Chews Ridge

by Christopher Kelly

Saturday night found me at Chews Ridge along the Tassajara road, 2.6 miles from the crest at moonset with my flocked C14. I was limited by time, so I hit a few peices of eye candy with 31mm and 22mm nagler eps (126x and 178x). Finder scope was 9x50mm stock. The scope did not have time to cool before I started to view; it might have been even more breathtaking. I noted hot air pillars when I looked at Merak at 126x.

No twinkling of fant stars was apparent, and M13 was visible with the unaided eye easily with averted vision, and fleetingly with direct vision.

M51 was easily presented in the finder, and with the C14 at 178x was spectacular, with spiral arms traced around the entire nucleus. The bridge to the satellite was clearly observed. Best view ever.

The view of M13 I had was simply the best I ever had through my C14. The ball was brightly resolved to the core. I had the impression that there wasn't anything more to resolve. M3 was great, resolved to the core.

M97 showed up as a huge cotton ball at 178x. It was visible in my finder, but the eyes were only fleetingly visible at this mag, although my companion saw them right away.

M108 and M109 were equally easy. M108 exibited a clearly mottled appearance. M82 had the distinct mottled appearance as well.

M101 was found in a few moments in my finder, and filled the field at 126x; my observing companion also noted some of the HII regions near the edge of the field.

BTW I got there late and had to search for my companion's dog which decided to jump out at the crest, if anybody was bothered by my headlights at the fire road at 3.1 miles past the crest I apologize.

Unfortunately, fell asleep sometime around 3am and never saw the comets. Can't wait to get out again in two weeks.

Yes, I believe seeing conditions matter a whole deal to the faintness of the objects you'll be able to see, and the quality of views you receive, all things being equal. Seeing may have as much a deleterious effect as transparency (just plain secZ or atmospheric extinction).

For example, a night that shows 1" seeing may allow you to see a 6.5 mag star under good conditions. On another night with 2" seeing, the light will be more or less spread out with 1/4 the light across the circle atmospheric blur. Hmmm...that is log(4) = 0.6 magnitudes. Not a small difference.

If you consistently get 0.75" at Chews Ridge, and get 1.5" at FP (these would both be good nights, I think) then you are picking up an extra 0.6 mag in addition to the darker sky.

But does it equate to a better view for extended objects? Maybe not for nebulae and galaxies, which are below the resolution limit of most scopes, but on globulars, where a large telescope is going to be able to show points of light, I think you are going to see a great benefit in the number of stars resolved, and conversely the view.

Posted on sf-bay-tac Apr 26, 2004 15:23:58 PT
Converted by report.pm 1.1 Jul 10, 2004 19:41:33 PT