[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: ZHR (was Re: Longitude/time)



At 11:45 AM 5/20/96 -0400, Lew Gramer wrote:

>I guess that's why some people still advocate limited publication of one group 
>or another's ZHR calculations, in favor of publishing actual observed numbers? 
>What are other people's thoughts on this?

I feel publication of both are worthwhile. Of couse, publishing actual
observed numbers may have more meaning to many observers as it provides an
idea as to what was seen on the ground so to speak. But whichever is
published, the author *must* specify which it is to avoid confusion and
false announcements.

I believe ZHR calculations can be made reliable if enough observations are
used. A ZHR analysis based on only my observation (which btw I almost never
do), would not be as accurate as including your observation with mine, which
would not be as accurate as including ours with all observations from ALPO,
etc. This is one reason I am an advocate of using worldwide observations
when performing a shower analysis. It is also the reason I publish actual
observed numbers in the NAMN Newsletter, allowing ALPO and IMO to use our
data in their ZHR calculations.

mark