Quote from: Sesquipedalian on 10/11/2013 02:37 pmQuote from: baldusi on 10/11/2013 01:52 pmWhat? Now you're gonna tell me that Buenos Aires isn't the capital of Brazil?Of course not. That's Rio de Janeiro.The joke. You killed the joke.
Quote from: baldusi on 10/11/2013 01:52 pmWhat? Now you're gonna tell me that Buenos Aires isn't the capital of Brazil?Of course not. That's Rio de Janeiro.
What? Now you're gonna tell me that Buenos Aires isn't the capital of Brazil?
Please SpaceX, we need that retro-burn video to keep this on topic! Please.........
Quote from: Robotbeat on 10/11/2013 03:22 pmQuote from: Sesquipedalian on 10/11/2013 02:37 pmQuote from: baldusi on 10/11/2013 01:52 pmWhat? Now you're gonna tell me that Buenos Aires isn't the capital of Brazil?Of course not. That's Rio de Janeiro.The joke. You killed the joke.Oh no he didn't.Ric
The remaining payloads are now identified: According to Space-Track, B is CUSat 1 and C is DANDE. They also give CUSat 2 as attached to the Falcon stage and H to V as debris.
Quote from: gwiz on 10/12/2013 06:58 pmThe remaining payloads are now identified: According to Space-Track, B is CUSat 1 and C is DANDE. They also give CUSat 2 as attached to the Falcon stage and H to V as debris.Some of the confusion of posters earlier in this thread is because the objects SpaceTrack are now calling A to Gare NOT the objects they were calling A to G a week ago. The orbital parameters didn't change becauseof drag or inaccurate data, they changed because they now refer to completely different objects.As far as I can tell, the old A, C, E, F and G are no longer being tracked. The old D is now being called J.The old B was a mix of objects including the new B but also including elsets that belong to debris objects.The new A, C, D, E, F do not have elsets prior to Oct 7 or so.The POPACS objects D, E, F still seem to be jumping around and it may be another few days before they sort out which is which.
Quote from: jcm on 10/12/2013 07:31 pmQuote from: gwiz on 10/12/2013 06:58 pmThe remaining payloads are now identified: According to Space-Track, B is CUSat 1 and C is DANDE. They also give CUSat 2 as attached to the Falcon stage and H to V as debris.Some of the confusion of posters earlier in this thread is because the objects SpaceTrack are now calling A to Gare NOT the objects they were calling A to G a week ago. The orbital parameters didn't change becauseof drag or inaccurate data, they changed because they now refer to completely different objects.As far as I can tell, the old A, C, E, F and G are no longer being tracked. The old D is now being called J.The old B was a mix of objects including the new B but also including elsets that belong to debris objects.The new A, C, D, E, F do not have elsets prior to Oct 7 or so.The POPACS objects D, E, F still seem to be jumping around and it may be another few days before they sort out which is which.Moving letter labels for orbital elements is normal. The letter labels are not fixed and are re-assigned based on arbitrary ordering.
Has anyone examined the possibility that the items being tracked are not accidental debris, but are actually small classified payloads to test something or other for the government?
Quote from: Blackjax on 10/13/2013 09:44 pmHas anyone examined the possibility that the items being tracked are not accidental debris, but are actually small classified payloads to test something or other for the government? there were no such payloads
Quote from: Jim on 10/13/2013 10:03 pmQuote from: Blackjax on 10/13/2013 09:44 pmHas anyone examined the possibility that the items being tracked are not accidental debris, but are actually small classified payloads to test something or other for the government? there were no such payloadsCould I persuade you to share your basis for this assertion?
Changing IDs of the cataloged numbers is also "normal" too - I mean that 39268 became 39276 and 39265 ceased to exist and the number reassigned to a different object. And that's also very annoying, because it means the numbers DON'T MEAN ANYTHING. You can't have any confidence that two elsets with the same catalog number refer to the same object.
Quote from: jcm on 10/12/2013 11:11 pmChanging IDs of the cataloged numbers is also "normal" too - I mean that 39268 became 39276 and 39265 ceased to exist and the number reassigned to a different object. And that's also very annoying, because it means the numbers DON'T MEAN ANYTHING. You can't have any confidence that two elsets with the same catalog number refer to the same object.Thanks for the insight. So, the 5-digit catalog ID is not a primary key in the database sense and consequently referential integrity is NOT a given when following individual objects across different epochs.
So much about the lessons learned.
catID label obj. peri x apo [km]39247* F9 R/B DEB W? 715 732? *) some objects like 39247 show up in the satellite catalog but are missing in other TLE views
Why does CUSAT 2 keep coming up? It never even launched. Can we assume that object is also "F9 Deb"?