[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
(meteorobs) reporting meteor data
I would like to add a few remarks regarding the discussion about
data formats/forms/standardization etc.
For an analysis of a meteor shower's activity you need a specific
set of data. Once you define the analysis procedures, you have also
to define a set of data which is necessary for this purpose. Of course,
the views and aims of meteor observations have changed over the
decades, and therefore one asks for other (more) data than some
10 years back. However, the form itself is only an offer to make
the work easier for both the observer - who provides his raw data -
and the analyser - who has to filter out the information he needs.
If the information is provided in a different format, but is complete,
this is OK. Indeed, we receive many reports in different formats, and
we make a lot of effort to have all useful data included in our
analyses which are intended to cover meteor reports on a global
scale. (If I say we, I would like to mention Bob Lunsford who
takes care about data from North America, Masahiro Koseki from
Japan, and Rainer Arlt in Germany who is responsible for keeping
the archive.)
As I mentioned before, the IMO intends to analyse the activity of
meteor showers using global data. The collected data base is available
in printed form and on diskette, and has been used by various people
for their own analyses. Of course, every local or national group or
association can do what they want. But without standardization any
combination of data is difficult and needs additional calibration.
And, as an example, using Perseid data only from one region means
that you have more gaps than intervals filled with data points. If
we intend to obtain continuous meteor data, we should accept that
standardization is necessary. And I think that there will be changes
of the current data format in the future if other points are necessary
to answer further questions.
As for the fireball data, the situation is a bit different. Most
fireball sightings are not a result of a specific `fireball observation',
but reports of witnesses. Again, it does not matter HOW the information
is submitted. The form is more or less a list of items which may be of
interest for further analyses. In most cases, some of the fields have
to be left blank anyway. I also know, that the fireball archive of
the AMS has been sent to the IMO's fireball data center, and that
Andre Knofel has put a lot of effort to include the reports in the
data base. It seems the cooperation works better than it is sometimes
assumed. Just as an aside: the publication of FIDAC news publication
was started when the GVN (Global Volcanism Network; former SEAN)
stopped distributing fireball data.
Good luck & have fun with your own meteor projects,
Jurgen Rendtel
IMO President
Follow-Ups: