Observation Run at KPNO (Mar 2017)

My colleague Ariel and I went to KPNO near Tucson for our observation run just right before the spring break.

Day 1 (Mar 21)

The flight from LAX to Tucson was ~ 8 am, so I had to wake up at ~ 5:15 am, and then quickly packed up my backpack. After eating some leftover bánh trôi in the fridge, I set off to catch the 6am Flyaway At the Westwood. Within half an hour, I arrived at LAX, where I met Ariel an hour later. The flight was smooth. On board I recognizes your destination – KPNO in distance, thanks to the super obvious signature just next to KPNO,  Baboquivari Peak. Of course all the domes appeared as small what dots merely.

We took a Uber to the KPNO in downtown Tucson, on campus of University of Arizona. Since the shuttle wouldn’t leave until 11 am, Ariel and I walked around the campus very briefly, but soon we decided not to continue because the temperature was scorching. Actually I’ve visited the campus three years ago during the DPS. However, it was at night so I didn’t see things clearly. It turned out to be that Ariel and I were the only two persons going to KP, and Ariel had to drive the shuttle.

IMG_3908
The bicentennial Moon tree in UA’s campus. Last time I saw it in dark.

The drive was ~1.5 hrs. The weather atop KP was visually perfect, although the wind was pretty strong. Starving we were, we devoured quite a lot at the cafeteria. We then went to the 36″ dome, waiting for Flynn, who showed up ~2:30 pm and gave us some very brief instructions on operating the dome and the telescope. Basically we still remember every procedure because our last visit was three months ago only. Flynn mentioned that recently there have been several reports of bear and mountain lion witness around KP and asked us to be cautious.

Ariel and I were both exhausted, so we went back to the dorm and took a nap. After dinner, we met at the dome and started working. Ariel arrived earlier. When I got there, she was taking flats already. Having adjusted the focus of the telescope by taking images of θ Gem, we started observations. Our targets were all comets, SPCs and LPCs. We did plan to observe some unusual asteroids with TJ < 2, including several Damocloids, but eventually didn’t have enough time. During the early run, we unconsciously stuck the telescope because the pointing exceeded the minimum altitude limit twice. As a result, the telescope had to be manually slewed by me through a control panel upstairs. We have now been experts on this!

We observed a PCCP object YF982D7 through BVRI filters. I quickly calibrated all the images, and measured astrometry. No cometary feature can be seen from our coadded images. It finally was designated as 2017 EF12 by the MPC on Day 3, so the cometary feature wasn’t confirmed at all. I’m wondering if some observer has been fooled by bad seeing. Otherwise it’d be quite interesting and exciting, were it a comet; it has a low-eccentricity orbit, and the semimajor axis is small too.

Before daybreak, we attempted to observe several newly discovered comets, such as C/2017 E4 (Lovejoy), only to realise that the influence from the Moon was awfully serious, so had to give up. The observing run ended at ~5:40 am, when the twilight became too strong.

After taking a shower, I went to bed and felt asleep soon.

Day 2 (Mar 22)

I woke up several times around noon, and forced me to sleep. Finally I got up at 4 pm and went to have dinner (breakfast in reality). The weather had been overcast, but the cloud dispersed and revealed a crystal clear sky before sunset. I went to the dome and met Ariel there. Again she was taking flats.

IMG_3918
The scene around Baboquivari in the south viewed from the dome.

As the twilight faded, we began the observing run with the synoptic observation about a variable star in the region of M42, which happened to be the only observed target tonight. As soon as we finished taking BVRI images of it, we saw the instruction of shutting down the dome, due to the strong wind and rising humidity. So we did. The humidity went up quickly and reached ~100% later. Ariel left the dome around 2 am, and I left around 4 am.

On the way back I felt the ambience a bit horrible. The smog was pretty strong; I could hardly see things beyond ~5 m even with a torchlight. The gust kept producing weird noise. Anyway, I successfully made my way to the cafeteria, and ate some hot soups there.

IMG_3920
The spicy chicken soup.

Before I went to bed, it started raining. What a night!

Day 3 (Mar 23)

Again I woke up several times before the time I planned to get up. This is equivalent to suffering from jet-lag. Before I went to have my dinner, there were considerable amounts of clouds in the sky. But fortunate enough, they dispersed towards dusk. The temperature was also much colder.

We still had plenty of time after having finished taking flats. To kill the time I was busy calibrating images from Day 1 and performing astrometry. Of course I couldn’t finish the all before the sky got dark enough. So we adjusted the focus. I should point out that seeing was extremely awful. However we changed the focus, images of field stars looked fat. Anyway we began the observing run with 128P, which somehow appeared fainter than expected, perhaps due to the fact that the twilight was still there a bit.

Around 9:30 pm, a staff (I forgot his name) brought some visitors into our dome, showing them “what astronomers are doing”. It didn’t last for long, and they left within ~15 min. We then concentrate back on imaging comets. During the run we did attempt to observe Damocloid 2015 RK245, but we couldn’t spot it in individual images.

Before the end, we observed comet C/2017 E4 (Lovejoy), which appeared super bright. Judging from the morphology, it’s a gassy one. It moved pretty fast too. We obtained 10-ish images, which did give us enough SNR of it. We finally challenged the telescope a bit by observing another bright comet C/2017 E1 (Borisov) — then the twilight had been quite strong already. We did get it, but way less impressive than C/2017 E4, maybe because of the bright sky background. The session ended at ~5:45 am. The slender crescent moon looked amazing in the eastern sky.

Day 4 (Mar 24)

Maybe I’m really aging; I again woke up first at 12pm, and then woke up every hour. I dreamed a lot, probably due to which I didn’t sleep well. Anyway, the weather for this observing run appeared to be the best since we arrived at KP; the humidity was low enough, <~ 40%, basically windless, and the temperature was pretty steady, ~9 ℃. As a result, seeing was way better than on Day 3.

We began the observing run from comet C/2010 U3 (Boattini), in Perseus, followed by the synoptic observation of the M42 field. Comet C/2017 C1 (NEOWISE) was observed successfully. Originally we expected it to be faint, since no one had observed it since Feb, but it turned out to be a good one. It was readily visible in individual images, moving fast. The synoptic observation also required us to observe a field containing ρ Oph, so we wasted some time on this.

IMG_3929
My night lunch for Day 4. The highlight is that spoon. Because I couldn’t find a spoon, I had to make one from foil. It looked fancy, even like from the antiquity, but actually functioned awfully…

The session was ended with C/2017 E1 (Borisov). Compared to Day 3, we were able to get two more images before the twilight was too bright.

Day 5 (Mar 25)

I slept a bit better today, at least my first wakeup was close to 1pm. I could clearly remember what I dreamed during the sleep — my family, and my calligraphy teacher 張老師, and his master pieces. He suffered from a stroke last Sept, resulting in weak disability of his right arm. Since then I had had quite a lot of dreams, in which he had convalesced and could write things as before. But a good thing is that I’ve heard that he’s getting better and better.

KP_pano
Pano pic of KP, taken by my phone.

The late afternoon witnessed a considerable amount of clouds. But thanks to them, I enjoyed a spectacular sunset. The clouds were like burnt, against a violet background of the sky. As time evolved they changed their shapes. I was simply standing outside and looking at the sky, doing nothing else. As one of my favourite things in my childhood which I did a lot was looking at the sky during sunsets, the scene certainly brought me back, just like yesterday once more. I thought I were only a little kid at a moment.

IMG_4010
The awesome sunset view, taken by my phone.

I went back into the dome after the show faded. The clouds were great decorations during the sunset, but form a bad thing for our observing run. The dome was shut down because of them. We had to wait till ~11 pm until the sky turned clear. Our first target was 315P, which displayed a fan-shaped broad tail. A super bright comet we observed was C/2015 ER61 (PANSTARRS), which was initially discovered as an asteroid by Pan-STARRS, but later a cometary feature was found.

This day’s observing run ended again by observing C/2017 E1. Earlier, our advisor Dave emailed us asking whether we’d observed it; it might be a potentially disintegrating candidate due to the rotational instability. Frankly I didn’t think about this point, but just thought that we shall observe it to improve the orbit; the current solution was still pretty nasty, because we saw a significant discrepancy between the observed and predicted positions. Anyway, this time we put more efforts to this comet, and we were able to obtain seven R-band images on it.

Before going back to the dorm, we saw the very elegantly thin crescent Moon rising in the east.

Day 6 (Mar 26)

I finally managed to adapt to the timezone for astronomers, which is good. But unfortunately it was the last day of our observing trip, which is bad.

We planned to end the whole KP observing run by observing C/2017 E1 again. However, for some reason an attempt image showed that the image quality couldn’t be even more nasty, and thus we decided to observe C/2013 C2 (Tenagra), which was predicted to be bright enough, provided that the prediction didn’t go wrong. It hadn’t been observed for almost a year, based on the MPC. So we did. But we couldn’t see anything obvious, so at least it wasn’t that bright. I haven’t yet reduced the data. Maybe something will show up, hopefully.

