Stephan Szyman wrote: > 27453 02 032A ???? P 20050809033243 58 25 2029547+362829 28 S+025 > 27453 02 032A ???? P 20050809033254 58 25 2028693+420159 28 S+008 > 27453 02 032A ???? P 20050809033315 58 25 2028126+525876 28 M-050 > 27453 02 032A ???? P 20050809033330 58 25 2029612+600163 28 S+026 > 27453 02 032A ???? P 20050809033334 58 25 2029203+612125 28 N+045 > 27453 02 032A ???? P 20050809033345 58 25 2029671+664941 28 D Congrats on your first IOD report! The only formatting error I see is that the time accuracy, "58", begins two columns too far to the right. Suggestion: to create IOD formatted reports, use ObsEntry, developed by George D. Lewis, and available here. http://users2.ev1.net/~mmccants/programs/obsentry.zip Here are your residuals relative NOAA 17's recent orbital elements: Total Time X-trak deg s deg 1 0.4344 0.6437 0.2993 2 0.2713 0.5079 0.1016 3 0.2419 -0.4533 0.1010 4 0.0494 -0.1050 0.0089 5 0.4944 1.0799 0.0420 6 0.1298 -0.0350 0.1290 The column Total, is the total residual, which is the arc between the observed position and that predicted by the derived elset. The column Time, is the time residual. The column X-trak is the cross-track residual, after allowing for Earth's rotation in the interval of the time residual. Your time residuals are much better than the 5 s accuracy you reported. Your cross-track residuals are not quite as good as the 2 arc min (0.033 deg) accuracy your reported. This level of time and position accuracy is more than adequate to report visual magnitude, which I believe was your intention. > I have placed question marks instead of data where I do not understand the > description of the columns. I am working with the IOD format description at > url: > > http://www.satobs.org/position/IODformat.html > > questions: > > 1. how do I determine my four-digit station number (cols. 17-20)? For now, while you experiment with positional observing, I suggest entering 0000 for the station number. If you seem likely to go beyond experimentation, then a permanent station number will be issued. > 2. in column 66, "optical behavior code," was I incorrect to > put S for steady when the brightness was increasing and decreasing? > perhaps this should have been I for irregular? I wasn't certain which to put. Since the brightness was varying during the span of your points, "I" seems more appropriate than "S". At other points of the pass, "S" probably would have been appropriate. Ted Molczan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive: http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 09 2005 - 14:40:08 EDT