I just heard back from Rocket Labs. They replied that the Object C #43851, which was used for this observation, is their Curie kick stage.
At this point, NMTSat is most likely one of
Object F, L, or P (#43854, #43859, #43862).
The other unidentified objects are
Object E, H, and K (#43853, #43856, #43858)
but these are tumbling. (Since I am looking for an optical beacon, one of the data products that comes out is the brightness of the satellite vs. time. These objects show periodic flashes with 3-10 second periods.) NMTSat has a passive magnetic stabilization system (basically a damped compass needle) that would prevent it from tumbling.
How do I get this reduced-uncertainty set of NORAD IDs into the database?
Unfortunately we don’t currently support something like that in DB. We use NORAD IDs as unique values for each satellite, so we can not use one when it is not confirmed that belongs to the satellite.
With the coming change of having satellite UUID, we will be able to use multiple NORAD IDs. So, info like the above are very useful!
One notice, in the network we are able to set a NORAD ID to follow for each satellite. This means that the satellite gets the TLEs of this NORAD ID. Unfortunately without having any reception (correct me if I’m wrong), is difficult to say which one we should follow.
I’m not familiar with that technique, is it successful enough for rejecting any NORAD ID of tumbling satellites? What I mean is, how possible is a cubesat with this system to tumble?
Does the software support requested observations of the orbital tracks of Objects F, L, and P (#43854, #43859, #43862) and that they be observed as if they were NMTSat (in terms of the 148.8 MHz beacon) with temporary number #99944 in the transmitter database? Or is the discrepancy in #s going to prevent the observation?
(I would like to request these observations. The caveat is that even if the right one is picked, the beacon only transmits every 10 minutes so it is likely that it will not be detected during an individual pass.)
The magnet technique has been used quite a few times, apparently successfully, and it should be able to eliminate spins at the rate that I detect. Guesstimated odds: 30% identification probability for each of the 3 not seen spinning, remaining 10% for one of the spinning ones or one of the other objects that they think they have identified.
(It is not a mechanically-damped compass needle. It is a magnet combined with a material that dissipates magnetic energy. Hence you don’t have to worry about, e.g., mechanical bearings sticking and it should be pretty reliable.)