[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: (IAAC) Obj: Jonckherre 320 - Inst: 17" f/15 classical Cassegrain equatorial mount



Yes I should have checked the ADS. You are right M 1-92 is now regarded as
a PPN with some nice images from HST of course as well
At 13:27 18/12/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Forgive me, guys - between the constant blast of meteor emails recently,
>and struggling to get my meteor data for the year all logged in, I have
>neglected to read all of the posts going over IAAC. As a result I'm just
>coming into this interesting thread!
>
>I had the occasion to observe M1-92 for the first time this Summer, at
>the Summer Star Party in the Berkshire Mountains of West Massachusetts.
>I've been intrigued by this little fainty ever since I first noticed it
>plotted in computer skycharting software several years ago. Until that
>one very transparent night at SSP though, I'd never managed to see it
>with my 20". But having carefully plotted it on the "D series" charts
>of my AstroAtlas that week, I managed to locate it with careful star-
>hopping. I confirmed it (only just) with the UHC filter, and shared the
>view with a couple of my (all-too-near) neighbors on the SSP field.
>
>I'd have to agree with Owen that Minkowski's Footprint (M1-92) is not
>really stellar - in fact, at 360x in the 20" for me, "small but diffuse"
>might be a better description. Also, I found that it responded somewhat
>to the UHC, though not showing noticeable improvement with an OIII. In
>NONE of these views though, could I clearly discern it's classic shape.
>
>By the way, the last I read was that the Footprint actually falls in
>the weird class of "proto-planetary" nebulae - like many of its fellow
>bipolar nebulae, it exhibits some of the characteristics of both an
>emission/reflection nebula, and a classical planetary. The theory (I
>surmise) is that it may be on it's way to becoming a true planetary.
>
>Clear skies all!
>Lew
>
>
>>I think you are correct. The Footprint nebula or M1-92 is a reflection
>>nebula with two halfs one brighter than the other. It has never looked
>>stellar to me. Campbells star almost always does and is one of the few PN's
>>that does not respond well to an OIII filter having almost no OIII emission
>> 
>> At 09:44 17/12/98 -0500, you wrote:
>> >Dave,
>> >
>> >I've done J320 and J900 with my 10" and they certainly are little guys.
>> >Another pair of small "planetary nebulae" in Cygnus are Campbell's Star
and
>> >the Footprint Nebula with the latter being the most stellar of the whole
>> >bunch.  While the Footprint is often listed as a planetary nebula, I
believe
>> >it is actually a reflection nebula.
>> >
>> >Clear skies,  Sue
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Dave Mitsky <djm28@psu.edu>
>> >J320 and J900, another planetary nebula that I had observed previously,
>> >>are featured on page 80 of the January 1999 Astronomy.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'netastrocatalog' lists, use the Web form at:
>> >http://www.tiac.net/users/lewkaren/netastrocatalog/subscribe.html
>> >
>> >
>> To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'netastrocatalog' lists, use the Web form at:
>> http://www.tiac.net/users/lewkaren/netastrocatalog/subscribe.html
>
>
>To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'netastrocatalog' lists, use the Web form at:
>http://www.tiac.net/users/lewkaren/netastrocatalog/subscribe.html
>
>
To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'netastrocatalog' lists, use the Web form at:
http://www.tiac.net/users/lewkaren/netastrocatalog/subscribe.html

References: