Yup, basically correct on the perceptions of motion at an unknown altitude
and distance, and unknown angle of either approach or departure. I would
love to look through a database of satellite re-entries, and search for
something that may fit the boot. Does anyone know if there is an online site
that provides such data? There will either be something to support it or
not.
Kevin VK3UKF.
>>The object was already incandescant when it caught
my eye. I think perhaps I caught the last moments of the display, the
breakup etc.<<
Then this would explain a short path for a satellite. The one last thing
that bothers me is the portion you did see along the horizon and it's
velocity.
In that location, it seems to be going too fast for a satellite. Here's
what I
mean. I just happened to notice yesterday, a high up and distant airliner
producing contrails close to 20 degrees above the horizon and traveling
pretty
much parallel to the horizon. It was crawling along. I marked off about 20
degrees with my fists and counted 40 seconds and it still not quite
reached
the 20 degree mark. Still in this case, we are essentially comparing
apples
with oranges. So I tried another thought process and considered what we
definitely know...that is, 1) the object traveled about 20 degrees. 2) It
was
traveling about 20 degrees above and parallel to the horizon. 3) The time
it took to
traverse this 20 degrees was 20 seconds. These numbers should make it easy
to get in the ballpark where I can say to myself, " What is most likely...a
meteor or satellite?" At that location, we end up with a velocity of about
1
degree per second...seemingly in the realm of a satellite...if it occurred
in
the zenith. We know the object was traveling very far off and the distance
traveled would appear much shorter than if it had occurred in the zenith.
It
would be like standing between two railroad tracks and following it with
your
eyes to the horizon. Near the horizon the tracks will appear to have
almost
converged. Now if I looked at the converging tracks near the horizon and a
glowing rock was somehow fired from one track to the other, the distance
covered
will appear very short. Whereas if this same rock was fired from one track
to
the other at my feet, it will appear many times longer...I estimate at
least
3 to 6 times longer. So lets say if the glowing rock between the two
tracks
near the horizon took 20 seconds to traverse the distance, it will also
take
20 seconds for the same rock to pass between the two tracks at my feet.
The
time for it appeared lit up, will essentially be the same at both
locations.
So using my estimate of the path length at my feet to be 3 to 6 times than
that near the horizon, I come up with an estimated distance traveled of
about 60
to 120 degrees...or 3 to 6 degrees per second. I believe more in the realm
of a meteor. Some of the initial estimates may be off and thus throw any
accuracy towards either a satellite or a meteor. But my hunch still wants
to lean
towards your object being more likely that of a meteor than a satellite.
But
I guess we will never know.
George Zay
______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
