[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Message Index][Thread Index]
[vsnet-chat 2760] Re: [vsnet-obs 27010] On V1830 Sgr sequence (Pearce)
- Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 11:07:29 +0200
- To: <tkato@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp>, <vsnet-chat@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp>
- From: "Berto Monard" <LAGMonar@csir.co.za>
- Subject: [vsnet-chat 2760] Re: [vsnet-obs 27010] On V1830 Sgr sequence (Pearce)
- Disclaimer: The CSIR exercises no editorial control over E-mail messages originating in the organisation and the views in this message are therefore not necessarily those of the CSIR and/or its employees.
- Sender: owner-vsnet-chat@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp
I have argued about the same 120 star sometime ago (years), possibly via this same medium. In fact I could start on a story, but I rather not...
The dreadful star is certainly fainter than 12.0 and I have since adopted the VSNET value of 12.5 as being a more acceptable magnitude. Possibly it is even fainter than that (visually definitely!).
I suggest that Andrew uses the 12.5 value.
Berto
>>> Taichi Kato <tkato@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp> 03/28/00 09:30AM >>>
From: andrew.pearce@clough.com.au
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 13:12:48 +0800
Subject: V1830 Sgr
The observation of V1830 Sgr in outburst that I sent earlier today was
based on comparions star magintudes on the VSS RASNZ chart. Unfortunately
there are not many on this chart and the main "120" comparison star
immediately north of the variable was used. However I feel that this is
too bright for this star. The VSNet chart shows this star to be mag 1255
which seems more reasonable.
Therefore my estimate for V1830 Sgr would be mag 13.5 rather than 12.8 if
the VSNet mags are used, and I think they are more realistic.
How accurate do you think the VSNet chart is??
Regards
Andrew
Return to Daisaku Nogami
vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp
VSNET Home Page