Skip to main content
New Announcement Feature, Code of Conduct, Circular Revisions. See news and announcements

GCN Circular 921

2001-01-26T21:07:32Z (23 years ago)
Kevin Hurley at UCBerkeley/SSL <>
K. Hurley, on behalf of the Ulysses GRB team, and D. Smith, on
behalf of the RXTE ASM GRB team, report:

This burst, which was incorrectly reported as occurring on the 25th in
today's GCN notice, was observed, with rather poor statistics, by
Ulysses.  It had a duration of ~10 s, a 25-100 keV fluence of ~2 x
10^-6 erg/cm^2, and a peak flux over 0.25 s of ~7 x 10^-7 erg/cm^2 s.
These numbers should be regarded as very approximate due to the
weakness of the burst. We have done a very rough, preliminary
triangulation using the RXTE ASM 5 - 12 keV data and the Ulysses 25 -
150 keV data.  Although the time histories are somewhat different in
these two energy ranges, the result indicates that the GRB came from
the northern part of the RXTE ASM error box, above declination ~ 49 o 20 '.  
If this event was observed by Konus-WIND or NEAR, a smaller
error box can probably be derived.

[GCN OPS NOTE:  Please note that the calendar dates for the recent
GCN/RXTE_ASM_GRB_POSITION Notice contained an error.  The date was listed as
GRB_DATE:                 11935 TJD;    25 DOY;   01/01/25
but the correct dates are
GRB_DATE:                 11935 TJD;    26 DOY;   01/01/26
This error occurred in the GCN processing of the ASM message -- it was not part
of the original ASM submission.  The burst occurred today, and not yesterday
as might be inferred by casual inspection of the DOY or YY/MM/DD fields.
GCN apologizes for this error.]
Looking for U.S. government information and services? Visit