
|
[az-observing]
||
[Date Prev]
[09-2006 Date Index]
[Date Next]
||
[Thread Prev]
[09-2006 Thread Index]
[Thread Next]
[AZ-Observing] Re: SMART-1 Impact Photometry
- From: Brent A Archinal <barchinal@xxxxxxxx>
- To: AZ-Observing@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 12:44:01 -0700
Regarding the brightness of the SMART-1 impact, note that the CFHT images
were taken in the infrared ("H2 narrow-band filter at 2122 nanometers"),
so it's difficult to tell what the "~5 mag" estimate of the brightness
mentioned by Peter Lipscomb would mean visually.
The magnitude 5 ("4.889") that Peter mentions for his image make it sound
encouraging that this should have been observable visually. However, here
it's not clear from the message that Tom Polakis quotes whether this is in
any way a calibrated magnitude. Further, Tony Cook has pointed out (
http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~acc/Dems/smart1.htm) that since the flash is
only on a single frame, it could be a cosmic ray hit and it still needs to
be confirmed that it was taken at the same time as the CFHT flash (and
predicted impact time). Perhaps this has been done by now but not yet
reported.
In any case, it's disappointing that there seem to be no other amateur
observations, either positive or negative of the flash. Of several who
seemed to have tried in Arizona, all were clouded out.
At least the location of the impact, as pointed out by Christen Viellet on
a representation of the USGS airbrush shaded relief mosaic
(http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/News/Smart1/, bottom image), appears to agree
at about the 1 km level with the predicted impact point based on Tony
Cook's and our (USGS) topographic models and control network. It will be
interesting to see if any surface change can be detected, e.g. with a
large telescope and good seeing. At the very least, it should be possible
for one of the upcoming lunar missions to image this area at high (few m
or less) resolution and check for evidence of an impact.
- Brent
--
See message header for info on list archives or unsubscribing, and please
send personal replies to the author, not the list.
|

|