[meteorite-list] Gebel Kamil iron is official now - 1.6 metric tons!?!?

[Alexander Seidel]

With an info like this - "A total of about 1600 kg of iron meteorite shrapnel (thousands of pieces), ranging in mass from < 1 to 35,000 g, plus a single 83 kg individual completely covered with well developed regmaglypts, was found in and around the 45 m diameter Kamil impact crater by an Italian-Egyptian geophysical team in February 2009 and February 2010" - shouldn´t we be a bit more patient and careful at this very early point after the discovery and quite early publication? I expect much more clearness at the taxonomic horizon once e.g. parts of that 83 kg individual or others will have been analyzed one of these days. And with a crater *THAT* large much more material may surface and be recovered as time goes by, and analysis may well be refined to some definite point. Just a matter of time and patience, right...??

Alex
Berlin/Germany


  
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Tue, 13 Jul 2010 07:48:03 -0400
> Von: Jeff Grossman <jgrossman at usgs.gov>
> An: meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> Betreff: Re: [meteorite-list] Gebel Kamil iron is official now - 1.6 metric tons!?!?

> "Ataxite" is a structural term, like octahedrite and hexahedrite.  
> Modern classification of iron meteorites is based on the chemical group, 
> which can tell you something about the parent asteroid.  The structural 
> classification is quasi-independent of the chemical classification, 
> inasmuch as members of each structural group can belong to multiple 
> chemical groups.  So "ataxite" has not been replaced with "iron, 
> ungrouped."  Both are correct.
> 
> When I used to edit MetBull, the heading on the description of this 
> meteorite would have said "Iron, ataxite (ungrouped)", but other editors 
> have abandoned this.
> 
> Jeff
> 
> On 7/12/2010 9:48 PM, Galactic Stone & Ironworks wrote:
> > Hi List,
> >
> > The new Egyptian iron is now official and in the Met Bulletin
> > database.  Notice the TKW!  1.6 metric tons!  That is a lot of
> > fragments.
> >
> > Also notice the classification type - iron ungrouped.  Not "ataxite".
> > Although the write-up does say the meteorite shows an "ataxitic
> > structure".
> >
> > http://tin.er.usgs.gov/meteor/metbull.php?code=52031
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > MikeG
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone&  Ironworks Meteorites
> > http://www.galactic-stone.com
> > http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > ______________________________________________
> > Visit the Archives at
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> > Meteorite-list mailing list
> > Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> > http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
> >
> >    
> 
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list