The 12" LX200 Eyepiece Saga

If you are a visual observer, the eyepieces in your arsenal are as important as the optical tube or mount. One of my goals has always been to find the perfect combination of the fewest number of eyepieces to be able to handle all my typical observing requirements. I don't like to spend time changing eyepieces and refocusing. I want to observe, not focus and fiddle around. My search for the perfect combination of eyepieces for variable star observing has had episodes of experimentation and expense followed by long periods of satisfaction and observing action.

After learning the capabilities and limitations of my first set of standard Plossl eyepieces I turned to the TeleVue brand to get superior quality eyepieces that had longer eye relief and a wider true field of view.

Eye relief is simply the distance between your eye and the lens of the EP where you can comfortably and effectively view what you are looking at. If you've ever stuck your eyeball practically on top of the lens of a inexpensive, short focal length, short eye relief EP to see into the tiny peep hole, you know this is not how you want to spend two to four hours a night 100 times a year.

True FOV is the area of sky you can view in any particular eyepiece/telescope combination. When you are making variable star estimates, the larger the true field of view the better chance your comparison stars will fall in the FOV. Generally speaking, the brighter the variable and comparison stars, the further spread out they are on the sky. So an eyepiece that can show you a larger chunk of sky is very helpful.

You may notice I haven't talked at all about magnification yet. That's mostly because when you are looking at stars they always just look like points of light, unlike planets or the Moon, which get bigger and dimmer with more magnification. The real advantage of higher magnification for star viewing is it makes the sky background darker, so you can see fainter stars. This usually comes at the cost of FOV. Generally speaking, the higher the magnification, the smaller the FOV.

There is a practical limit to how much you can magnify celestial objects in any telescope. For short focal ratio telescopes 30x per inch of aperture is about right. For longer f ratios, like the f/10 Schmidt Cassegrains, 20-25x per inch of aperture is more realistic. It is rare for any telescope to be abe to use more than 400x ever. I've only experienced a dozen nights where I thought 350x was reasonable.

That never stopped me from buying a bunch of eyepieces that would deliver more magnification! I've had everything from 5mm (600x!!) to 10mm (300x) and eventually sold or traded them all away because they never came out of the eyepiece box. My 7mm Nagler was a great eyepiece, but I only used it a few times in ten years, mostly to view Mars, Jupiter and Saturn on those exceptionally rare nights of almost perfect seeing.

As you can imagine, sorting through all these factors has taken some time. For almost a decade my two "go to" EPs have been 12mm and 17mm Nagler Type 4's. The 12mm gave me .33 degrees of sky at 250x, which was perfect for the 12" LX200 telescope. It's about as much magnification as you can really use on an average to good night, and 1/3 of a degree is a large enough piece of sky to cover a typical chart I would use to observe faint cataclysmic variables. The 17mm Nagler had an awesomely comfortable eye relief. I could observe all night long with that eyepiece- I loved it. It delivered .46 degrees of sky at a generous magnification of 176x. I could see almost as faint in the 17mm as the 12mm on average nights, but the lower magnification delivered more pleasant star images in fair to poor seeing. It also weighs 5 pounds! Think about that before you buy one. You may need to add counter weights if you use it. 


Another thing I loved about these eyepieces was the adjustable click stop eyeguard. They are a handy light shield built right into the housing of the EP to position your eye and block any stray light from getting in to mar the view. Every EP should have this.


For observing Mira stars I still needed something with a much lower magnification and wider FOV. These stars can range from the very faintest I can see, 14th to 15th magnitude, all the way up to 7th magnitude. I needed something to cover the mid and top ranges of these stars. I eventually settled on mounting an 80mm short tube refractor on the LX200, but this was only useful down to about mag 10.5 or so. The real answer to this issue was the TeleVue 55mm Plossl. It gives me almost a full degree of sky (.92 degrees) at 55x. I can see down to 13th magnitude easily, and observe stars as bright as 9th magnitude while still having some useful comparison stars in the FOV. Anything brighter is perfect for the 80mm refractor and its generous FOV.

I probably could have gone on forever, blissfully, with this combination of EPs, but at the Texas Star Party in 2011, I was able to borrow a 13mm Ethos EP from a friend and using it in my telescope was a life altering experience. I couldn't believe how much larger the FOV was. It's ridiculous! You have to move your head around to take it all in. And the crisp, flat, pinpoint star images it produces are stunning, even compared to the near perfection of the Nagler type EPs I'd come to love. I had to own a set. 


But I really had no desire to give up my 12mm and 17mm Naglers. There really was nothing wrong with them and after trying dozens of EPs I had stuck with these for a decade. I have to admit, they were sort of like old friends. After 50,000 variable star observations we'd grown close. So I thought I would try to get a little more oomph out of my telescope by getting the 10mm Ethos. This would give me 300x and the same 1/3 degree of sky the 12mm Nagler did. Hopefully, I could use it as my new go to EP for faint CVs because the added magnification would give me a darker sky background. And for those really good nights I bought the 8mm Ethos. A whopping 375x with still a 1/4 degree FOV. What could be better? I could have the best of both worlds.


I settled in for a few months with the new set of EPs and found myself, as before, using the 10mm once in a while and the 8mm almost never. I don't know why I thought the Ethos EPs were going to make the sky conditions better. They are just eyepieces, not atmospheric stabilization devices! I was back to using the old-faithful 12mm and 17mm Naglers in no time. It finally dawned on me what an idiot I was after the final night of the Cherry Springs Star Party when I realized I'd never even taken either of the new Ethos EPs out of the case. I had $1350.00 invested in two EPs I wasn't using.

So I took the plunge. I traded in the Naglers and the Ethos EPs and came home from Cherry Springs with just three EPs in the case. A new 13mm Ethos, a new 17mm Ethos and the trusty TeleVue 55mm Plossl. It didn't take me long to get used to the idea of using these fantastic new eyepieces as my trusty companions at the telescope. They are both simply stunning performers. 

The weather has been warm and dry and unusually clear at night for summer. I have had some of the best viewing in the 12" I can recall in the last four or five years. I have been able to see as faint as 16th magnitude on several nights with the new EPs.

I've had several nights of very exceptional seeing where I thought to myself, "You know, Self, we could probably use at least one more eyepiece, maybe a 10mm to give us 300x for nights like this." I know, it's a disease. But this time I told myself I'm not going to spend $600.00 or more for an EP I will only use on special occasions. Besides, the situations I want 300x for don't generally require a large FOV. I don't need a Nagler or Ethos EP to see extremely faint cataclysmic variables, or to view Saturn or Jupiter at high power.

So I decided to try out a TeleVue Delos 10mm. It still has a generous apparent FOV of 72 degrees, which yields .24 degrees true FOV and 300x in my 3000mm focal length telescope. I've only had it long enough to use at the telescope for one night, but I think we have a winner. It still cost $370.00, but that is a little more than half what a 10mm Ethos would cost, and I just can't do that again.

