Meteor Over the United Kingdom

I seen this too, though it had broken into about 6-8 parts. It definitely looked as though it was on fire. Some witness claimed hearing muffled bangs in the distance after seeing it... Looks like it may have hit somewhere.

I seen it from the north of Ireland

It did look unbelievable lol

Originally posted by Tardacus
Have their been any reports of where it has landed?

Landed ? I dont think these things land. I think they burn up when the enter our atmosphere. That is why you see them. Otherwise they are just dark rocks hurtling through space. They do not emit their own light. The sightings are because they are breaking and burning up. Some larger ones do crash to earth, creating large craters.

reply to post by angelchemuel


He's gone to the Chippy ? Sorry, what is a chippy ?

reply to post by mad bloke


Just because. Yeah I dont know why but I bet if this thread was about getting a flat tire on a cold and dark night someone would be able to find a verse in the bible that would be appropriate to that situation.
I guess some just want us to know they have read the book and others want to prove they are more spiritual.

reply to post by Tardacus


Altitude changes but speed should not be slow. This should be moving very fast. Falling to earth.

Me and my girlfriend saw it over southern Norway, Stavanger last night.
Heading south west. It was awesome, to say the least. It was visible for about 10 seconds before it broke up into many pieces. Couldn`t find anything in norwegian media tho. Hoping for some good video clips from this.

It started out very greenish at the start, then it went from green to white\light yellowish before it broke up into smaller pieces. This was the first time we saw something like this.

It was even more cool that it didnt have the downwards "crash" angel when it became visible, it had this straight horizontal flight pattern.
We where pretty stunned to be honest ^^

reply to post by toocoolnc


You must be in the wrong thread. No one is talking doom and gloom in here. We are discussing a very widely viewed meteor shower over the UK last night. Seems to me that if there is doom and gloom you are the one who brought it in. Anyway go over to the 2012 forum. You will find the doom and gloom you are looking for there.

reply to post by karen61057


Yes, however the objects in the Glasgow area were moving horizontally and very slow

It is being described as either a meteor shower or man made space debris. Proving once again that, what goes up, must come down.

earthsky.org...

reply to post by MrMothman


That is so curious dont you think? These things traditionally do not move slowly. One source is saying that it could have been space debris. Would that make a difference in its rate of fall ? Terminal velocity is not my forte'.

reply to post by Phage


In woogleuk's thread on this 'meteor' you mentioned that you didn't think it was space junk as the vast majority of space junk comes from a west to east direction. I assume that this is due to the orbital direction of satellites in space.
It seems that a lot of 'experts' are now claiming that the 'meteor' was in fact space junk, probably an obsolete satellite.

For the slightly ignorant like myslef could you please explain how and why most satellites orbit the earth in a west to east direction, why a satellite would be in an east to west orbit, how big a satellite would cause something on this sort of scale and wouldn't the 'authorities' be aware of any obsolete satellite that was about to crash into earth's atmosphere etc?

I hope those questions aren't as dumb as they seem.

This is how it all starts.

reply to post by karen61057


Isnt today supposed to be the day of the big announcment by the Smithsonian Institute ? Something to do with ET's or UFO's and area 51 ? Wasnt that supposed to be today? Can I play connect the dots here just for fun? Was that the fleets arrival that ya'll witnessed last night ? Just having a bit of fun here.


Look at silly me replying to myself. LOL.

reply to post by Freeborn

There are several different types of satellite orbits for space systems in orbit around the earth. The types vary in altitude, real or apparent path with respect to the earth, and duration of each orbit. For some missions, which use a constellation of multiple satellites, understanding the significance of the orbit means understanding the relationship of the orbits of the entire group.

Altitude further divides into the lowest (i.e., perigee) and highest (i.e., apogee) in the orbit. These vary the most with elliptical orbits and the least with circular orbits. A low perigee is valuable for missions in which sensors need to be close to the earth, or where low-power communications are being sent to the satellite. The disadvantage of the lower perigees is that they encounter more atmospheric friction, and, unless the satellite has fuel to adjust its orbit, gives it a shorter lifetime.

Angle of inclination is another parameter of the orbit. A 90 degree angle, which cannot be maintained, would have the satellite in a circular polar orbit over the North and South Poles. Zero degrees of inclination would be a perfect equatorial orbit.

Most orbits, helped by the rotation of the earth, travel east-to-west. It is possible to put a satellite in a west-to-east retrograde orbit, but the cost of the launch will be much higher, because it must cancel the earth's rotational speed.

Some satellites, such as those used for imagery intelligence (IMINT; taking detailed pictures) or signals intelligence (SIGINT; listening to things) carry substantial fuel, so their orbits can be shifted to areas of new interest. In some constellations, such as used for navigation or communications, there may be "in-orbit spares", so the spare needs to carry enough fuel so that it can shift into the orbit of a failed member of the constellation.

Source

That's just one source, but they all pretty much say the same, including NASA. So it is all about costs, they usually follow the same rotation as the Earth to use less fuel.

reply to post by Be9al


I love that this site has members from all over the planet. I think it is so cool that you are reporting from Norway and others reporting from England, Wales and Ireland. All while I sit in this little store front in Hampton Virginia all the way over here in the USA. It really is a small world after all. La la la. Back on topic.

Can you say Mother ship?????

reply to post by karen61057


reply to post by Freeborn


Yes it was highly unusual. The debris I saw last night in Scotland were definitely travelling East to West.

Not West to East.

Here is the latest BBC news Video about the Meteor last night in the UK....

Tim O'Brien from Jodrell Bank who was on the breakfast news this morning said that the meteor could have been travelling about 18,000 miles per hour...............

This video was last updated at 16.03 on the 22nd Sept, UK time.........

www.bbc.co.uk...
www.bbc.co.uk...

Fife, Scotland.

Got up this morning and daughter said "did you see the shooting star last night? I was standing at the window watching it, while you were sleeping."

"Duh! If I was sleeping how did I see a shooting star?"

Of course my first thought was - she's either dreamed that or she's been abducted by aliens. Anyway, I googled 'meteor' and realised I missed the bloody thing.

Is everyone agreeing with the time of these sightings because she reckons it was 1am and it was moving East to West? We did go to bed early so she might just have the time all wrong.

reply to post by wigit


It was 11pm, with other alleged sightings of a couple more after, but before midnight. It was traveling east to west, look for my map on the first page, that shows it how and where I seen it.

EDIT: Here, I'll post it again for ye, ye wee rascal

reply to post by Freeborn

In woogleuk's thread on this 'meteor' you mentioned that you didn't think it was space junk as the vast majority of space junk comes from a west to east direction. I assume that this is due to the orbital direction of satellites in space.

Actually my impression was that it was space junk. I said that an east-west reentry would be unusual.

The reason for the typical west-east direction has been provided.