LUNAR SECTION CIRCULAR Vol. 53 No. 1 January 2016 ______

CHRISTMAS DAY FULL MOON 2015

Maurice Collins' image of a rare Christmas Day Full Moon. The last time this happened was in 1977 and the next won’t be until 2034. FROM THE DIRECTOR

The waning gibbous Moon in the period immediately after Full offers spectacular views of sunset over several grand craters near the eastern limb. These include such familiar features as Petavius, Langrenus, Vendelinus and Cleomedes, and all were on display during a brief break in the Sheffield cloud on the morning of 2015 November 28. They may be well studied and frequently imaged, but these craters are always worth another look, and I was reminded that some fifty years ago they were considered part of what Patrick Moore termed ‘the great western chain’ (east was west in those days!). Such apparent ‘chains’ of craters were then regarded by some as evidence of non-random distribution, which in turn pointed to a likely volcanic origin whereby such features formed along lines of crustal weakness (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Map of major crater ‘chains’ by Patrick Moore. From Survey of the Moon (1963)

Of course, we now know that this is not the case and that these features are of impact origin, like the overwhelming majority of craters on the Moon. Moreover, their apparent alignment in chains is merely an effect of foreshortening as we approach the lunar limb. Another argument against a common volcanic origin is that craters such as Petavius, Vendelinus, Cleomedes and Langrenus clearly differ from each other in both morphology and age. Cleomedes is a dark-floored crater perched just within the outer northern ring of the Crisium basin, and it appears to be flooded by similar lavas that comprise the Mare Crisium; Vendelinus is a ruined relic from the pre-Nectarian era whose floor is crossed by bright ejecta that appears to come from the much younger Langrenus. Langrenus itself is a beautiful crater that would be even more spectacular were it more centrally located on the Moon’s disc. With its fine terracing

2 and central peak complex it is similar in general appearance to Copernicus, although it is larger (132 km) and probably older (Fig. 2). It is also the site of one of the more significant TLP reports, by the French astronomer Adouin Dollfus who recorded a series of glows there in 1992.

Fig. 2 Langrenus, imaged by Bill Leatherbarrow, 2015 November 28, 03h 34m UT. col. 112.9. 300mm Mak-Cass, ASI224MC camera with IR pass filter.

Petavius (177 km) is different again: it is a floor-fracture crater even larger than Langrenus and rather older. Its most distinctive feature is the great rille running from its central peaks to the SW rim, but this rille is only one of several such fractures caused by magma collecting below the surface and doming the crater floor. As it meets the SW terracing the main Petavius rille appears to form a T-junction with another rille circling the inner wall (Fig. 3).

3 Fig. 3 Petavius, imaged by Bill Leatherbarrow, 2015 November 28, 03h 29m UT, col. 112.8. 300mm Mak-Cass, ASI224MC camera with IR pass filter.

Observers have often queried the subsequent behaviour of this latter rille, but careful scrutiny using LROC imagery shows that it is connected with the Hase rille system that runs from the SW rim of Petavius to the crater Marinus, with just a few dog-legs and disconnections along its length (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4 How the Petavius rille connects to the Hase rille system. Image by NASA/QuickMap.

4 So even these familiar craters throw up interesting insights, and they are well worth revisiting in 2016, for which I wish you clear skies!

Finally, I am grateful to Alan Wells and Dave Finnigan for following up my observation of the central peak shadow of Maurolycus in the last issue. I hope we can report further on this in due course.

Bill Leatherbarrow

______

OBSERVATIONS RECEIVED

Apart from a sketch of Eratosthenes by Dale Holt, the dearth of visual observations and drawings continues as observers increasingly migrate to the use of high-resolution imaging. However, it should be emphasised again that visual submissions are still welcome. Meanwhile, despite the poor conditions in the UK in November and December excellent images have been received from the following observers: Leo Aerts, Maurice Collins, Dave Finnigan, Clyde Foster, Rik Hill, Alex Houston, Bill Leatherbarrow, Lars Lindhard and Mark Radice.

Meanwhile Mike Brown, one of our most experienced imagers, has submitted the following record in support of his view that imaging opportunities seem to be getting fewer and fewer, at least from his observing location in York. It makes depressing reading:

‘I’ve done an analysis of my last six years of Lunar avis captured, with the undermentioned results:

2010 15 sessions 2011 24 sessions 2012 21 sessions 2013 17 sessions 2014 11 sessions 2015 8 sessions

I felt the evidence proves a rather large decline in the number of opportunities and the general quality of the seeing. I suppose that Global Warming has its part to play, but this has been going on for years and not just the last two.

Interesting but worrying.’

Like the Director, Mike is located on the wrong side of the Pennines (at least from a meteorological point of view – no offence to Yorkshire folk!), where the usual prevailing westerly air flow is disturbed by the intervening hills. But, even allowing for that, nights of good seeing have become a precious few.

Here is a selection from the images received, along with Dale’s sketch. As usual, space does not permit us to reproduce as many as we would wish.

5 ERATOSTHENES, drawn by Dale Holt, 2015 December 4, 06.30 UT. To the right is an image taken by the Director on the same morning at 07.55 UT, col. 188.0°.

Sunset over Theophilus and Cyrillus Clyde Foster

Clyde Foster (South Africa) writes:

‘After capturing my Mars images on the morning of 1 December, the waning moon was well positioned, so I swung over for a few captures. Seeing was not particularly good, but the lunar sunset gave a different perspective on some of the craters. I used an IR filter with the ASI224MC for this capture. I imaged the 110km-diameter Theophilus which has impinged on the older 100km-diameter Cyrillus. Under these conditions Theophilus B , which is on the western wall of Theophilus is hidden in the shadow. The impressive terraces on the eastern wall are highlighted, whilst the southern wall detail gives an almost molten appearance. A few small mounds and craterlets in north eastern section of the floor are visible. In Cyrillus the inner mountain range on the eastern side of the crater is nicely highlighted as well as the main floor fracture. The impressive looking wall section between Cyrillus and Cyrillus F at the bottom centre must be reasonably flattish at its summit, as the detail shows also on the eastern side of the ridge.’

6 The Polar Regions Rik Hill and Lars Lindhart

For some reason the southern polar regions of the Moon seem to attract much more attention from observers than those of the north. Rik Hill (USA) writes:

‘I would encourage all lunar imagers to take a couple images of the [northern] polar regions when the libration is favorable. This is another such image. Each time I do this I see new features. Lunar libration allows us to see almost 10% more than half the Moon so what you do is wait until it shows more of your area of interest and image that region on that night. A beautiful video demonstrating libration during a full lunation, plus a good detailed explanation, can be found on the Wikipedia page for "lunar libration".

The very large, crater at the top of this image is the 108km Hermite. NASA's Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) found this crater to be the coldest place in the solar system at -413° Fahrenheit (−247° Celsius) even colder than Pluto's surface at -382° Fahrenheit, (-229° Celsius)!

