Brad Young wrote: > ... Point not great on USA 129 becuase it > was so dim, but it appeared to be 59s late. > > 24680 96 072A 8336 B 20090410031920780 17 25 0545731+554444 48 S It seems possible that you followed 77024B / 9904, which nearly duplicated a portion of USA 129's track, but almost exactly one minute later. Current elements place the object between a likely pair of reference stars at the time of your observation, not far from the pair that you used in your reduction. Applying your observation to what I believe is the correct star pair, yields: 09904 77 024B 8336 G 20090410031920780 17 25 0541842+563095 28 S Agreement between observation and prediction is ~0.2 s time, and 0.06 deg track. Another possibility is that you observed the correct object, but entered the wrong time into ObsReduce; subtracting one minute from your reported time places USA 129 near some possible reference stars, but the match to your observation is not as good as I found with 77024B; the time difference would be ~1 s, and track would be off ~0.14 deg. Ted Molczan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive: http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 10 2009 - 16:02:45 UTC