The Delos has a new kind of adjustable eyeguard that slides into place and twist locks once you have determined the perfect place for it in relation to the lens. This is almost a requirement for this EP. The Delos is very sensitive to eye placement. If you position your eye pupil too far in or too far out you experience edge darkening and field loss. This is not a star party eyepiece for the general public. It takes a pretty experienced observer to get the most out of this complex combination of elements.  But it is a very good quality EP with no ghosting and it delivers great definition on those really good nights at 300x. I think I'm done buying EPs for a long time...or at least until Al Nagler comes up with a new exotic glass and lens combination.

Rod Stubbings- Aussie Amateur Awesomeness

Rod Stubbings at home in the observatory

I've known Rod Stubbings since 1999, when I got heavily involved in monitoring cataclysmic variables for outbursts for the AAVSO and VSNET. Rod was by far the most active observer in the southern hemisphere, and he was solely responsible for the detection of dozens of rare and significant outbursts and eruptions of variable stars.


I finally had the pleasure of meeting Rod in 2002, at the AAVSO spring meeting in Hawaii. He is a quiet, unassuming man, with a quick smile and a knowing gaze. He doesn't have to say a lot for you to understand there is a lot going on behind those eyes. I liked him right away, and admired him even more after meeting him. Rod had been invited to that meeting by then Director of the AAVSO, Janet Mattei,  because she was going to honor him with the AAVSO Director's Award, one of the highest honors our organization bestows on individuals.


Since then he's been plugging away, observing hundreds of variable stars a week from his observatory in Victoria, Australia. He's been at it for over 18 years now. Today I received a note from my Aussie friend informing me that he has passed a significant milestone in his observing career. A few nights ago he made his 200,000th variable star observation, placing him in the top five visual observers in the history of variable star astronomy.


Hi Mike,


A few nights ago I reached a personal milestone of observing over 200,000 visual observations. This has taken 18 years and 8 months since 1993 which basically means I haven't been anywhere in that time frame! You might be pleased to know that I have finally caught up with my backlog of typing up data and all my observations up to December 2011 are in. I don't want to get 12 months behind ever again. Anyway another clear night tonight so back out to see what I can find until morning.....don't have to work tomorrow!


Cheers,
Rod


I was honored Rod thought enough of me to send a personal message, informing me of this outstanding achievement.
Yes, 200,000 is a big number, but let's examine what that means in terms of commitment-
Let's assume he can do 100 stars per night. I'm sure Rod can do more, but sometimes the weather will stop you short. That means he has spent somewhere in the neighborhood of 2000 nights under the stars in 224 months. That's 9-10 nights every month for 18 years and 8 months.


If it takes Rod 90 seconds apiece, and that alone should give you an idea of the kind of productivity we're talking about- that's a minute and a half to find the variable, estimate its brightness record it and move on to the next one- that comes to about 5000 hours of observing time at the eyepiece.


Of course, you don't just walk outside and begin observing. You have to open the observatory, uncover the telescope, get your bearings, turn on your dew heater, etc., etc. And at the end of the night there is a routine to closing up the dome that may be equally as long, so let's add say 20 minutes to each night he observes. That's an additional 667 hours total.


Observations not reported to anyone are not observations, and Rod's do not sit in a drawer or spin on a hard drive somewhere, useless to science. He has taken the time to report them all to the AAVSO and other groups over the years. Let's assume it takes him about an hour to type up 100 observations. That's another 2000 hours at the keyboard entering data and submitting reports.


Add it all up, and you begin to get a perspective on the kind of commitment we're talking about here. He has devoted approximately 7667 hours of his life in the last 18.75 years to variable stars. Or 409 hours a year at the telescope and keyboard. Roughly 3 hours a night 10 times a month, every month, for longer than I've known him.


Consider this also, Rod has been working full time throughout this period to support his family. This amounts to 896 work weeks. In the same time period he has invested the equivalent of 192 work weeks observing and reporting variable star activity.


Rod Stubbings is the quintessential citizen scientist. He has devoted an incredible amount of his time, money and effort into helping astronomers understand the structure and evolution of compact binary systems and other unusual stars, and he has done it all for the love of it.


He doesn't get paid. He doesn't have a grant to assist in the expenses of his contributions to science. He has received recognition and awards, but that isn't what motivates Rod. He just has his trusty telescope, an intimate knowledge of the night sky and an unwavering passion for variable star science.


So, what's next for a verified madman and variable star junkie? Rod says, "I told my daughter I was going to slow down and re-discover my family. Unbeknown to her it was only for a few weeks. When she found out she cracked up laughing, saying "I should have read the fine print!""


Congratulations, Rod. I hope we get to meet again, before you catch up to the other living legend of variable star observing in the southern hemisphere, Albert Jones. It's rarified air you're breathing down under these days.

Variable Star Chart Obsession

Every few years or so, the dining room table in my house becomes “AAVSO Variable Star Charts Central”. The centerpiece, placemats and silverware are put away, and in their place are three ring binders, plastic page protectors and stacks of paper charts. The printer in my office gets a workout, and I become a regular at the office supply store, buying ink, paper and other supplies as the project progresses.

This is the fifth time in ten years I have performed this major renovation project, so I’ve got it down to a science now. I’ve kept most of the charts that have been replaced, so it has become a sort of archival history project too.

When I first started observing, I started with all the stars in David Levy’s book A Guide to Variable Stars. I used everything I could lay my hands on. Old "micro-dot" charts, preliminary charts, and a few new format charts that I would have to hold upside-down and shine a flashlight through to match the view in the eyepiece. In 1998, not everything in the chart catalog was online yet, and only a small percentage of the charts were available as reversed charts for use with a Schmidt-Cassegrain. It wasn’t long before my observing program became all the stars with available reverse charts. That was a lot easier than using the flashlight trick or trying to flip them in your head. 

I realized immediately that I would need to organize all these charts into binders to keep them protected from the dew, frost, and wind. My system evolved quickly, and it hasn’t changed much over the years. I printed wide field finder charts from planetarium software with a limiting magnitude of about 9 that had a circle indicating the size of my finder scope field of view, and a little arrow pointing to my ‘jumping off star’. This was the star I would aim for when dialing in the setting circles or star-hopping to the next target. The same star would be indicated on the variable star chart so when I got to the eyepiece I could find my way to the variable star by star-hopping from there.  

In the binder, the finder chart was on the left and the variable star chart on the right. Simple for most CVs, I usually only needed one comparison chart. Each time I flip the page I'm on a new star. Mira stars with large amplitudes usually require additional charts. Typically, B charts for maxima above 9th mag, which I observe using the finder scope, D charts for 10-13th mag and E charts for fainter than 13th mag or to relieve crowding on some D charts. Some Milky Way fields require F charts to relieve the crowding of comp star labels or to show 15th magnitude comps.

The second generation of charts began with me printing reversed star fields from planetarium software and hand labeling the magnitudes, but I always hated the messy look of my handwriting on these charts and they were limited by the contents of the Guide Star Catalog, so they didn’t last long. Once the complete AAVSO chart catalog became available online, I started downloading all the charts and flipping the fields and labels around in an art program. I think that was when the true chart madness set in. I couldn't decide what to observe, so I decided to observe everything! I made hundreds and hundreds of charts in various scales and orientations. 

My CV binders stayed more or less unchanged for a long time once I had maximized the order for speed. That was an interesting project. I took day-glow stickers and labeled them with the names of all my CVs then placed them on their respective pages of Sky Atlas 2000 so I could figure out the most efficient order to observe them in. I recently read a paper on ACP Scheduler and was pleased to see I had followed the same logic as the software in assigning the observing order. I just did it the old-fashioned analog way. The same way I was observing. 

Using those binders I was able to observe 100+ CVs on a decent night. I did over 250 in a night a few times. It’s easy when all you are doing is reporting, “it isn’t in outburst”. But I have to admit 250 is just insane.

In 2003, I began coordinating chart production at AAVSO and we started the last major overhaul of the chart catalog before VSP came online. By 2005, I had replaced all my previous charts with the new ones we were making using Henden and ASAS photometry. Until recently, I still preferred these charts to anything the chart plotter could produce. They were beautifully crafted, hand labeled and thoroughly checked before being released to the public. But there was no way we could continue that practice and keep up with the pace of new discoveries or the demand for more and better charts.

By 2009, we had revised a significant percentage of the sequences with newer, better photometry and it was time to bring the binders back indoors from the observatory for another update. Not only that, but now I had a CCD on another telescope in a new roll off and I needed a whole different set of charts for those program stars!

With the latest round of improvements to VSP most of my previous objections to the charts it produces have been eliminated. First among these were the ridiculous huge star dots it used to plot for many variables! I have hated those blobs for years. So here we are again, updating all the chart binders and revising the observing programs again.

My visual program is now going to concentrate on AAVSO Legacy and Program LPVs. I want to observe stars I can make positive estimates of 99% of the time. I have tens of thousands of “fainter than” observations in the AID and I don’t find them that much fun to make any more. So I have several binders with all new LPV charts for the eyepiece.

My CV program will just be the prototypes, legacy CVs, bright active stars and a few favorites I will observe forever just because I like them. I’m pretty sure I will never sit out all night under the stars and report “I didn’t see it” 100 times ever again. Let someone else discover the next outburst of PQ And. I want to make observations you can plot on a light curve.

I have another binder for the CCD scope. That program is Z CamPaign stars, northern RCB, recurrent novae and some quirky favorites. I affectionately call them my ‘oddball' program stars.

Well, time to go. The printer has grown quiet, so I either have another batch of charts to organize, or I’m out of paper. Until next time…

Visual vs CCD Observing

The AAVSO discussion forum has had some very interesting threads lately, but this one, Trends In Visual Observing,  seems to have struck a chord with many people. The conversation starts out with the statistics on the number of visual observations submitted to AAVSO annually. In 2009, visual observers contributed a little more than half the number of observations submitted in 1999.

I’ve given a fair amount of thought to why my production has waned as a visual observer. It’s a complicated equation, and there are several factors with different amounts of influence. To be honest, I think I know what happened to me, but I don’t like to think about it because it makes me sad.

The Simoquation of Visual Observations

E + T + W + Pc
----------------------  = Nv
 A + Nc + O

E -enthusiasm
T -available time to observe annually
W -weather (number of clear or partly cloudy nights annually)
Pc -perception of value
A -affects of aging
Nc -number of nights spent taking CCD data annually
O -other astronomical activities
Nv -number of visual observations reported annually

In the beginning, I had almost unlimited enthusiasm. The first five years were my most productive as I devised a system for observing as many CVs in a night as possible. My goal was to report 10,000 visual observations per year. If I averaged 100 observations 100 nights per year, it could be done, and that was the plan.

I achieved this dubious goal once, and had a few years of 7,500-9,500 or so. That commitment is approximately equal to a second full time job. It is a lot of work.

When the economy was good, I was able to survive on cruise control for several years. I could afford to invest more time to observing and losing sleep. As the economy tanked, it became necessary for me to invest a lot more time and effort into work, just to maintain the income I had settled for. So, while I still had the unbridled enthusiasm, my time was becoming more limited. I couldn’t stay up all night several nights in a row and still perform adequately at my job. I wasn’t getting any younger either.

Weather patterns, particularly in winter, have definitely played a role in the last three years. I used to do a lot of observing in November, January and March. May and December used to be the cloudiest months. Last year we had no clear nights from mid- November to March. This year has been almost the same. March 4 UT was the first time I had observed visually since November 22. Is this an anomaly or a pattern? I don’t know. But if it weren’t for AAVSOnet I’d have gone postal by now for sure.

My perception of the value of my visual observations has been all over the map. I used to think that thousands of negative CV observations were useful, especially if I was monitoring for rare outbursts of WZ Sge type dwarf novae or little studied systems. Not so much any more. I don’t think it’s particularly interesting to discover yet another UGSU in outburst so guys with CCDs can observe superhumps and determine a period. If it turns out to be a simple UG or UGSS nobody cares at all, even if it only goes into outburst once a decade.

That’s one of the reasons I decided to study Z Cams. There aren’t that many of them, and we don’t know that much about them. Observations done now might actually shed light on a new problem. Even there, the new discoveries probably will come from CCD data though. The stars in the visual range are well observed. They should continue to be observed, but that’s not a lot of stars.

I championed the ‘stars in need of observations’ lists for a few years, but now I question whether they are worthy of the attention they are given. Just because AAVSO doesn’t have enough data to predict a maximum or minimum doesn’t have any scientific relevance at all. If we don’t have enough data to produce a decent light curve and no one is observing the star, and nobody is writing about it in the literature, who cares? It’s a star in need of ignoring. The effort and time spent on it is probably better spent maintaining the long established curves of stars we have excellent data for going back 100 years.

We keep hearing how there will be an ASAS north any day now, but it still isn’t online. Don’t believe it. They can barely keep ASAS south online on a consistent basis. The next generation of surveys will be observing fainter stars, so I don’t really see the surveys taking over for visual variable star observers. But they will be placing a great demand on observers to follow up new discoveries, and they will want CCD data. Nobody publishes papers based on visual observations any more unless they are dealing with archival projects and can’t find what they want on photographic plates.

