asteroid 2009 KK: Risk in May,Jun 2009

[ginyoc]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Sorry about my stupid little mistakes and thanks to you, MW, for finding them.
Built myself a neat little Excel sheet, too, and now got -1.17 as well .
Fun fact: if the observational data stays the same (which is not very likely) the Palermo scale will rise to -1.16 in about three months

 

[MichiganMan]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

just for giggles, I'll sometimes take objects I'm interested in, assume no more observations are made on that object, and calculate the expected Palermo scale for that object...

2009 KK wins with a Palermo scale of -0.202! at 1 year from possible solution date. (yesterday's data--has gone up since then) I have not tried 1999 RQ36 nor 2001WN5 'cause they are so far out--but that might be fun.

 

[MichiganMan]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

with today's data, barring further observations, 2009KK will rise to Palermo scale -0.05 at one year. I'll run some numbers on apophis and 2007 VK184 for comparison's sake...

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Great to have both of you here. It's been a fun exercise setting up the excel sheet to do the actual calcs.

That won't change my morning procedure.

First I will look at the new Ephemeris in 2022 and make my guess as to the new PS using my mooshy neural net. Soon I will get mega burned

Then I will next check NEODyS for the new PS projection.

Then I'll plug the numbers into my excel calculator (or you folks can). I have actually set it up to use actual MJD for the predictions (derived from NEODyS) for fractional years.

Then later, when the obs make their way to the Sentry risk page, I'll post them here as well, since the formatting is much easier to read.

BTW, there is something goofy. Apparently there is a factor of 3 difference between the impact energy posted on NEODyS and that on JPL's Sentry. It's probably some US/rest of the world unit conversion.

While Sentry reports the MT as 1.11*10^3 (and this works in the formula to derive -1.17), NEODyS reports it as 1.06*10^-1. That comes out to a PS of -3.59, so there is some conversion issue.
Since NEODyS also reports the PS as -1.17, it obviously should be increased by 10^3. I'm trying to figure it out.

Stupid US

 

[MichiganMan]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Apophis rises to -0.949
VK184 rises to -0.204

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

No new obs reported today.

Interesting factoid (thanx ginyoc) the Palermo Scale was named for the site of the 2001 conference where the paper was presented, but also to honor the location where planet->asteroid->dwarf planet 1Ceres was discovered on Jan 1, 1801 by Giuseppe Piazzi. :!:

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Good afternoon. I didn't get to check until late today as I was in a training class for thw South Branch Watershed Assn.

However, I followed my usual procedure. So far I have checked the ephemeris from Sentry's horizon, and the new EMOID from JPL.

Wow, what a change.

95 obs over 19 days now.

2022 CA dropped sgnificantly from .2200 to .1844
2022 5/29 distance dropped from .2584 to .2149
2022 date of plane crossing went from 4/18 to 4/29
RMS residuals went up from .43866 to .44679
EMOID (JPL) went down to .000628233

That looks like a big increase in risk to me. I'm gonna guess -1.04..and I could be too conservative.

Now I shall go check!

MW

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

LOL, OK so I ain't as smart as I thought I wuz

NEODyS PS -1.10
JPL Senty PS is -1.09

Data

JPL:

e .4569014253326248 0.0010092
a 1.505935338134823 0.0022969 AU
q .8178713356822543 0.00027274 AU
i 18.28034657663483 0.035057 deg
node 68.20344354677856 0.023526 deg
peri 247.2395306393412 0.0028425 deg
M 337.8815552693914 0.064953 deg
tp 2455041.972479291664
(2009-Jul-29.47247930) 0.026924 JED
period 675.0064358882405
1.85 1.5443
0.004228 d
yr
n .5333282482355539 0.0012202 deg/d
Q 2.193999340587393 0.0033463 AU
# obs. used (total) 95

data-arc span 19 days
first obs. used 2009-05-17
last obs. used 2009-06-05
planetary ephem. DE405
SB-pert. ephem. SB405-CPV-2
quality code 7
fit RMS .44679
data source ORB
producer Otto Matic
solution date 2009-Jun-06 00:50:06

