Here is a list of 17 PN brighter than magnitude 11 that are visible at 11pm DST.
Name Type Mag Size Con
IC 418 PN 10.7 12.0" Lep
IC 2621 PN 9.5 5.0" Car
NGC 246 PN 8.0 3.8' Cet
NGC 1514 PN 10.0 1.9' Tau
NGC 1535 PN 9.6 18.0" Eri
NGC 2346 PN 10.0 55.0" Mon
NGC 2392 PN 9.9 15.0" Gem
NGC 2438 PN 10.1 1.1' Pup
NGC 2440 PN 10.8 14.0" Pup
NGC 2867 PN 10.0 12.0" Car
NGC 2899 PN 10.0 2.0'x1.0' Vel
NGC 3132 PN 8.0 48.0" Vel
NGC 3195 PN 10.0 48.0"x30.0" Cha
NGC 3242 PN 8.6 16.0" Hya
NGC 3918 PN 8.0 12.0" Cen
NGC 5189 PN 10.3 2.6' Mus
NGC 7293 PN 6.5 12.8' Aqr
I looked at all except I2621, N2346 and N3195 last night.
The above magnitudes and sizes don't match up with what I saw.
N2899 seemed to be the faintest in my 12" Dob and I418 seemed to be the smallest. I used a 13mm Hyperion EP, 115x, 40' field.
Hi glen, our star party viewed most of the NGC items on your list last night and this morning and really enjoyed them, we got very lucky with the upper atmosphere stability- again. Someone must be looking out for us.
Saw 12 of these PN last night at 300 times (10mm eyepice and barlow) with the 12". It was windy with great transparency and no dew to worry about but poor seeing. Used wheels to move my scope inside my observatory so I could see more.
See http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...ad.php?t=15893
N 3195 was very faint but it is in the Caldwell list.
N 3242 has a ring within a ring, one of my favorites.
I "Discovered" NGC1535 for the first time last week - I can't believe it's not very well known. It's almost overhead, it's beutifully structured with an inner and outer shell, has a classic central star and a pretty blue green hue. A new favourite of mine!
As for NGC3195 (C109) - it's in the catalogue as pretty bright. Dunno what drugs they were on!
IC418 is something of a surprise.
The central star is bright in comparison to its small faint nebulous shell. The shell seems to appear and dissapear depending how you look at it and its easy to miss. Its a strange perceptual thing.
Saw IC418 through Mike Kerr's big scope at the South Pacific Star Party a few years back. It was amazing, so was the Horsehead nebula and the star eta Car.
Great thread, Glen. It is always fascinating to hear what different people see. Obviously a lot depends on seeing conditions, light pollution and the instrument being used.
I observed several of the targets on your list on Monday night through an 18" Obsession. Had I known about your list, I would have worked through them all!
IC 418 is a beautiful plantetary. I understand that many people perceive this as red in colour. I described it in my notes as "grey orange, central white star very prominent". What colour (if any) do you see?
NGC 1535 was a first view for me too, Jonathan, and what a cracker! I thought I could see at least two concentric rings around a large central star. No colour, though, in the 18 inch scope (two inches short, no doubt!).
For those who are spending much of their summer days in Orion, you may care to visit NGC 2022, a fine planetary. I'd be interested to hear if you can perceive the central star.
NGC 2438 was the first PN I ever observed. Its vicinty to M46 would have to be one of the most fortuitous "permanent conjunctions" in the heavens. Each sets off the other beautifully, the bright Puppian star field of M46 emphasising the ghostly palour of the PN.
My favourite PN is Caldwell 74 in Vela. Not only is the central star very pronounced, but the object is so bright and compact that is visible under a fully moonlit sky. A rare quality indeed in this elusive brand of objects!
Thanks for your comments, it is great to discuss observations. It must be great to see PN with an 18" at high power.
Another interesting PN is NGC 1514. It has a very bright star in it and shows up well with a UHC filter. Look for it below M45 about 3.5 degrees east of zeta Per. (3d23m pa108)
I like the article in the latest AS&T that objects to the use of Caldwell numbers Things get confusing if we renumber objects. Caldwell 74 is NGC 3132.
The attached file lists all the 124 PN with mags greater than 12. The brightest PN are listed first. Columns include the magnitudes of the the PN and central star and the PN's surface brightness. Size is in arc seconds, distance is given in light years and types are:
VORONTSOV-VELYAMINOV PLANETARY NEBULA TYPES:
1. Stellar Image. (I)
2. Smooth Disk (II)
2a. Smooth Disk, brighter towards center. (IIa)
2b. Smooth Disk, uniform brightness. (IIb)
2c. Smooth Disk, traces of ring structure. (IIc)
3. Irregular Disk (III)
3a. Irregular Disk, very irregular brightness distribution. (IIIa)
3b. Irregular Disk, traces of ring structure. (IIIb)
4. Ring Structure. (IV)
5. Irregular Form, similar to a diffuse nebula. (V)
6. Anomalous Form. (VI)
You can copy this tab delimited file to MS Excel and sort it by RA etc.
I like the article in the latest AS&T that objects to the use of Caldwell numbers Things get confusing if we renumber objects. Caldwell 74 is NGC 3132.
Having used the LX200 menu for the first 18 months of my observing, I became very accustomed to using the Caldwell catalogue. I found it much easier to remember 2 digits, rather than 4!
The NGC is a very imposing catalogue for those new to astronomy. I think catalogues like the Messier, Caldwell and Bennett have an important place in amateur astronomy. I have found it very enjoyable working through these catalogues systematically to savour some of the highlights of the sky. It has certainly made observing far more accessible to me than had I tried to wade through NGC or IC.
Perhaps "things get confusing" for those long-term observers who did not grow up with the Caldwell catalogue, and who are used to the NGC designations. For those new to astronomy there is no "renaming" as the Caldwell number may be the first number we have learnt.
We all develop our own preferences over time. The Messier catalogue itself it an example of this for more long-term observers. Messier's catalogue is quoted extensively in professional and amateur literature, even though its objects are also in the NGC.
To my mind what ultimately matters is that the nomenclature that we use assists us in our task of locating and enjoying objects. The Caldwell catalogue continues to be very helpful to many in that regard.
I think it is a pity that S&T, Meade and others have renamed these objects. It would be good if both NGC & C numbers were quoted. The ideal is for objects to be given the discoverers number/name but NGC & IC numbers have replaced them. Pardon me for being pedantic.
I'm a big fan of lists - they are opinions, and opinions are interesting. Whilst it is important to include the NGC/IC identifier (if for no other reason than to locate them in my ArgoNavis), they also need their own identifiers just so the user of the list can be systematic about observing them.
If anything, the Messier and Caldwell catalogues are much better documented than NCG/IC - even if they don't include my new fave, NGC 1535 (or AstroJunk 001 as it shall now be known )
I "Discovered" NGC1535 for the first time last week - I can't believe it's not very well known. It's almost overhead, it's beutifully structured with an inner and outer shell, has a classic central star and a pretty blue green hue. A new favourite of mine!
Yup, sure is a beauty! Was one of the first DSO's I ever imaged, hence why I have it as my avatar atm
John Herschel found NGC 3132 (C74) and numbered it 3228. So lets call it jh3228.
His 4 descriptions are attached.
The position gives RA and NPD (north polar distance)
The numbers at the end are sweep numbers. 810 etc
Reference
Herschel, J. F. W. (1847) Results of Astronomical Observations made during the years 1834-1838 at the Cape of Good Hope; being the completion of a telescopic survey of the whole surface of the visible heavens, commenced in 1825. Smith, Elder and Co, London.
)
