(meteorobs) More on video Orionids from Colorado

[Chris Peterson]

Thanks. I agree that my video results and the video flux data you link 
are in agreement. Interesting that they differ from the visual reports 
(which are plotted on the IMO homepage). I'm guessing that once the 
predicted peak had passed, the visual observations simply slowed down 
(there don't seem to have been many to begin with). One more argument 
for the never sleeping camera! <g>

I do find the double peaked structure interesting. I've never seen much 
structure in the Orionids, and assumed that the debris was quite diffuse 
and uniform. Has anybody modeled the shower this year?

Chris

*******************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On 10/26/2011 2:23 AM, Bernd Brinkmann wrote:
> Hello Chris,
>
>> It's snowing tonight, so that's the end of data collection for this
>> shower. But every night before this has been perfect- dry, transparent,
>> cloudless. Of course, there was some minor interference from the Moon in
>> the days before the peak, but in my experience that degree of
>> interference has almost no impact on my video meteor rates.
>>
>> So what I saw was a most unusual shower this year. Activity before the
>> predicted peak was a bit lower than most years, the peak night showed a
>> significant drop in activity, and then the meteor count rose the next
>> two nights, with a strong peak of activity on 24 October. That behavior
>> is not consistent with predictions, nor with the rather meager visual
>> observations plotted on the IMO Orionids page.
>
> But I think it corresponds very well with the fluxes of the IMO video network
> which can be seen here:
>
> http://vmo.imo.net/flx/
>