Having picked up V1413 Aql last evening for the first time this observing season

and using the latest AAVSO sequence, I would like to ask if others find this

sequence less than good visually. Actually, I  felt it was exceedingly poor. The

126 and particularly the 128 seem almost as bright as the 123, while the 129 is

dramatically fainter than either, yet very close to the 131.



Thus, any estimated magnitudes of V1413 would seem to me highly dependent of

just what combination of comp stars are chosen, with widely differing final

magnitudes. This is particularly troublesome given that V1413 has a close

companion potentially influencing estimates and also that the star seems to be

entering a new active phase. Other's opinions?



JBortle (BRJ)

Good morning Mr. Bortle,



I just checked CHET (Chart Error Tools) through Blue and Gold and did not

see an existing problem report for charts or sequence on V1413, so may I

suggest that you submit one?

Clear skies,

Bob Stine (SRB)



-----Original Message-----

From: cvnet-discussion@yahoogroups.com

[mailto:cvnet-discussion@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of cnj999

Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 7:15 AM

To: cvnet-discussion@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [cvnet-discussion] V1413 AQL's AAVSO Sequence?











Having picked up V1413 Aql last evening for the first time this observing

season and using the latest AAVSO sequence, I would like to ask if others

find this sequence less than good visually. Actually, I felt it was

exceedingly poor. The 126 and particularly the 128 seem almost as bright as

the 123, while the 129 is dramatically fainter than either, yet very close

to the 131.



Thus, any estimated magnitudes of V1413 would seem to me highly dependent of

just what combination of comp stars are chosen, with widely differing final

magnitudes. This is particularly troublesome given that V1413 has a close

companion potentially influencing estimates and also that the star seems to

be entering a new active phase. Other's opinions?



JBortle (BRJ)













[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Couldn't agree more with your comments John.  I've used the

126 star only a handful of times, and I have no confidence

in the brighter end of this sequence at all.  Most of my estimates

have been made with the 131 close comparison.  I don't have

a problem using a single comparison star, and of course it's

very easy to re-reduce the magnitude should a new value

be given to that star in due course.  I only find the 131 star

gives me trouble is when V1413 is in eclipse.  I don't have a problem

with the faint end of the sequence.



Bob Stine makes a valuable comment too.  We shouldn't be so

lazy when it comes to querying a sequence, and that includes

me in this case.



regards,

Gary

PYG

-------------------------------------------------------------

Gary Poyner

garypoyner@...

http://www.garypoyner.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/varstars.html

"You can always tell a Brummie....but you can't tell him much"!

--------------------------------------------------------------



----- Original Message -----

From: "cnj999" <jbortle@...>

To: <cvnet-discussion@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 3:14 PM

Subject: [cvnet-discussion] V1413 AQL's AAVSO Sequence?





Having picked up V1413 Aql last evening for the first time this observing

season and using the latest AAVSO sequence, I would like to ask if others

find this sequence less than good visually. Actually, I  felt it was

exceedingly poor. The 126 and particularly the 128 seem almost as bright as

the 123, while the 129 is dramatically fainter than either, yet very close

to the 131.



Thus, any estimated magnitudes of V1413 would seem to me highly dependent of

just what combination of comp stars are chosen, with widely differing final

magnitudes. This is particularly troublesome given that V1413 has a close

companion potentially influencing estimates and also that the star seems to

be entering a new active phase. Other's opinions?



JBortle (BRJ)

The culprit is the 123 comp, which is not only red (B-V= 1.9 over three nights)

it is a variable and not part of the sequence!!



This is an error propagated by the automated importation process somehow. This

star was actually discovered to be variable during the determination of this

sequence from the photometry files back in 2002.



There is not a great selection of non-red 12th mag stars to choose from here, or

there would be another 12th mag comp listed. I'll see what we can do.



Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Please submit a CHET report so it

doesn't get lost in the shuffle.



Mike Simonsen







--- In cvnet-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "Gary Poyner" <garypoyner@...> wrote:

>

> Couldn't agree more with your comments John.  I've used the

> 126 star only a handful of times, and I have no confidence

> in the brighter end of this sequence at all.  Most of my estimates

> have been made with the 131 close comparison.  I don't have

> a problem using a single comparison star, and of course it's

> very easy to re-reduce the magnitude should a new value

> be given to that star in due course.  I only find the 131 star

> gives me trouble is when V1413 is in eclipse.  I don't have a problem

> with the faint end of the sequence.

>

> Bob Stine makes a valuable comment too.  We shouldn't be so

> lazy when it comes to querying a sequence, and that includes

> me in this case.