If I were going to observe Miras and SRs, I would observe the ones in the Legacy Program and LPV Program Stars on the LPV section site, and maybe one or two special project stars for curiosity and fun. That’s plenty of great stars with excellent sequences to keep you busy forever. There is also a nice sample of LPVs with humps in their curves that I have always thought would be a great project. Frank Schorr has some great stuff on the LPV section site about these stars. Most are great visual targets for a modest sized telescope.

The EB and RR Lyrae people have made it pretty plain they aren’t interested in visual observations for their programs at all. Door closed- don’t knock.

Age has had its affects. I am far less inclined to suffer in order to obtain visual observations. Some nights I’ll only observe stars above +20 declination because that means I can sit in my nice cushy office chair for hours, instead of perching on a smaller adjustable seat or straining my back. I don’t usually have the energy or enthusiasm to do marathon all-nighters any more either. Three or four hours are about as much as I’m willing to endure. My goal used to be to do 100 observations minimum. Now my goal is not to ruin tomorrow by staying out too late tonight.

Continuously reading and learning more about variable star science and astronomy, and keeping up with the latest news and advances takes a significant investment of time. I also spend an almost equal amount of time writing about variable stars and astronomy for blogs, podcasts, newsletters and magazines these days. I like to think this doesn’t influence my ability or enthusiasm for observing, but deadlines have interfered in recent years.

Strangely enough, the more involved I am with AAVSO the fewer observations I make. Included in my “other astronomical activities” these days are the chart and sequence team, mentor program, CV section, speaker’s bureau, writer’s bureau and council activities, as well as all the things I do that are actually part of my job.

But for me personally, the biggest factors have been CCD observing and the piss poor pointing of my Meade 12" GPS LX200. The complexity, expense and time investment does not equal the amount of joy extracted for me. I resent the time I’ve had to invest in learning to observe and reduce CCD data in a scientific manner.  It takes almost as much time to reduce the data as it does to take it, and there isn’t anything fun about it. I spend more time messing with equipment and computers and less time enjoying being out under the sky. I feel no connection to the cosmos observing with a CCD. I simply feel it is a necessary evil if I want to do science that anyone will take seriously.

But the pointing issues are the worst. That damn telescope has dampened my enthusiasm for observing altogether. If I'm observing visually I can deal with it to some extent, because its easier to slew up and over, or wherever I have to go to find the target. But trying to land 16th mag variables on the CCD chip on the first try is a joke. I waste so much time trying to get to the target that my night just becomes a giant headache. Every hour with the CCD and that stupid telescope is 25-30 observations I was robbed of at the eyepiece.

My goal is to have the best of both worlds, but that goal still eludes me. I want to be in the dome observing visually while the computer and CCD scope run essentially unattended in the roll off next door. I can think of enough worthwhile and fun visual things to do to keep me busy.

Some days I think I’d be better off burning down the roll off and simplifying my life. Other days I think it would be simpler to just cut the umbilical cord and go CCD all the way. My willingness to tolerate the cold and staying up late will probably be the deciding factor in the end. But I’m afraid my experience will be the poorer for it.

When you observe visually, the data is a byproduct of the experience you have at the eyepiece. When you observe with a CCD, the data becomes the thing. The wonder, magic, mystery, romance and beauty will be gone, as I sit in front of a computer monitor, determining the optimum size for an annulus around a comp star, for a time series of 300 observations I collected automatically, in a black box I bought online.

To each his own. But, if that sounds like fun to you, you are not a visual observer.

Telescopic LPVs for New Visual Observers

Okay, so you’ve been observing some naked eye and binocular variables for a while. Good for you! The stars in the AAVSO Ten Star Training Program can be fun and rewarding to observe for a lifetime.

Maybe you were drawn in by the Citizen Sky project and now you’re getting hooked on variable stars. Hey, it happens; you are not alone. But epsilon Aurigae is in full eclipse now, and will remain faint for most of this year, so maybe you’re ready for some new stars to satisfy your new addiction.

Perhaps you already owned a telescope or you finally got that shiny new 8” Schmidt-Cassegrain you’ve had your eye on for Christmas. Now where do you look for interesting variables? I’ve got some suggestions for you. These are fun stars to observe, AAVSO still needs observations of these stars, and best of all, they are easy to find and identify, so you won’t spend cold winter nights looking for them. You can spend your time observing them instead!

R Aur- After you make your observation of epsilon Aurigae for the night, (because you should keep observing it all the way to the end of the epsilon Aur campaign!) use your telescope and finder to star hop over to this great long period variable. I think of this one as the ‘Pirate Star’, because its name is “Arr, Arr!”

There are plenty of magnitude 6 to 9 stars in the area to help point the way, making this one easy to find. Varying from 6.9-13.9V, it also happens to be an interesting double star! R Aur is on the rise from minimum right now, so it will get easier as winter turns to spring.

R Cas- This Mira gets as bright as 4.7, and can fade to 13.5. R Cas is currently on the rise from around 10th magnitude so it will be easy to observe all winter.

T Cas- When at or near maximum, this is one of the reddest stars you’ll ever see in the eyepiece. This Mira varies from 6.9-13.0V and has a very interesting light curve with multiple humps, perhaps indicating multiple periods. Currently around 9th magnitude, but is it rising or fading? Have fun following this one!

T Cas has humps like a camel in its light curve. What's up with that?

V Cas- This Mira has a pretty regular period of 228 days. Ranging from 6.9-13.4, V Cas is currently at minimum, so it will become easier to observe as winter progresses and it brightens.

S Per- Sitting in a beautiful star field with plenty of 8th and 9th magnitude stars to point the way, this interesting semi-regular variable, varying from 7.9-12V, is somewhat unpredictable, so you never know what it will be doing next time you observe it.

W Tau- Located in the Hyades, just west of Aldebaran is a bright double star consisting of theta 1 and theta 2 Tau. In the same medium power field of view is W Tau, a semi-regular variable that ranges from 8.2-13.0V. The period is listed as approximately 165 days, but this star is unpredictable, and the light curve for the last 1200 days is chaotic. This, plus the fact it is easy to find and observe, makes W Tauri a fine catch on a cold winter night.

W Tau is close to a beautiful double star in the Hyades cluster. You gotta be able to find this one!

There you go; a half dozen stars to add to your variable star program. If you’re looking for more you can check out the Stars Easy to Observe list on the AAVSO website at http://www.aavso.org/easy-stars

If you run into trouble, or just want some friendly advice from an experienced observer, contact me at mikesimonsen at aavso dot org. I coordinate the AAVSO Mentor Program and I can hook you up with one of our great mentors to help give you a boost up the learning curve.