It’d been pretty bright at the time we shut down the dome. I knew that Venus should be visible, so on the way back we searched for it for awhile. Indeed we managed to spot it by naked eye! It just passed the inferior conjunction with the Sun a day ago! This definitely becomes my record of seeing Venus closest to the Sun during non-transits by naked eye. Alas my camera was left in my office, a bit pity.

IMG_3973
Before I left the dome, I drew a super ugly graffiti of a man’s head. It used to be a maze but then I thought it was kinda boring. Some observers might feel asleep during observing runs, so putting something on like this horrible may help them stay awake. I’m considerate, ain’t I?

I got up at noon the next day. Before we left the mountain I grabbed something for lunch. After checking out, Ariel and I drove back to downtown Tucson at 2 pm, and then took a Uber to the airport. Our flight was ~5:15 pm and landed in LAX an hour later. So the whole trip came to an end, but I still have to reduce and measure all the images from Day 6.

Observation Run at KPNO (Mar 2017)

SOHO-3165

Today saw my first success of establishing an orbital linkage for a SOHO comet, SOHO-3165 , with observations from three consecutive apparitions. I have never done this work on my own — all the previous similar works I’ve done were either verifying Rainer’s solutions, or simply lucky because of lacking influential nongravs. SOHO-3165 doesn’t seem to be an easy one, as neither Bill nor Karl managed to get a solution. Bill managed to get a linkage with the first two apparitions, and third one was left unsuccessful with huge residuals. Therefore I was curious if I could solve this problem.

I haven’t done this job for long, perhaps over three years. As a result it took me a while before I could get onto the right track. A few tweaks of starting conditions enabled Aldo’s Exorb to get a decent orbit for the first apparition. In this step, a parabolic orbit had to be assumed. I then forced the program to solve an orbit for semimajor axis a = 3.05~\mathrm{AU}. With observations from the second apparitions the orbital solution was quickly refined. The trick was to fit for the first observation from the second apparition initially. Once the RMS decreased, more subsequent data could be fed in.

If there were no nongravs, the third apparition could be linked without much difficulty. However, this is not the case this time, which exactly complicated the computation work. In fact there is a huge offset in positions in the first observation of the third apparition (which was the only observation from the third apparition at this step). So there must be a nonzero transverse nongrav parameter. I tried A_2 = 10^{-8} \mathrm{AU ~ day}^{-2}, no success, and even worsened the solution to the previous two apparitions. Yet the program turned the optimised A_2 into a negative number, from which I immediately realised that the third apparition was postponed. Then -10^{-10}~ \mathrm{AU~day}^{-2}. Success! The program quickly shrunk the RMS of the fit. My last step was adding all the remaining observations and let the program find the best-fit solution.

soho3165

Yet seems like there is something wrong with the code about completing iterations. The code somehow continuously looked for but never succeeds in yielding a final convergence. I therefore manually paused the program. Luckily because the code was generally looping around small RMS. Although the above solution may well not have the smallest RMS, it has one close to already.

The motivation of this writing is simply to provide me as a reminder in the future about how I can obtain an orbital linkage when nonzero nongravs are presented.

SOHO-3165

Further to My Previous Blog, rgd RVSF

I got in touch with Dr. Nalin Samarasinha at PSI, who wrote the codes for all of the special cometary processing filters at PSI website. He has beeing patiently answering every of my questions so I now can understand what his RVSF code is basically doing, though I know very little of FORTRAN. The discrepancy I spot between the source code and the explanation file is indeed a typo.

I added a new keyword to my IDL routine so that the user could have the option whether they like to switch on or off the function of sub-pixel sampling of the image prior to the function of the filter or not. Through some simple tests I realized that the differences between sub-pixelization and non-sub-pixelization of the image would not be very obvious in terms of visual inspection. However, the speed matters considerably, especially when the input image size or the part of regions selected is quite large — the processing time, in this case, could be quite consuming. So it’s a good idea to preview the enhanced image without sub-pixel sampling, not only would you save a great amount of time, but also this would give you a basic knowledge about if your kernel parameters are appropriate, and finally, to process the image by sub-pixelization with reasonable kernel parameters.

I couldn’t discern any difference in the enhanced images with or without sub-pixelization, however, a subtraction between the two clearly reveals what is previously hidden behind. See the following image.

