[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) The AMS
Hi Jim,
Thanks for the additional post concerning AMS. I would like to comment on
the following:
>Current research interest in the potential scientific value of amateur
>operated radiometeor stations does notdetract from the continued importance
>of collecting visual data on the Sporadic meteor flux.
Was there a specific reason it was decided not to continue interest in showers?
>we are also exploring the use of notebook computers for the collection of
>visual data
I spoke with Dr. Meisel about this in the past, and thought the program was
determined to not be feasible. As I explained to him, I am interested in
this method, so please keep me advised of how the program progresses.
>The 1993 conference helped a lot, but we still have a ways to go with some
>individuals. I think we should all learn to accept our differences in
>research philosophy and work together to forward Meteor Science as a whole.
I agree with you Jim. As a result of the 1993 conference, were formal
arrangements made to share data between AMS and IMO. I recall you mentioned
fireball data I believe, but has that been all so far?
Take care,
Mark Davis
MeteorObs@charlestondot net
Awendaw, South Carolina, USA
Coordinator, North American Meteor Network (NAMN)
Assistant Recorder, ALPO Meteors Section
===================================================
Visit the NAMN home page at:
http://medicine.wustldot edu/~kronkg/namn.html
===================================================