>

> regards,

> Gary

> PYG

> -------------------------------------------------------------

> Gary Poyner

> garypoyner@...

> http://www.garypoyner.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/varstars.html

> "You can always tell a Brummie....but you can't tell him much"!

> --------------------------------------------------------------

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: "cnj999" <jbortle@...>

> To: <cvnet-discussion@yahoogroups.com>

> Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 3:14 PM

> Subject: [cvnet-discussion] V1413 AQL's AAVSO Sequence?

>

>

> Having picked up V1413 Aql last evening for the first time this observing

> season and using the latest AAVSO sequence, I would like to ask if others

> find this sequence less than good visually. Actually, I  felt it was

> exceedingly poor. The 126 and particularly the 128 seem almost as bright as

> the 123, while the 129 is dramatically fainter than either, yet very close

> to the 131.

>

> Thus, any estimated magnitudes of V1413 would seem to me highly dependent of

> just what combination of comp stars are chosen, with widely differing final

> magnitudes. This is particularly troublesome given that V1413 has a close

> companion potentially influencing estimates and also that the star seems to

> be entering a new active phase. Other's opinions?

>

> JBortle (BRJ)

>

--- In cvnet-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Simonsen" <mikesxn@...> wrote:

>

> The culprit is the 123 comp, which is not only red (B-V= 1.9 over three

nights) it is a variable and not part of the sequence!!

>

> This is an error propagated by the automated importation process somehow. This

star was actually discovered to be variable during the determination of this

sequence from the photometry files back in 2002.

>

> There is not a great selection of non-red 12th mag stars to choose from here,

or there would be another 12th mag comp listed. I'll see what we can do.

>

> Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Please submit a CHET report so

it doesn't get lost in the shuffle.

>

> Mike Simonsen

>



Quite honestly, Mike, I don't see the 12.3 as looking particularly off from its

listed magnitude value. On the other hand, the 12.3 and 12.6 are almost

identical and the latter is probably around 0.75 magnitudes brighter than the

12.9 ! Some of the other stars are nearly as bad.



As Gary concurs, the whole bright end of the sequence is just a mess and perhaps

the best approach would be to start over from scratch at the close of the star's

observing season (too bad it happens to be active this year).



JBortle

I just checked ASAS3 and the 123 star is asas variable 190346+1629.9and the

129 star looks like it's a variable also.



Richard Campbell CMP



On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 10:14 AM, cnj999 <jbortle@...> wrote:



>

>

> Having picked up V1413 Aql last evening for the first time this observing

> season and using the latest AAVSO sequence, I would like to ask if others

> find this sequence less than good visually. Actually, I felt it was

> exceedingly poor. The 126 and particularly the 128 seem almost as bright as

> the 123, while the 129 is dramatically fainter than either, yet very close

> to the 131.

>

> Thus, any estimated magnitudes of V1413 would seem to me highly dependent

> of just what combination of comp stars are chosen, with widely differing

> final magnitudes. This is particularly troublesome given that V1413 has a

> close companion potentially influencing estimates and also that the star

> seems to be entering a new active phase. Other's opinions?

>

> JBortle (BRJ)

>

>

>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Since most of the stars in this sequence are reddened, I've revised it to

exclude the known variables and suspects, and replaced the bluer stars with new

12th mag stars that are all similar reddish B-Vs to the rest of the comparison

stars.



I've retained the nearby 131 for ID purposes when the variable is faint. I'm not

married to this idea. It has a relatively high error also, probably due to

crowding.



I'd appreciate feedback from visual observers as to the 'improvements'. I can't

observe until I'm well again.



AUID           label    U (err)    B (err)   V (err)





000-BCF-097  117 14.234 (0.030)10 13.011 (0.013)10 11.687 (0.010)10



000-BJP-393  120 16.532 (0.019)10 14.068 (0.013)10 12.024 (0.006)10



000-BJP-394  123 16.462 (0.017)10 14.183 (0.010)10 12.253 (0.005)10



000-BJP-396  126 16.671 (0.021)10 14.496 (0.009)10 12.574 (0.008)10



000-BJP-397  128 15.472 (0.035)10 14.243 (0.008)10 12.763 (0.005)10



000-BCF-093  131 14.096 (0.123)10 14.055 (0.121)10 13.093 (0.120)10



000-BJP-398  132 17.575 (0.084)10 15.289 (0.083)10 13.232 (0.083)10



000-BCF-084  136 16.308 (0.025)10 15.058 (0.011)10 13.622 (0.009)10





Mike Simonsen