[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: (meteorobs) Ursid shower outburst confirmed
>
>Obs: Peter Jenniskens
>Loc.: Parkfield, California (about 120.0 Deg. W, +35.9 deg. N)
>Date: December 21-22, 2000
>
>UTC Teff Lm Urs Spo ZHR(Urs)
>
>08:07-08:19 0.20 6.2 4 3 50±25
>08:31-08:52 0.35 6.2 4 2 27±14
>09:13-09:32 0.32 6.2 2 3 14±10
>10:14-10:55 0.69 6.2 6 12 17±7
>
>------------
>
>------------
>Obs: Peter Gural
>Loc.: King City, California (about 121.0 Deg. W, +35.8 deg. N)
>Date: December 21-22, 2000
>
>UTC Teff Lm Urs Spo ZHR(Urs)
>
>08:01-08:10 0.15 6.2 10 2 200±65
Some extremely high errors in these visual observations and these
ZHR's do not seem to match those from other observers' data in the
United States, including California. You can not judge a meteor
shower's visual strength by such hit and miss observations.
Since the prediction was for faint meteors I can see the reason for
the use of intensified video cameras. But how does the data from
these cameras compare with other video intensified observations of
the Ursids from previous years? I would be very interested in seeing
what the "normal" rate would be for the Ursids with such equipment.
Gary W. Kronk
To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'meteorobs' email list, use the Web form at:
http://www.tiacdot net/users/lewkaren/meteorobs/subscribe.html
Follow-Ups:
References: