|
I too find the various catalogues confusing especially when different atlases use different conventions.
I use CNebulaX to plan which doubles to look at but it too has multiple reference names to the individual stars and then the Tri-Atlas, made from the CNebulaX maps sometimes has a different label on the double. Makes tracking down some of them interesting. An issue with CNX is that multiple stars (i.e. 3 or more) are not neatly presented in the planning component.
The ultimate double star resource is probably the Washington Double Star catalogue - download in one of many formats including a MS Access database with queries, about 24MB or so. Doing a search of that gives many and varied naming conventions. Issue with the WDS is that it gives RA/Dec and then you have to go find it on your map set. CdC has WDS as a catalogue within it but searching that can be a pain i.e. not straight forward or at least not to me. CdC does have some other features that make it handy for subsequent reference.
In general it seems that you who discovered it and wrote it down - well your naming conventions became a guide. Or it is attributed to the person who grouped them. E.g. the Dun series, Dunlop did not discover all of them but he had a list that eventually became Dun 1, Dun 2, ... in general I like the Dunlop doubles. There is also Innes series and HJ seems to be based off John Herschel's records.
As you say it makes it interesting when you have other catalogues such as the Tycho Double Star, Hipparcos, etc. If your goto database only operates off SAO then that makes it fun too. Simbad/Vizer becomes your friend and the work load climbs.
|