Paper detail

The Milky Way Bulge Extra-Tidal Star Survey: NGC 6569

We present spectroscopic evidence for tidal debris associated with the bulge globular cluster NGC 6569, based on medium-resolution (R ~ 11,000) Anglo-Australian Telescope spectra of 303 stars. Targets were selected using Blanco DECam Bulge Survey (BDBS) photometry and Gaia DR3 astrometry, spanning 7-30 arcmin (~1-5 rt, where rt is the King-model tidal radius) from the cluster center. Orbit-based modeling predicts a strongly time-variable Jacobi radius, with rJ ~ 8-11 arcmin near pericenter and ~18-22 arcmin near apocenter, so stars just outside rt can be unbound and feeding leading and lagging tidal tails. We identify 40 stars with kinematics and abundances consistent with previous, or borderline, cluster membership. The seven highest-quality candidates (S/N > 30) have mean [Fe/H] = -0.83 +/- 0.14 and [alpha/Fe] = +0.38 +/- 0.06 dex, matching the bound population. Interpreting these stars as recently stripped debris implies a present-day mass-loss rate of 1.0-1.6 solar masses per Myr, or 5.6 +/- 1.3% of the current cluster mass per Gyr. These results indicate ongoing tidal stripping of NGC 6569 and quantify its contribution to the bulge field. This paper is part of the Milky Way Bulge Extra-Tidal Star Survey (MWBest) and is our first detailed debris study of a massive bulge globular cluster.

preprint2026arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access28 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.