Thanks to everyone who has replied to my question - I had a feeling that most people who claim to have seen the Sputnik payload, had in fact seen the rocket, and the evidence so far bears that assumption out. I am going to use this information for a presentation I am giving to the Wiltshire Astornomical Society on October 2, two days before the 50th anniversary. Pierre Neirinck sent me a Sputnik mag list he made in 1960 with his own designations at the time.Mags are supposed to be at mean height,mostly overhead. 57 alpha 1:Sputnik 1 rocket - 1.0 (1-11-1957) 57 alpha 2 Sputnik 1 +5.5 +6 57 beta 1 :Sputnik 2 +0.5 58 delta 1 Sputnik 3 rocket -2 +6 ( -2.2 at 515km) 58 delta 2 Sputnik 3 +3 +9 58 delta 3 Sputnik 3 cone +3 +8 (21-6-1958) 60 epsilon 3 Sputnik 4 +3 +4 (before separation) 60 eps 1 :Sputnik 4 payload +3 +6 60 eps 2 Sputnik 4 rocket +3 +7 60 eps 4 Sputnik 4 cone +5 (26-5-1960) 60 eps 5 Retro rocket ? +7 +8 (28-5-1960)" Bruce MacDonald COSPAR Site 2751 Devizes, Wiltshire, UK 51.3440°N 1.9849° W 125M (WGS84) >I have another question. When working out the brightness of the payload >and rocket I calculated that the payload would be around mag 6 and the >rocket mag 0 (based on 50% phase at 500km range). I would be interested to >learn from anyone who may have seen them what the brightness of each object >actually was. _________________________________________________________________ The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe/Unsubscribe info, Frequently Asked Questions, SeeSat-L archive: http://www.satobs.org/seesat/seesatindex.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 11 2007 - 15:06:17 EDT