Page 3 of 8
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:19 pm
by RJN
I am beginning to like the AMC-16 launch explanation first suggested on page 2 by skysat. I decided to look into this a bit. Following kfetter, I found a space.com article
http://www.space.com/missionlaunches/at ... 41217.html
that describes the launch and gives an approximate time for "spacecraft separation" as 13:55 GMT (= UT) which might mesh well with the NSL-recorded image sequence which started on or before 14:17 UT.
The AMC-16 satellite was headed to geosynchonous orbit. This makes sense with the NSL-observation since geosynch is very high and would likely have little parallax between the two Hawaiian islands.
I also find the eyewitness account on page 2 compelling. I wonder if that other "small spot" mentioned be found on the FITS images.
The AMC-16 hypothesis can be checked. The AMC-16 satellite trajectory must be known. It can be compared to the NSL-positions of the mystery object, which can be estimated from the positions of adjacent stars.
BTW this is not a sociology experiment. Needed details can be found by the readers and posted to this board as needed. This is another case of trying to utilize the deep collective intelligence, eyes, and experience of the APOD readership to solve an astronomical mystery. So far the APOD crowd has (likely) solved everything put in front of them except the origin of Voynich manuscript -- and I'm thinking of revisiting that with perhaps a more narrow focus!
- RJN
Satellite info links from heavens-above
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:21 pm
by lior
Seems solved
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:24 pm
by Why is it cloudy?
It has to have been the AMC-16 from what was posted.
If it hadn't been for that launch, and the precise timing, I might have guessed a Saturn V third stage co-orbiting the Sun, coming in for a close pass, people have been fooled by them before. Spitzer is presumably too far away.
Hmmm
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:31 pm
by bilbo
Indeed, the AMC-16 theory seems plausible. Obvious in fact.
However it's somehow disturbing to me that, in the 53 days which have transpired since the recordings were obtained, the "powers that be" wouldn't have already confirmed it using data which primarily only they posses, or have professional access to obtain.
It may just be me, but the possibility of recent launches, or recent launch vehicle activity would have been one of the first areas of research regarding these recordings.
Since the possiblity of launch related activity seems likely, and the math is easy (at least for them), the presence of this discussion, and the representtion this object "remains mysterious" would seem to exclude AMC-16 from the list of candidates. Unless...
minor geography correction
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:38 pm
by bschoonm
I'd just like to point out that, contrary to the APOD text, Haleakala and Mauna Kea are both on the same island - the Big Island, Hawai'i.
That bright streak
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:40 pm
by refugee
I'm still looking for data.
1. Distance to the object (a radar somewhere should have tracked it).
2. Estimated velocity of the object.
3. Inclination of the object's trajectory.
Anyone have any of that data?
RE satellites: I know of no convention that requires nations placing clandestine objects in orbit to notify anyone they've done so. I also know of no convention that requires notification when one object 'calves' another clandestine object.
truly a ufo
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:45 pm
by scnightsky
This is truly a UFO. And that does NOT mean its an alien space craft.
Although i think that is as plausable as any other explanation. It just means it unidentified, its 'flying' and its definitly some type of object. At first i thought the fuel dump was a good explanation. But after looking at the pictures again i dont think so. When the object first appears its a long narrow streak, then seem to condense and slow down. Plus being visible for so long, would normally mean it in a very high oribit, being so bright, and at great distance, wouldnt it make the object quite large? Or if in a low orbit, it would have to be moving slowly, which then wouldnt have been visible for so long before being pulled into the atmosphere.
And if it is slowing down.. well now.. thats a different story.
space junk
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:47 pm
by Gabriel
Hi, may I suggest a non-scientific opinion? Could God possibly have anything to do with what which is non-explainable? God can only be explained to a certain extent, so I would think the same goes for His creations. Or possibly we are not meant to know at present. WE are all on a need to know basis in this life. Maybe if we spent more time needing to know what it is we must do in this life to help our neighbor and improve upon ourselves, we would not be so inclined to need to know what exactly is out there in space.
Streak
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:50 pm
by guest
A few sigmas away from the general norm, but to spice the brew: any chance at all that it could be an Aurora spy plane?
White Blob
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 3:53 pm
by Guest
Ok. Here's an eyewitness account. I had forgotten about this event until I saw the Astro Picture of the Day site earlier this evening.
I live in South Kona on the Big Island. I awoke in the very early AM. The sky was quite clear that AM. As I gazed up towards the zenith, tracking close to Leo was a very large "white blob". Being a frequent star gazer my initial response was "What the f#$# is that"!. I have never seen an object like it before. It's size was approximately twice, maybe a little more, than the Full Moon diameter.
After watching it track very slowly for about 10 minutes, I decided it was worth a look in my telescope. I have a 4" Vernonscope Refractor. Magnification was 20x. The wide field revealed a very soft light - no it was not a weather balloon as others have suggested - with stars visible behind it. Rather than some distinct object it seemed that a light was shining on part of the sky!
Even stranger was what I observed on the southern side of the object. About 3 full moon diameters away was a small dot of pale yellow/white light that looked and tracked like a satellite, however, moved much slower. Don't know about distance above the Earth, however, if it was in the atmosphere, there was no sound of any engine noise (I live in a very quiet area of the Island and any atmospheric sound from an airplane etc. would be audible). Also, there was no observable beam of light coming from the small object.
From the time I picked up the object until it disappeared into the East about 45 minutes later, it remained "parallel" to the "white blob", never varying its distance or speed. I have observed airplanes across the sky here, and this was not moving like an airplane. This tells me the object's distance from the Earth Surface was significantly higher.
One impression was a possible UFO, however, as I mentioned, there was no erratic pattern in its flight. Certainly doesn't rule it out, however, from what I've read (no I've never seen a UFO) UFO objects usually fly in erratic patterns.
Curious if anyone else saw this event Naked Eye???
Posted the above again since it seems to be getting lost in the evolving discussion. Also, seems like this is the only eyewitness account.
As I have read the various explanations, the "fuel dump" seems like a plausable explanation. Other things to consider:
- the "object's" brightness remained consistent during my observation (around 45 minutes). I'd say the magnitude was definitely on the minus side of the scale. Very easy naked eye object. It was not as visually bright as Arctaurus. However, since it covered a significantly larger part of the sky, visual magnitude was difficult to discern. The magnitude of the companion "satellite" or whatever it was, probably would be around 8 or 9 magnitude - definitely not naked eye (sky visibility was very good as the Southern Milky Way was quite vivid.
- there was only 1 small object tracking to the right of the white blob. If there was a second piece to the Centaur rocket, I didn't see it telescopically.
- Would a very high altitude account for the apparent speed of the object? Certainly, the slowest satellite I have ever seen.
- the shape of the blob was somewhat circular. As I mentioned, at least twice the Moon diameter, maybe 3 times. Shape did not change during observation period.
- Curious about the "fuel dump" scenario. At what altitude does a fuel dump take place? Does this occur in the atmosphere? or in outer space? Certainly, seeing stars behind the object would indicate some type of out-gassing taking place.
- Color of the object was pretty much white/creamy throughout observation period.
- Mauna Kea and Haleakala are about 40 - 50 km apart.
- While UFO is one possible explanation, I would expect to see some deviation in the object's track for this scenario to be plausible (maybe the ET was using "cruise control".
My impression after watching the object for some time was I was seeing a possible science experiment. Hence the "fuel dump" seems the most rational explanation, however, in this day and age, "rational" is not always the right answer.
That unidentified object
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:01 pm
by Refugee
Okay, after watching the clip a few more times, here's what I came up with:
1. The trajectory's inclination is consistent w/ an object launched from Cape Canaveral in an easterly direction. Ditto Khazakstan, with slight trajectory correction during launch.
2. The 20-minute clip would hint that the object is moving more slowly than a near-Earth object in orbit would move. I'm sure NASA has already measured the angle subtended by the object's travel during those 20 minutes and come up with a velocity, assuming they or the US Space Command also 'painted' the object w/ radar.
3. Knowing the exposure time (how long the lense is opened for each frame) would help determine the size and velocity of the object, by measuring the length of the streaks and doing a little basic math. Some assumptions would have to be made about the nature of the object's reflective surface, so there'd be a size range, as opposed to an exact size.
Anyone hear or know anything about the above?
be clear about your "facts"
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:01 pm
by Guest
bschoonm wrote: I'd just like to point out that, contrary to the APOD text, Haleakala and Mauna Kea are both on the same island - the Big Island, Hawai'i.
These mountains are not on the same island. Haleakala is on the island of Maui. Mauna Kea and Mauna Loa are on Hawaii's Big Island. The Alenuihaha Channel separates Haleakala and Mauna Kea - again the distance between the mountains is about 40 - 50 km.
And the size of this object?
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:12 pm
by MNG
If the height can be estimated, so can it's size. Presuming the exposure time was less than a couple of seconds (and as it's from a web cam, that seems certain), the length of the streak allows its size to be measured. The forshortening at the edges of the frames must be the fish-eye perspective. if nothing else, the size over the zenith will be a "true" reflection of the size. The lack of perspective (even from cameras close to each other) coupled with the considerable angular size suggests it must be hundreds of feet long. If just 2 degrees 'long' at 2000 feet it would be 34 feet long and at 20000 feet high, 340 feet long. As it keeps it's shape (unlike say, contrails) it must be either solid or in the upper atmosphere, making it over 3400 feet long. This object is not likely to be a jettisoned rocket stage. If the prevailing winds were aligned with the major axis of the object, the fuel dump theory looks better and better as that object could indeed have such a size.
Is a meterorologist reading this thread?
satellite
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:12 pm
by chemins
In the night skies above southern France, i used to witness (with the naked eye), satellites flying by. Can't remember the direction but usually i'd see something too distant and quick to be a plane. Sometimes the light would fade on and off, due to its rotation. This must me it, no?
