Announcement J62

At present, it is debatable if there is enough interest by IFAS members to lead in to a 2 part workshop on MP astrometry. You appear to be the only one showing interest, it would be great if there were a few others to make it worthwhile planning a whole workshop.

Eamon,
There are few enough areas left where amateurs can really make a difference, and I believe this could be one of the crucial ones. With enough of us doing asteroid telemetry even periodically I believe we can make a difference. The last near miss wasn't even noticed 'till after it had gone by a few weeks later. If we can provide the necessary data then advance warning can be years in advance and countermeasures can at least be debated/proposed.
Unfortunately I don't think my kit is up to the task at present, but maybe a workshop as proposed could prove me wrong. If even 10% of us spent even quarter of our observing sessions devoted to telemetry then some serious results could ensue!!
The gauntlet has been thrown - who will respond to the challenge? :roll: A workshop would provide a fastrack for us to get more involved. We don't all need to get a J number, it should be sufficient to contribute reports using the roving number (no kudos but serious science).

Folks - I'd just like to dispel a few possible misunderstandings.

If you haven't done astrometry before, fear not. Its no harder (and in many ways easier) than trying to image your favourite Messier object or the Moon. Really.

If you don't want an observatory code, that's fine - its not a prerequisite for submitting data to the MPC. It does make subsequent submissions easier though.

To be a regular contributor does not mean that you are doing astrometry every clear night. There is no required numbers of observations you 'have' to submit. You can choose to submit none, one or hundreds. You submit whatever you can and whatever you feel like doing.

From personal experience, I set up a run which takes no more than three hours - most of that time is spent reading my email whilst the images are taken. When done, I then go image my favourite Messier objects.

I may repeat the exercise the next night, a week later, a month later or never!

Its important that folks don;t get the impression that if you go for an observatory code that:

1. Its really really difficult
2. It'll take all my imaging time
3. I'll have to continuously submit measurements

All three are misconceptions.

If you submitted the data from just 6 hours worth of work, the MPC would be delighted and you would be submitting data of scientific value. And that 6 hours worth of work can be weeks apart and you might do it once per year.... Its totally voluntary - you are after all, not being paid!

Personally, and I understand that this is a personal feeling, whilst I'm happy to take the odd pretty picture and hone my processing/imaging skills, its not really enough. To contribute real science is another facet of what I can do. And I can do both! As I said before, it would be silly to just do astrometry - a look at the wonders of the heavens from time to time and image them to remind me what its all about is vital. But equally, I also think (for me) I would be doing myself a disservice if I took only pretty pictures...

As it stands right now, I get the best of both worlds. But I'm under no pressure to do either.

A workshop is a great idea for anyone with an interest in doing science - you can see what's out there and choose to follow the path or not. But by choosing the science path does *not* mean you have to slavishly follow it. And you do other stuff as well - multitasking is the name of the game!

€0.02

Dave

Well said Dave!

This'll get off the ground yet! Your proposed workshops will be the ignition.

Great write up Dave. I'd be very interested in attending any workshop on this topic. I'd love to start doing some real science. I'll probably wait until I get an observatory built during the summer.

In order to move this along here is what I think I want.

Astrometry The Workshop

Background & Definition (and perhaps a bit of history)
Objectives - what precisely one is attempting and why
Theory and Practice - should speak for itself
Equipment - minimum necessary, different approaches, what not to use, what best to use.
Techniques - Collection and treatment of data.
What next - application of that data (charting, submitting) who wants it etc.

Anyone care to add, shred or otherwise comment.

I would even pay to have a suitable course.

JMP

I would even pay to have a suitable course.

I'd pay too. To do this properly (and thats the only way for it to succeed) Dave & Dave will need to put in a fair bit of time and effort preparing and presenting workshops. I don't think it too much to ask that participants contribute €?? to attend a course.