Don’t Lick the Telescope, and Other Tips for Cold Weather Observing

December marks the transition here in Michigan from cool fall weather to downright frigid winter temperatures. For most of January, February and March, there is snow on the ground and the daytime temperatures will hover around freezing. Nighttime temperatures will be well below freezing, and on those few precious clear winter nights it can be unbelievably cold.

Here are some cold weather survival tips I have learned, observing from Michigan in temperatures down to 20 below zero Fahrenheit.

   1. Wear warm boots. When I meet people new to astronomy, they always want to know what the best telescope is and what accessories to buy. I always tell them, "The most important piece of equipment you will ever buy is warm boots". When it is clear, it is cold. If your feet are cold, you are miserable. If you are miserable, you are done.

Standing on the cold, damp ground outside you’ll soon know if your boots are up to the task. If they absorb moisture, or don’t insulate you from the cold ground your toes will be crying Uncle long before your favorite Messier object clears the trees.

  2. Always dress for temperatures 20 degrees colder than you predict it will be each night.

For the most part, you are not moving around a lot when looking through a telescope, downloading images from your camera or monitoring your tracking. You don’t generate any heat of your own just sitting there, and the night air has a way of sucking the warmth out of you faster than you think it will.

   3. Wear a hat. Most of the heat in your body escapes through the top of your head like a chimney. Cover your head and retain body heat.

I’ve seen lots of funky looking hats at star parties. Don’t worry about fashion. Go for comfort. My deep-winter, arctic-air-repelling hat is a big leather and fur job with earflaps and a long extension in back that covers my neck. I look like one of the wicked witch of the North’s soldiers in my long coat and that hat, but I’m warm.

   4. Keep your hands warm. Mittens are better than gloves, but they are awkward to use when dealing with focuser knobs, charts, pens and pencils, But if you can keep your fingers together, tucked away from the cold, they fare much better than they do as individual digits exposed to the elements. I’ve never had much luck with those gloves with the flip-top mitten cover for your fingers.

If you insist on wearing gloves, like I do, keep your hands in your pockets and out of the wind, as much as you can. Those little chemical heat packs you can buy in sporting goods stores work pretty well for a while. I sometimes throw a couple in my coat packets to create a safe haven for my fingers for a few moments between variable star observations.

If your fingers begin to hurt from the cold, go inside or get in your car and warm them up thoroughly. Frostbite can be very painful.

  5. Get out of the wind. Most of the time it’s not the air temperature that gets you, it’s the wind-chill. Put a building or a hedge, or better yet, an observatory, between you and the wind and you will be able to endure the cold for twice as long. The added bonus, of not having the telescope shake in the breeze, will save you time in making critical observations.

I remember very well the night that convinced me to build an observatory. It took twice as long as usual to set up wearing gloves, I dropped a small wrench in the snow and spent half an hour looking for it, the telescope was shaking so much it was hard to see anything in the eyepiece, my eyes kept tearing up from the wind and dropping tears onto the eyepiece lens, and the wind kept blowing right up my back as I faced south trying in vain to make variable star estimates.

I spent three hours out in the snow and wind and got exactly one variable star estimate that night. That week I became the proud owner of a fiberglass, domed observatory.

   6. Don’t breathe on optics. Breathing on cold glass means instant frost. If you wear a scarf over your face, be sure not to let the warm air you exhale spill out over the top of the scarf and down onto the eyepiece.

Set up your finder-scope so you are not breathing on the eyepiece when looking through the finder. On very cold nights, I sometimes have a large patch of frost on the back of the mirror cell of my Schmidt-Cassegrain, caused from my breath freezing on the back of the telescope while looking through the finder-scope.

   7. If you have dew heaters, use them right from the start of your session. They are much better at preventing frosted corrector plates, secondaries, eyepieces and finders than they are at removing frost. If you don’t have dew heaters, get them.

A heated box or holder for eyepieces can be a great benefit. If you only switch between a few, keep them in your pockets to stay warm.

Another accessory I find handy is a small hair dryer. If you have electricity available, one of these can be great to warm the eyepiece up enough to prevent fogging. If the lens or corrector plate on your telescope frosts up, you can use it to carefully remove the dew or frost.

You can also use it to warm your fingers. I’ve even stuck mine inside my coat to warm my frozen torso enough to go a little while longer. I’m sure this is a fire hazard, and you’ll probably read in the paper one day, “Michigan astronomer mysteriously ignites into flames, burning down observatory.”

   8. If you take notes at the telescope like I do, keep your pen warm or the ink will freeze. I have one of those "astronaut pens". Even that froze at 20 below.

I keep my pens tucked behind my ear to keep them warm. All my observing hats have a distinct black ink spot on the inside lining, just behind my left ear, from me continuously sliding my pen in and out under my cap and over my ear for warm storage.

   9. Use a plastic flashlight. If you are like most of my friends who read charts and log observations using a red flashlight, you put the flashlight in your mouth to write. On very cold nights, a metal flashlight can stick to your lip and be hard to remove without losing a bit of flesh.

Don’t laugh; I’ve seen it happen!

I suppose rule 9A should be, "don’t lick the telescope!"

If I ever see anyone get his or her tongue stuck to a frozen telescope, you’ll be the first to know!

   10. Take breaks every hour or half hour, depending on the weather, and go warm up. Keep an extra pair of dry socks warming on the dash of your car, or go in and throw a pair in the dryer for a few minutes. It’s amazing how a nice toasty pair of socks can change your attitude!

I’ve received several pairs of electric socks for Christmas and birthdays over the years from well-meaning friends and family, but I’ve never been really impressed by them. Considering the number of batteries it takes to actually keep your feet warm, it’s just not worth it. Refer to rule #1. Wear warm boots.

  11. Be aware of battery life in cold temperatures. The batteries in your flashlight, telescope, camera, dew heaters, etc., will perform poorly in cold temperatures. They’re smarter than me. They know when to quit. Keep warm extras handy.

  12. Keep your own personal battery charged. Plenty of rest, a good meal, snacks and hot coffee go a long way towards warding off the inevitable freeze.

The search for a thermos that would keep coffee hot in sub-zero temperatures was my ‘Holy Grail’ for a long time. After years of searching, I finally found one at a camping supply store. It cost a pretty penny, but it makes all the difference to me.

  13. Know your limits. You have to be realistic about how much cold, discomfort or pain you are willing endure in order to get those last few observations. Don’t wait until it’s too late and then decide to tear down and pack up.

When you are really frozen, you fingers don’t work right, you move slower, you feel more tired than you normally would, and you can get careless, dropping things in the dark or forgetting how to pack your gear just so. All this means it is going to take you longer than usual to tear down.

That’s when you will meet Mr. Frostbite. It is better to take my word for it than to learn a painful lesson from him.

With a little planning and common sense you can take advantage of those long, clear, cold winter nights. Orion, Gemini and Taurus are calling. Just be careful out there.