The difference between non-sub-pixelization and sub-pixelization sampling. Linear stretch.
The difference between non-sub-pixelization and sub-pixelization sampling. Linear stretch.

Additionally, I’m very delighted to find that the resulting enhanced image processed by means of sub-pixelization shares great similarity with the one processed through Nalin’s code or PSI’s online tool. So I think my routine is quite successful.

At last, before the end of this update, I need to confess that I had mistakenly regarded the author of the source codes to be Padma Yanamandra-Fisher. I had been confused by their names, all look rather long for me… ><

Further to My Previous Blog, rgd RVSF

Testing My Radially Variable Spatial Filter Code

I think I need to update my blog; it has been so long since my last update… Also should I prove that I’m still alive here.

I saw a message in the comets-ml posted by Martino Nicolini that the PSI website has released a web tool for processing cometary images, including azimuthal median/average/renormalization filters, 1/rho coma model division, and, quite unfamiliar to me, radially variable spatial filter (http://www.psi.edu/research/cometimen). I attempted to process an image taken by HST regarding comet C/2012 S1 (ISON) in May 2013 with the online tool, however, I had difficulty in retrieving the enhanced or processed data. Weirdly the size of the to-be-downloaded file was always 0 KB, obviously problematic. With consideration that the network is not permanently available for me, it sounds absurd and waste-of-time for me to wait for accessible network before performing specially processed cometary images, and therefore I decided to write codes for my own purpose.

So I did by taking reference to the explanation file of the enhancement techniques, understanding the global idea of how the radially variable spatial filter works. Realizing the algorithm of the filter was proved easy, and it didn’t take me long to accomplish the IDL routine.

I did some tests with the image CometCIEF_test.fits provided in this page. The following was generated with kernel A = 4.0, B = 4.0, N = 0.4. It looks correct anyway, quite similar to the appearance in the tutorial file.

RVSF test imageHowever, I found my result would look somewhat different from those presented in the tutorial file if the kernel size was smaller — probably the scaling plays a role there, yet anyway my outcome would look less detailed. The corresponding FORTRAN source code of the filter in the PSI page seems to has a typo, which I have already reported to Padma Yanamandra-Fisher. I’m still comparing my codes against the PSI’s…

Testing My Radially Variable Spatial Filter Code

二體問題下中心力場滿足二次平方反比之斥力問題

好久沒更新部落格了,今日留個爪印。

最近想徹底解決掉遺漏許久的彗星塵埃粒子在力場中的問題,如今所寫出的IDL代碼已經可以完美地解決了\beta = \frac{F_{rad}}{F_{grav}}< 1的情況。如下圖所示,模擬C/2011 L4 (PanSTARRS)彗星在今年4月1日的部分塵埃尾巴情況。

Synchrone and syndyne grids for the comet
Synchrone and syndyne grids for the comet

解決這個問題的本質其實就是不斷地計算不同塵埃粒子的Kepler’s Equation。由於粒子大小不同,釋放時間也不同,其mean anomaly和偏心率也會不同。計算方法參考的是Probstein和Finson於1968年所發表的一片論文《A theory of dust comets. I. Model and equations》。不過論文僅針對了軌道是拋物線運行的彗星的情況。但只要按照同樣的思路,橢圓軌道、雙曲線軌道的彗星情況同樣可以迎刃而解。然而論文中只討論了\beta < 1,對於大於及等於1之情況卻未有照顧。不等式取等號時對應塵埃粒子將以勻速直線運動方式運動,而大於時則是受到中心斥力。於是我很自然地聯想到,在中心斥力力場作用下,塵埃粒子的運動方程是否仍然有類似於中心吸引力的類似形式。

起初爲了方便了事,想在網上直接尋找答案,然而找了許久,並無收穫,於是決心自己動筆計算以探究竟。以下用極座標進行討論,認爲塵埃質量與太陽質量相比是無窮小量。原點設在中心力場中心。我們不難知道可以推導出以下兩組方程:

\ddot{r} - r\dot{\theta}^2 = \frac{\mu}{r^2}——(1)

r^2\dot{\theta}=h——(2)

其中\mu = \left ( \beta - 1 \right )GM_\odot 。首先先推導軌道類型。令u = \frac{1}{r}代入(1)式,並結合(2)式,可以得到如下一個二次非齊次線性微分方程:

\frac{\mathrm{d}^2 u}{\mathrm {d}\theta^2}+u=-\frac{\mu}{h^2}

可得其通解爲u=\frac{\mu}{h^2}\left [ e\cos \left ( \theta - \omega \right ) - 1\right ],其中e和\omega爲待定常數。將其表達回r,得到:

r=\frac{h^2/\mu}{ e\cos \left ( \theta - \omega \right ) - 1}——(3)

由解析幾何知,這是一條以外焦點爲原點的雙曲線。可記得Rutherford Scattering,被散射粒子正是沿着雙曲線軌道運行的!

