[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) Observing the Arietids-Triangulids
I was pondering doing some telescopic/binocular observing for some period
of time myself, as an experiment. I guess that's worth attemping?It will
not be my primary focus(pun intended- we're tied 1-1:-)
since I will be tri-ing (that's 2) to refine my plotting skills and this
seems like a useful opportunity. Any suggestions where I might point my
optical assisters from those with more detailed knowledge of the suspected
radaints?
Wayne
-------------
Original Text
From Gary Kronk/Medlib/Washington University <Gary_Kronk/Medlib/Was, on
8/22/96 5:55 AM:
To: "MeteorObs" <MeteorObs@latradedot com>
FROM too long. Original FROM is 'Gary Kronk/Medlib/Washington University
<Gary_Kronk/Medlib/Washington_University@msnotes.wustldot edu>'
---------------------- Original Message Follows ----------------------
George, your letter has very good points, but let me add a couple of
things.
First, of all the fourth magnitude meteor was hypothesized based on my
observing conditions. I have seen a very small percentage of 5th-magnitude
meteors during 23 years of observing, because of my typical limiting
magnitude
of 5.5-6. A quick check through my observing logs reveals that the
5th-magnitude meteors were all apparently seen when they were directly in
my
line of sight. So, instead of saying 4th-magnitude meteors while I was at
work
yesterday, I will revise that number to 5th-magnitude after checking my
logs
this morning. For you it might be 6th-magnitude meteors. It really does not
matter. The fact is a faint meteor in any observer's observing conditions
is
more difficult to see when not directly in your line of sight.
Second, the "10 degree" length was a bad choice on my part, but then I
never
said just how far it was from the radiant now did I? :-) Nevertheless it
is
still much shorter than the long-trailed meteor, so it basically comes down
to
personal terminology. The number could easily be decreased to a degree or
two.
The fact still stands that it is easier to see a faint meteor when closer
to
the radiant because of the foreshortening of the path. Basically it comes
down
to more photons gathering on the cones within your eye. If you are looking
at a
radiant, meteors from that radiant would more likely be in your line of
sight
and very accurate plotting and, subsequently, the precise location of the
radiant would be better noted. This region of the sky is interesting
because a
slight drift in the declination has some very interesting effects on the
orbital inclination of the stream. To everyone I need to emphasize, WE NEED
TO
VERY PRECISELY DETERMINE THIS RADIANT. (Remember, this is emphasizing, NOT
yelling :-) ).
I will personally be observing this radiant with either 7x35 or 7x50
binoculars, as I am very interested to see how abundant the fainter meteors
are. I am hoping to catch some stationary or at least some very
short-trailed
meteors so that the radiant can be pinpointed. Therefore, for this goal, I
need
to have the radiant area within the field of view.
Gary