(meteorobs) 2012/02/01 TX Fireball Trajectory Solutions v1

Wed Feb 8 23:38:47 EST 2012

Jake,

I agree its a bit further south.

Bill was kind enough to give me the AZ/EL values for all cameras. These are
plate solved using software so very solid and more accurate than the ones I
did manually.

I added the hawley camera and the austin camera and re-ran the program
using the updated values.

It generated 5 solutions using 5 different camera combos almost all
are identical and very close to Bill's solution.  Its pretty ridiculous,
how close these all are.

So I think this is a winner folks. :)

I posted a picture of the 6 trajectories and also a link to the trajectory
KMZ file. See the update at the bottom of this page:

http://www.mikesastrophotos.com/comets/2012-02-01-texas-fireball-trajectory-solutions/

*When viewing the kmz trajectories, keep in mind Bill's red line is 2d and
ends at 40km altitude while the other trajectory models are 3d & drawn
toward their 0km geometric end point.

Thanks,

Mike Hankey
Freeland MD

On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 10:33 PM, Jake S <jakeschaeferml at gmail.com> wrote:

> I've made some revisions as well. With the altitude data from Bill
> Cooke. Given that it was so shallow and still at 60 km when it passed
> by the seismograph greatly alters what I had expected. I would have
> expected the sonic boom to not generate such a large pressure wave
> until in the more dense lower air. But anyways this high altitude
> brings the trajectory farther south. Based on my calculations from the
> seismograph, the trajectory Bill Cooke has provided is only about 3km
> off which is easily within the uncertainty in my calculations
> (especially if the speed of sound is slightly off, colder than a
> standard day?)
>
> http://3dradar.wordpress.com/2012/02/09/dfw-tx-222012-0157-utc/
> -jake
>
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Mike Hankey <mike.hankey at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Jake,
> >
> > Thanks for the input. I'm going to make some revisions to my
> > information and also take into consideration the 2nd camera in Hawley.
> > Prior to Bill's post I was really confused about the cameras in
> > coleman vs hawley. I didn't realize there were actually two cameras.
> > I'm also going to work in the data from Pat on the austin camera. i
> > also have some revised & new az/el values. I will report back with v2.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mike
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Jake S <jakeschaeferml at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I drew up a rough map with the seismograph data on it (very rough
> >> drawing, if you want the actual data I can probably send you it).  In
> >> my previous post i had said the video trajectory was too far north but
> >> I think i must have drawn it off or something, because it appears they
> >> are very close. The video trajectory is actually slightly south.
> >>
> >> http://3dradar.wordpress.com/2012/02/09/dfw-tx-222012-0157-utc/
> >>
> >> I know all the eye witness's seem to show it over by Edgewood but i
> >> think these two pieces (video and seismographs) show it further north,
> >> the one seismograph isn't the greatest of hits but if going off that
> >> as being accurate, I'd search up by Greenville, TX, otherwise it could
> >> rotate more East/West and be down near Edgewood also but i think this
> >> is the less likely scenario. Until they are found, we won't know...
> >>
> >> -Jake
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 8, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Pat <pat_branch at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>> Jake can you provide a line (or the coordinates for a line) that
> represent the center of the seismograph data? I think between that and the
> Austin video I can actually look on the ground.
> >>>
> >>> I currently have it following the dark green band in Mike's map4
> below, but displaced to the north so that it just clips the north of the
> cedar creek reservoir. I think the seismograph data could give us a
> directional line on the ground (and if I am correct it should pass thru
> Ennis).
> >>>
> >>> --- In meteorobs at yahoogroups.com, Jake S <jakeschaeferml at ...> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I have a few comments on your trajectory, particularly on this image:
> >>>> http://www.mikesastrophotos.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/map4.jpg
> >>>>
> >>>> I think your red/maroon colored trajectory is too far north. Based on
> >>>> sonic boom arrival times to seismographs, the trajectory looks like it
> >>>> will be between the dark green and red lines on that map.
> >>>>
> >>>> >From the coordinates of : (31.99,-97.46), the meteor HAS to have
> >>>> passed no more than 86 km distance at its closest point. Factoring in
> >>>> altitude it must travel will reduce this further 86 =
> >>>> sqrt(altitude^2+ground distance^2). Factoring in a reasonable mach
> >>>> angle for the shockwave only slightly increases the distance. With all
> >>>> this in mind, i think your red trajectory is possibly up to 20 km too
> >>>> far north, at least near the starting point of that line, what that
> >>>> shift will do to the endpoint i don't know. If i knew the velocity and
> >>>> altitudes of the trajectory this could be refined i think.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Mike Hankey <mike.hankey at ...> wrote:
> >>>> > Thanks Pat. I would agree with a SE of Greenville location. Are you
> >>>> > saying these guys found meteorites from this fireball already?
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 10:29 PM, Pat <pat_branch at ...> wrote:
> >>>> >> Mike,
> >>>> >> Here is a great meteor view which I have not seen until now. It
> was shot in Austin from the Joe's Crab Shack at 600 Riverside Dr. The
> angles should be easy to calculate accurately because the city skyline
> gives you some angle estimates. I posted a picture of exactly where the
> video was shot from in the Files section of this group.
> >>>> >> The view was shot NNW between the two trees just off the balcony.
> >>>> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8juQ_ld_G7U
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> I still think it was SE of Greenville, but I am sure there were at
> least two large pieces that separated early. I have seen pictures of a team
> from the Austin Planetarium which I believe found some meteorites about 1
> mile east of Edgewood TX at the corner of County Roads 3601 and 3604.
> >>>> >> Pat
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> --- In meteorobs at yahoogroups.com, Mike Hankey <mike.hankey@>
> wrote:
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> Hello,
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> I've been working on the trajectory for this fireball, but i've
> been a
> >>>> >>> little discombobulated due to the mystery over Kevin's Hawley /
> >>>> >>> Coleman camera location. A friend forward'd me what I believe to
> be
> >>>> >>> the best location for Kevins camera and we suspect it is in
> coleman
> >>>> >>> and not hawley.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> I am a lot happier with these solutions and want to share now
> that I'm
> >>>> >>> more confident.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> I want to stress this is still just a v1 cut at the trajectories
> and
> >>>> >>> the calculations are based on manual solving of the allsky images,
> >>>> >>> which is an imperfect art form. So, this is probably wrong, but
> the
> >>>> >>> best calculated guess with available information.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> I'm willing to share my values and KMZ with anyone who is
> interested
> >>>> >>> and I would actually like to compare notes with someone to make
> sure I
> >>>> >>> didn't make any major mis-calculations with regard to
> lat/long/az/el
> >>>> >>> values.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> I will continue to work on this folding in good witness data.
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> Here are the maps:
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>>
> http://www.mikesastrophotos.com/comets/2012-02-01-texas-fireball-trajectory-solutions/
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> Thanks,
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>> Mike Hankey
> >>>> >>> Freeland MD
> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> >>> meteorobs mailing list
> >>>> >>> meteorobs@
> >>>> >>> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
> >>>> >>>
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >>
> >>>> >> _______________________________________________
> >>>> >> meteorobs mailing list
> >>>> >> meteorobs at ...
> >>>> >> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
> >>>> > _______________________________________________
> >>>> > meteorobs mailing list
> >>>> > meteorobs at ...
> >>>> > http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> meteorobs mailing list
> >>>> meteorobs at ...
> >>>> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> meteorobs mailing list
> >>> meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> >>> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> meteorobs mailing list
> >> meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> >> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
> > _______________________________________________
> > meteorobs mailing list
> > meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> > http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
> _______________________________________________
> meteorobs mailing list
> meteorobs at meteorobs.org
> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.meteorobs.org/pipermail/meteorobs/attachments/20120208/524563d3/attachment-0001.html 