Observations 30 Dec 2005: Part 3-last)
-----------------------------------------------------
Cosatrak 1 (Computerised satellite Tracking System).
MINTRON low light level CCD surveillance camera (0.005 lux typical
in non integration mode) and 0.00005 lux in STARLIGHT mode with 128
frame integration.
Used with 145mm focal length f/2.5 lens,integrating for 96 frames
which is equivalent to an exposure of 1.92 seconds per image.
Site 0433 : Longitude 18.51294 deg East, Latitude 33.94058 deg S,
Elevation 10 metres - situated in Pinelands (Cape Town), South Africa
For CLASSFD.TLE:
----------------------------
90041 05 775A 0433 G 20051230223230600 56 15 0626055+201802 39 +120 05
90042 05 828A 0433 G 20051230213907100 56 15 0823268+062907 39 +120 05
Strays seen:
-------------
23305 94 064A 0433 G 20051230214211500 56 15 0827167+052014 39 +120 05
27409 02 017A 0433 G 20051230211217600 56 15 0751459+065414 39 +090 05
27409 02 017A 0433 G 20051230211246400 56 15 0755540+055112 39 +090 05
27409 02 017A 0433 G 20051230211304600 56 15 0758379+050912 39 +090 05
Notes:
-------
(1) I have done much searching for #90041 since I failed to see it about
two weeks ago.Finally I MAY have gotten an image of it. It was very
faint but the pixel involved slowly got brighter during the 1 minute
I had it in the field of view. It is definately not a hot or dead
pixel - however I would not be prepared to say with certainty that
it was #90041. Pixels do funny things when its hot.
(2) Re missing unknown #91052 discovered on 28th December.I examined the
two frames in which I had an unknown satellite and I am totally
convinced that it was a satellite. In the first frame it appeared a
little diffuse, elongated slightly along the x axis (azimuth),on the
left hand side of the frame and quite bright at about magnitude +10
( the field limit was about +12).
In the second frame, taken a minute later and moved approximately
2 degrees in azimuth , it is still slightly elongated and now at the
right edge of the frame but not so diffuse and slightly brighter
than the first image. (I am here referring to the integrated images).
Looking at the first frame in "real" time one can see the pixel
involved varying slightly in brightness so the satellite is
variable.
In view of how prominent the two images were I fail to understand
why I was not able to acquire it again on the 30th December,2005.
(unless it has a long period of invisibility?).
I have not yet given up on this object ( nor #90041)
(3) If it stays clear I will track tonight ( 2nd Jan 2006)
Cheers
Greg
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive:
http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 02 2006 - 12:11:50 EST