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 
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 
> 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. 
Walter Nissen          
* 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)                                     *