我們定義q = r_{min} = \left | a \right |(1+e),a爲對應雙曲線之半長徑,爲負值。剩下的工作是找出r和\theta關於時間t的含數。

將(2)式代入(1)可以得到:

\ddot{r} - \frac{h^2}{r^3}=\frac{\mu}{r^2}——(4)

由於\ddot{r} = \dot{r}\frac{\mathrm{d} \dot{r}}{\mathrm{d} r},故(4)式可以化爲:

\dot{r}\mathrm{d} \dot{r}=(\frac{h^2}{r^3}+\frac{\mu}{r^2})\mathrm{d}r

兩邊積分得到:

\dot{r}^2=-\frac{2\mu}{r}-\frac{h^2}{r^2}+K_1——(5)

其中K_1是一個待定積分常數,可以用初始條件代入求出。方法如下。

對於r=q時,有\dot{r}=0,代入(5)可以解得K_1 = \frac{\mu}{\left | a \right |},即

\dot{r}^2=-\frac{2\mu}{r}-\frac{h^2}{r^2}+\frac{\mu}{\left | a \right |}——(6)

注意到v^2 = \dot{r}^2 + \dot{\theta}^2 r^2 ,對(6)變換下形式,於是立即獲得了一個與活力公式十分相似的一條描述粒子速率的一條公式:

v^2 = \mu (\frac{1}{\left | a \right |}-\frac{2}{r})——(7)

可以發現,只要把(7)式括號內的兩項調整位置,便是「正宗」的活力公式!

我們的任務還未完成,現繼續求r和\theta關於t的表達式。將(6)式變形,可以得到:

\mathrm{d}t = \frac{r\mathrm{d}r}{\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{\left | a \right |}}r^2 - 2\mu r - \mu \left | a \right |(e^2 - 1)}

即:

\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{\left | a \right |}}\mathrm{d}t=\frac{r\mathrm{d}r}{\left | a \right |\sqrt{(r - \left | a \right |)^2 - a^2 e^2}}

我們令r - \left | a \right |=\left | a \right |e\cosh{F},則有:

\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{\left | a \right |^3}}\mathrm{d}t = (e\cosh{F}+1)\mathrm{d}F

兩邊同時積分,得到:

\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{\left | a \right |^3}}t = e\sinh{F}+F+K_2

廣義Kepler’s Equation雛形初現!!上式中K_2爲一積分常數,用同樣的方式,考慮r = q時,選擇t=0爲過近日點之時,則可得到K_2 = 0 。於是廣義Kepler’s Equation爲

\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{\left | a \right |^3}}t = e\sinh{F}+F——(8)

可見,在斥力下的方程與引力下的方程形式上非常接近。仿照真正意義上的Kepler’s Equation,我們且將F亦稱爲eccentric anomaly(偏近點角)。這是個超越方程,只要將F解出,根據

r = \left | a \right |(1 + e\cosh{F})——(9)

則可求得r。r既得,\theta亦可根據(3)式求出。不過此處我們想看看\theta與F之間的關係爲何。爲簡單見,令 f = \theta - \omega

將(9)式代入(3)式,我們可以得到\cos{f} = \frac{e + \cosh{F}}{1 + e \cosh{F}}。利用半角公式2 \sin^2 {\frac{f}{2}} = 1 - \cos{f},得:

\sin{\frac{f}{2}} = \sqrt{\frac{(e-1)\sinh^2 {\frac{F}{2}}}{1+e \cosh{F}}}

類似地,利用2 \cos^2 {\frac{f}{2}} = 1 + \cos{f},可得:

\cos{\frac{f}{2}} = \sqrt{\frac{(e+1)\cosh^2 {\frac{F}{2}}}{1+e \cosh{F}}}

兩式相除,最後得到:

\tan{\frac{f}{2}} = \sqrt{\frac{e-1}{e+1}}\tanh{\frac{F}{2}}——(10)

至此,問題已經完美解決了!我們可以得到的結論是,中心力滿足二次平方反比條件的中心斥力情況下,被散射物體的運動軌跡方程與對應吸引力場下的雙曲線軌道運動方程十分相似,我們只需改變幾個地方的符號即可獲得。

二體問題下中心力場滿足二次平方反比之斥力問題

Solution to IDL Memory Allocation Problem

Long time since the last update of this blog.

