RE: PPAS, bright double flashes from NOAA 7

Leo Barhorst (leobarhorst@pi.net)
Wed, 5 Jun 96 22:31:29 PDT

---------------Original Message---------------
Leo Barhorst writes: 
> 88- 20 A 96-06-01 21:22:48   LB   75.1 0.2   6 12.52  'AF'aF'A, mag 
4(5)->inv 
> Flat maximum and sharp secondary flash 
 
Also egreps of the SeeSat-L archive yield: 
old1/158:96:81- 59 A d     NOAA 7: secundary [sic] maxima 
old1/206:97:81- 59 A d     NOAA 7: secundary maxima 
	 
latest/2135:16:81- 59 A 96-04-08 20:16:52   LB   38.1 0.2  10  3.81  'Ff'F, 
mag 3(4)->inv 
latest/2153:17:81- 59 A 96-04-13 20:44:58   LB   38.3 0.2  10  3.83  'Fff-'F, 
mag 3(5)->inv 
latest/2165:23:81- 59 A 96-04-15 20:13:19   LB   76.7 0.2  10  7.67  'FfFf'F, 
mag 3(5)->inv 
	 
I'm not sure I understand what you mean when you write 'Ff'F, but I presume 
you mean the same thing I would mean if I wrote F'fF', namely, alternating 
primary and secondary maxima, with the timings made of the primary maxima. 
 
I report here for PPAS(beginning): 
Walter I. Nissen, Jr., CDP, dk058@cleveland.freenet.edu, 55 Barrett RD #808, 
Berea, OH 44017-1657, USA, 216-243-4980, -81d 51.823', 41d 22.413', 256m, 
7x35 
81- 59 A 96-05-29  2:22:38.6 WN   14.9  .5   4  3.7   NOAA 7, F'Ff...fF'F 
                                                      bright dbl F, add'l sm 
96- 29 B 96-06-01  4:11:56.8 WN   33.3 1.    6  5.5   NOSS 2-3 r 
 
The bright, very rapid, untimably rapid, double flashes from NOAA 7 were 
quite 
striking and, so far as I can remember, unique in my experience.  There were 
also a number of secondary maxima, which may have been irregular in spacing. 
"untimably" may not yet be a word; I use it to mean they were too rapid to be 
timed separately. 
 
Has anyone seen bright, very rapid, double flashes from NOAA 7?  Or other 
objects? 
 
Thanks. 
 
Cheers. 
 
Walter Nissen                   dk058@cleveland.freenet.edu

----------End of Original Message----------

The 'Ff'F notation indeed means alternate primary and secondary maxima; 
measuring on the prime max.
Somehow I got mixed up in the last years, as looking in the brochure of
the BWGS I now know (again) that the correct notation dhould have been
F'fF'  The apostrophe means that was counted on the previous symbol. I'll
try to use the correct notation in the future.

Greetings
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Leo Barhorst    Alkmaar (Neth) 
52 deg 38 min N      4 deg  47 min E     2 m ASL
E-mail: leobarhorst@pi.net   also a member of Seesat-L
------------------------------------------------------------------------