Celestial hemisphere:  Northern  ·  Constellation: Taurus (Tau)  ·  Contains:  12.10  ·  87 Sylvia  ·  HD243778  ·  HD243941  ·  HD243974  ·  HD243975  ·  HD243991  ·  HD244048  ·  HD244067  ·  HD244173  ·  HD244277  ·  HD244285  ·  HD244329  ·  HD244338  ·  HD244394  ·  HD244415  ·  HD244425  ·  HD244490  ·  HD244514  ·  HD244515  ·  HD244547  ·  HD244548  ·  HD244581  ·  HD244582  ·  HD244598  ·  HD244609  ·  HD244644  ·  HD244645  ·  HD244663  ·  HD244694  ·  And 416 more.
Getting plate-solving status, please wait...
SH2-240 - Spaghetti Nebula, John Dziuba
Powered byPixInsight

SH2-240 - Spaghetti Nebula

Getting plate-solving status, please wait...
SH2-240 - Spaghetti Nebula, John Dziuba
Powered byPixInsight

SH2-240 - Spaghetti Nebula

Equipment

Loading...

Acquisition details

Loading...

Description

SH2-240, also known as the Spaghetti nebula, is a large and faint supernova remnant between Taurus and Auriga.  It is so faint in fact, that this nebula was not even discovered until 1952!  It is believed that the nebula was formed when a rapidly spinning neutron star exploded. 

This project was a real struggle.  It was my first time using the FSQ-106 with the .6 f3 reducer.  I had hoped that the fast optics would allow me to collect enough data to create a striking image. 

However given the extremely low brightness of this object, light pollution proved to be a major issue even using my 3nm band pass filters.   I only imaged during times when there was little to no moon.  This restriction alone was a real challenge as it was difficult to find opportunities where both the moon and clouds both cooperated.  Even then, I had a lot of sky glow noise in my subs. Especially in the O3 data. 

Broadband light pollution is becoming a significant problem in most cities, and I think that was in large part the culprit here.  The noise combined with the weak signal really washed out a lot of the beautiful fine filamentary detail that I had hoped to capture.  This was likely compounded by my choice of exposure time.  I think that the 300sec exposures were probably too long for such fast optics, and this likely contributed to the problem.

It is late in the season now to capture more data on this object.  I will have to try again in the future, hopefully from a dark sky site. 

Thanks for stopping by.

Comments