[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
(meteorobs) IMO "standard" methods?
A new subscriber recently asked me privately:
>What are the "standard" techniques these days?
Well, that's not a short question to answer of course. :) In fact,
that very question (with all its hundreds of nuances and details)
is one of the main reasons we started 'meteorobs' back in 1996!
Still, here are the raw, bare-bone basics of the IMO method, as I
understand it. (As always, the most experienced observers on our
list will certainly have comments or errata to add.)
For each session, record:
start, stop and all break times to the minute.
cloud cover changes as a percentage of the sky, with times.
each half hour, count stars in at least two IMO regions.
[There are 30 IMO Star Count regions covering the sky.]
For each meteor, record:
time (at least to the quarter hour - I do it to the minute).
estimated magnitude (use nearby comparison stars if possible).
speed (as relative slow/medium/fast, or as an angular velocity).
shower membership - using *three* criteria for association:
path alignment (must trace back to radiant area), path length
(path can't be too long for radiant distance), and velocity
(showers have acceptable speeds at a given radiant distance).
IMO also has a "standard" procedure for REDUCING the amount of data
you record step-wise, should rates increase above certain cutoffs.
(This is an aspect of the method few of us have had much occasion
to practice, but one that may be pretty critical come November!)
You can read much more about the IMO method (and some variations on
it, such as the DMS and AMS methods), by following the links on the
pages of the 'meteorobs' informational Web site:
http://www.tiacdot net/users/lewkaren/meteorobs
And especially:
http://www.tiacdot net/users/lewkaren/meteorobs/showers.html
http://www.tiacdot net/users/lewkaren/meteorobs/links.html
Clear skies!
Lew Gramer
To UNSUBSCRIBE from the 'meteorobs' email list, use the Web form at:
http://www.tiacdot net/users/lewkaren/meteorobs/subscribe.html