#1  
Old 11-01-2006, 10:28 PM
mickoking's Avatar
mickoking
Vagabond

mickoking is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: China
Posts: 1,477
Caldwell blues

G,day

I have noticed that a few people in this forum are using Caldwell catalogue numbers. At the risk of sounding grumpy Whats wrong with the NGC/IC catalogues?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-01-2006, 05:11 AM
edosaurus_rex's Avatar
edosaurus_rex
Registered User

edosaurus_rex is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 169
How we refer to objects is probably more a function of the list we used to find them in the first place. I personally don't know many of the NGC numbers of the Messier Objects because I started my Deep Sky observing with the Messier list. Fortuneately the Caldwell List is well known and if somebody uses C56 for example, you can readily find out what it is. But something like K30, "K" for Ed's Southern Gems Deep Sky Objects between -34 and -45 Dec visible from Texas List, is definitely NOT a good choice of catalogs to quote.

Clear, dark skies

Ed K (Author of the extremely obscure K Catalog!)
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-01-2006, 08:23 AM
Miaplacidus's Avatar
Miaplacidus (Brian)
He used to cut the grass.

Miaplacidus is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hobart
Posts: 1,235
G'day Micko,

You don't sound particularly grumpy, but may I ask what you think is so wrong about using the Caldwell designation? (I get the feeling that you're not alone in not liking them, but perhaps 100 years ago people were suspicious of Messier, who know?)

Just out of curiosity, do most handcontrollers and DSCs allow you to search by Caldwell number? (I know the Autostar does.)

Go Levy!

Brian.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-01-2006, 08:41 AM
Merlin66's Avatar
Merlin66 (Ken)
Registered User

Merlin66 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Junortoun Vic
Posts: 8,927
Bennett/ Hartung/Caldwell/Messier/IC/NGC

I compromise and accept that the various catalogues are sub sets which may be handy. Generally they refer to brighter objects easier for amateurs.
I like the Hartung # ( cos he was Australian) and Bennett # ( cos I worked with him in RSA!)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-01-2006, 09:35 PM
mickoking's Avatar
mickoking
Vagabond

mickoking is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: China
Posts: 1,477
You are correct miaplacidius I don't think much of the Caldwell catalogue. I am very happy with M/NGCand IC
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-01-2006, 10:51 PM
Miaplacidus's Avatar
Miaplacidus (Brian)
He used to cut the grass.

Miaplacidus is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hobart
Posts: 1,235
One thing I DO like about the Caldwell Objects is that you've got a rough idea of an object's declination just from the number alone. At least the designation codes SOME useful information. Still, I don't use them much myself, although there are a couple that don't have NCG/IC numbers. Anyway, maybe I'll use them more after Patrick Moore dies, out of respect. (He's not dead yet, by any chance, is he?)

BTW, still waiting on the Micko catalogue

Cheers, Brian.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-01-2006, 11:00 PM
mickoking's Avatar
mickoking
Vagabond

mickoking is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: China
Posts: 1,477
Brian , I don't think I will do a Micko catalogue because it will probably be worse than the calwell catalogue At least my list would include NGC5189


BTW, I have the highest respect for Patrick Moore as his books were instramental in developing my love of Astronomy particually as a pre-teen.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 01:17 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Astrophotography Prize
Advertisement