[meteorite-list] Find coordinates for recent falls
From: Jim Wooddell <jimwooddell_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 11:13:25 -0700
No, I am very fair I think. My reasoning was to provide two different
samples of field recovery. Sutters Mill was, IMO, an exception and
not the norm. It did not reflect an accepted practice. So I used
Stanfield as a perfect example of the difference. It is not the
normal condition to share find data and recently it seems that
changed. I fully understand that and do not disagree with it. We are
not in disagreement.
Stanfield is a perfect example of the process we are speaking of
relative to Novato, Sutters Mill...not working.
To think this will work in the real world, I think, is not practical.
In a perfect world maybe.
I am not ragging on Stanfield at all....I hope it did not come across that way.
On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Matson, Robert D.
<ROBERT.D.MATSON at saic.com> wrote:
> Hi Jim/List,
> You wrote, in part:
>> While I agree 100% that it's nice to have field data....lord
>> knows I've go through hell with the Franconia project, Stanfield
>> is a perfect example of this process not working. Has no really
>> useful field data in regards to assigned numbers. It simply is
>> not working as data is withheld....so only those hunters know
>> what their finds are.
> I think you're being a bit unfair here. The first find was made
> only 11 weeks ago. Given how many manhours have gone into each
> meteorite recovery, is it really fair to expect the finders to
> reveal their coordinates when they're still out there looking
> for more? Those coordinates aren't lost; you'd only need to
> consolidate information from 2 or 3 key people to have all of
> them. Will it happen someday? I really can't say. Mind you, I
> think it would be very interesting from a scientific perspective
> to have the full picture at Indian Butte/Stanfield. There was a
> significant difference between the upper atmospheric wind
> direction, and the bolide's flight direction, which leads to a
> very complex strewn field distribution when coupled with the
> multiple fragmentations that the meteoroid underwent.
> But the reality is that Sutter's Mill, Novato and Battle
> Mountain are rare exceptions to the more usual practice of
> withholding coordinates for recent (and not-so-recent) falls.
> Show me the public coordinates for Ash Creek, Whetstone
> Mountains, Buzzard Coulee, Addison, Grimsby, Mifflin or even
> Park Forest. That's right: they don't exist.
> Best wishes,
-- Jim Wooddell jimwooddell at gmail.com 928-247-2675Received on Thu 02 May 2013 02:13:25 PM PDT