RE: List of Bright Satellites - Why is it prepared Manually?
Ted Molczan (molczan@fox.nstn.ca)
Sun, 29 Dec 1996 20:22:48 -0500
Dave Ziemann wrote:
>>One reason I did not look so closely is that I had been hoping for a =
better
>>way of doing things than finding the relevent software, downloading it =
onto
>>my PC, learning how to drive it, grappling with unfamiliar terms and =
then
>>continuously feeding it with element sets which seem to be available =
from a
>>number of different sources.
>
>As an enthusiast I might want to do that, but as a novitiate I do not. =
It
>seems sort of dumb to have to download a program from the internet, =
when
>that program is itself reliant on data available (mainly) on the =
internet.
>Better if the program is located at a "one-stop" web site, from which =
it
>knows where to get element sets. I should never even hear the phrase
>"element set".=20
If you are not interested in the technical details, then you need only =
go outside during twilight and scan the half of the sky opposite the =
sun. From a suburban=20
area, at least ten satellites can be seen with the unaided eye each =
hour. No muss,
no fuss!
>That is what I meant when I said:
>>The currently available software is fantastic in terms of speed and =
accuracy,
>>but does make certain assumptions about the level of technical skill =
and
>>motivation of its users.
You could say that about virtually any computer software. A word =
processing=20
program is useless except to those who know a language and are motivated =
to=20
express themselves.=20
>I realise that this may not initially sound very appealing to those who =
sell
>multiple copies of satellite software, but the trend is inevitable.=20
Are you suggesting that someone is opposed to this "trend" for =
commercial=20
reasons? I believe that most orbit prediction programs are written for =
the=20
personal use of the programmer. Many of these programs are then made =
available=20
as freeware or shareware, but I doubt that anyone selling them is making =
enough
money to worry about competition.
>Another advantage of this approach is that all the users would by =
definition
>be using the same, latest element set
Assuming that the elements were located in a database, and updated in =
real-time,
as fast as NORAD issued updates, then users would be using the latest =
elset at
the time they log on, but they would not be using the *same* elset =
because they
would not all log on at the same time. In any case, there is little or =
no=20
practical benefit in everyone using the same element set to make =
predictions.
>I know that the serious hobbyist will want to take more control of the
>software and the data, but I am describing what a casual observer might =
want
>to do, and for whom the "activation energy barrier" is currently way =
too hi
My experience has been that the main "activation energy barrier" is =
within the=20
individual. Through public speaking and star parties, I have introduced =
hundreds=20
of people to satellite observation. For two years, I even managed a =
local=20
satellite observation group, involving about a dozen persons. They were =
provided
excellent software, the latest elements, and alerted to special events. =
Hands-on
training was available. As a result of all of this effort, one person =
has become=20
a regular observer, and none have become analysts.
I have compared notes with others like myself, and their experience has =
been=20
similar. From this I have formulated Molczan's Law:
If a person truly wants to become an satellite observer and/or
orbital analyst, then she will move heaven and earth to become
one; otherwise, no amount of externally applied energy will
help him overcome his activation energy barrier.
>But until then, I will download some satellite software, update my =
"favourite" satellites
>list, and wait for the clouds to go away...
And you will learn to love it!
Ted Molczan