Just to the left of Hermite is the clear 60km crater Sylvester and between them and above is the extremely foreshortened 32km crater Lovelace. To the lower right of Hermite is the large 57km crater Byrd with the clear, younger 42km crater Gioja on Byrd's southern wall. Above Byrd is a shadow-filled ring that is the 77km crater, Peary. On the far edge of this crater, marked by the arrow, is the lunar north pole, one of the holy grails of libration imaging.

7 Below Gioja are the twin (over-under) craters Main (48km) and below it is Challis (58km). Below them is the deep (2400m) 58km Scoresby. South of Scoresby is the large "walled plain" Meton. It is not simply called a "crater" because it's actually the merging of 4 or 5 craters that were flooded some 4 billion years ago. Barrow is the 95km diameter flooded crater to the left of Meton. Further left is the large, 124km Goldschmidt and finally the younger 53km crater Anaxagoras.’

Meanwhile, Lars Lindhart (Denmark) has submitted a fine panorama of the southern polar regions, and we hope that he will continue to send in his work.

8 Leo Aerts (Belgium) is another European observer who has just started to submit his work to the Section, although he is extremely well known as a fine planetary imager. Again, we hope that Leo will continue to send in his superb lunar images, a couple of examples of which are given below. The first is another excellent image of the southern highlands, this time featuring the unusual interior of the crater Boussingault.

Boussingault, imaged by Leo Aerts on 2013 December 9 at 17.58 UT.

The second is a magnificent capture of sunset over the spectacular flooded crater Fracastorius, showing much fine detail on the crater floor. This image (below) was taken on 2015 November 1 at 03.44 UT.

9 Finally, and continuing this month’s polar theme, two images from Mark Radice and Dave Finnigan. Mark’s capture of the are around Moretus is remarkable for the fact that it was taken with a 150mm Mak-Cass., showing just what can be achieved with a small-aperture telescope. At the other pole, Dave’s capture of W. Bond also shows the very fine rille crossing that crater’s floor that was featured on an image by Clyde Foster in last month’s issue.

10 11 MORE CONCENTRIC CRATERS Barry Fitz-Gerald

Concentric Craters (CCs) are unique lunar craters in which there is a torus-like structure, often compared to a doughnut within and roughly concentric with the crater rim. Their origin has been something of a conundrum for some time, with candidate explanations ranging from two craters coincidentally superimposed on one another, intrusive volcanic activity, with the torus being formed by magma injected into the crater walls, or simple collapse of the rim into the crater. Having looked at a number of CCs some time ago (see the Section publication The Moon: Occasional Papers of the BAA Lunar Section, Volume 2, December 2012 – available on the Section website) I came to the conclusion that they were a mixed bag, with some evidence for volcanism, but that generally the rim collapse hypothesis was most consistent with the evidence. The cause of the rim collapse is the major unknown, but localised uplift, producing tensional forces around the circumference of the crater rim was one proposed mechanism. The following are a few notes on the subject that support that conclusion but were not discussed in my original musing.

To start with it is useful to compare CCs to ordinary craters that have not undergone any modification, and happily we have a pair of craters on the floor of the crater Humboldt that allow us to do this.

Fig. 1 Quickmap image of CC and neighbour on the floor of Humboldt and topographic profile along the line indicated.

Fig. 1 shows this crater pair, each a shade under 9kms in diameter. They lie on the basalt floor of Humboldt which is large a Floor Fracture Crater (FFC) As can be seen the CC is older than the normal crater as indicated by the its sharp fresh appearance and the presence of an ejecta blanket. This normal crater clearly interrupts a graben that can be seen running from lower left to top right indicating that it post dates the graben. A similar graben to the north cuts the southern rim of the CC indicating that the crater was present before the graben formed. If these graben formed during the uplift that is implicated in the formation of FFCs then the CC would pre-date the uplift whilst the normal crater would post-date it.

The topographic cross-section reveals just how shallow CCs are in comparison to normal craters, it also shows the torus in cross section. As can be seen the CC is less

12 than half the depth of the normal crater despite being the same approximate diameter, and although not clear in this plot, the slope of the inner crater wall is approximately 7° less than that of the normal crater.

Humboldt has undergone considerable modification to produce the complex array of radial and concentric fractures that give this class of craters their name. This modification is currently believed to take the form of uplift as a result of the injection of magma into the highly shattered and brecciated rocks beneath crater floor. Much of the interior of Humboldt is filled with a relatively smooth light plains material – possibly a type of Cayley Plains deposit of impact-derived material or a form of volcanically derived mantling. Whatever the composition is, the important thing in this discussion is that the area surrounding the two craters appears to be homogeneous. This allows us to discount one theory concerning CCs which suggests that the original impact occurred in a layered target – if this was the case here both craters should exhibit a CC format.

What is likely however is that events occurring within Humboldt during its history will have had an effect on any pre-existing craters. We can say for instance that the CC was subject to the uplift and tensional forces that gave rise to the fractured floor of Humboldt as it pre-dates the fractures that would have formed during that episode. The normal crater, forming after any uplift had ceased would not have experienced any of these forces, and so would remain unmodified. My argument in my previous article in The Moon was that such uplift could potentially de-stabilise crater rims by affecting the circumferential faults that formed during initial crater formation. This could lead to a simultaneous failure of the entire crater rim, with the unstable crater wall collapsing inwards to form the torus we see.

Fig. 2 Quickmap image of CC and simple crater on the floor of the FFC Lavoisier. The simple crater is 4.9kms in diameter and North is to the left. Note the fractured rim of the CC to the south-east which in this image is in the 2 o'clock position.

You could be forgiven for thinking that Fig. 2 is another image of this crater pair, but it is in fact another pair on the floor of the crater Lavoisier which is on the western edge of Oceanus Procellarum. Lavoisier is a spectacular example of a FFC, with a

13 complex of marginal circumferential fractures as well as fractures that cross the centre of the crater in a south-east to north-west direction. As with Humboldt, these two craters are clearly different in age, with the CC being the oldest and pre-dating the fracture that cuts the rim to the south-east. The younger crater is unaffected by any of the fractures. What we see here mirrors the situation in Humboldt, with an old crater pre-dating the uplift and fracturing that formed the FFC. The temptation therefore is to link the uplift to the formation of the torus, with the tensional forces produced by the uplift being responsible. The younger craters post-date the uplift and therefore do not develop into CCs.

It is also worth noting that in both these cases the fractures cut the crater rims but do not obviously cut the torus. In both CCs these fractures appear to cut the rim in a slightly tangential orientation, breaching it at two points, and where this has occurred the torus is more well developed.

Fig. 3 Humboldt CC – yellow arrows show where a fracture trending SW-NE cuts the southern rim in two places, and the topographic profile along the line shown indicates that the torus (red arrow) adjacent to this fracture is particularly well developed.

