Re: Labelling unknowns

From: Björn Gimle (bjorn.gimle@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Nov 21 2012 - 18:59:30 UTC

  • Next message: Ted Molczan: "RE: Labelling unknowns"

    It is often confusing repeatedly using same/recent numbers. If an orbit (or
    more) is produced by amateurs, and used for searching, I may accidentally
    search for the wrong objects with my  predictions.
    
    2012/11/21 Ted Molczan <ssl3molcz@rogers.com>
    
    > >number. Lately, I have taken to creating them by taking the numeric
    > portion of the UNID
    >
    designation and changing the
    > >first digit to a 9. For example, an UNID found on 2012 Nov 21 UTC, would
    > receive the designation 12826A and the
    > >temporary number 92826. But there is nothing wrong with just using 99999
    > or something equally nondescript, well outside the current range of
    > official assignments.
    >
    >
    -- 
    ----------------------------------------
    Björn Gimle, COSPAR 5919
    59.2576 N, 18.6172 E, 23 m
    Phone: +46 (0)8 571 43 312
    Mobile: +46 (0) 704 385 486
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/private/seesat-l/attachments/20121121/c6d23e27/attachment.html 
    _______________________________________________
    Seesat-l mailing list
    http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 21 2012 - 19:00:11 UTC