UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Dec > Dec 14

Re: Skylab 3

From: James_Smith <lunartravel.nul>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 10:53:44 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Archived: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 21:04:22 -0500
Subject: Re: Skylab 3

>From: Bruce Maccabee <brumac.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 15:01:30 -0500
>Subject: Re: Skylab 3

>>From: James Smith <lunartravel.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:57:33 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
>>Subject: Re: Skylab 3

>>Another thing I thought of was that apogee (high point in the
>>orbit) and perigee (low point) would not be equal for an object
>>just prior to re-entry. So, the object could get heated up to
>>glowing at a lower altitude during perigee and then be at or
>>above the Skylab apogee. Then it just has to glow until it
>>comes into range at the higher apogee. Keeping a glow for an
>>hour seems far fetched.

>This would require that the object penetrate the atmosphere
>enough to get very hot (glowing "red") and then retain the heat
>as it clilmbed back up through the atmosphere and into the
>"cold" of space. It would have have the surface to volume ratio
>relatively large because the surface "provides" the heating (as
>it interacts with the air, but the volume stores the heat (heat
>capacity). Being small means, in turn, that it has to get close
>to the SL3 while still hot in order to be seen and photographed
>for about 10 minutes. A good question would be this: can any
>orbital object (not a meteor) penetrate the atmosphere deeply
>enough to become red hot (and a bright red at that) and then
>leave the atmosphere and climb 100 miles or so (while in a
>decaying orbit) while retaining its brilliance, or would it
>simply continued to burn up in the atmosphere once it gets low
>enough to heat up to "red hot.'

I can't find any technical papers on the topic, but anecdotal
reports indicate it is not too unusual to see re-entry glow on
objects for even a half an orbit prior to re-entry.


Highly elliptical orbits can have the object glow
and pass out of the heat up zone and survive.



However, without doing the calcs, the observations above imply
if objects do pass out of dense part of the atmosphere during
perigee, then they cool off rapidly.

So I think this ends this possibility.

>>Based on your updated SL3 web page, I want to re-emphasize the
>>conflict of dates of the laser experiment photos. The mission
>>report for Skylab 3...


>>shows on page 5-3 that the dates of the laser photos are Sept 19
>>(good ones) and Sept 20 (blurred ones). This conflicts with the
>>laser experiment report which states the images were from Sept
>>4. This is pretty important since on Sept 4 we had some fairly
>>long duration "close" passes. I think the Skylab transcripts
>>could help pinpoint/ confirm the times/days.

>I am quite certain that the report is wrong in saying that the
>laser experiments occurred on the 54th and 55th days (Sept 19
>and 20). The guys who actually ran the laser (at Goddard) would
>know what days they operated the laser (Sept 4 and 5) which are
>days 39 and 40 of SL3.

I am not so sure the Goddard report is right mainly because of
the long amount of time between the blurred laser photos and
the UFO photos. Given all the time they have to take pictures
since there are alot of EREP passes between Sept 4 and
Sept 20, it seems highly unlikely they would not film the Earth's
surface. We need the transcript to be sure. How can we
be definitive about the dates when there are conflicting officially
reported values?

>The report provided a little more information on the "red
>satellite" sighting in section 10.5 labelled "Visual
>Observations and Unusual Events." It says that the object
>changed to a more reddish hue during the last 20 seconds of
>visibility. This would make some sense if the object was red
>colored (reflecting red).

>Before entering the shadow transition region (where the sunlight
>is reddened by the atmosphere) the object would be illuminated
>by "white" light (direct sunlight). But while going through the
>sunlight- redenned region, it would be illuminated by red light,
>bringing out the red even more, but also being less bright.

>This would seem to argue for red reflection rather than red
>light emission.

>However if the object were both reflecting sunlight like metal
>("white" reflection) and also emitting bright red light (not a
>"normal" satellite) then the resulting color would be a
>"diluted" red (red emission plus white light reflection) while
>above the shadow transition region. When the object went into
>the reddened sun region the net color would no longer be a
>"diluted" red but rather a "saturated" red (red emission plus
>red reflection).

Regarding red satellite/orbiting objects, a search on the web
shows that the Lacrosse satellites 1-4 launched between 1989-
2000 into inclinations from 57 deg to 68 deg appear to be red-
orange due to being covered with Kapton thermal insulation.

ROSAT is another example shown in this image.



Visual satellite observers have reported some possible others
(unclear whether due to being close to eclipse exit/entry

Meteo 1-11r (72-22B, 05918)


ERBS (84-108B/15354)


Cosmos 2082


Adeos 2


SL-16 rocket (#25861)


So it is possible but infrequent.

Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast



[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp

Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com