[meteorite-list] Incorrect trajectory in INGEMMET report & Wiki page?

From: Jan Hattenbach <jan.hattenbach_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2007 23:57:22 +0200
Message-ID: <1818770121_at_web.de>

Hi Rob, and List,

I was also confused by the direction given in that report. According to an eyewitness who observed from Puno, the flight direction was "from left to right" which means somewhat N to S, not vice versa. The different wall heights of the crater also support the NE to SW flight direction. It's just one more incorrect part in media reports (in the beginning, I found lots of news repots claiming the impact was at midnight!)

BTW: Thanks a lot to all of you for the useful and interesting discussions here. I am lucky to live in Arequipa, Peru at the moment, so I took the opportunity to go to Desaguadero twice, fotograph the crater, talk to the locals and buy some of the stones. What an experience! Unfortunately, I did not meet Michael there, who in my mind makes an excellent job!

Jan (a new meteorite enthusiast...)

> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: "Rob Matson" <mojave_meteorites at cox.net>
> Gesendet: 06.10.07 23:27:50
> An: <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
> Betreff: [meteorite-list] Incorrect trajectory in INGEMMET report & Wiki page?


>
> Update and possible correction on the flight direction:
>
> The INGEMMET initial report and the Wikipedia entry for the Carancas
> meteorite both state that the flight direction was toward the NNE,
> but I'm wondering if they are both 180 degrees off. Here's the
> Wiki link:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Peruvian_meteorite_event
>
> The applicable sentence: "The object moved in a direction toward N030E."
> I suspect the source for this sentence is the INGEMMET initial report
> which says, "Apparent displacement azimuth of the object: towards N030E."
>
> Since the INGEMMET report got the GMT time wrong, I suppose it isn't a
> stretch to assume they reversed the direction as well (or perhaps they
> incorrectly translated from Spanish to English, replacing "from
> N030E" with "towards N030E".) Whatever the case, it clearly doesn't
> agree with this picture:
>
> http://www.signs-of-the-times.org/image/image/3376/dn12704-3_800.jpg
>
> So if this trajectory is correct, the motion is instead toward azimuth
> 210, and the meteoroid was on a *descending* node ecliptic crossing,
> not ascending. For moderate entry angles, the radiant would have been
> in Coma Berenices or Canes Venatici; Virgo for a steep entry angle;
> Bootes for a very shallow one. Still means a slow to moderate
> encounter velocity. --Rob
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
_____________________________________________________________________
Der WEB.DE SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
http://smartsurfer.web.de/?mc=100071&distributionid=000000000066
Received on Sat 06 Oct 2007 05:57:22 PM PDT