittent stellar core was pinned to its center. Viewing at 198x it was an obvious presence in the field, as a small oval that now had a steady stellar core at its heart. (New)

NGC 7300 (Aquarius, barred spiral, mag=12.8, size=2.0’x1.0’, SBr=13.5):
This galaxy appeared small and dim at 110x, and evenly illuminated. Using 198x it was easier but remained a small homogeneous oval. (New)

NGC 7298 (Aquarius, spiral, mag=13.7, size=1.3’x1.0’, SBr=14.0):
Picked up at 110x, it was a pretty dim small rounded dust mote. At 198x while easier to discern, it remained pretty weak visually and homogeneous to the eye. (New)

NGC 7269 (Aquarius, spiral, mag=13.7, size=1.1’x0.7’, SBr=13.3):
Though found at 110x, it was small and pretty dim. Even at 198x it remained weak and homogeneous to the eye. (New)

NGC 7309 (Aquarius, barred spiral, mag=12.5, size=1.9’x1.8’, SBr=13.7):
Small and diffuse at 110x, it presented as slightly bright to the eye and round in shape. Visually a little larger at 198x it was obvious in the field, and evenly illuminated. (New)

NGC 7396 (Pisces, spiral, mag=12.8, size=1.9’x1.1’, SBr=13.5):
Moving across the border into Pisces now, I picked up this spiral which was the brightest of a small grouping of galaxies within a 10’ field. Observed at 152x 198x and 283x it was a homogeneous oval, small in size. (New)

NGC 7398 (Pisces, spiral, mag=13.6, size=1.2’x0.8’, SBr=13.5):
About 9’ northeast of the previous object I spotted this decidedly dimmer and small homogeneous oval. Like all members of this group it was observed at 152x to 283x and changed little other than becoming a little more obvious. (New)

NGC 7397 (Pisces, barred lenticular, mag=14.2, size=0.7’x0.5’, SBr=12.8):
Next up was this even dimmer dust mote about 4’ south of NGC 7398. Across the magnification range utilized it remained a small and dim diffuse oval. (New)

NGC 7401 (Pisces, spiral, mag=14.4, size=0.9’x0.6’, SBr=13.2):
This very small dust bunny was spotted about 3’ east of NGC 7397. Only suspected at 198x it was confirmed, but remained pretty weak at 283x. Homogeneous and out of round, it was difficult. I however did not spot NGC 7402 just to its east. (New)

IC 1455 (Pisces, barred spiral, mag=13.5, size=1.0’x0.6’, SBr=12.7):
This weak homogeneous oval was picked up about 17.5’ northeast of the previous small galaxy grouping at 198x after nudging to its field. Overall it was dim and small, oval in shape and evenly illuminated across its envelope. (New)

NGC 628 / M74 (Pisces, spiral, mag=9.4, size=10.5’x9.5’, SBr=14.2):
I now decided to shift over to eastern Pisces a bit. I stopped by this sometimes challenging Messier galaxy before going after a supernova in the galaxy NGC 514 just over 4° to the southwest. M74 was easily swept up at 110x it presented a large and very obvious rounded disk that was quite diffuse in appearance. The core was a broadly brighter central brightness. Using 152x and 198x it was quite pretty and large in the FOV, with hints of subtle spiral structure within the diffuse glow.

NGC 514 (Pisces, barred spiral, mag=11.6, size=3.5’x2.8’, SBr=14.0):
Now moving to the host of a currently active supernova, the galaxy was slightly large and bright at 110x. Oval in shape and generally homogeneous, the supernova was easily spotted ENE of the galaxy center. I viewed the galaxy at both 152x and 198x and it was quite obvious, dominating the view. (New)

SN 2020uxz (Pisces, SN in NGC 514, mag=14.0~):
As mentioned above, the supernova was easily spotted about 46” ENE of the galaxy center at 110x though shifts in seeing caused it to dim and brighten periodically. At 152x and 198x its diamond sparkle was steady and obvious within the disk. (New)

NGC 505 (Pisces, lenticular, mag=13.8, size=0.9’x0.6’, SBr=13.1):
Next up was this very small and dim dust mote noted at 110x. Viewing with 152x it was a small homogeneous oval. (New)

NGC 489 (Pisces, spiral, mag=12.6, size=1.7’x0.4’, SBr=11.9):
At 110x this highly inclined spiral presented a slightly bright thin sliver. There seemed to be a couple of foreground stars involved with its disk. Then at 152x and 198x these dim stars (16th mag) were more apparent though still quite dim. Still small and obvious as a flattened oval with a stellar core. (New)

NGC 524 (Pisces, lenticular, mag=10.3, size=2.8’x2.8’, SBr=12.3):
Nearby was this previously observed object so I took a quick gander before moving on to my next target. At 110x it was pretty bright and slightly large. Round it shape it contained a broadly brighter core within a diffuse halo. This is the dominant galaxy of loose collection of galaxies known as the NGC 524 Group, which included the previous two objects and the following eight galaxies.

NGC 525 (Pisces, lenticular, mag=13.2, size=1.5’x0.7’, SBr=13.1):
A few minutes north of NGC 524 I found this previously missed object while observing NGC 524 from home with the 10 inch a few years ago. In this case it was observed with the 17.5 inch at 152x and 198x as a small and dim homogeneous oval. (New)

NGC 516 (Pisces, barred lenticular, mag=13.1, size=1.4’x0.5’, SBr=12.7):
As with the previous object, this too was missed during that earlier session at home when NGC 524 was observed with the 10 inch. In this case it too was observed at 152x and 198x in the 17.5 inch and was pretty much a copy of NGC 525. It appeared as a small and dim homogenous oval. However, it was a little brighter to the eye and slightly more obvious. (New)

NGC 509 (Pisces, barred lenticular, mag=13.4, size=1.6’x0.6’, SBr=13.2):
Observed at 152x and 198x it presented a small and pretty dim homogeneous oval. (New)

NGC 518 (Pisces, spiral, mag=13.3, size=1.7’x0.6’, SBr=13.1):
This one pretty much mirrored the appearance of NGC 509 at both 152x and 198x. (New)

NGC 502 (Pisces, lenticular, mag=12.8, size=1.1’x1.0’, SBr=12.9):
Next up in this group was this previously observed member. Seen at 152x and 198x it presented a small and just subtly bright round glow that displayed a stellar core.

NGC 532 (Pisces, spiral, mag=12.9, size=2.5’x0.8’, SBr=13.5):
Small and a little bright at 152x and 198x, the next member of the group appeared as a squat oval that was generally homogeneous to the eye. (New)

NGC 511 (Pisces, elliptical, mag=13.7, size=1.2’x1.2’, SBr=14.1):
This one was a very dim, small and homogeneous oval at both 152x and 198x. There was a dim foreground star involved at the southern edge of its disk. Overall it was the weakest of the group. (New)

NGC 522 (Pisces, spiral, mag=12.9, size=2.7’x0.5’, SBr=13.0):
In keeping with the general theme of the galaxy group, this spiral presented a small and dim homogeneous oval, though more flattened than most. It was likewise observed at both 152x and 198x. (New)

NGC 247 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=9.1, size=21.4’x6.9’, SBr=14.4):
I had noticed that for whatever reason I had not previously targeted this nearby (~11.1 MLY) member of the Sculptor group of galaxies. So moving into Cetus, at 110x it was easy and quite large in extent. It appeared very diffuse in nature and generally homogeneous. A bright mag 9.5 field star was at its southern tip. Viewed at 152x it was very large and very bright and extremely diffuse and dusty looking. Its core was subtly and broadly brighter in the major axis. Having the darker skies most definitely helped with this eerie and ghostly object. (New)

NGC 244 (Cetus, lenticular, mag=12.9, size=1.5’x0.9’, SBr=13.1):
Observing with just 152x (Ethos 13mm) this galaxy presented a small but slightly bright round homogeneous glow. (New)

NGC 179 (Cetus, lenticular, mag=13.3, size=0.9’x0.8’, SBr=12.8):
Viewed at 152x this was a dim and small rounded glow. Generally homogeneous, a 15th mag field star was noted just off its northern edge. (New)

