sponsored by psychohistorian.org

DOCdb

Deep Sky Observer's Companion – the online database

 

Welcome, guest!

If you've already registered, please log in,

or register an observer profile for added functionality.

List:

log in to manage your observing lists

 browse:

 

 position:

 

 next:

 

 options:

summary

rename

prune

trim

remove

close

copy

combine

plan

bookmark

load

new

delete

marathon

favourite!

Full database:

Entire DOCdb database of 18,816 objects.

 browse:

 position:

NGC 6677 (15,212 of 18,816)

 next:

oc gc pln bn dn gx gxcl ast aka lost

Object:

list

bookmark

finder chart

altitude today

altitude (year)

 search:

½°, , in DOCdb


Warning: date(): It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected the timezone 'UTC' for now, but please set date.timezone to select your timezone. in /home/yivumoo/public_html/show_object.php on line 167

show browsing

NGC 6677

NGC 6677, LEDA 62035, MCG+11-22-057, UGC 11290

RA: 18h 33m 36.1s
Dec: +67° 06′ 39″

Con: Draco
Ch: MSA:1065, U2:30, SA:3

Ref: NGC/IC, NED

(reference key)

Type: galaxy, Sbc

Mag: B=14.4, V=13.6

Size: 0.9′ x 0.4′
PA: 95°

History and Accurate Positions for the NGC/IC Objects (Corwin 2004)

NGC 6677 and 6679 = IC 4763. Malcolm and I have fussed over this field for several years now, and have been unable to come to a consensus. So here is my take on the area.

The two brightest galaxies here -- Malcolm's objects "A" and "B" -- were seen by Swift, Bigourdan, and Howe. (Kobold also has an observation of NGC 6677 in the Strassburg Annals, Vol. 3, 1909, but his comparison star has a high proper motion which makes the derivation of an accurate position more difficult.) I agree with Malcolm that A must be NGC 6677, but am pretty well convinced that B is NGC 6679 = IC 4763. Here's why:

1) As I always do for identification problems, I determined as accurate a position as I can for every object bearing on an identity question. In this case, this meant reducing Bigourdan's micrometric observations, and digging positions out of the Guide Star Catalogue. Here are the results for Malcolm's three objects (positions are for the equinox 1950.0):

Galaxy NGC/IC RA Dec Source Notes A N6677 18 33 39.20 +67 04 09.8 GSC 18 33 38.83 +67 04 11.3 Big 5 Sept 1891 only 18 33 40 +67 04.1 Howe B N6679=I4763 18 33 33.29 +67 05 47.1 GSC 18 33 33.58 +67 05 44.8 Big 18 33 35 +67 05.7 Howe C --- 18 33 34.36 +67 06 21.8 GSC

Notice that I have used Bigourdan's observations only from the night of 5 Sept 1891 for NGC 6677. His observations on 25 June 1897 refer to the star southeast of the galaxy. I also suspect that his comparison star (BD +66 1115 = GSC 4227-00549) has a relatively large proper motion as there is a systematic offset of +0.24 sec and -7.8 arcsec between his positions and the GSC positions for all the objects for which he used this star as a comparison. I've corrected his positions in the table above for these offsets.

The excellent agreement between Bigourdan's, Howe's, and the GSC positions convinces me that the two micrometric observations from each of the early observers do indeed refer to Malcolm's objects A and B. Furthermore, their descriptions also make sense -- and agree with Swift's -- if we note one additional fact: object B is in fact a close double galaxy. Object C is more than 30 arcsec north of B, which puts it much too far away to be part of the object that Howe measured as NGC 6679: "This is a nebulous D * of mags 12.5, distance 5 arcsec, [position] angle 60 deg." Bigourdan's description of it as a double star, one that he could not resolve at 344X, also points to the close pair as the actual NGC 6679 -- and adds support to the evidence from his measured position that the pair is equal to Big 333 = IC 4763 (it is, of course, clear that Bigourdan himself realized this).

All of this evidence, combined with Swift's own descriptions (in his papers 1, 3, and 9) seem to me to pin down the identifications without much doubt. I've not taken Swift's own positions into account as we know that they are not very good. In this case, Howe has noted that Swift's declination for N6679 in the NGC is out by 8.5 arcmin. Swift corrected this by 10 arcmin when he finally published the observation in AN 3004, but by then, the damage had been done.

Published comments

Sulentic & Tifft (1973)

The RNGC (Sulentic and Tifft 1973) notes that this is a 13.5 mag galaxy. Their coded description reads EL,UHISB,DKPCHS NRCT.

Favourite lists

Lacaille's catalogue

The Messier objects

Dunlop's catalogue

The Bennett objects

The Caldwell list

Named DSOs

Object search

First search phrase

    and

Second search phrase

Type of object to include:

open cluster
globular cluster
planetary nebula
bright nebula
dark nebula
galaxy
galaxy cluster
asterism & stars
unverified/lost
nova

The Bug Report

DOCdb is still in beta-release.

Known issues, feature requests, and updates on bug fixes, are here:

> Bug Report

Feedback

Found a bug? Have a comment or suggestion to improve DOCdb? Please let us know!

> Contact us

Help!

DOCdb is a free online resource that exists to promote deep sky observing.

You could help by sharing your observations, writing an article, digitizing and proof-reading historical material, and more.

> Find out more

Everything on DOCdb.net is © 2004-2010 by Auke Slotegraaf, unless stated otherwise or if you can prove you have divine permission to use it. Before using material published here, please consult the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.5 License. Some material on DOCdb is copyright the individual authors. If in doubt, don't reproduce. And that goes for having children, too. Please note that the recommended browser for DOCdb is Firefox 3.x. You may also get good results with K-Meleon. Good luck if you're using IE. A successful experience with other browsers, including Opera and Safari, may vary.