KH alert and "Do we need a TLE format change"

From: Bjorn Gimle (
Date: Tue Feb 01 2005 - 17:43:59 EST

  • Next message: Jonathan McDowell: "Re: KH alert and "Do we need a TLE format change""

    Though Ted has already issued a general alert, here is a 
    more traditional one:
    Tomorrow Jan.02 USA 129 will pass 2:35 before USA 161 on its
    NB node crossing. Sunday it will have increased to 2:39.
    The target (?) Mean Motion is as far below that of USA 161
    as it will be above it on the day of manoeuvre.
    If it should happen on Sunday, I thus expect approximately
    USA 129 037
    1 34680U 96072A   05037.68460000  .00010000  00000-0  13476-3 0    12
    2 34680  98.0020 102.6299 0527534 220.5041 359.8411 14.72668894  1018
    MM of USA 129 is around 14.737, so after the orbit raise,
    USA 129 would be late by about 120 s/day (more if delayed).
    An approximate compensation for early/late reboost is to add
    to 359.8411 about 7 deg/day of delay, thus 353.0000 if on Saturday,
    007.0000 if on Monday etc.
    It seems very unreasonable that it is delayed until the perigee is
    on the equator, another two weeks later, so the reason for the
    last (premature) change remains unclear to me.
    Note that I used a fake USSTRATCOM no. to avoid overwriting 
    current elsets. I strongly feel that we should use another
    code than U for amateur TLEs, after the catalog #.
    Additionally, it would be very useful, in archived TLEs
    especially, to use a third code for guesstimates and
    search orbits.
    Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Feb 01 2005 - 17:53:09 EST