 Check out the bookstore at IRBS.com |
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
From: Bill (no email)
Date: Fri May 05 2006 - 03:18:45 EDT
Thanks Chuck, I *should have* done a third count and checked against Frank's
and .gov sites, but time was short and frustration levels were getting high.
But there are no "should haves," I did or I didn't.
Omar's site listed Mintaka as RA 5:32:18 and declination as 0d 00.4' N on
May 5, 2006. RA 5:32:18 = SHA 276d 55!5 without a v adjustment for the sun?
Almanac listed delta Orionus as SHA 276d 55!3 and declination as Od 17!6 S.
That's an significant difference in declination.
Quote:
> Mintaka and delta Orionus are one and the same. Look
> on pages 272 and 273 of the U.S. Nautical Almanac
> under SHA 276.
I did, but my almanac has it as delta Orionus, not Mintaka. And Omar's
Mintaka did not match the... Oy vey, whatever that means ;-)
Even after correcting to almanac SHA and declination, I am still off Alex's
figures, which is another point of frustration (especially after the aborted
calculator duel and defense of 229's honor. <G>)
Bill
> -- Bill wrote:
>
>> Using the Hipparcos Catalogue the closet star I
>> could to delta Orion for
>> that SHA range and declination starting in Od was
>> Mintaka. I could not see
>> a delta Orion on Omars site.
>>
>> I don't see anything matching Mintak's name or
>> specifications in the
>> almanac.
>
Chuck responded:
>
> Mintaka and delta Orionus are one and the same. Look
> on pages 272 and 273 of the U.S. Nautical Almanac
> under SHA 276. It is the right-most of the 3 stars in
> Orion's belt.
>
> Mintaka is one of my favorite stars. Note that its
> declination is about 0 degrees 17 minutes South. That
> means that it rises almost exactly in the east (090)
> and sets almost exactly in the west (270) every day of
> the year.
|