Answering the Call

This morning at 3:20AM I nearly fell off my chair in the observatory...literally.

Most of you know by now that I am a variable star observer. I have a 12-inch telescope in a dome I use to monitor several hundred cataclysmic variables for outbursts visually, and another 12-inch telescope in a roll off roof observatory that has a CCD camera doing photometry, more or less automated.

The visual monitoring program is sort of the astronomical version of a Chinese fire drill. I start in the east and work my way west through the night going from one variable star to the next as fast as I can. I make an observation in 60-90 seconds, log it, and move on. The reason for the rush is, it's a numbers game.

Most cataclysmic variables are too faint to be seen at all in a 12-inch scope when they are quiescent, not in outburst. Only when they erupt do they become visible. Most of the stars I follow outburst brighter than 15th magnitude, typically in the 13's or 14's. Some, like SS Cygni, get a lot brighter in outburst, and can be seen with binoculars.

Outbursts can last days or weeks depending on the star, but the thing is, they are totally unpredictable and they do not wait for anyone. If you miss a rare outburst, you may not get another chance for years, or decades. In some cases, never again.

On any given night only a handful of these stars may actually be active, out of the hundreds known. So the only way to be sure to catch them as they go into outburst, and to increase your chances of catching that rare find, is to observe as many of them each clear night as possible. I try to do at least 100 observations per night.

The majority of visual observations I log in a night are negative detections. In other words, I didn't see the star. It's not in outburst, or it's too faint for me to detect yet. When I log the observation I note the name of the star, the time to the nearest minute and the magnitude of the faintest comparison star I can see. For me, the limiting magnitude is usually between 14.8 and 15.2. On moonlit nights or under hazy skies that may drop to 14.5 or less, and on really fine, clear, dry nights I may occasionally glimpse a 15.5 comp star briefly.

When I report the observation it is written as 'less than the magnitude of the faintest comp star' (<14.8). So it's easy to tell the quality of a night by the typical limiting magnitude as you slew from one area of the sky to the next. The fainter you can see, the better the night, basically. In the morning, I type out my report and submit it to the AAVSO and several other email lists that track CV activity.

So, back to my story.

Around 2:30 I start observing in Andromeda, which is just about straight overhead. The star dots have shrunken down to fine points and the seeing has obviously improved a lot. As I examine the field of V402 And I'm stunned to see the 15.8 comp star plain as day. I've seen it on CCD images before, but never in the eyepiece. I move to the next field, LL And and I can see the 15.9 comp star easily with averted vision. I would have to image this field for 60 seconds with a CCD and V filter to measure a 15.9 star, and yet here it is in my Mark I eyeball! The sky has literally opened up for me and I am seeing things in the eyepiece I have not even glimpsed before. I log more than a dozen more record magnitudes over the next 45 minutes and also manage to catch several CVs in outburst.

It's just me, the telescope and the Universe sharing an exceptional night together when suddenly the peace is shattered by -- RING-RING...RING-RING...RING-RING!

My very loud cell phone is ringing at 3:20AM. The obnoxiousness of it startled me so much I nearly fell off my chair. As I fumble to find it in one of my pockets in the dark, terrible thoughts start to run through my head. Did someone fall ill, get rushed to the hospital or die? Is it Mom? Maybe something happened to Dad. I answer the phone with my flashlight still in my mouth.

"Hewowe?"

"Mike, is that you?" It's my brother Doug, and the first thing that pops into my head as I take the flashlight out of my mouth is 'he's in jail and needs me to come get him.'

"Yea" I say rather irritated.

"I'm surprised you answered".
"I'm surprised you called. What's wr..." I never get the rest out because Doug is in full blown talking mode now. It's a one-way street. His mouth opens up and his ears shut down.

"I'm outside looking up at the most incredible sky I've ever seen." (Tell me about it.)
"Mars is talking to me, I can see Pluto and that little-dipper-like-thingy" (the Pleiades) "and oh my God, it's just beautiful, Mike."

I try to tell him the name of the cluster and that Pluto can only be seen with a telescope, but he'll never remember. My brother is drunk dialing at 3:20 in the morning and I was stupid enough to answer the cell without looking at the caller ID. Crap!

So after a few more 'I love you, mans' we hang up and its me and the morning sky alone again. I made a note in my log, DOUG CALLED!, and proceeded back to the business at hand. After my nerves calmed down a bit I started to chuckle to myself, because he was right. It was a beautiful sky, he knew I'd be out there at the telescope, and he just wanted to share the moment with me, bless his heart.

I took a little time to get lost in the Orion Nebula in his honor, and debated with myself if it was worth trying to chase down the Horsehead Nebula. I quickly came to my senses and got back with the program. I was rewarded for my efforts with three Orion CVs in outburst in a row, CN Ori, V1159 Ori and BI Ori--the Trifecta! This really was a great night!

I finished up in Auriga and Gemini about an hour before dawn and came in to warm up, eat breakfast and submit my reports. Out of 116 CV observations, 20 were active or in outburst. The rest are hiding away, biding their time, waiting to present themselves on another fine night.

Note to self:
Turn the cell phone on 'vibrate' when out at the telescope.

Avoiding Bias: Simonsen's Rules for Variable Star Observing

There has been some recent discussion on the Citizen Sky website about looking at the light curve or checking the quick look data of a star you are observing. The main concern revolves around observers having too much information, or a preconceived notion, before making an observation. We call this bias. The term biased is used to describe an action, judgment, or other outcome influenced by a prejudged perspective. In variable star observing, or any scientific investigation, bias is a bad thing.

Half the fun of variable star observing for me is precisely the fact that I don’t know what my favorite variable star is doing at any given moment for sure. It’s why I climb out of bed in the middle of the night in the winter to go observe them. I can’t wait to see what they are up to. If I already knew, or thought I knew, there would be no reason to lose sleep.

So the first part of my advice is simple- don’t look at the light curve or recent data on a variable star you plan to observe before you observe it. You risk biasing your observation, and you’re missing out on the fun. The science is usually the reason people start doing this, and the fun they discover along the way is why they keep doing it for years and years. To risk either is, well…stupid!

By all means, when you are done, and have reported your observation, go look at how it compares to other observers’ data and see where it fits in the light curve. This is valuable feedback, you’re probably going to be quite happy with your result, and you can be proud of your contribution to science for the night.


If your observation looks different than other observers, don’t worry too much about that either. Don’t assume the other guy is a better, more experienced, more correct observer than you, even if he used a CCD or the Binford 9000 photometry device. He could be a half-blind, one-eyed village idiot for all you know. The other guy or gal might not even have been looking at the same star you were.

I was taught some basic rules for observing (a very long time ago) when I started out. These rules have been passed down from generation to generation, so they are not specifically mine, or necessarily original, but we shall hereby refer to them as ‘Simonsen’s Rules for Variable Star Observing.’

