Re: [SPAM]Re: [SPAM]Re: [SPAM]Re: [guide-user] MAC galaxies

s.kranz1@comcast.net Feb 24, 2009

Is not the whole LEDA galaxy catalog in Guide?



If it's LEDA 2738730, I wonder why Guide doesn't show it as such?



hmmmmmmmmm weird



Mag 16.4, huh?  It showed up pretty well!



Thanks again!

-Scott


----- Original Message -----
From: "Owen Brazell" <owen@...>
To: guide-user@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:13:30 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Re: [SPAM]Re: [SPAM]Re: [SPAM]Re: [guide-user] MAC galaxies






There is LEDA 2738730 in that position I think.
If you use Aladin then it will show the galaxies
and idents. It would also be known as NPM1G +70.0037 at about mag 16.4 from NED

Owen

At 21:12 24/02/2009, you wrote:

>you would think so.
>
>But the galaxy I observed was right next to a
>LEDA galaxy, but it had no designation.
>
>oh well, it will probably never happen again.
>
>By the way, the "unknown" galaxy I observed is
>1.2' NW of LEDA 86836. Both galaxies were
>visible about 50% with d/v and held steadily
>with a/v, but the "unknown" galaxy actually was
>the first one seen as it moved into the FOV and
>appeared brighter than the LEDA.
>
>Thanks!
>
>-Scott
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Owen Brazell"
><<mailto:owen%40online.rednet.co.uk> owen@... >
>To: <mailto:guide-user%40yahoogroups.com> guide-user@yahoogroups.com
>Cc: <mailto:guide-user%40yahoogroups.com> guide-user@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 3:01:38 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
>Subject: Re: [SPAM]Re: [SPAM]Re: [guide-user] MAC galaxies
>
>most of the MAC galaxies would be in the Leda million galaxy
>database. The MAC numbers have no official designation.
>
>Owen
>
>At 19:43 24/02/2009,
><mailto:s.kranz1%40comcast.net> s.kranz1@... wrote:
>
> >Yes, I'm looking for the Mitchell galaxies.
> >
> >Over the weekend, I observed a couple galaxies that had no
> >designation at all listed in GUIDE (all settings turned on) with the
> >DSS images overlaid. I found out from a friend using MegaStar that
> >they had MAC id's. Just thought it would be GREAT if we could get a
> >MAC catalog on GUIDE to identify those little buggers.
> >
> >-Scott
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >
> >From: Owen Brazell
> >
> >To: <mailto:guide-user%40yahoogroups.com>
> <mailto:guide-user%40yahoogroups.com> guide-user@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >Sent: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:15:06 +0000 (UTC)
> >
> >Subject: Re: [SPAM]Re: [guide-user] MAC galaxies
> >
> >no I think he means the Mitchell anonymous galaxy catalogue
> >
> >Owen
> >
> >At 08:44 24/02/2009, you wrote:
> >
> > >Hello,
> >
> > >
> >
> > >I found this source online (if you mean
> "Minimum Aperture Catalog" with MAC,
> >
> > >which shows all kind of objects, not only galaxies):
> >
> > ><<
> < http://www.elisanet.fi/jere.kahanpaa/astro/MAC.html > http://www.elisanet.fi/jere.kahanpaa/astro/MAC.html
> > http://www.el
> > isanet.fi/jere.kahanpaa/astro/MAC.html>
> < http://www.elisanet.fi/jere.kahanpaa/astro/MAC.html > http://www.elisanet.fi/jere.kahanpaa/astro/MAC.html
>
> >
> > >
> >
> > >But the catalog is sorted by constellations in 55 single HTML files
> >
> > >with further
> >
> > >links to drawings (GIF files) and notes. I think it would need a lot
> >
> > >of manual work
> >
> > >to consturct a single Guide readable file (by means of a TDF file).
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > I think the MAC catalogue is private to Megastar so I don't think it
> >
> > > > would be available to upload anywhere else.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > > >How would I go about loading the MAC galaxy catalog into GUIDE?
> >
> > > > >
> >
> > > > >Has anyone done this before?
> >
> > >
> >
> > >Clear skies
> >
> > >Bernd
> >
> > >
> >
> > >Bernd Brinkmann
> >
> > >
> >
> > >Sternwarte Herne, MPC code A18
> >
> > >Herne, Germany
> >
> > >
> >
> > >e-mail: <mailto:info%40sternwarte-herne.de>
> <mailto:info%40sternwarte-herne.de> info@...
> >
> > > http://www.sternwarte-herne.de
> >
> > >
> >
> >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]