Re 2007 AF4<br /><br />The observation count has increased.<br /><br />JPL has not yet updated, but NEODyS has added a 2067 potential impact, but decreased the 2089 odds slightly.<br /><br />They don't go out as far as the most likely impact in 2095, so will wait to add a full update until the JPL site does.<br /><br />MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
- Status
Once again, more observations, risk increases slightly...<br /><br />Analysis based on<br />384 observations spanning 26.495 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Feb-05.89151)<br /><br />Torino Scale (maximum) 0 <br />Palermo Scale (maximum) -2.65 (1/10/2095)<br />Palermo Scale (cumulative) -2.13 <br />Impact Probability (cumulative) 3.8e-05 <br />Number of Potential Impacts 35 <br /><br />From JPL, First potential impact 1/9/2078<br /> Earth MOID = .00246041 AU <br /><br />From NEODyS first is in 2067<br />Earth MOID (AU) 0.00248 <br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
2008 AF4 is almost back into Torino Scale 1 danger zone again. Interesting. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>
Indeed. There are very few (<1%, from what I see) that become more likely with time.<br /> It's interesting to watch. We now have two asteroids that are enough of a threat that perhaps we should consider saving our planet.<br /><br />The good news is that we have 4 decades to decide on<br /> whether the threats are serious enough to dedicate the time, cost, and risk of screwing up to a mission.<br /><br />The unknown risk is that a new asteroid could pop up with only one orbit to respond.<br /><br />We are not prepared for that.<br /><br />MW<br /><br />BTW, I am very encouraged by the detection rate of very small (5-25 m ) asteroids we are accomplishing.<br /><br />Sure, some are close, and too small to make much of a difference other than fireworks. But this gives us much more confdence that there are not bigger ones lurking about.<br /><br />I think that, considering the minimal effort expended, our current surveys are doing an amazing job.<br /><br />3 years ago, all these tiny asteroids would have been missed. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
More data.<br /><br />Today the highest risk encounter decreased, but the cumulative risk increased.<br /><br />Analysis based on<br />398 observations spanning 27.832 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Feb-07.22804)<br /><br />Torino Scale (maximum) 0 <br />Palermo Scale (maximum) -2.76 (Jan 10, 2095)<br />Palermo Scale (cumulative) -2.12 <br />Impact Probability (cumulative) 3.9e-05 <br />Number of Potential Impacts 37 <br /><br /> Earth MOID = .00246033 AU <br /> <br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
2008 AF4 update.<br />Finally, the Palermo Scale numbers are decreasing.<br /><br />Analysis based on<br />426 observations spanning 29.500 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Feb-08.89639)<br /><br /><br />Torino Scale (maximum) 0 <br />Palermo Scale (maximum) -2.77 <br />Palermo Scale (cumulative) -2.36 <br />Impact Probability (cumulative) 2.2e-05 <br />Number of Potential Impacts 33 <br /><br /><br />The JPL first impact is back to 2078.<br />But the highest risk impact is now Jan 9, 2089, instead of 2095.<br /><br /> edit: NEODyS info<br /><br />Earth MOID (AU) 0.00248 <br /><br />It does still list a 1 in 10 billion-ish chance of an impact in 2067.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
Another update, reduced number of potential impacts.<br /><br />Analysis based on<br />441 observations spanning 30.356 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Feb-09.75216)<br /><br />Torino Scale (maximum) 0 <br />Palermo Scale (maximum) -2.73 (1/9/2089)<br />Palermo Scale (cumulative) -2.38 <br />Impact Probability (cumulative) 2.0e-05 <br />Number of Potential Impacts 26 <br /><br /> Earth MOID = .00247553 AU <br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
Another update.<br /><br />It appears that 2008 AF4 is settling in to where it is going to wind up on the risk chart until the next close approach in 2012. Since it is moving further away (even though another few months of optical observations are possible) it seems unlikely any major changes will occur. It's too far away for radar obs until at least Aug 2012, and Arecibo may be decomissioned by then; perhaps Goldstone is big enough.<br /><br />It is possible that before 2012, a rare observation might come in that would cause a substantial change, but it will be a challenge.<br /><br />I will continue to document the process, since it's a good way to document the evolution of risk over time.<br /><br /><br />Analysis based on<br />455 observations spanning 30.879 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Feb-10.27536)<br /><br /><br />Torino Scale (maximum) 0 <br />Palermo Scale (maximum) -2.73 (1/9/2089)<br />Palermo Scale (cumulative) -2.34 <br />Impact Probability (cumulative) 2.3e-05 <br />Number of Potential Impacts 26 <br /><br />Earth MOID = .00247556 AU <br /><br />It looks like, unless there is a big change, it will remain a Torino Scale 0 object, in 3rd place behind Torino 1 2007VK 184.<br />All other objects are Torino scale zero.<br /><br />It could drop below Apophis in the near future if impacts other than the most likely one in 2089 are eliminated.<br /><br />Current risk rankings (for objects with more than 2 days of observations)<br />Object/Palermo scale cumulative risk<br /><br />2007 VK184....-1.82<br />2008 AF4...-2.34<br />2004 MN4 (Apophis)...-2.52<br />1994 WR2...-2.96<br />2004 XY130...-3.04<br />1979 XB...-3.07<br />2000 SG344...-3.08<br />2006 QV89...-3.22<br />2007 RY19...-3.26<br />2007 FT3...-3.27<br />2007 QS7...-3.27<br /><br />Of this top 11 list, only 2008 AF4 is currently observable, hence is likely to change.<br /><br />A new object, 2008 CK70 has a cumulative Palermo ranking of -3.36, but the arc is only 1.7 days. It MAY make a 1 Lunar distance close approach on the 15th but is <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
MW: Thanks for the updates and charts.<br /><br />Of course there is also 1950DA, which based on existing models has a 1/300 chance of collision in 2880 and a 56 year arc, and <i>based on existing models</i> is the most dangerous asteroid of all. As we have discussed before in other threads, the models have many tiny errors which cumulatively are expected to have significant affects on understanding the future trajectory so far in the future. It just deserves careful watching in the many generations after we all all dead! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>
Good point, for me and our current society, 1950DA is moot.<br />Thanx for mentioning it.<br /><br />So I do rather ignore it. Though I think I will look at the orbit on the JPL Small-Body database browser for fun.<br /><br />That's 200 presidents from now, assuming the US, or humans make it that long. <img src="/images/icons/crazy.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
Well, well, 2008 AF4 is now Torino Scale 1 !<br /><br />Analysis based on<br />511 observations spanning 34.531 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Feb-13.92722<br /><br />Torino Scale (maximum) 1 <br />Palermo Scale (maximum) -2.53 (Jan 9 2089, TS 1)<br />Palermo Scale (cumulative) -2.38 <br />Impact Probability (cumulative) 2.0e-05 <br />Number of Potential Impacts 21 <br /><br />Vimpact 16.13 km/s <br />Vinfinity 11.66 km/s <br />H 19.7 <br />Diameter 0.390 km <br />Mass 8.0e+10 kg <br />Energy 2.5e+03 MT <br /><br />Earth MOID = .00247545 AU =370,322 km<br /><br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
*queue the tense music*<br /><br />AF4 is making its climb up the ladder <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>
And a somber bye bye to 2004 VD17 which was finally completely kicked off the danger list by some new observations a few days ago. For a few months in fall 2006, asteroid 2004 VD17 had climbed to Torino scale 2 (one of only two asteroids to get above TS 1). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>
2008 AF4 update, back to TS 0, hovering right on the border...<br /><br />Analysis based on<br />534 observations spanning 37.725 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Feb-17.12131)<br /><br />Torino Scale (maximum) 0 <br />Palermo Scale (maximum) -2.68 (1/9/2089)<br />Palermo Scale (cumulative) -2.41 <br />Impact Probability (cumulative) 1.9e-05 <br />Number of Potential Impacts 26 <br /><br /> Earth MOID = .00247554 AU <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>2008 AF4 update, back to TS 0, hovering right on the border... Analysis based on 534 observations spanning 37.725 days (2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Feb-17.12131) Torino Scale (maximum) 0 Palermo Scale (maximum) -2.68 (1/9/2089) Palermo Scale (cumulative) -2.41 Impact Probability (cumulative) 1.9e-05 Number of Potential Impacts 26 Earth MOID = .00247554 AU <br />Posted by meteorwayne</DIV></p><p> </p><p>OK, well 2007 AF4 is back to Torino Scale 1</p><p> <font size="2">Analysis based on<br />557 observations spanning 50.910 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Mar-01.30627)</font></p><p><table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="4" bgcolor="#ffffcc"><tbody><tr><td align="right"><strong>Torino Scale (maximum)</strong>
