Jamie Dillon wrote,
>Searched in vain for Nix Olympica (or orographic clouds thereupon)...
>I'm guessing you're partly working on the strength of that story by Sheehan
>et. al. in S&T about finding the Tharsis calderas.
>As you likely know, humans didn't know about that big mountain till the
>Mariner probes flew. Took fancy enhancement on this week's Hubble closeup
>for the Tharsis volcanoes to show. For crying out loud, how many of us are
>Barnard at the eyepiece of the Lick night after night?
>Yammv certainly, but I found those stories to be misleading and seriously
>not in a nice way.
Olympus mons is tricky to pick up visually, in my 9.25 SCT at least, since
its contrast is quite low relative to the surrounding desert region. Last Sunday
night I had very steady seeing & was able to pick up fine detail in the Mare
Sirenium & the fine structures surrounding Solis Lacus. Infact, the eyepiece
view of these dark features rivalled the most recent images I obtained.
However, despite experimenting with the variable polarizer & filters I could not
definetely see Olympus mons, although a couple of times I suspected some structure
in the right place.
Olympus mons is a suprisingly large feature & should be visible in a
telescope that gives a high contrast visual image (eg. a high quality refractor under
excellent seeing). It may be easier to see a little before or after opposition
when close to terminator, certainly some of the best amateur images show it
clearly as something which looks as though it has relief - a sort of little
pimple on the terminator!
My most recent images easily show Olympus mons, it was obvious even on the
raw images;
http://members.aol.com/_ht_a/hattonjasonp/planets/2003AUG25_JPH_Mars.jpg
Olympus mons is the small light circular feature near the lower right limb.
I'm sure Olympus mons should be detectible visually on a moderate - large
scope, it is just a question of having enough image contrast & very good seeing.
Best wishes & clear skies,
Jason
