ISS and Uranus – a lucky capture….Brisbane 3rd Nov 2013 7:28pm AEST

[Dennis]

I was outdoors on Sun night (3rd Nov 2013) experimenting with the C9.25 and DSLR to see how corrected, or flat the field would be using the Celestron x0.63 Reducer/Corrector and it turned out to be not very corrected or flat!

I slewed to Uranus and then checked the 4 brighter satellites in Starry Night Pro when lo and behold, I saw that the ISS was due to make a close pass in the next couple of minutes. I hurriedly framed what I thought would be the best FOV. With my naked eye I saw the ISS approaching and thought that I had hit the “record” button (twice) to start recording with a non-reporting optic fitted.

When I looked at the rear CF active LED I noticed it wasn’t active (red) so I just hit the shutter release and grabbed the trail of the ISS instead, which shows obvious width due to the almost 1500mm focal length. I manually held the shutter open for some 25 secs, but the recorded ISS trail is just a second or so long.

I have cropped an 800x600 full res frame to show the trail plus uploaded a few screen shots from The Sky X Pro to verify that I had indeed recorded Uranus and the ISS in the same field – a lot of sheer good luck was required due to the last minute effort with Uranus and the ISS just squeezing into the same frame!

Cheers

Dennis

[Lee]

That's cool - it has a wide track doesn't it!

[Shark Bait (Stu)]

Nicely ambushed Dennis.

The SkyX planetarium software looks like it has some features that Starry Night is lacking.

What areas do you find Sky X excels in compared to SN?

Stu.

[Dennis]

Originally Posted by Shark Bait

Nicely ambushed Dennis.

The SkyX planetarium software looks like it has some features that Starry Night is lacking.

What areas do you find Sky X excels in compared to SN?

Stu.

Hi Stu

I have used Starry Night since version 3 (I am now on SNP Pro Plus 6) and I find it an easy to use program with a nice, intuitive user interface. I have generally upgraded to the Pro versions whenever they were released for additional functionality and SNP includes objects such as the satellites of Uranus & Neptune, something The Sky X does not seem to do.

My favourite mode of using SNP is simulating wide field and telescopic field of views based upon the equipment list and it is very easy to navigate.

I consider The Sky X Pro to be a more technical program and tend to use it for Near Earth Objects and telescope control, image linking via CCDSoft and ability to access the USNO Catalogue to display stars down to around mag 18.

I consider them to be complimentary, each with their own strengths and weaknesses and I would hate to be in a position where I would have to choose just one of them.

Cheers

Dennis

[Dennis]

Originally Posted by Lee

That's cool - it has a wide track doesn't it!

Thanks Lee – I was surprised at the width of, and detail in, the extended track. If only I had had more time to prepare….

Cheers

Dennis