Rule #1- Be sure you are measuring the right star. Always be very conscientious when identifying the variable. There is nothing more useless than an observation of the wrong star!

Rule #2- Report exactly what you see, not what you think you should be seeing…period.

Rule #3- Bias is your enemy; avoid it. (see rule #2)

This may be difficult for some people, so here are some tips for overcoming your preconceived notions.

If you see the observations of some other observer(s) beforehand-
1. Assume they are lying to deceive you!
2. Know they are bad observers, so their opinion is worthless!
3. They could be, and probably are, completely crazy. How many variable star observers have you met? I rest my case.

If the bias is some personal belief, based on your own preconceived notion, realize that-
1. You are lying to yourself! (and now you are talking to yourself…hmm)
2. You are a bad observer (you should know!) and your opinion is worthless.
3. You are obviously schizophrenic – you are in fact crazy!

Rule #4- We never know for certain what a variable star will do from moment to moment. Therefore, you can never be certain what your star is doing at any given moment, that’s why we do this. This can be added to the reasons bias should be avoided.

Rule #5- Make every observation as if you are the only one looking at your star at this moment. You may not have to pretend. The number of variable star observers worldwide is so small this is often the case. You are special; don’t forget that.

Rule #6- Have fun.
For astronomers, the universe is our laboratory. It’s beautiful, mysterious, impressive, awe-inspiring, and humbling, and it’s ours. Enjoy it.

Simple, Exquisite Beauty

Making naked eye and observations for the Citizen Sky project has put me back in touch with the night sky on a level I didn’t realize I was missing.

Image credit: Rob Beaird http://robsreflections.wordpress.com/

On a typical clear night, I’ll spend anywhere from two to eight hours racing from one variable star field to another with the visual scope, under the protection of an observatory dome, or at the controls of my CCD telescope slewing and centering targets and watching images download on a computer screen from inside a warm room. I only see a small portion of the sky through the dome slot, eyepiece or on the monitor.

When a bright meteor flashes through the sky I rarely see it, unless I happen to be standing outside taking a break. I often don’t even know the weather is changing until the images in the eyepiece or on the screen start to deteriorate. Then I walk outside and look up to see if it’s a total wash out or just a passing cloud or two.

Now I find myself taking longer breaks from the telescope and spending some quiet time alone with the Universe. Just me and the night sky I fell in love with long ago. I’ve come to appreciate the simple majesty of those bright stars shining down on Earth just as they have for thousands of years. And over the course of the last year I’ve become familiar with several naked eye variables that I now keep track of.

I’ve followed an eclipse of Algol through the course of an evening. The first time I ever did it was at the AAVSO spring meeting in Nantucket, on the night we had the star party and tour of the Maria Mitchell Observatory. It was already halfway to minimum when I first noticed it, but I was able to follow it every half hour or so as it faded to minimum and then rose back to maximum. Clouds rolled in over the island in the early morning hours, so I didn’t get to see it back at full strength until the following night, but it made a lasting impression on me.

I’ve begun tracking the changes of delta and mu Cephei. Delta Cephei is the prototype of an entire class of astronomically significant variables. Cepheid variables are used to calibrate distances to far off stars and galaxies. Mu Cephei is also known as Herschel’s Garnet Star. It’s an orangish semi-regular variable that has been observed by variable star observers for over one hundred years.

As autumn approaches, the winter constellations are beginning to make their presence known again before dawn. I’ve spent a lot of time admiring the fiery bright winter constellations of Orion, Taurus, Gemini, and Auriga as they rise to fill the pre-dawn sky. I find myself fixing my gaze on eta Geminorum, Betelgeuse, Algol and epsilon Aurigae now, instead of racing from sideways ‘Y’ of Taurus, through the Pleiades, up the curve of stars that is Perseus’ lower branch through Auriga and on to Cassiopeia. Now I have little rest areas along the way.

A calmness and sense of satisfaction comes over me when life slows down and fills these moments with the perfect silence that is 5 o’clock in the morning. The sound of a hoot owl in a nearby tree reminds me I am not alone, and we share the view as dawn begins to break in the east. Swiftly and silently, a meteor streaks across the sky and I smile to myself, because I didn’t miss that one.

Can Visual Astronomers Still Contribute to Science?

Today's episode of the 365 Days of Astronomy Podcast examines the controversial issue of the scientific value of visual observations.

Entitled Can Visual Observers Still Contribute to Science? we examine the consequences of living in an age with CCDs and automated sky surveys, and the impact they are having on visual variable star observers.


Restless Universe is the podcast of the American Association of Variable Star Observers (AAVSO).

Refining the Distance Scale

I scan the new astrophysics papers regularly. I almost always find something I end up downloading and reading, either right then and there, or later when I have time to concentrate. Rarely do I stumble across a paper that I can't take my eyes away from, like a great novel. One of those times when, forsaking all else, you must get to the last page.

Yesterday I found a great paper. What I was most pleased with was the fact it was written in plain English, with good grammar and organization. I understood every bit of it from start to end! That almost never happens. I couldn't stop reading it.

I don't have a PhD in astronomy or physics. I do this because I love it, period. So I often find myself part way into a paper on some astrophysical phenomena that the author is trying to explain, but no lights are going on in my brain. Either the subject is too technical for me to grasp, or the author is writing about things at a level only the top five experts in the world would ever understand. Add the poor English skills of foreign scientists writing in a second language and things can get ugly fast.

At some point I have to decide to either suck it up and plow through, hoping that a light will come on somewhere in the process, or skim through the rest to see if anything interesting develops with the plot.

Rarely do I find myself whooping it up and commenting out loud about the paper in my hands.

Okay, enough teasing. The paper is Absolute Magnitudes of Dwarf Novae: Murmurs of Period Bounce by Joe Patterson. Obviously, the subject appeals to me because dwarf novae are my special area of interest. But let me quote you some examples of why I was so impressed with this paper.

The first paragraph:
"Distance is the sine qua non of astrophysics. A distance estimate is required to convert flux to luminosity, and stellar physics is all about luminosity, not flux. Unfortunately, distances to cataclysmic variables are particularly difficult to estimate, because the dominant light source is not a star, but an accretion disk- preventing straightforward application of physical methods developed for single stars."

That will never be stated more clearly, ever. Yet it has a conversational tone to it that invites you in to take a look around. Remember, this is a scientific paper!

There are some other gems near the beginning that particularly caught my attention.

"In the 1980's available data on dwarf nova eruptions consisted of a blend of photographic and visual magnitudes. But now we have access to searchable variable star records, especially that of the AAVSO. The human eye is the ideal detector for this purpose, since it is immune to changes in technology, and used by thousands of observers. Furthermore, the central wavelengths of the eye and the commonly used Johnson V filter are similar; and both detectors are broad enough to render line emission insignificant."