NGC 209 (Cetus, lenticular, mag=12.9, size=1.4’x1.0’, SBr=13.3):
Picked up at 152x and also observed at 198x this small oval appeared slightly dim to the eye and oval in shape. It sported a stellar core at its center. (New)

NGC 171 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=12,2, size=2.1’x1.9’, SBr=13.5):
This was discovered by William Herschel in 1784 and rediscovered by John Herschel in 1834 which was later listed as NGC 175. Dreyer stated in a 1912 update that Caroline made a 1° error in declination and that the William Herschel entry should be struck because John’s position (for the same object) is correct. However, it is typical (though not always) to list an object by its earliest detection. So I will stick with what is utilized in the IDSA.

Observed using 152x and 198x, it presented a small but somewhat bright round glow. Overall it was evenly illuminated across its disk. (New)

NGC 216, (Cetus, lenticular, mag=13.2, size=1.8’x0.7’, SBr=13.5):
This lenticular appeared small and oval at both 152x and 198x. Dim to the eye it was generally homogeneous across its envelope. (New)

IC 51 (Cetus, lenticular, mag=12.8, size=1.4’x1.3’, SBr=13.2):
The result of a galactic collision, this polar ring galaxy is found in Dr. Halton Arp’s Atlas of Peculiar Galaxies as number 230. Through the scope at 152x and 198x it was slightly bright, small and evenly illuminated. As expected, none of its unique structure was visible. (New)

NGC 210 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=10.9, size=5.0’x3.3’, SBr=13.8):
This little oval was somewhat bright at 152x and evenly illuminated. At 198x it was very obvious in the field and remained homogeneous. (New)

NGC 178 (Cetus, spiral, mag=12.6, size=2.0’x1.0’, SBr=13.2):
Picked up at 152x this thick oval was small and homogeneous to the eye. It was subtly bright and obvious within the field at 198x. (New)

NGC 246 (Cetus, planetary nebula, mag=10.9, size=4.6’x4.1’, SBr=13.8):
This ghostly planetary, known colloquially as the “Skull Nebula” has been observed a few times previously. Since it was nearby I dropped in for a quick look-see. At 152x it was a large and eerie out of round apparition. Its brighter ring around the edge was easily apparent and stood out nicely with the darker and unevenly illuminated central region. Four stars were involved within the disk, including the bright 12th magnitude central star. A perfect treat for the upcoming Halloween season!

NGC 255 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=11.9, size=3.0’x2.5’, SBr=13.9):
Swept up at 152x it presented a somewhat bright out of round glow. Overall just slightly large in extent, It remained homogeneous even at 198x. (New)

NGC 309 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=11.9, size=3.0’x2.5’, SBr=14.0):
Despite its similar attributes as compared to the previous object, I found this object obviously dimmer to the eye. Small and out of round, it also remained homogeneous at 152x and 198x. (New)

NGC 163 (Cetus, elliptical, mag=12.7, size=1.5’x1.2’, SBr=13.4):
This galaxy was a small and little dim oval at 152x. Viewed at 198x it presented a small concentrated brighter core. (New)

NGC 165 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=13.1, size=1.5’x1.3’, SBr=13.7):
Forming a pair with NGC 163, about 7’ to its west, this was the dimmer of the two. Generally rounded in shape it was a weak presence in the field comparatively, and remained homogeneous even at 198x. (New)

NGC 151 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=11.6, size=3.7’x1.7’, SBr=13.4):
Fairly bright at 152x, it presented a small oval with a broadly brighter core. It stood out well in the field at 198x with its obvious brighter core are inside its diffuse halo. (New)

NGC 586 (Cetus, spiral, mag=13.2, size=1.6’x0.8’, SBr=13.2):
This galaxy lies just ESE of previously viewed NGC 584, which at a cursory look displayed a bright and slightly large oval with a stellar core. Having missed NGC 586 before, it was now my focus. At 152x in the same FOV as its neighbor, I presented a small and dim oval. Even at 198x it remained weak and homogeneous to the eye. (New)