Additional Information Earth MOID = .000628233 AU
T_jup = 4.364

NEODyS:

a 1.50594 0.002333 AU
e 0.456902 0.001025
i 18.28 0.03562 deg
Ω 68.203 0.0239 deg
ω 247.24 0.002889 deg
M 337.882 0.06599 deg

Perihelion 0.8179 AU
Aphelion 2.194 AU
Orbital period 675.007 days
0.00062812

 

[hannes77]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

http://www.hohmanntransfer.com/news.htm

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Welcome to Space.com

Was there a point to that link, hannes77? I didn't see anything more there than what I had already posted. If there was something specific, could you link to that rather than just the site, which does not specifically address this asteroid?
Thanx
MW

 

[galldora]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Are we worrying yet? :lol: :?

Can you do one of those neat ... impact probabilty things? Sorry for my umm dense-ness. JPL is still at 9.6e-05 and I do not know that I could figure out what -1.10 might be. And maybe I could but most likely not :lol:

I do hope though that everyones weekend, despite the increase has gone well

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Just to ballpark it, when JPL updates, the risk will increase to about 1.1e-04 or up to about a 1 in 9000 rather than 1 in 10000 chance of an impact. The PS (Palermo Scale) of -1.10 means it is about 11 times a smaller threat than the background rate for an impact of that size.

 

[galldora]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Okay hmm ... I guess I live with 1 in 9000.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Not that I have much choice in the matter anyhow. Thank you very much MW. I appreciate it. I will try and not worry until its 1 in 2 chances

 

[silylene]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Wow, just got back from a business trip and find the risk of 2009 KK has increased again, to 1/9,000.

To put that in perspective:
http://discovermagazine.com/1996/may/afistfulofrisks763
http://www.reason.com/news/show/36765.html
The risk of being murdered in one year in the US: 1/11,000
The risk of a woman dying from birth in the US: 1/12,500
The risk of a young adult or adolescent dying in a car accident, per year, US: 1/3,500; suicide 1/7,700
The risk of being killed by a car while crossing the street, per year, US: 1/48,500
The risk of being killed by lightning, 1 year, US: 1/6.2M

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Thanx, silylene, I see JPL Sentry has updated with PS -1.09

Torino Scale (maximum) 1
Palermo Scale (maximum) -1.09
Palermo Scale (cumulative) -1.09
Impact Probability (cumulative) 1.2e-04
Number of Potential Impacts 1
Analysis based on
95 observations spanning 18.844 days
(2009-May-17.25987 to 2009-Jun-05.10357)

Vimpact 19.14 km/s
Vinfinity 15.57 km/s
H 20.5
Diameter 0.260 km
Mass 2.5e+10 kg
Energy 1.1e+03 MT
all above are mean values
weighted by impact probability

Now I can plug the NEODyS and JPL value into my excel sheet.....

 

[clmason]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

I've been following this thread for a bit, and just wanted to say thanks for all the info and explanations.

As a lay person, based on the descriptions of the Torino scale, previously posted, and available on the JPL site, it would seem to me the level should be at 2 now.

The main difference between 1 and 2 is that it "may become routine with expanded searches" (which seems to be likely), but is also "meriting attention by astronomers", which seems to apply, attention is warranted. However, level 2 still says "there is no cause for public attention or public concern as an actual collision is very unlikely". This seems appropriate. The professionals and amateurs are paying more attention, but there's no need for public concern, or really, even a press release or announcement of any kind.

Likewise, we also shouldn't be level 3 since that says there is a "1% or greater chance of collision capable of localized destruction".

So, based on the definitions, I think we are clearly not at a level 3, but also clearly not at a level 1 anymore, so long as it is agreed that attention by astronomers is warranted, which level 1 precludes, by the omission of this requirement.

Thoughts?

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

The general thought that until the Palermo Scale reaches 0 (i.e. equal to the background level of impacts) it remains as a TS 1. We are a factor of 10 below that level at this time. That's not 10% below that level, but 10 times lower than that background risk level.

It's only we astronerds that are even aware of this at the current time

Don't forget the impact risk is:
Impact Probability: 1.2e-04

0.012000000% chance of Earth impact
or
1 in 8,330 chance
or
99.98800000% chance the asteroid will miss the Earth

 

[clmason]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

The general thought that until the Palermo Scale reaches 0 (i.e. equal to the background level of impacts) it remains as a TS 1. We are a factor of 10 below that level at this time. That's not 10% below that level, but 10 times lower than that background risk level.

It's only we astronerds that are even aware of this at the current time

Don't forget the impact risk is:
Impact Probability: 1.2e-04

0.012000000% chance of Earth impact
or
1 in 8,330 chance
or
99.98800000% chance the asteroid will miss the Earth

Okay, gotcha. I guess I was taking the Tornio definitions too literally. Maybe they should be rephrased?

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

No, not really. Remember this is 10 times less of a risk than the background threat...

TS 1:

A routine discovery in which a pass near the Earth is predicted that poses no unusual level of danger. Current calculations show the chance of collision is extremely unlikely with no cause for public attention or public concern. New telescopic observations very likely will lead to re-assignment to Level 0.

 

[clmason]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

No, not really. Remember this is 10 times less of a risk than the background threat...

TS 1:

A routine discovery in which a pass near the Earth is predicted that poses no unusual level of danger. Current calculations show the chance of collision is extremely unlikely with no cause for public attention or public concern. New telescopic observations very likely will lead to re-assignment to Level 0.

Right. I don't mean to nitpick, but the level 2 says "meriting attention by astronomers", probably that's not fair then? Stuff at level 1 maybe merits attention too? As I said, I think it's just fuzziness in the definition since the only *stated* difference is the attention issue. Since level 3 says 1 percent, maybe level 2 should explicitly say 0.1 percent? Anyway, sorry for picking at the nits!

Thanks.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

See, you have to understand the purpose of the Torino scale. It is to communicate with the (generally scientifically ignorant) general public. At this juncture, 2009 KK will most likely not even be an issue in a few weeks. It is of general interest to astronomers (like some of us here, you and I included) but has not yet reached the level that it should be monitored by all astronomers for more data. After all, the nominal orbit in 2022 barely brings it any closer to earth (~ 73 LD) than it will reach this year (~79 LD).

For example, in just the next 5 months, 80 objects we know of will pass closer, including 36 as large or larger that 2009 KK.

So the projections of this object for 2022 are truly not unusual

Wayne

 

[cyclonebuster]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

No, not really. Remember this is 10 times less of a risk than the background threat...

TS 1:

A routine discovery in which a pass near the Earth is predicted that poses no unusual level of danger. Current calculations show the chance of collision is extremely unlikely with no cause for public attention or public concern. New telescopic observations very likely will lead to re-assignment to Level 0.

Right. I don't mean to nitpick, but the level 2 says "meriting attention by astronomers", probably that's not fair then? Stuff at level 1 maybe merits attention too? As I said, I think it's just fuzziness in the definition since the only *stated* difference is the attention issue. Since level 3 says 1 percent, maybe level 2 should explicitly say 0.1 percent? Anyway, sorry for picking at the nits!

Thanks.

I have seen days when there was a 90 percent no chance of rain, yet it still poured. I have also seen days when 100 percent chance of rain was predicted yet there was no rain. We may need a few years of data on this to be sure.

 

[Boris_Badenov]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

I have seen days when there was a 90 percent no chance of rain, yet it still poured. I have also seen days when 100 percent chance of rain was predicted yet there was no rain. We may need a few years of data on this to be sure.

As my family always comes to me to see how accurate these reports are, I've already contacted a couple to warn them that the hysteria will be on the way over this one.
I'll predict this one will be a near miss, not a hit. (history's on my side )

 

[MichiganMan]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

As you can see, we are still firmly in the Torino scale 1 area, and you can see the risk needed to reach 2, then 4, 5, and ultimately up to 9.

Once the size of the asteroid is known, one moves horizontally across as the risk changes....

The Torino scale ranking is actually mathematically determined, not based on language..... the language is just a descriptor.

 

[MeteorWayne]

Re: asteroid 2009 KK May 29 2022

Maybe not Boris...after all almost no one has heard about the only other TS 1 object 2007 VK184. Everyone else is still worried about TS 0 object Apophis because it has a good publicist (and a brief time as TS4 )

However if it reaches TS 2, then the headlines will start for sure