I’ve confronted with the following error when trying to processing a large array made up of SECCHI COR2 data, and it had been extremely painstaking before the solution was found. Many of the solutions to the problem told you to simply switch a platform, i.e. from Win 32-bit to Linux, in that the problem inherits from discontiguous distribution of  memory allocation. For a better understanding, let’s suppose you get 1000MB free space in total. However, it may well be that summing up several, i.e., five 200MB discontinuous free space gives you this value. Yet if you want to use 500MB at a time in IDL, the following error warning message pops out:

   % Unable to allocate memory: to make array.
      Not enough space
   % Execution halted at: $MAIN$

I get an excellent alternative way to overcome this problem partly after reading guides from Coyote’s Guide. It works for me! At least I can reduce a median background from the daily stack.

When working with IDL after that aforementioned error message, exit the Workbench first. The next step is to find out a file entitled idlde.ini in one of the files storing IDL. Then use some text editor to open it. It may read like following:

   -vm
   {VM_DIR}
   -vmargs
   -Xms256M
   -Xmx768M
   -XX:MaxPermSize=128m

Make sure that {VM_DIR} remains unchanged; it’s the path to Java JVM on your machine and malfunctions may occur otherwise. Change the lines:

   -vm
   {VM_DIR}
   -vmargs
   -Xms128M
   -Xmx128M
   -XX:MaxPermSize=128m

Restart your IDL Workbench and you may see difference. Yet please don’t get too exhilrated. If you still use an oversized array, this may not have your problem resolve. Just never be too careful when running IDL in Win 32-bit machine. Frankly speaking it’s better recommended to running IDL in non-Win machines, on which It’s said that more powerfulness of IDL will be functioned, but I can’t tell more as lacking such experience.

Solution to IDL Memory Allocation Problem

Previously Unknown Comet in STEREO Images

The suspect was picked by Alan Watson the day before yesterday. I managed to get all of the positions in COR2B images.

