26 September 2006

26 September 2006

Observing LocationSIBL
Observational Period1100-1115 EDT
Atmospheric ConditionsClear, mild. Lots of foiling from heating of building roofs and air conditioning exhaust.
TransparencyExcellent
SeeingFair
InstrumentsCanon 15x50 IS binocular w/Baader AstroSolar filter film - Charlie
Observing PartyCharlie Ridgway

Target Sunspots
ConstellationVir
CategorySolar
Time2006 EDT
Comments
Heliphraphic Latitude
(B0)
+6.92°
Heliographic Longitude
(L0)
289.26°
Position Angle
(P)
+25.59°
Carrington rotation number
(CR)
2048

No sunspots were seem

 Groups SpotsR
North0 0 0
South0 0 0
Total0 0 0
R = (Groups * 10) + Spots)



Observing LocationTotL
Observational Period2015-2230 EDT
Atmospheric ConditionsIt started out with very black, transparent skies but partky cloudy and ended up heat and a little hazy but mostly clear. Gegenschein became visible after 2315.

[I wonder if the sky was really as black as it appeared at the time or if it appeared blacker than it was because it was being seen next to white cloud bottoms. We definitely did not are the Gegenacheigln above the skyline to the south when we started out.]

TransparencyExcellent
SeeingGood
InstrumentsCanon 15x50 IS binocular (hand held)- Charlie
Takahashi 22x60 binocular - Peter
Fujinon 7x50 binocular - Peter
Observing PartyCharlie Ridgway
Peter Tagatac
I had a meeting to attend downtown and was carrying my computer so didn't bring my tripod. I decided that I would listen to my Sky Walker tapes. I was part way through the first tape when Peter arrived. We eventually started comparing notes on objects he has been observing in preparation for writing a review on the Takshashi binocular. We looked at some open clusters and double stars. I didn't make notes on anything we observed. The one thing I do remember was that I unequivocally saw M57 tonight. We also saw both Uranus and Neptune in his binocular and in mine with image stabilization turned on.

I was quite happy that I saw all of the Little Dipper naked-eye again, including Mag.5.02 Pherkad Minor. Later we looked around a bit and both saw down to Mag. 5.32 in the Alpha Perseus Association. Then we dropped down to the fishhook asterism in Per and both saw the Mag. 5.39 star below δ Per, HIP 18396. Applying the correction factor for atmospheric extinction from the Observer's Handbook, that would make the zenith limiting magnitude about 5.6 at the time. It probably would have been even deeper if we had performed the test earlier in the night when it was cloudy but not as hazy.

I thought that I had seen two bright satellites following each other across the sky and was wondering if it was the ISS and a Progress capsule. On checking Heavens above I found that the only thing bright all night was an Iridium flare. It was a Mag. -4 and on the right trajectory, but a little earlier than what I saw. 3 am speculating that it was a slow fade because it was so bright and that the reason it appeared to me to be two equally bright satellites was due to cloud movement.

Disclaimer
This is my personal record of my astronomical observations. It was written for my personal reference. The only reason it is in a blog is that a blog is a very convenient way to get the records formatted more or less uniformly and they will, hopefully, have greater longevity at Google where the servers are backed up than on my hard drive which never gets backed up. I occasionally include copyrighted material in my posts. I do this to make it convenient for me to access things I think I might want to refer to again. I think of this like making a photocopy of something I read that I put in a file where I can find it when I want it. As I understand copyright law, as explained in the DVD series Copyright Compliance by Chip Taylor Communications, this use is allowed under the Fair Use doctrine since I am not making any money on this blog, I don’t publicize the blog, and only occasionally post small excerpts of copyrighted works.


Disclosure
This blog is a personal blog written and edited by me. This blog does not accept any form of advertising, sponsorship, or paid insertions. We write for our own purposes. However, we may be influenced by our background, occupation, religion, political affiliation or experience.

The owner(s) of this blog will never receive compensation in any way from this blog.

The owner(s) of this blog is not compensated to provide opinion on products, services, websites and various other topics. The views and opinions expressed on this blog are purely the blog owners. If we claim or appear to be experts on a certain topic or product or service area, we will only endorse products or services that we believe, based on our expertise, are worthy of such endorsement. Any product claim, statistic, quote or other representation about a product or service should be verified with the manufacturer or provider.

This blog does not contain any content which might present a conflict of interest.