Fig. 3 shows the Humboldt CC, and as can be seen the torus forms a prominent bench like feature adjacent to the points where the fracture cuts the crater rim.

14 Fig.4 Lavoisier CC – yellow arrows show where a fracture trending SE-NW cuts the southern rim in two places, and the topographic profile along the line shown indicates that the torus (red arrow) adjacent to this fracture is particularly well developed.

Fig. 4 shows the Lavoisier CC where the same situation applies, with a well developed bench-like torus adjacent to the section of rim affected by the fracture. What this may be indicating is that the rim sections affected by these fractures were more unstable and consequently collapsed to a greater degree than other sections of the rim. This further indicates that the formation of the torus occurred after the fractures formed, suggesting a sequence of events starting with a simple crater, followed by uplift and fracture formation, and finally rim collapse and formation of the torus.

If uplift and tensional forces produce the rim collapse suggested, we might expect to see modification of the crater rim. In the above cases any such modification might be difficult to identify as the whole rim is believed to have been involved. There are however a number of CCs which have an asymmetric torus, suggesting (assuming the collapse hypothesis) that only part of the rim has collapsed, and in these cases it might be possible to discern some difference between the collapsed and uncollapsed rim sections.

15 Fig. 5 Quickmap image of crater Leaky, showing the partial torus in the north and topographic profile the line indicated.

There are a number of CCs that suggest that torus formation is due to rim collapse. Fig. 5 for example shows the crater Leaky, approximately 12.5kms in diameter, and with a partial torus which is most prominently developed in the north, but more or less absent in the south. This torus is a bit more angular in outline when compared to the Humboldt and Lavoisier CCs, which may relate to underlying geology and topography, which contrasts to the rather homogeneous location in Humboldt and Lavoisier. A glance at the topographic profile shows that the north-eastern rim is approximately 150m lower than the south-western rim, whilst the slope beneath the lower rim is also slightly shallower in the northeast, but only by a marginal amount. This observation is consistent with the collapse hypothesis where you would expect greatest modification of the crater rim in the areas where the torus is most well developed.

16 Fig. 6 Quickmap image of crater Damoiseau BA, showing the asymmetric partial torus more well developed in the east and a topographic profile along the line indicated.

Damoiseau BA shown in Fig.6, is approximately 8.5kms in diameter and has a torus more well developed in the east than the west. In this case the eastern rim is some 100m lower than the western rim, where the torus is present but much less prominent.

Fig. 7 Quickmap image of crater Bell E, showing the an irregular torus more well developed in the north-west and south-east and a topographic profile the line indicated.

17 Fig. 7 shows the 16km diameter Bell E, which has an irregular torus with prominent sections to the north-west and south-east. The torus is irregular and rather sharp in appearance as compared to other CCs, and again as can be seen from the cross- section, the crater rim is lower where the torus is more well developed. A word of caution is however in order: this crater, like Leaky and Damoiseau BA, lies on uneven topography, where rim heights might reflect an irregular pre-impact ground surface. A more convincing argument can be made using CCs lying on level mare surfaces, but inconveniently such examples are few and far between. One possible candidate is the CC within the Apollo Basin shown in Fig. 8.

Fig. 8 Quickmap image of CC within the Apollo Basin, showing the asymmetric partial torus with additional slumped masses between the crater wall and torus, particularly in the south-east where one has compressed and distorted the original torus. Topographic profile is along the line indicated.

This is a complex CC, with a complete torus accompanied by later more irregular wall collapses, giving the impression of a small string of sausages wedged between the torus and the crater wall. As can be seen, the morphology of the torus and of the later collapse features is pretty similar, suggesting at least a common mode of origin by mass movement. Lying on the level plains of the Apollo Basin, any differences in rim height is more likely to be a result of post impact modification rather than a result of pre-impact topography. The topographic profile shows that the rim height in the south-east, corresponding to the location of a large later collapse feature, is marginally lower than the opposite rim. The upper crater wall is also less steep to the south-east (~ 5°) than to the north-west, possibly supporting the idea that these collapses, and by extension the formation of the torus, have altered the crater profile in subtle ways. In a CC with a symmetrical torus this modification to the rim will affect the whole crater circumference in such a way that discerning any modification becomes difficult, and it is only in the asymmetric examples that we see a difference in different parts of the crater rim.

Hesiodus A (Fig. 9) is probably the finest example of a CC, and is located adjacent to several equally fine FFCs including Pitatus and Hesiodus. Hesiodus A partially overlaps the south-western rim of Hesiodus but mostly lies on what looks like a flat

18 mare surface. A topographic profile however shows that Hesiodus A is elevated above the surrounding terrain, with the surface sloping away from the crater rim to the north-west and south-east. In fact the crater appears to lie on a low ridge which runs in a north-east to south-west direction. It is inconspicuous visually but can be identified using the Path Query tool on Quickmap. This ridge rises to a height of some 150m, and slopes at a gentle 8° down towards the north and Rima Hesiodus. This ridge may be the result of the uplift that has occurred in the area, particularly within Pitatus and Hesiodus, where the theory of FFC formation suggests that the injection of magma into subsurface reservoirs called laccoliths forced the crater floors upwards. The presence of Rima Hesiodus to the north, as well as smaller less conspicuous graben-type structures immediately north and south of Hesiodus A, testify to the fact that uplift is not restricted to the floors of the FFCs but has affected the general area.

Fig. 9 Quickmap image of CC within Hesiodus A, showing the highly symmetric torus, and a topographic profile is along the line indicated. Note the elevated nature of the surface to the north-west and south-east indicative of uplift.

The evidence of uplift that has affected Hesiodus A and the presence of a fine torus are suggestive, and would be consistent with the idea that tensional forces produced during uplift could have contributed to the destabilisation of the crater rim. This would however require that the impact that formed Hesiodus A, which was initially a simple bowl-shaped crater pre-dated any uplift events. There is not much to go on to determine this relative chronology, and there is always the chance that Hesiodus A sits on top of this ridge by chance, but this observation taken together with the examples mentioned above may make a fair argument in favour of uplift being implicated.

19 Fig. 10 Quickmap image of CC Marth with topographic profile is along the line indicated.

Another example where the timing is less of a problem is the CC Marth in Palus Epidemiarum (Fig. 10) where the torus appears almost as conspicuous as the crater rim itself. Palus Epidemiarum is crossed by at least three graben-like fractures trending in a south-west to north-east direction. These graben are shallow, approximately 20 to 30m deep and approximately 1.5kms wide, and appear to be offshoots of the complex of graben surrounding the crater Ramsden. One of the graben clearly interrupts the southern rim of Marth, indicating that the crater pre-dates the graben and therefore the uplift. This graben has been partially obscured by later geological activity, but interestingly enough, the torus here shows a similar bench-like character to that seen in the Humboldt and Lavoisier CCs, indicating that the torus post-dates much of the fracturing. Marth has clearly had an eventful life, heavily modified by mare volcanism and tectonic activity but its credentials as a CC are unmistakable.

