RE: Object L or object H? (Re: BY O 040216)

From: Ted Molczan via Seesat-l <>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2016 12:52:08 -0400
Marco Langbroek wrote:

> > The orbit of object 16012L / 41442 is the same as that attributed to Hitomi in the 17 TLEs
> with ID 16012A / 41337 from
> > epoch 16086.39579725 through 16091.92327283.
> > USSTRATCOM's TLEs for Hitomi (16012A / 41337) from 16086.39579725 through 16091.92327283,
> were for the orbit of one of
> > the pieces of debris, which has since been reassigned to 16012L / 41442.
> Ted,
> May I offer the alternative suggestion that the initial "A" orbits might
> actually be object H, not L?
> L fits the new "A" better in terms of RAAN, but in most other elements (arg of
> perigee, MA, Mean Motion, inc, a) and in actual orbital position relative to the
> "new" A-object (and hence pass time), the H object seems to fit better imo.

Propagating the epoch 16091.92327283 TLE of 16012A to the epoch of the epoch 16092.25625104 TLE of 16012L, yields a
nearly exact match. Inclination and RAAN are within 0.0001 deg, argument of perigee within 0.08 deg, and argument of
latitude within 0.003 deg. Perigee is within 0.012 km, apogee within 0.009 km. A conjunction analysis for 2016 Apr 01
from 00-12 h UTC, reveals the orbits never more than 0.49 km apart. It is easy to conclude that they are of the same

The same exercise with respect to the epoch 16092.18948948 TLE of 16012H yields not as close a match of the elements,
including a 0.885 deg discrepancy in argument of latitude. The conjunction analysis reveals the orbits never closer than
100 km, and gradually separating.

Ted Molczan

Seesat-l mailing list
Received on Sat Apr 02 2016 - 11:52:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Apr 02 2016 - 16:52:56 UTC