NET USNO-B1.0
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.22564 12 13 02.65 -01 48 23.7 8.53R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.24647 12 12 53.26 -01 48 26.1 8.91R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.26730 12 12 45.80 -01 48 21.9 9.50R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.28814 12 12 35.61 -01 48 25.3 8.43R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.30897 12 12 27.68 -01 48 29.6 8.52R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.32980 12 12 18.74 -01 48 30.5 8.86R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.35064 12 12 11.77 -01 48 49.6 8.76R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.37147 12 12 02.30 -01 48 46.8 8.65R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.39230 12 11 55.22 -01 48 44.8 8.65R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.41314 12 11 46.69 -01 49 03.9 8.72R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.22564 12 13 00.49 -01 48 16.0 9.29R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.24647 12 12 53.26 -01 48 26.1 8.91R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.26730 12 12 45.80 -01 48 21.9 9.50R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.28814 12 12 35.61 -01 48 25.3 8.43R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.28814 12 12 36.14 -01 48 34.7 9.37R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.30897 12 12 27.68 -01 48 29.6 8.52R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.32980 12 12 18.74 -01 48 30.5 8.86R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.35064 12 12 11.77 -01 48 49.6 8.76R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.37147 12 12 02.30 -01 48 46.8 8.65R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.39230 12 11 55.22 -01 48 44.8 8.65R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.41314 12 11 46.69 -01 49 03.2 8.73R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.43397 12 11 38.88 -01 48 52.7 7.47R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.45480 12 11 30.39 -01 49 21.4 8.69R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.47563 12 11 22.36 -01 49 16.6 8.64R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.49647 12 11 14.47 -01 49 20.2 8.53R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.51730 12 11 05.85 -01 49 35.7 8.39R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.53813 12 10 58.59 -01 49 36.5 7.41R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.55897 12 10 50.12 -01 49 31.4 8.22R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.57980 12 10 41.55 -01 49 45.1 8.50R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.60063 12 10 32.19 -01 49 52.6 8.13R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.62147 12 10 25.26 -01 49 53.3 7.25R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.64230 12 10 16.48 -01 50 05.5 7.68R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.66313 12 10 08.48 -01 50 08.8 7.61R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.68397 12 10 00.17 -01 50 10.0 7.84R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.70480 12 09 52.11 -01 50 18.7 7.95R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.72563 12 09 44.40 -01 50 27.5 7.25R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.74647 12 09 36.12 -01 50 32.7 6.97R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.76730 12 09 27.75 -01 50 36.3 7.34R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.78813 12 09 19.80 -01 50 39.9 8.01R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.80897 12 09 11.44 -01 50 42.9 7.36R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.82980 12 09 03.59 -01 50 44.5 7.28R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.85063 12 08 55.54 -01 50 58.5 7.03R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.87147 12 08 47.03 -01 51 02.5 7.55R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.89230 12 08 38.53 -01 51 07.9 7.40R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.91313 12 08 30.71 -01 51 14.9 6.95R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.93397 12 08 23.42 -01 51 23.9 7.16R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.95480 12 08 14.47 -01 51 21.2 7.42R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.97563 12 08 06.00 -01 51 27.2 7.30R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 13.99647 12 07 58.43 -01 51 35.8 6.74R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.01730 12 07 50.77 -01 51 44.1 7.16R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.03813 12 07 41.87 -01 51 45.3 7.19R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.05897 12 07 33.90 -01 51 51.8 6.98R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.07980 12 07 25.90 -01 51 56.8 6.66R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.10063 12 07 18.04 -01 52 03.0 7.17R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.12147 12 07 09.80 -01 52 06.4 7.03R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.14230 12 07 01.17 -01 52 09.6 7.12R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.16313 12 06 53.59 -01 52 19.5 6.48R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.18397 12 06 45.77 -01 52 22.4 6.69R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.20480 12 06 37.20 -01 52 27.4 6.73R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.22563 12 06 28.81 -01 52 33.1 6.82R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.24647 12 06 21.30 -01 52 43.2 6.41R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.26730 12 06 13.45 -01 52 46.3 6.26R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.28813 12 06 05.43 -01 52 50.0 6.43R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.30897 12 05 56.89 -01 52 53.8 6.89R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.32980 12 05 49.14 -01 52 59.5 6.81R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.35063 12 05 41.28 -01 53 07.7 6.56R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.37147 12 05 33.18 -01 53 07.6 6.35R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.39230 12 05 25.05 -01 53 16.1 6.86R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.41313 12 05 17.09 -01 53 22.2 6.49R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.43397 12 05 08.93 -01 53 24.7 6.63R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.45480 12 05 01.07 -01 53 32.0 6.48R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.47563 12 04 53.13 -01 53 34.1 6.18R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.49647 12 04 45.17 -01 53 43.3 6.35R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.51730 12 04 37.03 -01 53 45.8 6.42R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.53813 12 04 28.97 -01 53 52.1 6.01R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.55897 12 04 21.07 -01 53 57.7 6.31R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.57980 12 04 13.00 -01 54 01.4 6.14R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.60063 12 04 05.23 -01 54 11.6 6.19R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.62147 12 03 56.69 -01 54 12.9 6.03R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.64230 12 03 48.70 -01 54 16.5 6.24R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.66313 12 03 41.07 -01 54 27.1 5.79R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.68396 12 03 32.78 -01 54 28.9 5.98R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.70480 12 03 25.28 -01 54 32.9 6.00R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.72563 12 03 17.44 -01 54 37.5 5.86R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.74646 12 03 09.57 -01 54 44.2 5.84R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.76730 12 03 01.60 -01 54 48.6 5.72R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.78813 12 02 53.87 -01 54 50.1 5.94R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.80896 12 02 45.14 -01 54 57.9 6.10R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.82980 12 02 37.64 -01 55 02.2 5.79R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.85063 12 02 29.48 -01 55 06.7 5.90R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.87146 12 02 21.83 -01 55 09.6 5.86R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.89230 12 02 13.78 -01 55 15.9 5.79R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.91313 12 02 06.15 -01 55 20.5 6.14R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.93396 12 01 57.60 -01 55 26.2 5.93R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.95480 12 01 50.17 -01 55 33.5 6.04R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.97563 12 01 42.34 -01 55 36.9 5.98R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 14.99646 12 01 34.56 -01 55 39.8 6.03R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.01729 12 01 26.35 -01 55 44.1 5.90R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.03812 12 01 18.53 -01 55 44.8 6.26R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.05896 12 01 10.71 -01 55 57.5 5.82R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.07979 12 01 02.89 -01 56 01.5 5.91R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.10062 12 00 54.86 -01 56 01.2 6.00R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.12146 12 00 47.03 -01 56 09.0 5.99R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.14229 12 00 39.22 -01 56 11.4 6.17R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.16312 12 00 31.40 -01 56 19.4 5.95R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.18396 12 00 23.72 -01 56 21.0 6.16R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.20479 12 00 15.85 -01 56 26.2 5.95R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.22562 12 00 07.89 -01 56 29.5 6.25R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.24646 12 00 00.22 -01 56 36.1 6.06R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.26729 11 59 52.35 -01 56 41.0 6.19R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.28812 11 59 44.30 -01 56 44.9 6.24R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.30896 11 59 36.58 -01 56 45.6 6.42R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.32979 11 59 28.95 -01 56 53.6 6.32R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.35062 11 59 20.99 -01 56 58.2 6.47R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.37146 11 59 13.40 -01 57 04.2 6.32R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.39229 11 59 05.44 -01 57 04.4 6.43R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.41312 11 58 57.80 -01 57 12.3 6.72R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.43396 11 58 49.95 -01 57 14.3 6.58R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.45479 11 58 42.21 -01 57 18.0 6.81R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.47562 11 58 34.72 -01 57 22.1 6.62R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.49646 11 58 26.90 -01 57 32.4 6.70R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.51729 11 58 18.95 -01 57 35.0 6.54R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.53812 11 58 11.41 -01 57 40.2 6.48R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.55896 11 58 03.39 -01 57 44.2 6.72R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.57979 11 57 55.67 -01 57 46.9 6.96R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.60062 11 57 48.04 -01 57 53.2 6.71R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.62146 11 57 40.04 -01 57 57.6 6.91R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.64229 11 57 32.44 -01 58 02.9 6.76R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.66312 11 57 24.69 -01 58 02.8 7.07R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.68396 11 57 17.19 -01 58 10.0 7.16R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.70479 11 57 09.34 -01 58 13.3 7.07R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.72562 11 57 01.52 -01 58 17.6 7.00R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.74646 11 56 54.26 -01 58 25.2 6.92R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.76729 11 56 46.15 -01 58 27.5 6.94R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.78812 11 56 38.38 -01 58 30.9 6.87R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.80896 11 56 30.70 -01 58 34.6 7.19R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.82979 11 56 23.25 -01 58 43.2 7.08R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.85062 11 56 15.46 -01 58 44.2 7.25R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.87146 11 56 07.84 -01 58 49.9 7.33R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.89229 11 56 00.41 -01 58 59.6 6.84R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.91313 11 55 52.94 -01 59 02.2 7.60R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.93396 11 55 45.32 -01 59 03.7 7.52R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.95479 11 55 37.58 -01 59 07.4 7.61R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.97563 11 55 29.68 -01 59 11.2 7.62R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 15.99646 11 55 22.19 -01 59 15.6 7.09R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.01729 11 55 14.47 -01 59 19.4 7.47R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.03813 11 55 06.93 -01 59 27.7 7.26R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.05896 11 54 59.17 -01 59 28.7 7.63R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.07979 11 54 51.50 -01 59 29.4 7.23R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.10063 11 54 44.12 -01 59 36.7 7.74R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.12146 11 54 36.77 -01 59 43.8 7.37R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.14229 11 54 29.01 -01 59 43.6 7.70R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.16313 11 54 21.66 -01 59 50.9 7.93R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.18396 11 54 14.10 -01 59 54.0 8.04R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.20479 11 54 06.27 -01 59 55.1 7.91R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.22563 11 53 58.72 -02 00 00.0 7.74R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.24646 11 53 51.32 -02 00 03.2 8.20R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.26729 11 53 43.49 -02 00 07.1 7.86R C50
AWSHB01 IC2012 01 16.28813 11 53 36.39 -02 00 19.5 7.87R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.30896 11 53 28.62 -02 00 16.9 8.31R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.32979 11 53 21.05 -02 00 20.6 8.09R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.35063 11 53 13.34 -02 00 28.2 8.10R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.37146 11 53 05.97 -02 00 32.1 8.09R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.39229 11 52 58.65 -02 00 35.1 7.83R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.41313 11 52 51.04 -02 00 40.4 8.06R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.43396 11 52 43.58 -02 00 41.9 8.75R C50
AWSHB01 C2012 01 16.45479 11 52 35.94 -02 00 48.4 8.70R C50
—– end —–

More analysis to come…

Previously Unknown Comet in STEREO Images