In conclusion, it is possible to show that the rims of some CCs show distinct modification in height and slope in those sections where the torus is most well developed. It is also possible to demonstrate that the formation of the torus is the final act in the formation some CCs where the location (within FFCs) or local topography (fractured or elevated mare surface) indicate an uplift event or events of some sort. These observations are consistent with the hypothesis that CCs form as a result of tensional forces destabilizing the crater rim, probably by affecting the concentric faults that formed during the original impact event. Of course other factors could cause destabilization in areas where uplift has not occurred, with large nearby impacts and associated tectonic re-adjustments possibly playing a part in the examples of CCs located in the highlands, and away from the influences elsewhere. No doubt CCs are still a heterogeneous lot, but at the moment my money is on rim collapse as a factor common to all of them.

20 Acknowledgement: All images and topographic charts are reproduced by courtesy of the LROC Website at http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/index.html, School of Earth and Space Exploration, University of Arizona.

LUNAR GEOLOGICAL CHANGE DETECTION PROGRAMME 2016 Jan

Observations/Studies for November were received from: Jay Albert (Lake Worth, FL, USA - ALPO) observed: Anaximander, Aristarchus, Eratosthenes, Piazzi Smyth, Plato, Proclus, Promontorium Agarum, Torricelli B, and Vallis Alpes. Alberto Anunziato (Argentina – AEA) observed/imaged: Albategnius, Aristarchus, Atlas, Bullialdus, Cleomedes, Colombo, Fabricius, Manilius, Mare Nubium, Menelaus, Mons La Hire, Plato, Proclus, Pytheas, Santbech, and Tycho. Kevin Berwick (Ireland – ALPO) observed Alphonsus and Aristarchus. Juan Manuel Biagi (Argentina – AEA) imaged Aristarchus and Plato. Francisco Cardinali (Argentina – AEA) imaged: Aristarchus, Copernicus and Gassendi. Marie Cook (Mundesley, UK) observed Copernicus and Plato. Darryl Davis (Albany, OR, USA – ALPO) observed: South. Pasquale D’Ambrosio (Italy - UAI) imaged Birt. Rik Hill (Tucson, AZ, USA - ALPO) imaged Stadius. Bill Leatherbarrow (Sheffield, UK – BAA) imaged: Langrenus, Petavius, and Vendelinus. Franco Taccogna (Italy, UAI) imaged: Proclus.

News: Firstly I would like to wish a happy New Year to all our readers, and even more so, plenty of clear sky to observe the Moon. Hopefully as my teaching load is lighter in the Spring semester, I can return to doing a more complete analysis of each observation we cover in this section of the newsletter. I will also try to re-boot the web-site for looking for changes on the Moon between LROC images.

As promised, below in Table 1, is a summary of the 38 or so repeat illumination events covered in the last three months of newsletters, with adjusted weights in the right most column.

21 Table 1. Summary of repeat illumination observations covered in the LSC for Sep-Dec 2015.

TLP Reports: No TLP reports were received in November – well perhaps with the exception of a Promontorium Agarum observation by Jay Albert, but it may be that this was just natural surface colour that he was detecting at this illumination angle – see below for the full details under Routine Reports.

Routine Reports: Below is a selection of reports received for November that can help us to re-assess unusual past lunar observations.

Proclus: On 2015 Nov 17 UT 17:14-18:49 Franco Taccogna (Italy, UAI) imaged Proclus under the same illumination conditions (to within ±0.5˚) to the following TLP report:

On 2004 Jun 24 at UT 01:15-03:15 J. Albert (Lake Worth, FL, USA, seeing 8/10 and transparency = mag 3) noticed that the shadow on the east wall of Proclus looked unusual. It was divided by a bright vertical feature. To the south of this feature, the shadow on the crater wall was black (as would be expected). To the north of the bright vertical feature, however, the shadow started black, but gradually lightened until it ended where the crater wall was brightly sunlit. Observer used to seeing lunar shadows as black with sharp boundaries, so this struck him as odd. Since he had never looked closely at Proclus before, it's possible that what he saw was normal for this solar angle and the intensity difference is due to the colour of the feature. He took a photo with a digital camera which shows the intensity difference, but poorly and certainly not as well as he saw it in the eyepiece at 311x (using a Celestron NexStar 11" SCT with a 9mm orthoscopic

22 eyepiece). He made a sketch which more clearly showed the intensity gradation. The ALPO/BAA weight=1.

Figure 1. Proclus orientated with north towards the top.(Left) Image by Franco Taccogna (UAI) taken on 2015 Nov 17 UT 17:14. (Centre) The original sketch by Jay Albert from 2004 Jun 24 UT 02:30. (Right) Image by Brendan Shaw from 2011 Jul 06 UT 20:09.

Franco, using a 20cm Newtonian, took a series of images, the sharpest of which is shown in Fig1 (Left). For comparison another similar illumination image, taken by Brendan Shaw is shown on the right, albeit a few years earlier and at a different topocentric libration. You can see Jay’s sketch in the centre. Based upon some comments when I showed Jay, Brendan’s image in 2011, Jay noted then that: “Thanks for sending me Brendan Shaw's amazing photo. It's extremely close to what I saw. The only difference is that the light, vertical line seemed brighter to me than indicated in the photo. That line is probably a bit exaggerated in my sketch because it was hard to draw it as thin as it probably was. I rechecked my own photos from June 2004 and discovered that there is a faint hint of that line when I magnify the photo on the computer screen. One or two other vertical bands are also evident in these photos. I guess this was Proclus' normal appearance and not a TLP.” The reason why I kept Jay’s 2004 observation on the TLP list was to wait to see if we could get a view from another topocentric libration (ideally similar), however now that we have, I think it is safe to remove it from the catalog by assigning a weight of 0. The issue over Jay saying that he thought the line between the two shadows was brighter, could simply be due to a combination of resolution and contrast between the eye and modern day CCD cameras. Anyway there is now no longer anything that we could consider as being extraordinary about Jay’s original observation, other than the majority of his sketch seems to be remarkably accurate.

Birt: On 2015 Nov 20 UT 18:35-19:43 Pasquale D’Ambrosio (UAI) imaged this crater under identical illumination conditions (to within ±0.5˚) to the following TLP report by the famous planetary astronomer Charles Capen:

Birt 1955 Apr 15 UT 03:20-05:00 Observed by Capen (California Seeing=Excellent) "Small craters between Birt & wall were invis. at times under excellent seeing, while craterlets on w.side were continually obs." NASA catalog weight=4. NASA catalog ID #586. ALPO/BAA weight=3.

23 Figure 2. Birt as imaged by Pasquale D’Ambrosio (UAI) on 2015 Nov 20 at the UTs given in the above images. The images have been sharpened, contrast stretched and were then orientated with north towards the top approximately.

