Sidney Miller asked Rainer: > Rainer, I enjoyed your list of bright objects, because >that's what I like to show people in hopes that they will join >this hobby. But I've never seen the following any brighter >than magnitude 4.0 -- or worse. Are these four objects >bright ones or dim ones for the rest of SeeSat-L? > > 12054 80089A Cosmos 1220 > 22220 92076B Cosmos 2219 r > 03019 67104B Cosmos 185 r > 04850 71003B Meteor 1-7r Here is my answer, which is not meant to preempt Rainer in any way. The standard magnitudes in my weekly xxx.n2l file are mean values. Those that are followed by a "v" are based on visual observations, most of them by Russell Eberst, and numbering in the hundreds for some objects or classes of objects. Rainer made most of the calculations, which he published on Seesat-L in late 1995 and early 1996. So predicted magnitudes, including Rainer's maximums for his brightest 51, are mean values. Observers should find that most of their observations fall within about +/-1 mag, and a few will exceed predictions by +/-2 mag. For the objects you listed above, I searched Russell's observations since Aug'89, and found that Rainer's maximums were met or exceeded on numerous occasions. Here are the maximums I found: 88089A 0.8 92076B 1.8 67104B 1.7 71003B 2.2 So over many observations, observers can count on the "v" objects meeting and often exceeding the predicted magnitude. The "d" std mags are based on the mean of the object's three dimensions, and are not as reliable as the "v" objects. Ted Molczan