Robert, the André & Saraceno is a little unclear on where exactly its data comes from. The study’s
home page states, “We propose an extensive imaging survey of the densest portions of the Gould Belt with SPIRE at 250-500 and PACS at 110-170 microns”. The paper itself, in
Sections 3 and 4 discusses data from Herschel and Alma with the future-tense style of a proposal, not a paper. The paper is a good summary of what they hope to achieve, but is vague on where exactly the accompanying images derive. In this thread, I downloaded the image sets identified with the actual object’s real-sky location, e.g., Taurus, Coal Sack, Corona Aust., etc. There’s no ID on those charts, and they are a much higher-res set from an unidentified study subsequent to Cambrésy.
The other links in each “Target” box go to fields criss-crossed with green lines in rectangular form. Those must be the authors’ pointing instructions.
This is all kind of an ado about not much, because wherever the charts hail from, they are dadgum useful out in the dark skies. Agreed that’s a pity the way the Herschel was unable to be serviced.
Off-thread, Robert, I have read a couple of papers about footloose O stars out in the middle of where they’re not supposed to exist. I have logged two of them (one being Wd20A in Westerlund 2, the most massive binary in the Galaxy. A little due diligence reveals that there’s no way a binary of 160 Msols could be ejected out to where this thing lives; nothing is big enough to just toss it out there. Let me go ferret the sources out and let’s start a new thread. It’s relevant because these stars can be seen in a 7-inch.
=Dana