Figure 3. Birt as seen from NASA’s LRO spacecraft (WAC mosaic from the http://target.lroc.asu.edu/q3/ web site).

Now Birt is 16 km in diameter from north to south, so I would imagine that Pasco’s images have a spatial resolution of the order of 2-3 km. The largest of the craters between Birt and Rupes Recta (formerly the Straight Wall) is only 2 km in diameter (see the spacecraft image in Fig 3 above), so at best Pasquale’s image might see these as spots, if the image contrast was good enough. Pasquale’s images are sufficient in resolution to detect the extent of Rima Birt to the west of Birt, but are perhaps just on the limit of detecting Capen’s craters. We shall therefore leave the weight of this 1955 report at 3 because common sense tells that if Capen could see the craterlets just to the west, which were smaller, then surely he should have seen those to the east too? We will monitor this repeat illumination crater in future to see if we can out do the resolution that Pasquale obtained.

Copernicus: On 2015 Nov 20 UT 20:10-20:15 Marie Cook BAA) observed this crater under the same illumination conditions (to within ±0.5˚) to the following TLP report:

On 1990 Apr 04 at UT 21:30-21:50 Barry Lefranc (Milton Keynes, UK, Seeing was very good) reported observing a white flame effect in Copernicus crater (sketch made) - though Foley comments that the actual location was east of the crater. The Cameron 2006 catalog ID=398 and the weight=2. The ALPO/BAA weight=2.

24 Marie was using a 9cm Questar telescope at x80, under II seeing conditions and moderate transparency. She commented that the crater was about half shadow filled, that the detail was sharp, but that there was no sign of a white flame effect either inside the crater or beyond it. So everything appeared quite normal. Clearly what was reported in 1990 was abnormal, however as we have very little information to go on, i.e. no sketches or images, I think we had better keep the weight at 2. If anybody knows the email address of Barry Lefranc, please get in contact as I would like to try to get hold of a copy of their sketch.

Plato: On 2015 Nov 21 UT 03:30-03:42 Alberto Anunziato (AEA) observed/imaged Plato under the same illumination conditions (to within ±0.5˚) to the following past TLP reports:

Plato 1972 Mar 24/25 UT 20:38-00:00 Observed by M.Burton (UK, 13.5" reflector, seeing IV-V, Transparency Fair, x180) UT20:38-20:45 floor was darker in a red filter than in a blue. UT20:47-20:56 JS Burgess (seeing 2/5, x200, with and without filters) found everything normal (with and without filters). UT20:00-20:07 and 21:30-21:35 A.J. Beddoes found everything normal (with and without filters). However at 23:10 L.Fitton suspected that the E (IAU?) floor of Plato had a red-brown cast, but could not be quite sure. UT23:54-00:00 M.Burton, detected the floor was darker in red than in blue light. Burton did not detect any colour without the use of filters on either of the two occasions that he detected a blink. In view of the fact that two observers did not detect anything, albeit not concurrently with the TLP reports, this TLP is being given an ALPO/BAA weight of 1.

On 2009 Apr 04 at UT 21:40 M.C Cook (Mundesley, UK) after receiving a telephone alert call, examined Plato crater. Although she did not report C. Brook's slight mottled pink on the floor of Plato, she did report through that the floor patches looked darker than normal, especially in blue light and in red they were not visible at all. In white light they were darker than normal. A.C. Cook was probably observing at the same time via a couple of remotely controlled telescopes in Aberystwyth. The results (time lapse imagery through narrow band filters) will be examined at a later date. Note that this observation was made after C. Brook said that he could no longer see his TLP. Therefore this constitutes a different TLP as there had been a gap of 1 hour since the last TLP report. ALPO/BAA weight=2.

Figure 4. Plato as imaged by Alberto Anunziato (AEA) on 2015 Nov 21, some time between 03:30- 03:42 UT. The image has been orientated with north towards the top, sharpened and had its colour saturation increased. No attempt has been made to remove atmospheric spectral dispersion.

The image that Alberto took, has been examined in separate red and blue components and shows the floor to be slightly darker in blue than in red light, which is at odds with the 1972 report. There is some red/brown casts in places in the image, but it is possible that at least some of this could be due to atmospheric spectral dispersion effects on contrasty edges, or on brightness gradients. However seeing that the 1972 observation was made under poor to very poor seeing conditions, I will keep the weight at 1 for now, and would be interested to see if we can obtain

25 other repeat illumination images of this event in colour, so verify the colours that Alberto obtained, or if they are more in agreement with the 1972 results?

Concerning the 2009 report, I still have not gotten around to checking my CCD video from Aberystwyth University telescopes, however the image scale was probably too low to detect the floor patches mentioned, so may not be of much help. Alberto’s images do not show the normal floor patches either, so unfortunately we cannot comment on whether they were brighter or darker in red or blue light. The weight for the 2009 report will stay at 2.

South: On 2015 Nov 23 UT 02:55-03:00 Darryl Davis (ALPO) observed the crater South and the Herschel area about 1.5 hours after the end of the following repeat illumination event from the World War One era:

40-54W, 54N-60N i.e. nr. South? or J.Herschel 1913 Jun 15 UT 22:00? Observer: Maw (Surrey, UK, 6" & 8" refractors) "Small distinct reddish spot which became diffused into a patch as term. advanced on the plateau NE of the crater South. When the plateau was on the term. (Goodacre says the crater was J.Herschel for same date -- 2 different spots or misident. for one?" NASA catalog weight=3. NASA catalog ID #345. ALPO/BAA weight=2.

Darryl was using a Questar telescope at x80 with seeing=4/10 and transparency=3rd magnitude. He was observing primarily to check out a black rectangle effect he had seen previously back on 2015 Sep 25 UT 03:28-03:40. This clearly had not been a TLP, but was worth investigating. The rectangle effect was because of a shadow formed by the NE wall of South. That wall was fairly straight and must have had a fairly uniform elevation which made the shadow appear to have fairly uniform width along its length. On the Nov observing session, the illumination was higher because the shadow had begun to be less dark and some of the unevenness along the wall of South was beginning to show minor undulations. Darryl made no comments about the 1913 repeat illumination event, so we will leave that at a weight of 2.

Promontorium Agarum: On 2015 Nov 24 UT 00:50-01:15 Jay Albert (ALPO) observed with a Celestron C11 (x224) scope, under seeing 4/10 and transparency 3rd magnitude, under the same illumination conditions (to within ±0.5˚) to the following TLP report from 1980:

On 1980 Sep 22 at UT05:00? D. Louderback (South Bend, WA, USA, 8" reflector, x140 and 2.5" refractor) observed in Promontorium Agarum that one of his pre-designated points, called "A", through to "C and "D" was at least 5 brightness points brighter in red than in blue light. The reverse was true on Sep 25th. Tonight the red seemed to be on a narrow strip on the western edge. The Cameron 2006 catalog ID=109 and the weight=3. The ALPO/BAA weight=3.

