Proposal #370
| Proposer | (45802) Mikhail Ashchepkau (ashchepkau@gmail.com) obscode: AMIF |
|---|---|
| Assigned To | (3663) Dirk Terrell |
| Date Submitted | June 19, 2023 |
| Status | Declined |
| Priority | Normal |
| Proposal | Dear AAVSO, I would propose dual observations of MS Aql field with interval about 1 week. There are a lot of SR vars in the field, but ASASSN-V 194033.04+115216.7 is suspicious: my photometry in CV gives 13-14m (close to VSX), but ASASSN-V light curve shows brightness about 15V or less. Other measured 10 stars in 30-min field do no have such high difference. I hope, pair of R-V-B images taken with BSM or even MPO will help to get reliable data. Plate name: MS Aql |
| Target | RA (H.HH) | Dec (D.DD) | Magnitude | Telescope | Observation Frequency | Expiration Date | Proprietary Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ASASSN-V 194033.04+115216.7 | 19.675844 | 11.87133 | 15.5–14.5 | — | — | — | No |
Comments
- (3000) Sebastián Otero — June 19, 2023, 3:56 p.m.
Mikhail, the difference in magnitude you are talking about is just a problem with the pre-processed magnitudes in the latest version of the ASAS-SN variable stars database.
The numbers in VSX came from the original processing and they were correct. I don't know what they did more recently to end up with such faint magnitudes.
The Sky Patrol data shows the correct range.
I updated the VSX page with data from different surveys and the range is V= 13.4 - 14.1.
So the primary justification for the proposal is no longer valid.
The star is a run of the mill semirregular red giant. Do you still want to observe it, now that you know that the difference is just an artifact of the ASAS-SN procesing?- (45802) Mikhail Ashchepkau — June 19, 2023, 4:53 p.m.
Thank you, Sebastian! Yes, Patrol shows 15g but not V. Proposal is not valid.
I will continue to observe this nice field with my modest equipment :)
Comments on this proposal are closed.