Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions.

[Jim Strope]

My opinion on your points...........   A -  I would term the mere presence of flow lines as saying that the meteorite was "flight marked" but not necessarily Oriented.   B - I don't think that the absence of fusion crust would mean that a specimen could not be Oriented.  An example would be the famous "King of Irons" Gibeon.  In my opinion, Orientation refers to shape also.   C- Yes, I believe that the elongation of regmaglypts is a sign of possible orientation.  When this is combined with a flat bottom with a roll over rim the signs of Orientation are even more convincing.   I think the real test of orientation is when you can look at the piece and actually visualize the direction of flight.  I have seen many photos on ebay described as oriented where I ask myself - "Oriented in what direction?"   Orientation should be obvious to the casual observer or the term "flight marked" should be used.   Best Wishes to all..............   Jim Strope 421 Fourth Street Glen Dale, WV  26038   Catch a Falling Star Meteorites http://www.catchafallingstar.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Michel Franco To: Michael Farmer ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 3:24 AM Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Note on meteorite descriptions. Michael, Jim, Matteo, list,   This is an interesting thread.   I think it should be developped. And I have questions for experts like you guys. A: Does the presence of some flow lines is enough to say that a meteorite is oriented ? B. Does a meteorite with conical shape ( approx similar to Bob Haag Venus cone ) but without any crust ( due to a long stay on earth surface before find) can be said oriented . C:   When thumbprints  have a particular elliptical shape  with a depressed side and a rim on the other side, is it a sign of orientation.?   Best regards   Michel FRANCO Caillou Noir