Yet another case of astronomer entitlement. You don't own the universe, astronomers.
In the same way biologies don't own santient species, yes. Someoems gotta classify this stuff, though.
Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
41–50 of 102 posts
Re: Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
#42> announced the discovery of an unusual asteroid, designated 2018 CN41 Can someone explain why in 2025 they discover an asteroid which gets designated as "2018" and then they delete it when it turns out that it was an object launched in space precisely in 2018?
https://www.iau.org/public/themes/naming/ It's initially given a temporary name prior to the now official name. 2018 CN41 Means it's the 41st object identified in the first half of February in 2018. A is first half of jan. B is 2nd half. Etc.. then the iteration in that section
The year and number designator is for known man made object launches. All satellites get a COSPAR ID
It's done in sequential order.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Designator
Even top secret NRO launches get a designator, since it's impossible to hide the launch itself, but its orbital activity and TLE might not be obvious once in space.
Re: Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
#43Seems like an odd move to just delete it. Is it any less worthy of being tracked because it's man made? Wouldn't adding it to the database at least reduce the chance of the same mistake being made again by other astronomers? Isn't this, like other space junk in such orbits, effectively an "anthropogenic asteroid"? Why not just add them in with a special tag or naming convention to indicate that they're man-made?
It is being tracked under the correct designation “2018-017A”, therefore they are deleting an erroneous report that was temporarily assigned the designation that was deleted. What makes you think they “stopped tracking” it?
OK. But it seems like something is amiss if this error keeps being made. Why didn't the reporting astronomer, or anyone who presumably checked the submission, find the 2018-017A object when searching for it in their database?
Re: Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
#44Seems like an odd move to just delete it. Is it any less worthy of being tracked because it's man made? Wouldn't adding it to the database at least reduce the chance of the same mistake being made again by other astronomers? Isn't this, like other space junk in such orbits, effectively an "anthropogenic asteroid"? Why not just add them in with a special tag or naming convention to indicate that they're man-made?
You should probably read the article first before you make assumptive comments like this.
Re: Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
#45> Deep space is “largely unregulated,” McDowell told a special-session audience Jan. 14 at the American Astronomical Society’s (AAS) winter meeting in National Harbor, Maryland. “There’s no requirement to file some kind of public flight plan, no equivalent of the TLEs or the corporate data that we get for low-orbit satellites.”
This will be one of my favorite regulatory journalistic scare-quotes going forward.
Re: Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
#46Seems like an odd move to just delete it. Is it any less worthy of being tracked because it's man made? Wouldn't adding it to the database at least reduce the chance of the same mistake being made again by other astronomers? Isn't this, like other space junk in such orbits, effectively an "anthropogenic asteroid"? Why not just add them in with a special tag or naming convention to indicate that they're man-made?
too late, deleted forever
Just like when you delete that tweet
Re: Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
#47> Deep space is “largely unregulated,” McDowell told a special-session audience Jan. 14 at the American Astronomical Society’s (AAS) winter meeting in National Harbor, Maryland. “There’s no requirement to file some kind of public flight plan, no equivalent of the TLEs or the corporate data that we get for low-orbit satellites.” This will be one of my favorite regulatory journalistic scare-quotes going forward.
They might just be normal quotes.
Re: Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
#48Seems like an odd move to just delete it. Is it any less worthy of being tracked because it's man made? Wouldn't adding it to the database at least reduce the chance of the same mistake being made again by other astronomers? Isn't this, like other space junk in such orbits, effectively an "anthropogenic asteroid"? Why not just add them in with a special tag or naming convention to indicate that they're man-made?
It is being tracked under the correct designation “2018-017A”, therefore they are deleting an erroneous report that was temporarily assigned the designation that was deleted. What makes you think they “stopped tracking” it?
The headline says "delete" not "correct" or "replace". Blame clickbait.
Re: Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is being tracked under the correct designation “2018-017A”, therefore they are deleting an erroneous report that was temporarily assigned the designation that was deleted. What makes you think they “stopped tracking” it?
OK. But it seems like something is amiss if this error keeps being made. Why didn't the reporting astronomer, or anyone who presumably checked the submission, find the 2018-017A object when searching for it in their database?
Because their software, sat_id can only search Earth-orbiting satellites:
> Payne noted that when the Tesla Roadster was originally launched in 2018, the community caught it and flagged it as an artificial object, and the MPC “correctly labeled it as such without assigning a minor planet designation.”
But when subsequent observations were archived by the MPC and later identified by G., sat_id failed to locate the Roadster, said Payne. And the object was not caught upon further review because unlike most satellites, it orbits the Sun and not Earth. In addition, it is an unusual Sun-centric orbit for a spacecraft. Because it was a test flight for the Falcon Heavy, there was no destination in particular; that is why its trajectory originates near Earth but overshoots Mars’ orbit, as G. noted.
As the article mentioned, there is no such thing as space-track.org or celestrak.org where anyone can get trajectories for all deep space spacecraft. The closest thing we have is JPL Horizons, so they're working with them:
> Payne agreed that a central repository, “regularly updated by national and private space agencies, would significantly enhance the identification process.” Currently, he said, the MPC is collaborating with JPL on a system to better detect artificial objects that aren’t in Earth orbit and filter them out of the MPC’s observational database.
Re: Astronomers delete asteroid because it turned out to be Tesla Roadster
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is not the first time it has happened and often they are mistakenly classified as NEOs. https://x.com/planet4589/status/1638916566644576259
> mistakenly classified as NEOs. Is it not an Object that approaches to Near the Earth?
That's not how definitions work. The IAU defines what "NEO" means and it excludes artificial objects: https://www.iau.org/public/themes/neo/
You may complain that you should be able to derive the definition from the name, but then all names would be as long as their definition, defeating the purpose.