Re: A retraction and addendum to Coinjock observing.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
My first view of the “bubble” in NGC 7635 was probably just feet away from where you were viewing it. October 7, 1999 through Kent’s 25 at Coinjock. I’ve logged successful sightings of the bubble four times – twice in Kent’s 25 and twice in my 30. I have several observations of NGC 7635 with the 18-inch that does not show this spherical orb to best advantage , instead, just the comma shaped glow of the bright nebula extending from the star you mention, and I’ve not seen it in anything smaller.
I have often noted it as looking like a reflection nebula, illuminated by the sta,r but the nebula does respond well to narrowband filters and must have a strong emission component.
From: BackBayAstro@groups.io <BackBayAstro@groups.io> On Behalf Of jimcoble2000 via groups.io
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2020 9:12 AM
To: BBAA Groups Io <firstname.lastname@example.org>; VPAS <email@example.com>
Subject: [BackBayAstro] A retraction and addendum to Coinjock observing.
Upon further research and examination I think I need to clarify statement about observing the bubble nebula the other night. Kent and I did indeed see a small part of it but I was fooled into the classic mistake of thinking NGC 7635 was the bubble nebula, as is often listed. This listing is not entirely accurate it seems. The bubble does lie in the NGC nebula but is only a tiny part of it and much more difficult to see. There is a lot going on up there in that small part of the sky. Pictures don't help much either as they do not represent what you see at the telescope. After looking for a bit I thought the nebula extended to a 7th magnitude star across from M-52. Which it does. The bubble is a very dim tiny feature under this star. We did see where it was and perhaps only a small part but did not correctly isolate the bubble as a distinct object. I don't think this can be done with a small scope. you might see a little of the bubble itself but only a little. It does deserve it's reputation as a difficult object perhaps suitable for only large telescopes. I am happy for what little we did see but needed to clarify my previous statement based on incomplete information. Mea Culpa.