Re: List of Bright Satellites - Why is it prepared Manually?
Robert Sheaffer (sheaffer@netcom.com)
Fri, 13 Dec 1996 08:28:30 -0800 (PST)
Patrick Wiggins
>
> Greetings!
> A few days back I posted a request for information on satellites
> visible from mildly light polluted skies with the naked eye.
Am I alone in thinking that this is a cart-before-the-horse approach?
In other words, "figure out a list of satellites we might be able to
see, then run them through prediction software to see which ones turn
up".
I am wondering why, with all of the satellite-prediction software
we have today, it is still necessary to ask this question, especially
since magnitude estimates can be found in Ted Molczan's elements
file. Why doesn't one of these programs simply run through the
elements list, calculate a predicted magnitude, and if it shows
up brighter than a predicted magnitude, print it out? So far as
I know, only QUICKSAT does something close to this. However, it
uses its own file of predicted magnitudes which are actually
'greatest ever' brightness rather than 'expected' brightness,
which results in a lot of predicted passes that are not seen.
Is there some other software package that gives this information?
Oh, the winter observer's blahs! First, it has been so rainy here
in California that there are hardly any clear skies in which to
see anything. Second, there is so little sunlight above us in
LEO at this time of year that only for a short time is anything
illuminated. Third, the evening window of satellite visibility comes
so EARLY at this time of year that I can't even get home from work
before much of it is over!
> For those out there who might also like to have a copy of the
> results, here it is:
>
> 04071 Cosmos 292 r
> 04786 Cosmos 382
> 06212 Radcat
> 10967 Seasat
> 12054 Cosmos 1220
> 13153 Cosmos 1356
> 14521 Cosmos 1510
> 15334 Cosmos 1603
> 15354 ERBS
> 15772 Cosmos 1656 r
> 16182 Cosmos 1697 r
> 16495 Cosmos 1726
> 16609 Mir
> 16682 Cosmos 1741 r
> 16910 EGP r
> 17590 Cosmos 1833 r
> 17974 Cosmos 1844 r
> 18422 Cosmos 1892 r
> 19119 Cosmos 1943
> 19120 Cosmos 1943 r
> 19649 Cosmos 1980
> 19650 Cosmos 1980 r
> 19671 Lacrosse 1
> 20322 COBE
> 20580 HST
> 20625 Cosmos 2082 r
> 20682 NOSS 2-1
> 21147 Lacrosse 2
> 21148 Lacrosse 2 r
> 21397 Okean 3
> 21701 UARS
> 21799 NOSS-2-2
> 22220 Cosmos 2219 r
> 22236 Cosmos 2221
> 22251 USA 86
> 22285 Cosmos 2227
> 22566 Cosmos 2237 r
> 22803 Cosmos 2263 r
> 23088 Cosmos 2278 r
> 23343 Resurs 1-3 r
> 23405 Cosmos 2297 r
> 23596 Cosmos 2313
> 23705 Cosmos 2322 r
> 23728 USA 116
> 23748 Cosmos 2326
> 23907 NOSS 2-3 r
> 23937 TiPS
> 24298 Cosmos 2333 r
>
> BTW, just in case anyone finds anything on this list that they
> think maybe would *not* be visible to the naked eye (other that the NOSS
> groups and TiPS) please let me know.
I *hope* he does not havew to enter this list into his prediction
software, one satellite at a time, each evening!
--
Robert Sheaffer - robert@debunker.com - Skeptical to the Max!
San Jose, California - 37 deg 17' 19" north, 121 deg 59' 09" west.
Visit my new Home Page - http://www.debunker.com/~sheaffer
Skeptical Resources Debunking All Manner of Bogus Claims
Also: Opera / Astronomy / Mens Issues / more