[vsnet-outburst 4112] Re: V359 Cen: astrometry

[Taichi Kato <tkato@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp>]

Re: V359 Cen: astrometry

> The coordinates in GCVS or Downes' online catalog are not so bad (but
> a bit south); on the other hand, the quisient magnitude in the latter
> (mag 21) seems to be underestimated much, as of Murani & Zwitter
> (1998) (V>20.5).  The magnitude in Woudt and Warner (2001) (V \sim
> 18.7) is more reasonable. 

   The quiescent magnitude of 21 is apparently from Duerbeck (1987)
Space Sci. Rev. 45, 1, although the chart given by Duerbeck shows
a much brighter object.  It may be possible that the object experienced
a faint state on the plate Duerbeck examined.  However, considering that
many of recently recovered old novae/recurrent novae had underestimated
magnitudes in Duerbeck (1987), it seems possible that this specimen
reflects the systematic tendency of underestimated quiescent magnitudes
for "poorly known novae" in Duerbeck (1987).  Researchers should be careful
in statistically analyzing these "old novae"...

Regards,
Taichi Kato

VSNET Home Page

Return to Daisaku Nogami

---

vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp