Thursday, October 05, 2017

tried for NSV 1484 (Halifax)

I charged the robotic Burke-Gaffney Observatory to image variable NSV 1484, an object I had attempted unsuccessfully to view before. Centring on GSC 03730 00607 in Camelopardalis, I was able to include a number of nearby double stars.

variable star NSV 1484 with doubles in luminance

Luminance only, 4 seconds subexposures, 20 stacked shots. FITS Liberator, GIMP. North is up; east is left.

I did not see NSV 1484 on the evening of 16 Jan '12 even though I could see magnitude 11 stars. I do not see it in this image, near the bottom-left edge of the frame! It should be south of TYC 03730-0145 1 and GSC 03730-0076, the vertically arranged medium bright stars, and between J041145.8+595414 and GSC 03730-0073, the horizontally oriented dim stars. Nada. Magnitude 16 stars are easily spotted in this stacked photograph. But there's no NSC 1484. Weird.

North of centre, at the top edge of the frame, is the bright and tight pair HD 25993. The position angle is roughly 45 degrees with A to the south-west. B is only slightly dimmer. It is interesting to note that SkyTools 3 Pro reports the separation at 4.60". I thought the limit for the BGO setup was 5.

The bright triad, with HR 1270, to the south-west is not a double.

South of centre is the faint tight double of STI 500. Tantalising. The brighter element is to the east and the companion looks to be at a PA just under 270. ST3P shows that the A star is in fact on the west side.

The bright non-round star to the north-east is double HD 26112. The stars are merged. ST3P states they are less than 2 seconds of arc.


Did a bit of digging in the New Catalogue of Suspected Variable Stars warehoused at the Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University. NSV number: 01484.
  • hours RA, equinox 2000.0: 041142.2+595406. 
  • type of variability: UV
  • magnitude at maximum brightness: 6
  • l_magMin, if magMin is a bright limit: <
  • minimum magnitude or amplitude: 12
  • magCode, the photometric system for magnitudes: p 
Note: Seen only on one plate with double images (Dec. 15, 1900).

Uh huh. So no one has seen this for over 100 years?

And the "if magMin is a bright limit" tag being true suggests perhaps it is not brighter than mag 12?


Tried again (and centred) on 7 Oct '17.

No comments: