Re: Mark IV data off by one day

[Thomas Droege <tdroege2@earthlink.net>]

Because of the way I was taking data, I did not get Manderville on 2543108.
;^(

Tom Droege


> [Original Message]
> From: Richard Miles <rmiles.btee@btinternet.com>
> To: <tdroege2@earthlink.net>; Billings, Gary W. <obs681@telusplanet.net>
> Date: 6/12/2004 2:53:08 AM
> Subject: Re: Mark IV data off by one day
>
> Gary / Tom,
>
> Don't rule this idea out just yet.
>
> The best of the candidate asteroids looks to be 739 Mandeville, which was
> near 220.7 deg RA and +18.9 deg Dec on the date in question.  This object
> was nominally at V=12.0 and moving at 13 arcmin/day.  Therefore it should
be
> possible to discriminate the actual day from images taken.
>
> Cheers,
> Richard Miles
>
> P.S. tried sending to TASS list earlier but my new address was not
> recognised and so it was thrown out.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Thomas Droege" <tdroege2@earthlink.net>
> To: "Billings, Gary W." <obs681@telusplanet.net>; <tass@listserv.wwa.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 2:54 AM
> Subject: Re: Mark IV data off by one day
>
>
> > Gary,
> >
> > A good idea.  It does not have to move much.  So a search for an
asteroid
> > in the data would tell since our astrometry is usually good to 1 arc
> > second.  An astroid that moved a few arc seconds a day would tell the
> tale.
> >
> > Anyone want to take this on?  What we need are mag 9-11 asteroida that
> move
> > say 10 or more arc seconds a day somewhere between 160 and 270 degrees
in
> > RA and 18 to 50 degrees in Dec.  The day is 2453109 If you get the
> position
> > of asteroids at the time that they cross the zenith they will be pretty
> > close in time to when I measure them.  I will need a few, because the
way
> I
> > was taking data in April only covered about half the sky.
> >
> > Tom Droege
> >
> >
> > > [Original Message]
> > > From: Gary W. Billings <obs681@telusplanet.net>
> > > To: <tass@listserv.wwa.com>
> > > Date: 6/10/2004 9:03:42 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Mark IV data off by one day
> > >
> > > If there are any frames from the day in question that captured a
> > > sufficiently bright moving asteroid...  that could move from "absence
of
> > > evidence" to "evidence of absence" of a day error...
> > >
> > > g.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Thomas Droege" <tdroege2@earthlink.net>
> > > To: "Man, Stupendous" <richmond@stupendous.cis.rit.edu>;
> > > <tass@listserv.wwa.com>
> > > Cc: <mwrsps@rit.edu>
> > > Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 5:24 PM
> > > Subject: RE: Mark IV data off by one day
> > >
> > >
> > > > Here is an attempt to look another way at the possibility that the
> Mark
> > IV
> > > > data was off one day on 2543109.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>