NGC/IC Project Restoration Effort

===== NGC 1911 may be NGC 1920. JH has N1920 in seven different sweeps, but not in the one sweep when he found N1911 -- that is Sweep 522. The declinations are within an arcminute, but the RA is different by 1m 20s. The extra 20 seconds bothers me, so I've put a colon on the identity. JH's eight different descriptions are pretty well accordant, though he does have the size of the nebula range between 20 arcsec and 2 arcmin (he puts N1911 at 30 arcsec). I also checked the possibility of a systematic position offset among the other 37 objects that JH recorded in that very productive sweep through the northern part of the LMC -- there isn't any. One curious thing turned up, however: N1911 is the ONLY object in the sweep that was not seen in any other sweep. By the way, JH suggests that this and N1915 may be the same. Jenni Kay accepts this hypothesis, noting that neither of JH's positions match those of any cluster in the area, and that the two clusters taken as the NGC objects are much too faint. While I agree with both points, I do not think that NGC 1911 and 1915 are the same; see N1915 for more on this. A final note: Archinal and Hynes have an entry for NGC 1911, equating it with KMHK 763. This KMHK cluster, however, is far too faint for JH to have seen -- it can't be NGC 1911 (Jenni's comment, noted above, concurs). ----- This is probably a wire mistake. The sweep claims that JH used wire 2; if he had actually used wire 1, the RA would be 1m 19s more than his reduced value. This would make the position identical (within JH's usual errors) to that of NGC 1920, so I am pretty confident of the identity. You may read the first sentence in this note as "NGC 1911 is probably NGC 1920."

===== NGC 1911 See observing notes for NGC 1920.