NGC 701 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=12.2, size=2.5’x1.2’, SBr=13.2):
This somewhat bright oval was swept up at 152x and presented a slightly large homogeneous glow. Viewed with 198x I detected a very fleeting stellar core and its overall appearance was diffuse. (New)

NGC 755 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=12.6, size=3.4’x1.1’, SBr=13.9):
At 152x this galaxy appeared as a ghostly finger of even light. Overall it was a little bright and small, and remained homogeneous at 198x. (New)

NGC 731 (Cetus, elliptical, mag=12.1, size=1.7’x1.7’, SBr=13.1):
Pretty bright at 152x this small round glow was obvious in the field. At 198x a stellar core was detected at its center. (New)

NGC 773 (Cetus, spiral, mag=13.2, size=1.4’x0.7’, SBr=13.2):
Viewed at both 152x and 198x this dim and small oval remained diffuse and evenly illuminated. (New)

NGC 788 (Cetus, lenticular, mag=12.1, size=1.9’x1.4’, SBr=13.0):
Seen with 152x and 198x this lenticular was oval in shape and pretty bright to the eye. Overall is presentation was of a even glow with no hint of internal brightness. (New)

NGC 779 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=11.2, size=4.0’x1.2’, SBr=12.7):
Just slightly large in angular extent, this finger of light was bright and elongated. At 198x I detected a central lens of brightness along the major axis, with a stellar core pinned to its center. (New)

NGC 790 (Cetus, lenticular, mag=12.7, size=1.3’x1.3’, SBr=13.1):
At both 152x and 198x this small round glow was a little dim and homogeneous in appearance. (New)

NGC 850 (Cetus, lenticular, mag=12.9, size=1.1’x1.1’, SBr=13.0):
Picked up at 152x as a small and round dim glow, it displayed a stellar core at 198x. (New)

NGC 800 (Cetus, spiral, mag=13.1, size=1.0’x0.9’, SBr=12.7):
This dim spiral forms a close pair with NGC 799 (almost 2’ to the north). I found it the brighter of the pair though it remained dim. Overall at 152x and 198x it was round and homogeneous to the eye. (New)

NGC 799 (Cetus, barred spiral, mag=13.4, size=2.0’x1.7’, SBr=14.5):
In the same FOV, this weaker glow was seen at both 152x and 198x. It was the dimmer of the pair, but slightly larger in extent. Oval in shape it was homogeneous. (New)

NGC 863 (Cetus, spiral, mag=13.0, size=1.1’x1.0’, SBr=12.9):
Forms a pair with NGC 856 about 14’ to the WNW. The brighter of the duo, it presented as a small and rounded homogeneous glow at both 152x and 198x. (New)

NGC 856 (Cetus, spiral, mag=13.2, size=1.3’x0.9’, SBr=13.2):
Also known as NGC 859 due to duplicate discoveries and entries into the original NGC, this presented the dimmer of the two sharing the FOV. At 152x and 198x it was a small and homogeneous oval. (New)

NGC 867 (Cetus, lenticular, mag=12.9, size=1.1’x1.1’, SBr=13.0):
My final object has a history that is at a minimum, confusing. Based on William Herschel’s very rough positional calculations and observations later by Heinrich d’Arrest, it was generally accepted that NGC 867 (Herschel) equals NGC 875 (d”Arrest) and noted as such in the original NGC by Dreyer. Of more recent vintage, Prof. Harold Corwin has suggested based on discrepancies that this galaxy might also be equivalent to the one listed as IC 225. So this is a bit of an “oy vey” object, and one can throw a dart and pick their favorite designation! Personally I will just go with the original.

Nonetheless, I observed it at 152x and 198x and found it to be a small and somewhat dim round glow. It also exhibited a stellar core pinned to its center. (New)


I wrapped up the session after 0100 hours as things were really getting soppy wet and chilly. It was an excellent follow-on outing to my debacle the week before when I was frustrated by clouds during a period when it was supposed to be clear. So in the long run I left the field happy and successful, albeit a bit exhausted. Thanks for tagging along.