He gives praise to the observations of amateur observers, the AAVSO and explains why visual observations are scientifically valuable all in one breath! I have a new hero.

I won't spoil it by giving away the end, and if you want to find out what period bouncers are you're going to have to read the paper.

I'm going to print it out on fine paper, have it bound in a nice little cover, and get Joe to autograph it for me when I see him in Tucson later this month at the CV conference, 'Wild Stars in the Old West.'

Observing Variable Stars Visually

There has been a lot of discussion lately about what visual observers can do to make an honest contribution to science. What variable stars are really interesting to astronomers, and what observations are likely to lead to new understanding of the properties of these and other stars?

It’s no secret that with CCDs being capable of higher precision and numerous surveys covering the sky, with more coming online in the future, visual observers will have to be more selective about what they observe if they want to make a meaningful contribution to science. But there is still a lot the visual observer can do.

No survey exists at the moment that covers the entire sky every night in any bandpass or to any limiting magnitude. ASAS-3, for example, has a cadence of about once every three nights or so. It has a useful range of magnitude coverage from around 8 to 13.5V, and it only covers the sky from the South celestial pole to around +28 degrees in declination.

Pretty much anything north of ASAS-3 sky coverage is still a viable target for visual observers, in spite of the fact that ASAS is running a similar survey in the northern sky right now. There is no guarantee that data will ever become public. There are a number of other surveys going, but the data is not publicly available, and until it is, these surveys do not impact the visual observers usefulness at all.

There are also plenty of targets for visual observers to monitor that require higher cadence of observations, or that a three day delay in notification of activity, like a rare outburst of a cataclysmic variable, a precipitous fade of an R CrB type star, or some other unusual rapid behavior, would cause valuable science to be lost.

Most surveys do not spend much time observing stars approaching conjunction with the Sun, nor do they adequately observe stars in the morning sky that are just coming out from behind the Sun. So observing stars that are setting soon after sunset or rising in the pre-dawn hours can also be fruitful territory for visual observers.

No surveys cover stars brighter than 8th magnitude, and individual CCD observers tend to avoid stars this bright also. Stars that get as bright as this, or are always brighter than this will remain good visual targets for a long time. Naked eye and binocular variables remain the domain of visual observers for now.

Similarly, visual observers with larger telescopes, able to observe stars fainter than 13th magnitude can still support science by covering the gap between the faint end of ASAS coverage and the bright limit of many of the new surveys coming online.

So with that in mind, here are some suggestions for visual targets for winter 2009.

Cataclysmic Variables
There are a number of CVs that rarely go into outburst. Catching one of these on the rise is not only useful, it can be a lot of fun.

First there are three recurrent novae. One visible in the southern sky early in the evening, T Pyx, is overdue for a dramatic outburst. Two more that are worth getting up early in the morning for as winter progresses are U Sco and T CrB. An outburst of any of these stars will be big news and very interesting.

Andromeda, Cassiopiea and Perseus in the north hold several treasures in the rare if ever seen category; LL And, PQ And, V630 Cas, UW Per, V336 Per. If you’ve never heard of these CVs before, it’s because no one has seen them in a while. Normally, I would have included UW Tri in this short list, but it just had a rare outburst in late October 2008. AL Com, IR Com and UZ Boo would be happy discoveries on a cold night.

Some circumpolar stars, easily observed on winter nights include DV UMa, an eclipsing UGSU, and KV Dra.

The ecliptic is well stocked with rarely outbursting cataclysmics. EI Psc, XY Psc, V701 Tau, EG Cnc, a UGWZ that exhibits post outburst re-brightenings as it fades, NSV 18241 in Leo, RZ Leo and HV Vir. A little further south you can monitor WX Cet, CG CMa, and EX Hya.

R Coronae Borealis stars
There are some northern RCBs that observers can and should monitor very clear night for evidence of sudden fading episodes from maximum, or the unpredictable way they brighten to maximum from a deep fade. These are DY Per, Z UMi, R CrB, and SU Tau. LT Dra is listed as RCB in VSX. That is one I didn’t know about. In the south RY Sgr is above the ASAS limit at maximum and V CrA is at or near the limit, hovering around 8.3 or so at maximum. Many RCBs get fainter than the ASAS limit, so following the deep fades of some of these when they occur may also be something worth pursuing, if you have the aperture and dark skies to do it.

Miras and SRs
Any Miras north of +28 degrees declination are still great candidates for the visual observer. You might also consider tracking down stars that are going into conjunction. In the winter these might include stars in Aql, Aqr, PsA, Sge, Vul, Lyr and Del. If you’re an early riser, stars emerging from conjunction in Cen, Lup, Sco, Sgr, Sct, Oph, Her and CrB provide an opportunity for you to cover stars not likely well observed by the surveys.

There are dozens of bright SR stars to observe that are generally not covered by any survey. For the winter months these include: RS And, TZ And, AQ And, V Ari, UU Aur, X Cnc, RS Cnc, RT Cnc, TU Gem, TV Gem, NQ Gem, Y Lyn, SV Lyn, CE Lyn, RV Mon, SX Mon,W Ori, BQ Ori, CK Ori, SU Per, AD Per, Y Tau and TT Tau.

There are also plenty northern circumpolar SRs you can observe year-round.
U Cam, RY Cam, ST Cam, UV Cam, WZ Cas, V393 Cas, V465 Cas, Rho Cas, W Cep,
RU Cep, RW Cep, SS Cep, AR Cep, FZ Cep, Mu Cep, RY Dra, TX Dra, UX Dra, AH Dra, Z UMa and RY UMa.

Eclipsing variables
Since making and sky checking the IYA training charts for Algol, I’ve found myself looking up and doing a quick estimate every time I go outside on a clear night. I even managed to catch an eclipse of Algol from Nantucket during the 2008 fall meeting. That Friday night was the only time the sky was clear during the whole trip, and it happily coincided with the planned observatory tours and star party, as well as an eclipse of Algol.

A very interesting eclipse will take place this winter. EE Cep is a poorly understood eclipsing binary, similar to Epsilon Aur, in that the secondary is probably an object surrounded by a disk of dust. Eclipses only happen once every 5.6 years, it is well placed for observation and the range of magnitudes is from 10-12th magnitude. Mid-eclipse should occur on or near January 14, 2009. The longest eclipse lasted 60 days, so observations from early December through the end of February are potentially useful. The most interesting action will take place between January 2 and 27.

As you can see, there are plenty of opportunities as a visual observer in the next few months to support science. Don’t let anyone tell you the age of visual observations is dead. You can chuckle to yourself when you are the one to catch the next outburst of T CrB while some of your friends were observing superhumps of yet another UGSU with their CCD only a few degrees away all night.