[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
(meteorobs) Preliminary ZHR California 17-11
-
To: George Zay <GeoZay@aol.com>, Robert Lunsford <lunro.imo.usa@prodigy.com>, Dutch Meteor Society -- Alex Scholten <a.scholten@dcs.cnt.antennadot nl>, Carl Johannink <cjohannink@compuserve.com>, Casper ter Kuile <pegasoft@cc.ruudot nl>, Erwin Ballegoij <ballegoy@worldaccessdot nl>, Guus Docters van Leeuwen <dl@THRijswijkdot nl>, Hans Betlem <betlem@strw.leidenunivdot nl>, Jaap van 't Leven <JVTleven@interdot nldot net>, Jos Nijland <jnb@worldonlinedot nl>, Klaas Jobse <cyclops@zeelandnetdot nl>, Marc de Lignie <mcdelign@pidot net>, Olga van Mil <pvmilnwk@boxdot nl>, Peter Jenniskens <peter@max.arc.nasadot gov>, Peter Bus <epbus@worldaccessdot nl>, Piet Koning <P.A.Koning@net.HCCdot nl>, Reinder Bouma <rjbouma@pidot net>, Robert Haas <delpsurf@pop3.cistrondot nl>, meteorobs@latrade.com, Eddy Echternach <zenit@astro.rugdot nl>, Peter Jenniskens <peter@max.arc.nasadot gov>, IMO news <imo-news@imodot net>
-
Subject: (meteorobs) Preliminary ZHR California 17-11
-
From: Marco Langbroek <marcolan@stad.dsldot nl>
-
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 1997 12:48:47 +0100 (CET)
-
Cc: marcolan@stad.dsldot nl
-
Reply-To: meteorobs@latrade.com
-
Sender: owner-meteorobs
Hello everybody,
I have done some very (VERY) preliminary calculations, using Bob
Lunsfords data, to get some insight into the Zenit Hourly Rates (ZHR)
experienced for the maximum period, which California presumably
experienced or was very close at. You find them below.
Please note that this is very preliminary, and based on one observer
only. So, it is only an indication (emphasis) of the ZHR levels. I choose
Bob's data for several reasons: he reports a good Lm, made a good set of
data available, and from earlier work with his data I now he has a
perception which is quite the 'average' or 'standard'
perception (i.e. Cp ~1.0). His sporadic rates combined with reported Lm's
hint that his perception did not seriously alter due to the moonlight
conditions. So for an indication, I think his data will suffice.
I calculated ZHR's in ~1 hour intervals, with gamma 1.4 in radiant
altitude dilution (gamma 1.0 would result in only slightly lower rates).
I give two ZHR's: one under the assumption of a population index r=2.0,
and one for r=2.5. The first assumes emphasis on bright meteors, the
second assumes a faint component similar as what we saw in 1996 (but
almost unnoticable due to the moonlight). For the moment, I think the
r=2.0 column is most appropriate. In the last column, I give Bob's
limiting magnitudes for reverence, because variations in Lm of course
might influence rates slightly.
r=2.0 r=2.5
UT ZHR +- ZHR +- Lm
10:00 118 24 149 30 5.45
11:00 112 20 144 26 5.35
12:00 114 16 134 19 5.65
13:00 141 19 182 24 5.34
Please note the moonlight circumstances, so take it as an indication only.
Activity seems rather constant at just above ZHR 100. Perhaps, rates
where higher in the last hour, but this is sensitive to the Lm estimate
(the effect disappears largely if the true Lm was higher). But the report
of increased fireball occurence during this last hour suggest that rates
might really have been higher (perhaps peaking after twilight set in?).
During our 1996 European narrow peak we also experienced a fireball
flurry besides the faint meteors (both Koen and me personally saw at leat
12 Leonids of -3 and brighter in one hour).
I did not look at our Dutch results yet (still have to listen to my
tapes: due to some personal circumstances that was not possible untill
now. Koen will report his data within 1-2 hours from now to me), but if
our estimate of ZHR 30-40 during our European Nov 17 night interval is
correct, this would pretty well line up with the rates at about 100 or
slightly higer for California. It suggest a B~1 structure, like
1994-1996, peaking over west USA/east Pacific.
-Marco Langbroek
Dutch Meteor Society