Re: Confusing one sat for another

Bjorn Gimle (
19 Oct 1995 13:49:28 GMT

In response to a message from Walter Nissen:

I have also been thinking about the risk of confusing objects, and 
I actually did it recently in an "unidentified" message.
That time, I made a very uncertain id, because my 'bad candidate' was 
about a minute in error, and the true object did not appear in my
prediction ( which it did on a later rerun ), and I misread 
the 'minute' of my second observation point !

If you run QuickSat, and set line    to N ( Y=use only latest elset)
and use several TLE input files, you can see the errors in using 
different (old) elsets. These are usually a fraction of a degree,
and a few seconds, so if the observation and your logs are as accurate
the risk is very small.

If you also log a second observation point, or the time it takes to
traverse the binocular field, the chance of another object having the
same time, position, direction, speed is extremely small.

If you have an old elset with a time error, that you think could match,
adjust the epoch (or even better, ndot2 and BStar ) slightly, until
it matches the observation, and see if position/speed match.

== ;  59.22371 N, 18.22857 E ==
==(      +46-8-7428086          ==
************ Sent via DN Online (Sweden) UUCP Gateway **************