What an enormous amount of observations! some of them as deep as mag.16 (stars in NGC489)! Very nice.
Objects like M74, G73 and a nova always appeal to the imagination!
Thanks for sharing!

Another magnificent haul! Even an extragalactic glob......

John Baars wrote: ↑Sat Oct 17, 2020 6:23 pm What an enormous amount of observations! some of them as deep as mag.16 (stars in NGC489)! Very nice.
Objects like M74, G73 and a nova always appeal to the imagination!
Thanks for sharing!

Thanks John. I will clarify that the stars of 16th mag were of course line of sight foreground stars in the Milky Way that were merely imposed upon the disk of NGC 489. But dim they were nonetheless.

notFritzArgelander wrote: ↑Sat Oct 17, 2020 8:50 pm Another magnificent haul! Even an extragalactic glob......

Thank you nFA. Speaking of extragalactic globs, I have never targeted what is considered the brightest one of those, NGC 1049 in the Fornax Dwarf. In that case, the glob is easier to see than the host galaxy. Although, I suppose one might make the case for M54 being the brightest extragalactic glob since it belongs to the Sagittarius Dwarf. Some discount that it is extragalactic any longer since its host is in the process of merging with our galaxy.

A wonderful outing Kt4hx, a pleasure to read and follow in the IDSA, although I stumble around in there a bit to find things.
Clear skies to you.

kt4hx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 12:01 am

notFritzArgelander wrote: ↑Sat Oct 17, 2020 8:50 pm Another magnificent haul! Even an extragalactic glob......

Thank you nFA. Speaking of extragalactic globs, I have never targeted what is considered the brightest one of those, NGC 1049 in the Fornax Dwarf. In that case, the glob is easier to see than the host galaxy. Although, I suppose one might make the case for M54 being the brightest extragalactic glob since it belongs to the Sagittarius Dwarf. Some discount that it is extragalactic any longer since its host is in the process of merging with our galaxy.

Which some? I'd prefer to count it as extragalactic if it were more bound to the Sagittarius Dwarf than to the MW. Since it's smack dab in the center of the Sgr Dwarf and some have argued that it is the core of the Sgr Dwarf and not a glob at all.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messier_54

Wow! Thanks for the detailed report. You certainly got the most from the little time you had.

Very nice, well written report, and very informative
Thanks for posting

John Donne wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:08 am A wonderful outing Kt4hx, a pleasure to read and follow in the IDSA, although I stumble around in there a bit to find things.
Clear skies to you.

Thanks John. I don't know how long you've had the IDSA, but like any atlas it can take a little getting used to. I am what I like to call an "atlaholic" as I collect printed sky atlases. I have several and like the IDSA a lot, though as I always say, no one atlas gets everything right. I am on my second copy of the IDSA (desk edition) as it has been my field atlas of choice for a few years now and my original copy got kind of frazzled. Since I moved the 17.5 inch to the dark site full time I have been using Uranometria more in conjunction with the IDSA. Both are good, but of course Urano plots deeper which I need at times.

notFritzArgelander wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:41 am

kt4hx wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 12:01 am

notFritzArgelander wrote: ↑Sat Oct 17, 2020 8:50 pm Another magnificent haul! Even an extragalactic glob......

Thank you nFA. Speaking of extragalactic globs, I have never targeted what is considered the brightest one of those, NGC 1049 in the Fornax Dwarf. In that case, the glob is easier to see than the host galaxy. Although, I suppose one might make the case for M54 being the brightest extragalactic glob since it belongs to the Sagittarius Dwarf. Some discount that it is extragalactic any longer since its host is in the process of merging with our galaxy.

Which some? I'd prefer to count it as extragalactic if it were more bound to the Sagittarius Dwarf than to the MW. Since it's smack dab in the center of the Sgr Dwarf and some have argued that it is the core of the Sgr Dwarf and not a glob at all.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messier_54

Well in this case, the some I was referring to is Steve Gottlieb who stated that "Although not strictly speaking extragalactic, several globular clusters, the brightest of which is M54, belong to the Sagittarius Dwarf Elliptical Galaxy, which is being absorbed into the Milky Way,."