<p> </p><p>Here are the latest orbital elemants from JPL</p><p>EMOID is 0.00225267 AU</p><p><br /><font size="2"><font face="Helvetica"><strong>Orbital Elements at Epoch 2454600.5 (2008-May-14.0) TDB<br /></strong><font color="#000000"><strong>Reference: JPL 40</strong> </font><font color="#000000"><strong>(heliocentric ecliptic J2000)</strong></font></font></font><br /><table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="1" width="100%" bgcolor="#000000"><tbody><tr><td><table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr bgcolor="#999999"><td align="center"><font face="Helvetica, Ariel, Verdana, sans-serif" size="2"><strong> Element</strong></font>
<p>Well, Well.</p><p>Lots of changes with latest obs through March 5th.</p><p>The risk has increased, the number of virtual impactors has decreased.</p><p><font size="2">Analysis based on<br />566 observations spanning 55.459 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Mar-05.85535)</font></p><p><table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="4" bgcolor="#ffffcc"><tbody><tr><td align="right"><strong>Torino Scale (maximum)</strong>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>How did you make that yellow box? <br />Posted by bobw</DIV></p><p>It's just a copy and paste from the JPL Risk page.</p><p>I was as shocked as you how it came out 
</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div><p> </p><p>More observations, and it climbs further up the list.</p><p>Here are the top two risk objects for future earth impacts, both more likely than Apophis.</p><p><table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" bgcolor="#ffffff"><tbody><tr valign="bottom" bgcolor="#cccccc"><td><strong>Object<br />Designation</strong>
<p>2008 AF4 Update</p><p>More obs, risk creeps up again</p><p><font size="2">Analysis based on<br />572 observations spanning 57.824 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Mar-08.22017)</font></p><p><table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="4" bgcolor="#ffffcc"><tbody><tr><td align="right"><strong>Torino Scale (maximum)</strong>
Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'><font color="#ff0000">2008 AF4 UpdateMore obs, risk creeps up againAnalysis based on572 observations spanning 57.824 days(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Mar-08.22017)Torino Scale (maximum)1Palermo Scale (maximum)-2.14Palermo Scale (cumulative)-2.03Impact Probability (cumulative)4.4e-05Number of Potential Impacts7Highest risk impact still Jan 9 2089 <br />Posted by <strong>meteorwayne</strong></font></DIV><br /><br />2008AF4 is turning out to be a very interesting asteroid. It is quite unusuual for the risk to slowly creep up with more observations. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>2008AF4 is turning out to be a very interesting asteroid. It is quite unusuual for the risk to slowly creep up with more observations. <br />Posted by silylene</DIV></p><p>Indeed; moving up in risk again, now a -2.00 cumulative Palermos Scale!</p><p><font size="2">Analysis based on<br />575 observations spanning 57.824 days<br />(2008-Jan-10.39652 to 2008-Mar-08.22017)</font></p><p><table border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="4" bgcolor="#ffffcc"><tbody><tr><td align="right"><strong>Torino Scale (maximum)</strong>
2008 ER7 might develop to be interesting too, PS = -2.47 However the arc is still very very short, only 2 days. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><em><font color="#0000ff">- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -</font></em> </div><div class="Discussion_UserSignature" align="center"><font color="#0000ff"><em>I really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function.</em></font> </div> </div>
<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>2008 ER7 might develop to be interesting too, PS = -2.47 However the arc is still very very short, only 2 days. <br />Posted by silylene</DIV></p><p> </p><p>It's too short an arc to even worry about; and it may stay very short since it's such a tiny object...probably a few more days to work with though...<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#000080"><em><font color="#000000">But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id.</font></em> </font></p><p><font color="#000080">I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function</font><font color="#000080"> </font></p> </div>
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 188
-
-
-
Definition of Universe requires clarification, to enable discussion
- Started by Catastrophe
- Replies: 36
-
Just a couple of questions please about just how far back we can model.- Started by Starstruck
- Replies: 12
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram