Return to Home Page
Kato-san writes:
>> Are you completely sure that the object recorded in the BD catalog was
>> not TU Aql near maximum?
No, actually, although perhaps the original records could be
examined (not really worth it, however). The BD position is in fact
closer to TU Aql, and at epoch 1855 the companion star would have been
some 10" further north (i.e. farther from the BD position). TU Aql
does spend a fair bit of time brighter than the companion, so this is
reasonable. On the other hand, the historical astrometric catalogues
have tagged the northern component (brighter in the blue, so always
measured on the blue-sensitive plates instead of the variable), so some
decision was made way-back-when (maybe AGK1?) to assign it to that star.
Since there is no biblio on the companion beyond inclusion in the
astrometric catalogues, it would not cause confusion to assign the BD name
to the variable (in accordance with the GCVS folks), but use the AGK name
for the companion (AG+01 2292). This probably ruffles the least number
of feathers.
\Brian
Return to the Powerful Daisaku
vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp
