Re: What is Cosmos 1953?

Walter Nissen (dk058@cleveland.Freenet.Edu)
Mon, 4 Aug 1997 17:58:03 -0400 (EDT)

> (estimates are difficult for objects this bright, but mag -4 or so) 
Yes, they are difficult.  I take even my own with a grain to a heap of 
salt.  I once saw Mir with Venus in the sky at the same time, so I'm 
pretty darn confident of that estimate of mag -3. 
> Subject: What is Cosmos 1953? 
I have posted dozens of messages here in SeeSat-L about the Tselina-Ds, 
especially about C* 1953 and C* 1933.  At one time I followed an old 
tradition and confused the Tselinas with the Okeans (no one seems to be 
able to distinguish the orbits, tho the radio emissions apparently 
differ), and I called them the C* 1933 family.  It seems they (or some of 
them) have a characteristic life cycle, including the spectacular behavior 
you cite.  Well worth looking into.  I think I've posted a complete list 
of objects here a couple of times, but could do so again.  I am hopeful 
the Kettering Group or somebody will have detailed records of dates of 
transmissions and I hope to correlate these with whatever brightness data 
is available from PPAS (or elsewhere). 
Please, Leigh, and everyone, report your observations of brightness of the 
Tselinas for the PPAS.  Even fragmentary reports might be useful.  And 
this includes reports of observations as early as 1978.  If you can't get 
organized enough to send them for PPAS (right about now Bart and Kurt are 
shaking their fingers like school masters, not only at those not 
reporting, but also at me for suggesting such a thing :-), please send 
what you have to me (to me for the Tselinas only). 
> Cosmos 1953 is not on the "100 brightest satellites list". 
I guess you mean Jay's list, from Kelso.  Even given all the grief I've 
given Jay about omitting EGP, still, I agree that even the active Tselinas 
do not belong there, because, being often difficult to pick up, they will 
cause too much frustration to too many observers.  "100 brightest" doesn't 
mean "100 most rewarding".  Many satellites which glint brightly are not 
in VISUAL.TLE.  The bright NOSS triads aren't there either, I believe. 
It's the nature of the beast.  Observing satellites involves some 
risk-taking.  For those who lean more toward shooting fish in a barrel, 
there are more predictable objects like comets and long-period variable 
stars, not to mention Galilean satellites and globular clusters. 
> I have never seen Mir as bright. 
Keep looking.                                      (earnest :-) 
Walter Nissen  
-81.8637, 41.3735, 256m elevation 
P.S.  Thanks, Mike, for your reply.


EGP : the Queen of coruscation