Object
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:16 pm
by RAG
This is a crude application of measurement, but I measured the shift of the background stars and calculate that the time lapse of the photos was approximately :23 minutes (~5.62 degrees of background star travel = 22.48 minutes). Likewise, measuring the apparent travel of the object across the computer screen I calculate 50 degrees of object travel across the sky. Without knowing the altitude of the object, it is not possible to calculate the actual distance of travel in miles, kilometers, et cetera. Also, the photo of the sky would match star charts for Haleakala's sky view nearly overhead at approximately 5:00 AM. My theroy--a Navy blimp illuminated (slightly) on the underside by ground lights! 50 degrees of travel across the sky in 23 minutes means this was probably a very slow moving object.
streak
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:19 pm
by Daddy-O
Interesting that I find this topic. About 2 years ago while at the Pohakuloa Training Area on the big island, I and several individuals witnessed an odd display in the night sky. At first it seemed as though it was a star that started moving. It then accelerated and turned extremely bright while coming to a full stop and disappearing. To this day I do not know what I witnessed but it certainly left us in dismay if not curious and slightly reluctant to admit what we had seen.
Radio telescope?
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:19 pm
by Firemothjoe
Please leave the Wookies at home for the time being, as much as we'd like to believe what it may be, there are some really amazing individuals on this board trying to figure out what it's not. And this subject is becoming national news today, and millions may end up viewing this thread (that's how I stumbled across).
So I don't know if this question has been asked yet, so here it goes. Has the event been observed by anything other than telescopes and radar? Anything in the way of radio or IR telescopes?
Dec 17 APOD
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:23 pm
by BSRed
It was the Hula Bowl blimp going to, comming from, or just flying around for the Hula Bowl. The streaks are due to time lapse photos. The streaks are different lengths suggesting either speed fluctuations or angle change from point of observation. The latter, more than likely, being the case. The object is slow, quiet, and luminescent. Lights exist inside the "balloon" part. If not light from inside the blimp itself then reflected from the moon or artificial lighting. Blimps can't be heard at high altitudes and they are slow as snails!
How ya doin!!!
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:28 pm
by Guest
This thing moved quite quickly. I am not saying I know what I saw exactly, only that I saw it.
Not a blimp
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:31 pm
by Guest
From my visual account - still haven't heard from anyone else seeing this visually - this was not a blimp. Again, stars were visible behind the object. Hence, a type of gas is the most plausable explanation. Still curious about the altitude. Would a fuel dump in outer space be illuminated by the Sun to a minus magnitude? Would the fuel dump track consistently with the object ejecting the fuel?
Re: minor geography correction
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:37 pm
by plex03
bschoonm wrote:I'd just like to point out that, contrary to the APOD text, Haleakala and Mauna Kea are both on the same island - the Big Island, Hawai'i.
Wrong. Haleakala is on Maui while Mauna Kea is on the big island of Hawai'i.
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:41 pm
by Ted Stickles
I saw a streak fly over Florida last night as well. The thing made ZERO noise and it was a wierd blue.....sor of like the blue lights you see at the airport. It went in a Northwesternly direction...any ideas what that might have been?
Can someone do the math?
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:41 pm
by donb
I'm not experienced with the actual math, but a couple things should be easily calculated:
IF the object is in earth orbit, then its altitude can easily be calculated just by how fast it is crossing the sky. The time is captured in the pictures, the location is relative to the stars. An earlier post suggested about 50 degrees in 20 minutes, which is about right. There's no such thing as a "slow" satellite in orbit. The speed and height are related. At 23000 miles, the satellite would not (appear to) move at all (geosynchronous). At 200 miles it crosses the entire sky in less than 5 minutes (look up upcoming ISS or HST passes on Heavens Above). So, if it is in orbit, it is well above 200 miles, and well below 23000. I'm sure someone who knows this stuff can be fairly precise. (I'm not sure how a highly elliptical orbit changes this, but I think its not by much.)
It may not be in orbit. It could be higher, and passing by. It can't be lower. To be lower, it would have to be in the atmosphere (eg a blimp, weather balloon, etc) With the cameras 50KM apart, and the maximum atmospheric height around 30KM (~20 miles), the parallax would be huge. This thing would not be in the same constellation. Indeed, at 25Km up, and between the cameras, one would show it at 45 degrees above one horizon, one would show it 45 degrees above the OPPOSITE horizon.
Whatever it is, it is very high (ie in space).
i've seen this before
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:51 pm
by joseph
i have seen this exact same thing before. one night while camping in northern utah three of us saw this light streak across the sky. way too big for an airplane or satellite. the next night on the news it was reported that hundreds of people across a couple hundred miles had seen it but NORAD and the airport did not have or wouldn't give an explanation.
unknown object
Posted: Tue Feb 08, 2005 4:52 pm
by dmk
Wasn't a new spy satellite launched recently? Would heavens-above have information on that?