(meteorobs) The Disintegrating Meteor

[GeoZay at aol.com]

Wes>>   I am somewhat concerned by the number of  meteor "old hands" that
seem to find this interesting image an occasion to  cry "Liar liar, Pants on
fire" rather than to use their imagination.   For myself, I prefer to believe
that Geir is accurate in his observation  documentation and find it an
interesting puzzle. <<
 
Well...if it gets past the "old hands", then I'd say he had something.  :O)  

Wes>>Any photographer with five  minutes experience with any SLR on tripod
fired remotely KNOWS that mirror  flop is an extremely small effect: nowhere
near the size of the streak in the  image. <<
 
I'd agree with you if we are talking about having a 50mm or 35mm lens  
on...but I think we are talking about a 10" telescope? I'd have to go back and  look 
to see what the actual size is, but I think it was stated that it was a  10"? 
Anyhow, when I accidentally bump my 10" while looking thru the  eyepiece, I'd 
see something looking rather similar...if I used my imagination  just a tiny 
bit. :O)
 
 Wes>> Furthermore, anyone with
handheld star images knows  that the effect is more like "worms" than "cigar
and  smoke".  <<
 
You know, a bright something can be "burned" into the film and afterwards  
bump the telescope before the shutter closed and you will come out with  
something similar in the photograph. The meteor/airplane or what have you has  
already burned it's image in. What happens afterwards won't effect the meteor  like 
image after it is gone. A bright star can then jiggle around burning it's  own 
image in the film. If I look closely at the image in the "train" area, I see  
what could be 3 or 4 stars burned in its midst.
 

Wes>> Since he was setting up for lunar  photography (hence the plate
scale) he must have been aimed E by NE at about  15 degrees elevation (the
moon at the specified time was up 10.72deg, Az  105.9deg).<<
 
I just realized this object was low in the sky near the horizon. This  brings 
in a couple more things to think about. If this was a meteor, it would  
indicate to me that it was quite far away...maybe 150 miles? At least quite a  bit 
further than if it occured closer to the zenith. That train sure looks  mighty 
spread out and focused for that distance. I'd expect any train to be  
compressed with distinguishing detail quite depressed.  I'm beginning to  lean 
towards the object being an airplane that switched on its landing lights  
momentarily. I've seen this happen quite frequently when aircraft pass over  mountains. 
It use to be a routine sight from my old observatory in the mountains  of San 
Diego, Calif. I don't know if it can happen, but maybe if they were  landing 
lights close to an aircraft, they would also illuminate heat turbulance  near 
the plane like a strobe? Of course this would make the plane a lot closer  than 
a meteor, because of the lower elevation. Also makes things easier to  
photograph in detail. Not all the time will small aircraft be heard at the  likely 
distance. The "meteor" image could look like what I see in the  
photograph...but you might expect some part of a plane showing up in the image  as well?
 
Wes>> Reentering
boosters and other rockets usually have residual  volatiles which can produce
a plume and trail.  <<
 
A possibility, but my money is more on the airplane theory at the  moment.
 
>> This still doesn't rule out a grazing meteor from  the
east, but I prefer the space junk idea at the moment. <<
 
If a grazing meteor or space junk...wouldn't both of these be relatively  
long distance travelers? With space junk traveling much further than an  
earthgrazing meteor. To me, the photograph doesn't seem to fit either of these  
possibilities. Bottom line, it still doesn't make any sense for the photograph  to 
be that of a meteor and it's train.
George Zay