Re: Proposed Naming Convention for Unknown Objects

From: Björn Gimle (
Date: Mon Apr 10 2000 - 10:50:10 PDT

  • Next message: "Re: Unidentified tumbler"

    I don't agree with the comments below:
    1) It violates the "Must" requirement to be compatible with reporting formats
    2) It complicates communications between analysts discussing possible orbits.
    3) It makes it difficult for observers trying to find the proper search elsets from mails (or unkn.tle)
    1) IOD needs a USSPACECOM no. 
    2 and 3) Most TLE administrative tools and predictions use USSPACECOM for selection/identification.
    The registry should contain a mapping of each International ID to the USSPACECOM no(s) used in proposed elset s.
    It should be entered into the registry when one or two analysts have failed to identify it with a known alldat.tle entry.
    Before it appears in the registry, observers using IOD or elcor formats should pick a number higher than what's in the registry, and allow for recent mail reports.
    -- --
    -- COSPAR 5918, 59.298 N, 18.102 E, 55 m                     --
    -- SeeSat-L / Visual Satellite Observer Home Page found at   --
    --       --
    > Would Ted be willing to maintain the registry of un-identified objects?
    > Whoever does it there should be the conditions
    > (a) that a new object is only added when it has accurately observed on 
    >     several occasions
    > (b) the orbit must be the only one fitting the observations. 
    > For instance, I have issued several orbits recently, but these would not
    > qualify because there were insufficient observations and alternative 
    > orbits.
    Unsubscribe from SeeSat-L by sending a message with 'unsubscribe'
    in the SUBJECT to

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 10 2000 - 10:51:16 PDT