Jay performed many blink attempts with W25 red and W44A blue filters and noted that the promontory appeared slightly brighter in red light than in blue. However, the effect was not limited to the narrow edge as described in the original TLP report but was evident in the overall area. He saw no colour whatsoever in white light. It is interesting that Jay detected colour and not anywhere else that night. It is definitely worth leaving the Louderbeck observation at a weight of 3 to encourage others to re-observe and see if they can detect natural(?) surface colour here too – though why Louderbeck saw it on the western edge and Jay over the entire feature is a puzzle.

Aristarchus: On 2015 Nov 28 UT 06:19 Juan Manuel Biagi (AEA) imaged this crater, using a Meade LX200 scope under the same illumination and viewing angle (to within ±1˚) to the following TLP report from the 1970’s:

Aristarchus and vicinity 1975 Feb 28 UT 03:20-03:45 Observers LeCroy Jr & Sr (Springfield, VA, USA). NASA catalog states: "Orange flash in crater that then spread over whole crater then turned to bluish haze at 0320h. Couldn't see surface underneath. All W. hemisphere was brighter than normal. Blue was

26 only on Aris. Rest of Moon was examined for phenom. but none seen elsewhere. Gone by 0343h (just a few hrs after Eng. obs. -- not likely U.S. obs. had temp. inversion high press. sys. W. of him too). 4.5" reflector 45x, 150x. NASA catalog weight=4. NASA catalog TLP ID No. #1401. ALPO/BAA weight=4.

Figure 5. Colour image of the Aristarchus area taken by Juan Manuel Biagi (AEA) on 2016=5 Nov 28 UT 06:19. The image has been orientated with north towards the top and has been sharpened and had its colour saturation increased to 60%.

Although Juan’s image (see Fig 5) is saturated inside Aristarchus, it does at least show that Aristarchus would have been extremely bright at the time, and this in itself might have made it difficult to see the interior surface of the crater. This does not reveal any clues though as to the “orange” flash effect that was reported in 1975, and so the weight will remain at 4.

Gassendi: On 2015 Nov 29 UT 04:47 Francisco Cardinalli (AEA) imaged (See Fig 6) Gassendi under the same illumination conditions (to within ±0.5˚) to the following 1960’s Patrick Moore report:

Gassendi 1966 Sep 02 UT 22:55-02:55 Observed by Moseley, Moore, Gill, Harris, Frost and Hall (Armagh, Northern Ireland, 10" refractor + Moon Blink, Seeing=fair) and by Cave (England using a Moon blink) "Eng. Moonblink sys. detected red glows on c.p. & around it; seen vis. too. (Corralitos obs.at the time? did not see anything?)" Note that the Armagh observers were all using the same telescope, The observing times of M. Cave are not given but they saw a blink SW of the central peaks. NASA catalog ID 972. NASA catalog weight=5. ALPO/BAA weight=3.

Figure 6. Colour Gassendi on 2015 Nov 29 UT 03:43 as imaged by Francisco Cardinalli and others (AEA). This image is orientated with north towards the top and has been sharpened and then had its colour saturation increased to 80%.

You can see the colour image that Francisco captured in Fig 6 – this is the normal appearance that Moseley, Moore, Gill etc, should have seen. As a Moon Blink device was in operation, at some

27 point, it is difficult to explain how a blink effect was detected if the colours had been due to atmospheric spectral dispersion, or even chromatic aberration. I have tried producing some synthetic spectral dispersion views of the image anyway and although one can produce red on bright features such as the central peaks, it is always on the same side with blue on the other side, and anyway even stronger on more contrasty areas. The 1966 report will remain at a weight of 3 as we do not know the time that the Corralitos team were observing, and as they were located in New Mexico, it seems unlikely that they could have observed at the same time?

Alphonsus: On 2015 Nov 29 UT 23:53-00:19 Kevin Berwick (ALPO) observed visually this crater under the same illumination conditions (to within ±0.5˚), to the following 1959 H.P. Wilkins report:

Alphonsus 1958 Nov 29 UTC 22:00? Observed by Wilkins (Kent, UK, 15" reflector) "Near site of Kozyrev's outbreak saw a circular patch, black pit centre, & red, round masses all around it." NASA catalog weight=4. NASA catalog ID #708.ALPO/BAA weight=3.

Figure 7. Sketch of the Alphonsus area by Kevin Berwick from 2015 Nov 29/30 UT 23:53-00:19.

Kevin reported that he was particularly interested in this repeat illumination session because of its association with Kozryrev, a Russian astronomer who claimed to have spectroscopic evidence of a TLP. In addition, the Wilkins TLP report had a high weight. From Dublin the clouds cleared at 23:20 UT and Kevin was able to make a sketch (Fig 7) showing the usual dark patches on the crater floor, together with a couple of bright patches also. Kevin was using a Televue TV101 4 inch apochromatic refractor, but did not report any colour. He wondered if chromatic aberration might have explained the colours that Wilkins saw, but this seems unlikely as the 1958 report was made with a 15” Newtonian telescope. Atmospheric spectral dispersion seems unlikely too as the Moon was 43˚ above the horizon at the time, assuming Cameron’s UT estimate is correct. The weight of the Wilkins report shall therefore remain at 3.

Suggested Features to observe in January-February: For those of you without access to the Internet (in the UK), below is a list of days and times when you can observe, and by doing so really help to resolve some past historical lunar observational puzzles. Warning – a few of these may be at extremely low altitudes. Note that the impact flash work can be done only with low light sensitive video rate cameras.

2016-Jan-01 UT 04:31-06:07 Ill=60% Alphonsus – colour images needed.

