Skip to content
Home » Note, Paper: Identified Flying Objects

Note, Paper: Identified Flying Objects

  • by

Interesting, to say the least, issue of RNAA (Research Notes Of The AAS) for March vol. 9 #3 (all of these papers are OPEN):

Dvorak, R. Cuntz, M.  On the Stability of Retrograde Orbits Between Jupiter and Saturn  46   adbb59
McDowell, J.  2005 VL1 is not Venera-2  55  adbe79
Spada, F.  “Dark Comet” 2005 VL1 is Unlikely to be the Lost Soviet-era Probe Venera 2  58   adbf9a
Bamberger, D.  Could (355256) 2007 KN4 Become a Large Potentially Hazardous Asteroid?  59   adc009
Rommel, F. L. Proudfoot, B. C. N. Holler, B. J. et al.  Prediction and Observation of a Stellar Occultation by Haumea’s Satellite Namaka  62  adc25f
Lilly, E. Schambeau, C. A. Thirouin, A. et al.  Observations and Characterization of the New Active Centaur 2023 RS61  67  adc453
Lehmann, T.  Apparent Change in Comet 103P/Hartley 2’s Rotation Period During 2023/2024 Measured via Aperture Photometry  68  adc4e7

A certain person (whom I do not need to give free publicity) claims that the object temporarily designated 2005 VL1 is actually artificial. While searching (trolling?) through the records, he found that object, though rather than alien, he deemed it Soviet (legal alien). Not one but two respected authors are quashing the rumor. Jonathan McDowell is a long-suffering object tracker and space historian; I’ll take his analysis (plus Federica’s) over speculators. Conclusion: the burden lies upon the rest of us to prove McDowell and Spada et al. wrong, not vice versa. But hey, a dark comet: now that’s interesting.

The rest are deep (thematically) dives into small-body characterization, though (as with other RNAA entries) they leave you wanting more. It’s called “Notes” for a reason.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *