(meteorobs) Whitmire, SC likely fall location

Marc Fries mfries8 at hotmail.com
Wed Feb 15 20:41:13 EST 2012


Still?   ;-)

On 2/15/12 4:06 PM, Stuart McDaniel wrote:
> I am only about 50 miles from the drop zone.
> Stuart McDaniel
> Lawndale, NC
> Secr.,
> Cleve. Co. Astronomical Society
> IMCA #9052
>
> http://spacerocks.weebly.com
> *From:* Jim Wooddell <mailto:nf114ec at npgcable.com>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 15, 2012 5:02 PM
> *To:* Meteor science and meteor observing 
> <mailto:meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
> *Subject:* Re: (meteorobs) Whitmire, SC likely fall location
> Okay guys...here the real scoop!  Too Funny!
> http://weeklyworldnews.com/headlines/44055/ufo-over-south-carolina/
> I am not signing this!
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Jake S <mailto:jakeschaeferml at gmail.com>
>     *To:* Meteor science and meteor observing
>     <mailto:meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, February 15, 2012 2:35 PM
>     *Subject:* (meteorobs) Whitmire, SC likely fall location
>     The data from the seismographs, coupled with the allsky camera
>     lead to an estimated trajectory that does point towards those
>     radar hits. They are definitely within the uncertainty/error bounds.
>
>
>     On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Mike Hankey
>     <mike.hankey at gmail.com <mailto:mike.hankey at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     > Hey Rob,
>     >
>     > If you wouldn't mind sending me the kmzs for this, i'm
>     interested to see
>     > what a good meteorite return looks like.
>     >
>     > Thanks,
>     >
>     > Mike
>     >
>     > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Matson, Robert D.
>     > <ROBERT.D.MATSON at saic.com <mailto:ROBERT.D.MATSON at saic.com>> wrote:
>     >>
>     >> Hi All,
>     >>
>     >> I found the confirming radar hits (from two radars) yesterday
>     >> afternoon -- I can send the .KMZ files to anyone that is
>     >> interested. They are definitely associated with the fall.
>     >> The reflectivity, velocity and spectral returns all have
>     >> the "candystriping" that Marc Fries and I have come to
>     >> associate with past confirmed meteorite falls.
>     >>
>     >> The location is not as bad as it could be. Yes, lots of
>     >> forest, but also many cleared areas due to the nearby
>     >> town of Whitmire, SC.  --Rob
>     >>
>     >> -----Original Message-----
>     >> From: meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org
>     <mailto:meteorobs-bounces at meteorobs.org> on behalf of Esko Lyytinen
>     >> Sent: Wed 2/15/2012 2:57 AM
>     >> To: Meteor science and meteor observing
>     >> Subject: Re: (meteorobs) [meteorite-list] GA SC Bolide seems
>     have produced
>     >> a large rock
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> I made a one station analysis of the Lawndale camera video.
>     >>
>     >> The camera was calibrated with eight found stars. And a number
>     of frames
>     >> were manually measured.
>     >> A direct fit to the timed directions gives the apparent entry
>     direction
>     >> approximately. In this a reasonable looking deceleration was
>     taken into
>     >> account.
>     >> Some level "scaling" can be got by means of an assumed
>     beginning height,
>     >> consistent with the resulting velocity, with a few iterations.
>     >> I get it arriving form az-direction around 315 or 325 . The entry
>     >> velocity seems to be about 13 km/s having then he beginning
>     height at
>     >> around 80 or 85 km.
>     >>
>     >> The reulting landing site from this model is very close to Jake's
>     >> southers radar "group". I tried a further velocity (and connected
>     >> beginnig height fit) and with the entry velocity of 13.4 km/s
>     (in this
>     >> model arriving from direction 319) with resulting beginning
>     height of
>     >> about 85 km. Now there is an almost exact hit! The end height
>     in this is
>     >> 26 km. Camera calibration at low elevation angles may be not so
>     good
>     >> affecting some uncertainty to this.
>     >> Also a resonable rough dark flight was modeled. In this the
>     landing is
>     >> 13.8 km before the sea-level crossing of the direct track.
>     >> Then the prediction from this would be a few kilometer to the
>     West of
>     >> the radar hits.
>     >>
>     >> Wind effects are not taken into account and may well affect this.
>     >> Just now the server in Wyoming tell
>     >>
>     >> "Sorry, the server is too busy to process your request.
>     >> Please try again later."
>     >>
>     >> when trying to get the atmospheric sounding data.
>     >>
>     >> I am practically confident that these "southern" radar hits are
>     from
>     >> this. It would be good to know the exact time of the radar hits.
>     >> In my opinion the northern hit it less probabaly from this.
>     >>
>     >> No reliable end deceleration is derived from this. And from
>     only one
>     >> station data, this may not be got quite reilably. Ablation
>     model would
>     >> give a reasonable end mass for this velocity and end height of
>     around 5
>     >> kg (if OC). But if this was strongly fragmented in early
>     flight, as may
>     >> well have happened, considering the bright flashing, this mass
>     value may
>     >> rather suit to the biggest mass(es) and the total end mass may
>     be bigger.
>     >>
>     >> The fall-time to the radar height would be telling on the
>     masses of these.
>     >>
>     >> Regards,
>     >> Esko
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> > Here is my analysis of this meteor:
>     >> >
>     >> > http://3dradar.wordpress.com/2012/02/15/sc-2132012-at-642-utc/
>     >> >
>     >> > I think there is a chance there could be meteorites from this
>     event. I
>     >> > think it is highly misleading to say it "produced a large
>     meteorite"
>     >> > when nothing has been found yet...
>     >> >
>     >> > I think the radar hits probably need further scrutiny (Marc
>     Fries, Rob
>     >> > Matson?) but it seems from what I see, this meteor deserves a
>     bit more
>     >> > attention?
>     >> >
>     >> > - Jake
>     >>
>     >> _______________________________________________
>     >> meteorobs mailing list
>     >> meteorobs at meteorobs.org <mailto:meteorobs at meteorobs.org>
>     >> http://lists.meteorobs.org/mailman/listinfo/meteorobs
>     >>
>     >
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > meteorobs mailing list
>     > meteorobs at meteorobs.org <mailto: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/20120215/1c8a89fa/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the meteorobs mailing list