28 2016-Jan-02 UT 02:43-04:00 Ill=51% Alphonsus – image through near IR and UV filters & study floor. 2016-Jan-02 UT 04:52-07:38 Ill=49% Earthshine – video for sporadic impacts (hi-sensitive camera) 2016-Jan-03 UT 03:28-07:38 Ill=40% Earthshine – video for Quadrantids (hi-sensitive camera) 2016-Jan-03 UT 03:55-04:46 Ill=40% Aristarchus – study the NE part of the crater. 2016-Jan-03 UT 07:18-07:42 Ill=40% Plato – is there a phosphorescent glimmer on shadowed floor? 2016-Jan-04 UT 04:04-07:38 Ill=31% Earthshine – video for Quadrantids (hi-sensitive camera) 2016-Jan-04 UT 08:15-08:24 Ill=31% Promontorium Laplace & Mons La Hire – how bright are these? 2016-Jan-05 UT 04:41-07:38 Ill=22% Earthshine – video for Quadrantids (hi-sensitive camera) 2016-Jan-05 UT 07:13-08:24 Ill=22% Aristarchus – any colour visible? 2016-Jan-06 UT 20:36-00:32 Ill=14% Moon – colour image mosaic needed of the crescent. 2016-Jan-07 UT 07:05-08:23 Ill=8% South Pole – can you see evidence for Harold Hill’s extended cusp? 2016-Jan-12 UT 16:12-16:40 Ill=8% Aristarchus – study this crater in Earthshine. 2016-Jan-13 UT 16:13-19:05 Ill=16% Aristarchus – study this crater in Earthshine. 2016-Jan-13 UT 17:00-18:16 Ill=16% Earthshine – video for sporadic impacts (hi-sensitive camera) 2016-Jan-14 UT 17:01-19:43 Ill=26% Earthshine – video for sporadic impacts (hi-sensitive camera) 2016-Jan-14 UT 18:39-19:41 Ill=26% Posidonius – does Posidonius A have a shadow in it? 2016-Jan-15 UT 16:16-18:10 Ill=35% Menelaus – is there a faint patch of light just inside the NW rim? 2016-Jan-15 UT 17:03-21:06 Ill=37% Earthshine – video for sporadic impacts (hi-sensitive camera) 2016-Jan-16 UT 16:54-18:41 Ill=47% Theophilus – sketch/image the SW wall close to Cyrillus. 2016-Jan-16 UT 17:04-22:25 Ill=49% Earthshine – video for sporadic impacts (hi-sensitive camera). 2016-Jan-17 UT 16:20-18:35 Ill=58% Alphonsus – is there a point of light on the floor N of the c.p.? 2016-Jan-17 UT 18:19-22:13 Ill=59% Plato – any sign of colour in the shadow gaps on the floor? 2016-Jan-18 UT 16:35-19:16 Ill=69% Aristarchus – can you see the crater on the night side? 2016-Jan-18 UT 19:16-21:09 Ill=70% Clavius – can you see a narrow beam of light effect from A to B? 2016-Jan-19 UT 18:29-20:21 Ill=80% Conon – is there a fuzzy bright spot on the floor?

29 2016-Jan-20 UT 16:25-16:36 Ill=87% Ross D – sketches or high resolution images needed. 2016-Jan-21 UT 16:27-17:48 Ill=94% Herodotus – sketch/image the floor, looking for light patches. 2016-Jan-22 UT 16:28-18:57 Ill=97% Aristarchus – colour images needed of crater floor. 2016-Jan-22/23 UT 23:19-03:04 Ill=98% Torricelli B – monitor brightness and look for star like points. 2016-Jan-23/24 UT 23:09-01:00 Ill=100% Fracastorius – is the floor brighter in red or blue light? 2016-Jan-24/25 UT 22:12-00:08 Ill=99% Plato – sketch and image (in colour). 2016-Jan-25 UT 21:22-23:19 Ill=96% Plato – is the central craterlet more visible in red or blue light? 2016-Jan-27 UT 00:08-01:30 Ill=91% Aristarchus – sketch or image (In colour). 2016-Jan-28 UT 00:38-01:38 Ill=85% Theophilus – is there a 100˚ fan on the floor & does it have colour? 2016-Feb-01 UT 04:08-07:14 Ill=49% Earthshine – video for Capricornids Sag. (hi-sensitive camera). 2016-Feb-01 UT 07:25-07:56 Ill=48% Tycho – imaging of the interior shadow needed. 2016-Feb-02 UT 05:36-07:13 Ill=39% Earthshine – video for Capricornids Sag. (hi-sensitive camera). 2016-Feb-05 UT 05:51-07:49 Ill=13% Grimaldi – please image this crater in colour or check visually. 2016-Feb-11 UT 17:48-18:49 Ill=13% Earthshine – video for sporadic impacts (hi-sensitive camera). 2016-Feb-11 UT 17:06-19:07 Ill=13% Aristarchus – describe the brightness and appearance? 2016-Feb-12 UT 17:08-18:38 Ill=21% Grimaldi – please image or sketch. 2016-Feb-12 UT 17:50-20:11 Ill=22% Earthshine – video for Chi Capricornids (hi-sensitive camera). 2016-Feb-13 UT 17:52-21:29 Ill=33% Earthshine – video for Chi Capricornids (hi-sensitive camera). 2016-Feb-13 UT 18:38-20:47 Ill=33% Theophilus – please image or sketch. 2016-Feb-14 UT 17:53-22:43 Ill=45% Earthshine – video for Chi Capricornids (hi-sensitive camera). 2016-Feb-14 UT 18:40-20:32 Ill=45% Ross D – please image/sketch the crater and its surrounds in hi-res. 2016-Feb-14/15 UT 21:36-00:25 Ill=45% Agrippa, Godin & Mare Crisium – sketch or image. 2016-Feb-15 UT 19:13-20:37 Ill=55% Ptolemaeus – image/describe visually the shadowy interior. 2016-Feb-16 UT 00:33-01:27 Ill=57% Mons Piton – sketch or image and look for changes in brightness. 2016-Feb-16 UT 18:40-20:32 Ill=66% Rima Birt – how clearly can you see/image this rille tonight? 2016-Feb-17 UT 21:55-23:34 Ill=77% Plato – are there any faint veins of colour on the eastern wall?

30 2016-Feb-18/19 UT 21:57-00:00 Ill=85% Gassendi & Atlas – check out these craters for colour. 2016-Feb-20 UT 00:52-03:50 Ill=92% Gassendi – is there a bright point at the NNE slope of the c.p.? 2016-Feb-21 UT 00:09-01:56 Ill=97% Sirsalis – please take snap shot images in III-IV seeing. 2016-Feb-22 UT 01:15-03:20 Ill=99% E. of Lictenberg – in 1988 H. Hill saw a rosy area here, can you? 2016-Feb-23 UT 04:09-04:56 Ill=100% Gauss – can you see the W. wall through a Polaroid filter? 2016-Feb-24/25 UT 22:54-00:11 Ill=95% Gassendi – high resolution colour images needed. 2016-Feb-26 UT 01:08-03:05 Ill=90% Lichtenberg – any faint natural colour visible/imaged here? 2016-Feb-28 UT 01:49-03:21 Ill=76% Torricelli B – can you see/image this crater in earthshine? 2016-Feb-29 UT 04:00-05:14 Ill=67% Alphonsus – spectra or colour images of the central peak needed.

The following web site lists date, times, and what to observe to support the observing programs of ALPO and the BAA and covers more than just repeat illumination of TLPs: http://users.aber.ac.uk/atc/lunar_schedule.htm . The latest Spot the Difference between spacecraft imagery taken on different dates can be found on: http://users.aber.ac.uk/atc/tlp/spot_the_difference.htm . If in the unlikely event you see a TLP, firstly read the TLP checklist on http://users.aber.ac.uk/atc/alpo/ltp.htm, and if this does not explain what you are seeing, please give me a call on my cell phone: +44 (0)798 505 5681 and I will alert other observers. Note when telephoning from outside the UK you must not use the (0). When phoning from within the UK please do not use the +44! Twitter TLP alerts can be accessed on http://twitter.com/lunarnaut.

