Averton
16-05-2023, 03:49 PM
There are just not enough hours in a day! Due to other commitments we were only able to have a short time to take images and then didn't get to process them til late.
For the first time since using the SSM there was a very clear disparity between the data collected from the SSM and the actual seeing we experienced. The SSM data gave an average seeing of 1.1 arc seconds with a standard deviation of 0.3. The actual seeing was following the instantaneous values from the SSM ie when the SSM was showing bad figures the seeing was worse and when it showed good figures the seeing was better. However worse and better here are relative to an overall very poor seeing. The images on the screen were unstable and blurry and moving around considerably. The observed average seeing was far more like 2-3 arc seconds at best. We don't mount the SSM sensor at the objective of the scope as recommended but on a separate tripod beside the scope mount. This has never appeared to be an issue in the past but perhaps accounts for the disparity.
Anyway, here are the best images we could extract from the data. The 540nm one is particularly poor in comparison to more recent images.
For the first time since using the SSM there was a very clear disparity between the data collected from the SSM and the actual seeing we experienced. The SSM data gave an average seeing of 1.1 arc seconds with a standard deviation of 0.3. The actual seeing was following the instantaneous values from the SSM ie when the SSM was showing bad figures the seeing was worse and when it showed good figures the seeing was better. However worse and better here are relative to an overall very poor seeing. The images on the screen were unstable and blurry and moving around considerably. The observed average seeing was far more like 2-3 arc seconds at best. We don't mount the SSM sensor at the objective of the scope as recommended but on a separate tripod beside the scope mount. This has never appeared to be an issue in the past but perhaps accounts for the disparity.
Anyway, here are the best images we could extract from the data. The 540nm one is particularly poor in comparison to more recent images.