results

[BillW]

Hi,
Been busy of late and getting better and better results.
Here's a summary of how things have improved!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=milJHQat4q8&feature=youtu.be

Was reading some historical material on photographic meteor spectroscopy and one figure stood out.
In the 60's it was over 550 hours observing (no idea how many films that was) for 17 spectra and no details on the the quality of spectra.
One every ~32 hours worth of exposure spread over a decade!

Times have changed!

cheers,
Bill.

[allanuk]

Not changed that much Bill. I'm at around 300 hours of video observing so far and I have caught 14 spectra. 7 of those were too faint to analyse and the rest are of various quality. So that's one every 21hrs or one usable spectrum every 42hrs.
I suspect that in the 60's this was a lot harder and the analysis was very time consuming. I imagine they only deployed cameras during the major meteor showers to maximise the return. With todays equipment we can run every night regardless of weather or meteor activity. There is always a chance of catching something, even between the clouds.

So spectra captured per hour of video observing has not really changed that much if you run the cameras every night. The big change will be during the periods of major meteor activity when we could expect a greater return for a nights work. Over a year we could have a lot of spectra, and over the next decade ; well you work it out.

[BillW]

This is a case of lies, damned lies and statistics.

Perhaps a better way to think of it, in results terms, is as a rate of 1.7 spectra per year. That was what I was meaning...

You have already surpassed that and after another ten years I'm prepared to wager you'll have quite a few more than 17 spectra!