[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) Hello all
Just wondering,
Is anyone planning a cross validation experiment to compare visual counts w/ mags etc, with the video record counts w/mags etc to get an idea of what differences there may or, may not be?
Regards,
Elton
"Malcolm J. Currie" wrote:
>
> Sirko has pre-empted most of what I was going to say or ask.
>
> First I welcome another supplier of integrated low-light video systems
> which have applications in meteor observation.
>
> 15,000x amplification sounds low. 30,000-50,000x amplification sounds
> more normal. Some of us are interested in the faint meteors too, so a
> small field is less of a problem, but even so 5 degrees is too small
> for mag 8. An even response across 15 degrees might just do, but it's
> tight.
>
> For many meteor folk they would want to see several constellations in
> the field to record visual meteors with a wider field is likely to sell
> more than the current configuration. The ability to interchange lenses
> for varying field diameters and limiting magnitudes is desirable.
>
> The restricted field of view means many meteors will start and/or
> leave the field of view. What's the distortion like? With a small
> field there are fewer stars to determine the astrometry, and hence
> radiant determinations are poorer. Relatively longer paths reduce
> orientation errors too.
>
> What's the diameter of the image intensifier phosphor?
>
> > PS: I'll be off now for the solar eclipse and the Perseids until August
> > 24, so I will not be able to continue this thread until then.
>
> Aug.24! We had the early Perseid thread again this year. Is Sirko
> looking for the latest Perseid?
>
> Malcolm
>
> To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'meteorobs' email list, use the Web form at:
> http://www.tiacdot net/users/lewkaren/meteorobs/subscribe.html
To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'meteorobs' email list, use the Web form at:
http://www.tiacdot net/users/lewkaren/meteorobs/subscribe.html
References: