EGP, bright stuff, FreeNet Decennary
Walter Nissen (dk058@cleveland.Freenet.Edu)
Tue, 16 Jul 1996 07:03:36 -0400
> > They give a table of stellar magnitudes for
> >Ajisai for ranges from 1.5 to 2.9 Mm and .3 < k < .5 (not good to good
> > Ajisai varies pretty wildly from time to time within a
> >single pass and also at different passes. But at its best, I think I am
> >seeing 1st magnitude flashes, albeit of very short duration.
> Is this naked eye or with binoculars?
These are stellar magnitudes. When I see an STS about as bright as
Fomalhaut, as I did, I am going to report a very bright magnitude for the
STS, even if both are barely visible in my binoculars due to haze or
whatever.
EGP often flashes pretty well at some point during a pass. It isn't
reliable, however.
> Does anyone regularly see EGP naked eye?
I'm the wrong one to ask about this. I use binoculars (by the way, those
ideal binoculars should also dispense 25,000 IU of Vitamin A every 12
hours to keep the observer's eyes healthy) even when I wouldn't have to.
And I use a heavily light-polluted site. I have to assume that when I
start seeing glare in the binocs that a naked-eye observer is in pretty
fine shape.
> I seem to recall reading that although brightness is theoretically mag 1, it
> is of such short duration that it does not register in the eye. As a
> practical matter, EGP only appears at about mag 5. All my obs have shown it
> that way.
If duration had much of anything to do with it, strobe lights would be
invisible.
> That's why I didn't consider it for VISUAL. I've had messages of frustration
> from new observers who don't see predicted passes because they're too faint.
There is a tradeoff here. Such messages shouldn't have total
determinative power. There is the issue of how interesting the satellite
is when you can see it. I am perfectly happy to rely on your judgment is
making the tradeoff. The Zenits, and even the Lacrosses, occasionally
give sub-par performances.
> >Equally certainly, it is an object of
> >extremely high interest to beginning visual observers, because at special
> >and frequent moments it overcomes its usual invisibilty.
> Aha. But VISUAL is a list of bright, naked eye satellites, not visually
> interesting ones.
I suggest EGP because sometimes it is a bright, naked-eye satellite.
> >C* 1844 r This one seemed rather faint. What are your mag observations for
> this?
According to my list of bright satellites, available from the SeeSat-L
archive, I've seen it at "mag 2 or 3". Much like the other Zenits, as far
as I know.
> >C* 2297 r OK for these. Can you furnish some mag obs for these also?
> >C* 2313
> >C* 2322 r
> >C* 2326
>From my forthcoming update of the "bright" list:
2297 r 23405 94- 77B 2
2313 23596 95- 28A 1
2322 r 23705 95- 58B 2
2326 23748 95- 71A 1 or 1.5
All of these are very easy, just like their sister ships.
> Thanks for your input. Anyone else have additions/subtractions?
Thanks for more than my input.
Cheers.
Walter Nissen dk058@cleveland.freenet.edu
---
* 1986 JUL 16 FreeNet Decennary 1996 JUL 16 *
* Pioneering milestones: First open, community-wide on-line service *
* First broad expansion of the Internet beyond government and *
* university researchers (1989) *