TheSkySearchers

This is my first ever try to make a visual report. Feedback is appreciated.

Date: Apr 19th 2021
Telescope: Orion Optics VX12 300 mm, F/4
Mount: iOptron CEM120 + Tri-pier360
Used eyepieces: Omegon SWAN 26mm 70°, Tele vue 15 mm Plössl, Baader classic ortho 6 mm

I thought I got the mount problem solved, and since good seeings have been rare, and I really have had a chance to really try out my setup, I decided to go through several targets instead of really observing them.

I started at 10:00 PM local time (DST). The temperature was +4°C and the north-east half of the horizon was still orange after sunset. I had put the setup together earlier, so I did some last settings and waited for the Polaris to emerge. After polar alignment I checked the collimation and if the primary mirror was still pinched. No pinching, but collimation could have been better.

I also noticed, how quickly things happen with the moon. A couple of days ago it was small and low around 11 PM . Now it was about half and high in the sky at midnight. Nasty surprise.

I started with Hercules' M13 and the 26 mm. The goto got me there fine, and the fuzzy ball was there in the view. It looked more like a nebula. I changed to 15 mm and I started to see it as a ball of stars. With 6 mm it looked like a swarm of bees.

Next Leo.
M65 and M66 were directly visible but faint against the moonlit sky with both 26 mm and 15 mm. I took a look at M65 also with the 6 mm, still visible.

M95 and M86 vere barely visible with averted vision with 26 mm.

I realized that the 26 mm was too weak with the moonlight. The secondary shadow was messing up with the viewing. And even if the sky looked dark blue, through the telescope it looked much lighter blue with a darker spot in the middle.
Decided to go with the 15 mm.

Continued with Leo.
M95, M96 and M105 were directly, but barely visible with 15 mm.

Since Virgo was in the south and still low, I decided to look there while I can.
M49, M58, M98 and M100 were not visible.

M60 and M86 were barely visible with averted vision. It helped a bit when I kept my eye closed for a short time and opened it towards the eyepiece. The sky was so light that it made me lose the little dark vision that I got while not looking into the eyepiece or up to the sky.

M85, M90 and M99 well were visible with averted vision.

M89 was visible with averted vision, but with direct vision I could barely tell if I saw it or not.

M84 and M87 were well visible directly. They would probably have looked nice with darker background.

Then turned to Ursa major.
M81 and M82 looked really nice. Just like in some instructional pictures for visual observers.
M108 was barely visible with averted vision.
M97 was so faint, that I'm not sure if I saw that or not.
M101 and M109 kept hiding from me.

At this point it was half past midnight and I decided to take a brek and let the moon get lower. Also had to take my dog out for walk. It was quite overdue because of my activities during the evening and night.

When I returned, I decided to continue with Canes venatici.
entered the M106 to the goto, and the telescope started to turn, but then the DEC axis stopped turning and the dreadful noise appeared again.

I had to call it a night just when the moon got lower and the sky little darker.
It was now 1:15 AM and +1°C.
I'm really annoyed to waste a rare good night (excluding the moon) due to sudden equipment problem.

Sorry to hear about the equipment issues. Yeah, I know that is a real bummer.

Very enjoyable read until the issues though and thanks for that!

Any idea what is causing the noise in DEC?

Great report, sadly I don't know anything about iOptron mounts.

This is a well written report Turboscrew. It is a pleasure to drive through these targets with you.

In my limited experience equipment is the wildcard in all of my goto outings. The trick is to pigeonhole the frustration and relish the views that you have achieved.
You have covered quite a few nice targets to which I suspect you will make returns when the tech glitches are overcone.

Again, well done!
Thank you for posting.

It's good to see that you had at least a partial night of trouble free observing.

One thing that concerns me is the secondary shadow that you see on using the 26mm SWAN. For an f4 scope that gives a 6.5 mm exit pupil which is likely too large unless you are very young. To avoid the secondary shadow you could make your long focal length eyepiece a bit shorter. When I had an f4 Newt I never used anything over 20mm focal length.

The declination freeze is concerning. You've reached out to customer support I trust?

Thank you for the nice report! I was able to follow along easily. Hope the trouble with your drive ends up being something not too serious!

Juno16 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:57 am Sorry to hear about the equipment issues. Yeah, I know that is a real bummer.

Very enjoyable read until the issues though and thanks for that!

Any idea what is causing the noise in DEC?

Not yet.

John Donne wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:16 am This is a well written report Turboscrew. It is a pleasure to drive through these targets with you.

In my limited experience equipment is the wildcard in all of my goto outings. The trick is to pigeonhole the frustration and relish the views that you have achieved.
You have covered quite a few nice targets to which I suspect you will make returns when the tech glitches are overcone.

Again, well done!
Thank you for posting.

Yes. I'll visit the targets later with less hurry. This time I wanted some idea what my gear is capable of, and what I can expect to see. I also noticed, that a prepared sheet for further notes about each target would have been a good idea.

notFritzArgelander wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:53 am It's good to see that you had at least a partial night of trouble free observing.

One thing that concerns me is the secondary shadow that you see on using the 26mm SWAN. For an f4 scope that gives a 6.5 mm exit pupil which is likely too large unless you are very young. To avoid the secondary shadow you could make your long focal length eyepiece a bit shorter. When I had an f4 Newt I never used anything over 20mm focal length.

The declination freeze is concerning. You've reached out to customer support I trust?

I think the main problem with the 26 mm was the moonlit sky being too bright. I had to close my eye for a while to get better look. That eyepiece also works as a polar alignment eyepiece. I need to find the direction of polaris from the pole, and the polaris should be at the edge of the TFOV when the telescope is directed to the pole. The radius of the TFOV is, in theory, 81" larger than the radius of the "orbit" of Polaris around the pole.

I guess I should try the "Allen key"-trick to find out my maximum pupil size.

And yes, I have e-mailed iOptron support twice. Still no answer, except the "message received" confirmation e-mail.

Should the report also contain the location where the observations were made?
And if, how specific? Is "Nokia, Finland" enough?

turboscrew wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 10:36 am Should the report also contain the location where the observations were made?
And if, how specific? Is "Nokia, Finland" enough?

There is no specific requirements here for report contents actually. It is pretty much as much or as little as you wish to put in. As to location, since Nokia is already in your profile info and shows up in each post you make, then unless you state otherwise in a report everyone will assume that is where your observing is done. Of course if you wish to specify that in each report you most certainly can. If you read all or most of the reports you will see different styles and content.

For example, if you look at one of my reports, such as this one: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17564

you will see my style. The format and content are what are comfortable for me and something that has evolved over the years I've been observing. However, that is simply how I do it and in no way means someone else should do exactly what I do. So I recommend finding your comfort zone regarding the details you put in your reports.

Well done on your first report (aside from the drive issues) and good luck with your future outings. As you found out, the moon is not the friend of galaxy observing. It simply makes what sky glow you may have worse, and in dark sky areas its impact is even more profound.

kt4hx wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 10:59 am

turboscrew wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 10:36 am Should the report also contain the location where the observations were made?
And if, how specific? Is "Nokia, Finland" enough?

There is no specific requirements here for report contents actually. It is pretty much as much or as little as you wish to put in. As to location, since Nokia is already in your profile info and shows up in each post you make, then unless you state otherwise in a report everyone will assume that is where your observing is done. Of course if you wish to specify that in each report you most certainly can. If you read all or most of the reports you will see different styles and content.

For example, if you look at one of my reports, such as this one: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17564

you will see my style. The format and content are what are comfortable for me and something that has evolved over the years I've been observing. However, that is simply how I do it and in no way means someone else should do exactly what I do. So I recommend finding your comfort zone regarding the details you put in your reports.

Well done on your first report (aside from the drive issues) and good luck with your future outings. As you found out, the moon is not the friend of galaxy observing. It simply makes what sky glow you may have worse, and in dark sky areas its impact is even more profound.

Thanks. Your example gave me good ideas what to add in my future reports.
When it comes to style and comfort zone, I don't know yet. Statistics made of a single event tend to be unreliable.

turboscrew wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 11:55 am

kt4hx wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 10:59 am

turboscrew wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 10:36 am Should the report also contain the location where the observations were made?
And if, how specific? Is "Nokia, Finland" enough?

There is no specific requirements here for report contents actually. It is pretty much as much or as little as you wish to put in. As to location, since Nokia is already in your profile info and shows up in each post you make, then unless you state otherwise in a report everyone will assume that is where your observing is done. Of course if you wish to specify that in each report you most certainly can. If you read all or most of the reports you will see different styles and content.

For example, if you look at one of my reports, such as this one: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=17564

you will see my style. The format and content are what are comfortable for me and something that has evolved over the years I've been observing. However, that is simply how I do it and in no way means someone else should do exactly what I do. So I recommend finding your comfort zone regarding the details you put in your reports.

Well done on your first report (aside from the drive issues) and good luck with your future outings. As you found out, the moon is not the friend of galaxy observing. It simply makes what sky glow you may have worse, and in dark sky areas its impact is even more profound.

Thanks. Your example gave me good ideas what to add in my future reports.
When it comes to style and comfort zone, I don't know yet. Statistics made of a single event tend to be unreliable.

Of course that is true. But in no time you will have many events on which to base your style. Its all a learning experience as we begin what is hopefully a long and pleasing journey of learning. Good luck and enjoy looking up.

turboscrew wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:31 am I also noticed, how quickly things happen with the moon. A couple of days ago it was small and low around 11 PM . Now it was about half and high in the sky at midnight. Nasty surprise.

Yeah, that thing is always trying to ruin my DSO observing. :wink:

I use an app called Sundial on my phone that shows rise, transit, and set times as well as percent illuminated. It's quite handy. It also graphically shows twilight times.

Hello turboscrew and congrats on winning the TSS Visual Report of the Day Award! Excellent report.

app.php/article/4-20-2021-tss-visual-report-of-the-day

Great report and congrats on getting the VROD award!

Where to heck did I got that Jun 19th? Should have been Apr 19th, of course.

turboscrew wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:16 pm Where to heck did I got that Jun 19th? Should have been Apr 19th, of course.

You are observing in the future, where impressive! This is a very nice first report Turboscrew, you hit it running. It also gives us a perspective on what it takes to observe in Finland. Well done!

I agree with nFA, 26mm is too long for your scope, and Erfle design of SWAN EP is poor match for a fast newt. I would suggest to look for 82 deg 14 to 20mm EP.

Bigzmey wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 5:17 pm

turboscrew wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 4:16 pm Where to heck did I got that Jun 19th? Should have been Apr 19th, of course.

You are observing in the future, where impressive! This is a very nice first report Turboscrew, you hit it running. It also gives us a perspective on what it takes to observe in Finland. Well done!

I agree with nFA, 26mm is too long for your scope, and Erfle design of SWAN EP is poor match for a fast newt. I would suggest to look for 82 deg 14 to 20mm EP.

Well, there was another reason for getting that eyepiece - the polar alignment.
The bright star there is supposed to be Polaris, and the center should be the pole.

I edited the date @turboscrew for posterity's sake...