Jump to content
  • Join the online East Midlands astronomy club today!

    With active forums, two dark sites and a knowledgeable membership, East Midlands Stargazers has something for everyone.

Near Earth Asteroid encounters Polaris 2nd Nov 2016


Orion
 Share

Recommended Posts

That is brilliant. :)

 

I read about this event a few weeks back and then forgot all about it. Thought it should be an easy target when it got that close to Polaris.

 

What was the actual time taken for the movement on your 7 seconds of video?

 

I look forward to seeing your other flickrs when I finish work. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/2/2016 at 16:13, Tweedledee said:

That is brilliant. :)

 

I read about this event a few weeks back and then forgot all about it. Thought it should be an easy target when it got that close to Polaris.

 

What was the actual time taken for the movement on your 7 seconds of video?

 

I look forward to seeing your other flickrs when I finish work. :thumbsup:

 

Thanks Pete.  I can't remember the actual times, but will check with the file date and times for beginning and end.  It was about 15 mins before to 15 minutes after closest approach to Polaris.  One thing that dawned on me was, the video just plays in the way it was made in PIP. But it went 8 times as fast as you saw it play back.  I put the movie in WMM and slowed it down to eighth speed.  But that doesn't represent how we would see it in real life if we were watching it in a scope.  So I want to work out how to chose a play back speed that is representative of true motion.  

 

Guy Wells told me at the time of closest approach (0230 am), making my video about 0215 to 0245am, it was travelling at a speed of 40 arc seconds/minute.  I don't know how fast or slow that is. But it would be nice to see my video played at the appropriate speed.

 

When I was acquiring data, I was sitting watching it move on screen after each 25 second exposure, about a diameter of the speck of light, so I could see apparent motion, but it wasn't moving to the eye other than having changed its position. But had it been a live feed, I think you would see it move if I had made the APT magnification to 15x.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Orion said:

 

Thanks Pete.  I can't remember the actual times, but will check with the file date and times for beginning and end.  It was about 15 mins before to 15 minutes after closest approach to Polaris.  One thing that dawned on me was, the video just plays in the way it was made in PIP. But it went 8 times as fast as you saw it play back.  I put the movie in WMM and slowed it down to eighth speed.  But that doesn't represent how we would see it in real life if we were watching it in a scope.  So I want to work out how to chose a play back speed that is representative of true motion.  

 

Guy Wells told me at the time of closest approach (0230 am), making my video about 0215 to 0245am, it was travelling at a speed of 40 arc seconds/minute.  I don't know how fast or slow that is. But it would be nice to see my video played at the appropriate speed.

 

When I was acquiring data, I was sitting watching it move on screen after each 25 second exposure, about a diameter of the speck of light, so I could see apparent motion, but it wasn't moving to the eye other than having changed its position. But had it been a live feed, I think you would see it move if I had made the APT magnification to 15x.

At 40 arcseconds/minute it did about a third of a degree in your video over the half hour. Just looked at the star field on Stellarium and confirmed that would be about right. Looks like it got within 3 or 4 arc minutes from Polaris at its closest? Comparing it with the stars on Stellarium the asteroid looks to be about 11th or 12th magnitude in your video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/11/2016 at 16:13, Tweedledee said:

That is brilliant. :)

 

I read about this event a few weeks back and then forgot all about it. Thought it should be an easy target when it got that close to Polaris.

 

What was the actual time taken for the movement on your 7 seconds of video?

 

I look forward to seeing your other flickrs when I finish work. :thumbsup:

GT81 and HEQ5 PRO mount expected tomorrow.

On 02/11/2016 at 17:36, BAZ said:

That's impressive Derek, well done. :)

 

Thanks Martyn.  I think I might rework the data by adding earlier and after data, and turn it into a negative video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/11/2016 at 21:46, Daz Type-R said:

That's excellent!

Thanks Darren.  I guess the next attempt could be Pluto maybe? stretch it from mag 11-12 to 13? might be very difficult with my 300mm camera lens though. i should inspect the images of 2003YT1 to see if there are any stars present at mag 14. that would be a test.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
On 11/4/2016 at 11:15, Tweedledee said:

At 40 arcseconds/minute it did about a third of a degree in your video over the half hour. Just looked at the star field on Stellarium and confirmed that would be about right. Looks like it got within 3 or 4 arc minutes from Polaris at its closest? Comparing it with the stars on Stellarium the asteroid looks to be about 11th or 12th magnitude in your video.

Thanks Pete for having a look and comparing in Stellarium. Yes, I think it was about 12th mag.  I've reprocessed some of the data files to produce another variant image.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reprocessed some of the images (56) and stacked in DSS on stars, to show the asteroid trail as it went past Polaris.  Line to lower left is a pixel trail due to stacking on the stars.  The image from DSS was processed in Photoshop CS2, inverted and some settings of gamma, contrast, brightness, exposure etc were tweaked to enhance the trail. The colours induced are false.  I've left the stack to show the edges, just to show the stacking, and also, because if I cropped the image, some stars would be lost.

 

2003-YT1-trail 2 Nov 2016

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tweedledee said:

Marvellous stuff Derek. I bet there are very few people who managed to capture that fast moving event, never mind what advanced equipment they used. You did a cracking job on it. :thumbsup:

 

Thanks Pete.  I think I'll look after that data and see what else I can do whilst learning the tools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.