[meteorite-list] re: Satellite Reentry Witness 4

[Kevin Forbes]

Yup, basically correct on the perceptions of motion at an unknown altitude 
and distance, and unknown angle of either approach or departure. I would 
love to look through a database of satellite re-entries, and search for 
something that may fit the boot. Does anyone know if there is an online site 
that provides such data? There will either be something to support it or 
not.


Kevin VK3UKF.

>
> >>The object was already incandescant when it caught
>my eye.  I think perhaps I caught the last moments of the display, the
>breakup  etc.<<
>Then this would explain a short path for a satellite. The one last thing
>that bothers me is the portion you did see along the horizon and it's 
>velocity.
>In that location, it seems to be going too fast for a satellite. Here's 
>what I
>  mean. I just happened to notice yesterday, a high up and distant airliner
>producing contrails close to 20 degrees above the horizon and  traveling 
>pretty
>much parallel to the horizon. It was crawling along. I marked  off about 20
>degrees with my fists and counted 40 seconds and it still not quite  
>reached
>the 20 degree mark. Still in this case, we are essentially comparing  
>apples
>with oranges. So I tried another thought process and considered what we
>definitely know...that is, 1) the object traveled about 20 degrees. 2) It 
>was
>traveling about 20 degrees above and parallel to the horizon. 3) The time 
>it  took to
>traverse this 20 degrees was 20 seconds. These numbers should make it  easy
>to get in the ballpark where I can say to myself, " What is most likely...a
>meteor or satellite?" At that location, we end up with a velocity of about 
>1
>degree per second...seemingly in the realm of a satellite...if it occurred  
>in
>the zenith. We know the object was traveling very far off and the  distance
>traveled would appear much shorter than if it had occurred in the  zenith. 
>It
>would be like standing between two railroad tracks and following it  with 
>your
>eyes to the horizon. Near the horizon the tracks will appear to have  
>almost
>converged. Now if I looked at the converging tracks near the horizon and  a
>glowing rock was somehow fired from one track to the other, the distance  
>covered
>will appear very short. Whereas if this same rock was fired from  one track 
>to
>the other at my feet, it will appear many times longer...I estimate  at 
>least
>3 to 6 times longer. So lets say if the glowing rock between the two  
>tracks
>near the horizon  took 20 seconds to traverse the distance, it will  also 
>take
>20 seconds for the same rock to pass between the two tracks at my  feet. 
>The
>time for it appeared lit up, will essentially be the same at both  
>locations.
>So using my estimate of the path length at my feet to be 3 to 6  times than
>that near the horizon, I come up with an estimated distance  traveled of 
>about 60
>to 120 degrees...or 3 to 6 degrees per second. I believe  more in the realm
>of a meteor. Some of the initial estimates may be off and thus  throw any
>accuracy towards either a satellite or a meteor. But my  hunch still wants 
>to lean
>towards your object being more likely that of a meteor  than a satellite. 
>But
>I guess we will never know.
>George Zay
>
>
>
>
>