Then again, maybe I was reading more into his statement than he intended. Personally, given the Sag Dwarf has not fully merged with the MW, I would still consider M54 extragalactic. I found the below linked diagram of the merger process for the Sag Dwarf interesting. I recall when the majority of opinion was that M54 was the core of the Sag Dwarf, but thought that had been mostly dispelled in favor of it being a globular based on its composition.

http://cdn.sci-news.com/images/enlarge7 ... ounter.jpg

jrkirkham wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 2:48 am Wow! Thanks for the detailed report. You certainly got the most from the little time you had.

Thanks Rob. Indeed a good time was had by me!

Ylem wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:05 am Very nice, well written report, and very informative
Thanks for posting

Thanks Jeff, glad you enjoyed the read. A bit long, but then about five hours in the field is long - at least for me.

Wow Alan, what a busy session.
A great read, Thank you very much for sharing.

Wow!

Great session by a master Alan. We should crown you as the "king" of DSO's.

Peter802 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 7:03 am Wow Alan, what a busy session.
A great read, Thank you very much for sharing.

Thank you Peter. This one should have lasted all the way through your morning coffee and breakfast!

Shabadoo wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 2:58 pmWow!

Thanks Jeff, I was just out communing with the sky.
I

helicon wrote: ↑Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:15 pm Great session by a master Alan. We should crown you as the "king" of DSO's.

Thank you Michael, I appreciate the comments. Just doing what I love to do.

Another great haul of DSO's Alan, thanks for sharing.

NGC 1365 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 8:40 am Another great haul of DSO's Alan, thanks for sharing.

Thanks Ivan, appreciate you taking the time to read my report. While I have observed quite a bit since March, I haven't filed reports for most of those observing sessions.

Three words - "Holy Cow, Alan".

How do you do it?

KingNothing13 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 12:37 pm Three words - "Holy Cow, Alan".

How do you do it?

First thanks Brett, glad you enjoyed reading my report.

Second, to address your question, first I would say my decades of experience in locating and observing deep sky objects is the linchpin of the matter. I have always been, continue to be and likely will remain (always subject to change of course ) a manual star hopping observer. By observing so many dim objects, I have trained my eye to detect subtle changes in light that helps with detection of dim objects (sometimes right at the threshold of detection) and sometimes structure within them. When I star hop I have to insure my finders (unity and optical) are both aligned accurately, because I often have to triangulate an object's position with them based on the surrounding star field as depicted in my atlas and seen through the optical finder. I am frequently successful at putting them in the field of view of the main scope using this method. I will also add that I love the hunt. I think when you do something that is so enjoyable to you, then you learn quicker and pay closer attention to the learning process. As I am fond of saying, "the more fun we have the more we learn, and the more we learn, the more fun we have."

Lastly, I will not discount the factor of having a 17.5 inch scope located and some of the darkest skies east of the Mississippi, which as we all know are at a premium nowadays.

Hi Alan. A superlative report from you. What a large cache of great objects that you logged. You really put that 17.5" f/4 telescope to good use. Thanks for your well written and fun read report Alan, and the best of wishes for many more sessions with opportunities like this again soon.

Makuser wrote: ↑Mon Oct 19, 2020 11:33 pm Hi Alan. A superlative report from you. What a large cache of great objects that you logged. You really put that 17.5" f/4 telescope to good use. Thanks for your well written and fun read report Alan, and the best of wishes for many more sessions with opportunities like this again soon.

Thank you Marshall. Moving this 17.5 inch over to the dark site house has been very enjoyable indeed. With 24 observing sessions since mid-March it has been a banner year.

Again, a ton of galaxies observed for this report Alan - well done!

As usual, good to see that nearly all of them are " new" objects. In my deep-sky hunting days, I would never re-visit a previously observed DSO, since I was always trying to reach certain milestone numbers (of different DSOs observed) each year.

Also good that you took the time to check out an asterism (O'Neal 14). I'll need to get back into these sometime soon, but I'm focused on Mars this month...