[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) Star Counting
Well, getting below 7.5 is a problem I'll never have in NJ!!
And as for having to count twice or 3 times, better that than having the
counting of limiting mag areas be your only activity for the hour, like
those long and lonely spring days :->
I haven't counted Taurus yet (Still down in our annoying skyglow zone)-
can't wait.
Wayne
-------------
Original Text
From Lew Gramer <dedalus@latradedot com>, on 8/20/96 4:34 PM:
To: "Meteor Observing Mailing List" <meteorobs@latradedot com>
I agree very strongly with Bob's observation re: star counts. In fact what
makes
the counts so frustrating for me when I'm at a dark site, is the necessity
of
restarting the count, sometimes two or three times running, because I catch
a
meteor that needs plotting or recording mid-way through the count. To avoid
errors, this always leads me to restart the count.
And per NAMN recommendations, I do this for at least two, and sometimes
three
different fields, roughly every half hour to hour! The result, especially
on a
night like the Perseid max, is that "1 minute" counts can end up covering
15 or
20 minutes... Maybe necessary for accuracy, but certainly not much fun. :(
(And double-counting only compounds this problem!) Coincidentally, I did
find
the Taurus LM triangle to be relatively easy to count: that's how I managed
to
recount it no less than *four* times, before noting the official star
count.
It's true that it is a pretty long-sided triangle, but the three boundary
stars
are very easy to pick out: with my trusty train-cord in hand, lining up the
boundaries of the star-count region is fairly easy. Thus I'm pretty
confident of
my star count for that region, precisely because:
a. it was a new region for me to count, so I was very cautious about
both the boundary and the count; and,
b. I was so amazed at the result (after curiosity luckily caused me to
check the table for the corresponding LM), that I couldn't
believe
it at first, and redid it several times...
And by the way, in answer to George's question, no, I don't where glasses
while
observing. Puzzling, perhaps, but that is what I observed that night! Of
course,
as we all know, when the data doesn't fit our preconceived notions (in this
case
about limiting magnitudes), the appropriate response is to CONFIRM that
data and
then maybe change our ideas - NOT to toss the data out as anomolous... ;>
Thanks to Trond, Mark, Bob, and Casper for their feedback, not to mention
their
"hints" (:>) that I fill out the low end of these tables myself with the
AAVSO
atlas... If I think I'll be getting down to the Keys more often for my
observing
(God willing), I will definitely do exactly that! Thanks again all!
Clear skies all,
Lew