[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
aircraft vs. satellite
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: aircraft vs. satellite
- From: Stupendous Man <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 17:25:18 -0500
- Old-Return-Path: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Resent-Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 17:58:24 -0500
- Resent-From: email@example.com
- Resent-Message-ID: <"dnviaD.A.NCF.P2Vs0"@kani.wwa.com>
- Resent-Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
Aha -- now I understand. When I looked at the individual
"dots" in the trail, I found that their JD times differered
by a few minutes. That's why I concluded they were due to a
satellite -- an aircraft would move more than 3 degrees in a
But, thanks to Nick's message, I understand -- all the
points came from a single image, and were really made at
the same time ... but the TASS software _gave them times
which were several minutes apart_ (incorrectly).
The software said, "Oh, here's a point source -- it must
be a star, and since it's at this _position_, it must have
gone through my field of view at this _time_." For true
stars, position _is_ related to time. But for airplane
trails, it's not.
Okay, I get it now.
Is this good or bad? I think neither -- it's just the way
things work out. From now on, if we see a trail of dots
which moves diagonally across a field, and the dots are each
a few minutes apart, we'll know it was probably an aircraft.
And, has Nick points out, especially if there are several
parallel tracks :-)