Scott Campbell wrote: > Several new obs from last night seem to support a maneuver. > > Lacrosse 5 > 1 28646U 05016A 06064.04580047 -.00000031 00000-0 -73315-5 0 05 > 2 28646 57.0163 56.5788 0008477 12.1634 347.9827 14.53345083 08 Apparently, it manoeuvred very slightly lower sometime between Feb 23 and Mar 03: Lacrosse 5 15.0 4.0 0.0 2.5 v 1 28646U 05016A 06064.04579298 -.00000078 00000-0 -18589-4 0 03 2 28646 57.0134 56.5747 0006964 32.2334 327.9104 14.53344666 02 Arc 2006 Mar 03.06 - 05.06, WRMS residuals = 0.015 deg 1 28646U 05016A 06054.69099923 -.00000078 00000-0 -18589-4 0 05 2 28646 57.0134 91.5591 0004657 22.0551 338.0662 14.53342475 01 Arc 2006 Jan 29.25 - Feb 23.75, WRMS residuals = 0.016 deg I tried analyzing the combination of both arcs, but they proved inconsistent. In the 06064.04579298 elset, inclination and rate of decay have been held constant at the values of the pre-manoeuvre elset, pending further observations. This new result refutes my day 06063 solutions, based on only a one day arc, which indicated a 50 deg decrease in argument of perigee, as reported at the URL below. It now appears not to have changed significantly; therefore, I have deleted my day 06063 solutions from my database. http://satobs.org/seesat/Mar-2006/0032.html 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 : Sun Mar 05 2006 - 10:24:30 EST