Hello! I’m wondering if I should change my SPV targets. Currently, I observe RR CET, SZ HYA, and DY HER throughout the year. These are well observed variables, so my observations provide continuous basic coverage.
I’ve not submitted observations to AAVSO for several years after moving to an area with poor seeing and equipment issues. I’ve recently sent my 8" LX200 and SBIG ST402 with BVIC filters to Starfront in Texas and have resumed my sequences.
Since the SPVs I had been observing are well observed, I’m wondering if there would be more value to change to others on the SPV observing list that have requests for additional data. I realize that well observed variables require continuous monitoring, but I would like guidance whether changing to other less well observed variables on the target list would provide more “bang for the buck.” Best regards.
Mike
Hi Mike,
Given that there is adequate coverage for these stars, I think it would be reasonable to consider other SPVs. I’d suggest asking for some recommendations over on the SPP forum.
Kind regards,
Brian
Thanks! I’ll repost in that forum. Mike
Mike,
Since I’m part of the SPP section I thought I would reply here. I’ve been trying to get a list of new SPP targets put together for a while now. I might finally have the time to do that. These would be target with a lot less history that need some coverage. Do you have a magnitude range you feel comfortable observing?
Eric
Thanks! My 8" LX200 gets good results to about mag = 16.
Mike
Hi Mike
I’ll let you in on a little secret of mine that gives me great satisfaction: ( I think LPV observers have kept the secret for decades )
I like to observe stars that have little or nothing in the database. It makes me want to observe every clear night just to see how that star’s light curve is progressing when I add it to the database and play it back in VSTAR. The period or classification may need redefinition. Talk about nail-biting excitement! Much more rewarding than the day job.
Often my data is the only data, or only recent data. My light curve can occasionally be cleaner than professional survey data, if there is any. You can imagine the satisfaction then!
Another pleasant surprise may come when you have spent a couple years generating a nice light curve, then happen to find another careful observer got the same light curve with a photomultiplier tube 65 years ago. It kind of validates your results.
Plus, if know what that PEP observer had to do to get it right 65 years ago, you gain a lot of respect for their technique. Better yet, you validate data that was taken in an era when there was no previous data to compare to. They went where no explorer had gone and today you validate that you have become one of the small band of careful explorers of the galaxy.
When taking data on a data-starved star, I feel like I have accomplished something new, rather than spending valuable time on a star that has 500,000 data points in the last two years.
It may be rewarding to you if you find a star that has no data or, even better, has crappy data. Observe it carefully every clear night. Generate a clean, consistent-if periodic, light curve.
Ray
Thanks you four your guidance!
Mike