Dr Anthony Cook, Department of Physics, Aberystwyth University, Penglais, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion, SY23 3BZ, WALES, UNITED KINGDOM. Email: atc @ aber.ac.uk.

OCCULTATION NEWS January 2016 Tim Haymes

Announcement:

31 The 35th annual meeting of European occultation observers will take place in the UK in 2016, at the University of Surrey, Guildford on August 19-21. Pre-registration information is available on the symposium web site: www.esop35.uk. Full details of booking and costs should be available by end of February. Section members will be attending, either as residential delegates or day visitors. The program will become clearer during registration. If you plan to attend, please let me know by dropping me a note on [email protected]

This is a good opportunity to meet fellow observers from the UK and Europe (and beyond) engaged in many aspects of occultation observing, including Lunar. We hope to meet you there.

January 2016 General Predictions

Prediction for other locations will differ from these times by several minutes or may not be occulted in examples of grazing incidence. Please request predictions for your observatory from the Coordinator by including your Long/Lat and instrument aperture and we will create them for you.

Occultation prediction for Birmingham, UK W. Longitude 1 44 44.0, Latitude 52 27 41.0, Alt. 50m; Telescope dia 15cm

day Time P Star Sp Mag Mag % Elon Sun Moon CA y m d h m s No v r ill Alt Alt Az o 16 Jan 2 5 51 40 R 1824 G0 7.8 7.5 50- 90 34 176 11S 16 Jan 2 7 33 34.2 R 1830 A3 7.3 7.1 49- 89 -6 31 205 53N 16 Jan 4 3 34 50.1 R 158411 M* 8.0 7.2 32- 69 10 122 76S 16 Jan 12 17 0 34.0 R 3188 A1 5.6 5.6 8+ 33 -6 18 220 -18N lambda Cap 16 Jan 12 18 0 18.0 D 3198 K0 8.1 7.5 8+ 34 12 233 79S 16 Jan 13 17 28 14.5 D 146287 A5 8.0 7.9 16+ 47 -10 24 215 49S 16 Jan 13 17 46 8.8 D 146294 F0 8.6 8.4 16+ 47 23 219 49S 16 Jan 14 17 23 33.1 D 146820 G0 8.2 7.9 25+ 60 -9 33 201 59N 16 Jan 14 18 34 25.3 D 3493 K0 8.7 8.0 25+ 60 28 220 88S 16 Jan 16 18 42 42.4 D 219 K4 4.8 4.1 47+ 87 43 196 66N mu Piscium 16 Jan 16 22 18 5.1 D 237 K0 7.0 6.5 49+ 89 21 253 69N 16 Jan 17 17 59 13.4 D 110516 K0 6.9 6.4 59+ 100 46 163 48S 16 Jan 17 19 42 30.9 D 362 F5 6.5 6.2 59+ 101 47 200 84N 25 Cet 16 Jan 18 17 44 33.5 D 93387 F8 7.1 6.7 70+ 113 -11 45 139 51N 16 Jan 19 0 51 29.0 D 516 G5 6.9 6.3 72+ 116 20 267 45S dbl: 8.1 8.1 0.10" 90, dT = +0.21sec 16 Jan 19 17 7 26.8 D 626 F5 6.3 6.1 79+ 126 -6 36 113 21S 48 Tau 16 Jan 19 19 19 49.4 D 635 G8 3.7 3.1 80+ 127 51 151 16S gamma Tau 16 Jan 19 22 26 33.6 D 659 F7 6.6 81+ 128 48 221 39S Dbl: 7.7 7.0 0.09" 145, dT=+0.3sec 16 Jan 19 23 57 23.9 D 667 K2 5.0 4.4 81+ 128 37 246 62N 75 Tau 16 Jan 20 0 6 13.4 D 672 F7 6.7 81+ 128 36 248 70S dbl: 6.85 8.38 0.14" 264, dT=-0.3sec 16 Jan 20 0 9 55.3 D 669 G7 3.8 3.3 81+ 129 35 249 17S dbl: 3.8 7.3 0.14" 356, dT=-0.6sec 16 Jan 20 0 52 12.8 D 677 A6 4.8 4.7 81+ 129 30 258 71S 16 Jan 20 0 59 41.4 D 680 F5 6.5 6.3 81+ 129 28 259 60S db: 0.30" 297, dT = -0.6sec 16 Jan 20 2 16 43.2 D 685 F0 6.6 6.5 82+ 130 17 275 89S 16 Jan 20 3 24 5.2 DD 692 K5 0.9 0.1v 82+ 130 8 287 51N Aldebaran 16 Jan 20 3 58 14.1 RB 692 K5 0.9 0.1v 82+ 130 3 294 -30N Aldebaran 16 Jan 20 20 58 37.3 D 94476 B9 7.8 7.8 88+ 140 54 167 28S 16 Jan 20 22 54 54.3 D 806 F8 5.0 4.7 89+ 141 52 212 51S 111 Tau 16 Jan 21 18 43 15.1 D 944 A6 5.9 94+ 152 36 108 67N 124 Ori 16 Jan 21 22 15 50.3 D 95554 G7 7.6 6.9 95+ 153 56 176 38N 16 Jan 21 22 26 18.9 D 970 G9 6.3 5.7 95+ 153 55 180 70S 16 Jan 21 23 30 58.6 D 975 A0 6.8 95+ 154 53 206 24S dbl: 7.4 8.0 2.4" 013, dT=-7sec 16 Jan 22 4 17 19.0 D 1003 F6 6.3 6.0 96+ 156 17 277 42N 21 Gem 16 Jan 22 19 4 49.2 D 1091 K5 6.5 5.8 98+ 164 30 102 38S

32 Full Moon 16 Jan 26 23 39 50.3 R 1567 K1 6.4 5.8 91- 146 32 127 19N 37 Leo 16 Jan 28 0 28 46.9 R 1676 K5 6.5 5.7 85- 134 29 131 53N 16 Jan 30 4 0 3.6 R 1891 A1 4.4 68- 111 31 168 51N theta Vir 16 Feb 1 3 43 22.0 R 2097 K0 6.8 6.2 49- 89 18 143 78N 16 Feb 3 4 36 17.3 R 2352 F0 7.0 30- 67 10 136 27N

Double Star information: Mag1, Mag2, Separation, Position Angle, predicted step duration (dT). Star Identifiers: nnnn = ZC, nnnnnn = SAO. X nnnnn = Xtended ZC

The Lunar Occultation Sub-Section wishes everyone - Good Observing and clear skies in 2016

Occultation co-ordinator, Tim Haymes, Hill Rise, Knowl Hill Common, Knowl Hill, Reading RG10 9YD EMail: [email protected]

Yahoo Group: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/UKoccultations/

33