(meteorobs) Plotting and shower association

• To: Meteor Observing Mailing List <meteorobs@latradedot com>
• Subject: (meteorobs) Plotting and shower association
• From: Lew Gramer <dedalus>
• Date: Thu, 17 Oct 96 16:29:59 -0400
• In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 17 Oct 96 10:01:50 EDT." <vines.G5i8+i0dNmB@bangate2.tekdot com>
• Reply-To: meteorobs@latradedot com
• Sender: owner-meteorobs

Wayne Hally wrote:
>To insure that I don't influence my plotz, I make it a practice not to know 
>precisely where the radiants are when I'm plotting. Therefore I'm never really
>quite sure which showers I might be looking at.

I've always wondered about that little snag in the IMO plotting method! What you 
do is surely good observing practice for us newbies, especially when observing 
minor or suspect shower radiants. The problem is that IMO expects shower 
associations along with all the other data during a plotting session: and I 
COULD add that info during the analysis afterwards, but I feel kind of funny 
doing it post facto instead, so I generally make a *suspect* association right 
after I plot the meteor (and occasionally before), but before I note magnitude, 
etc. What do the "less new salts" think on this one?

Lew

• Re: (meteorobs) October 09/10 Observation
• From: wayne.t.hally@bangate1.tekdot com

• Prev: Re: (meteorobs) Oct 15 Observations ZAYGE
• Next: Re: (meteorobs) October 09/10 Observation
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread