From gabuzda@caesar.ucc.ie Wed Aug 13 10:54 MDT 2003
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 17:57:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: Denise Gabuzda <gabuzda@caesar.ucc.ie>
X-X-Sender:  <gabuzda@nerva.ucc.ie>
To: Data Analysts <analysts@zia.aoc.NRAO.EDU>
Subject: Re: bg137
In-Reply-To: <200308131646.KAA16271@aspen.aoc.NRAO.EDU>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-1.9, required 7,
	EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION, IN_REP_TO, SPAM_PHRASE_03_05, USER_AGENT_PINE)
X-Lines: 68

Hi Meri,

Yes, this sounds fine. If it gets reobserved sometime
in the next few weeks, we'll be happy!

Do you know what the situation is with BG121C? Barry
Clark had sent an email saying the schedule I sent in
was too long. I've sent in a slightly revised version
that my SCHED says is just under 24 hours, which should
be okay, but I haven't gotten confirmation that it
checked out.

Cheers,

	Denise

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Data Analysts wrote:

>
> Hi Denise,
>
> I've talked to the person who schedules the
> dynamic projects and he says there will be
> plenty of opportunities in the next few weeks
> to reobserve this.
>
> So I will copy BG137 to BG137B and we'll
> reobserve as soon as we can.  Does that sound ok?
>
> Meri
>
> >
> > Hi Meri,
> >
> > I had noticed that KP got taken out for a good
> > fraction of the run. Can you give me some idea
> > of whether KP is now back in action and how soon
> > BG137 would be likely to be reobserved? It isn't
> > important that it be reobserved incredibly soon,
> > but I wouldn't want to risk having you not correlate
> > the data and then not getting it reobserved at all!
> >
> > 	Denise
> >
> > On Wed, 13 Aug 2003, Data Analysts wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Hi Denise,
> > >
> > > Have you had a chance to look at the
> > > BG137 log from last night?  Unfortunately,
> > > KP was lost about 6 hours into the run.
> > > That left you with 8 antennas because
> > > PT was already out with PT-LINK observations
> > > at the VLA.
> > >
> > > According to the instructions with BG137,
> > > the minimum number of antennas required was nine.
> > > So do you want to reobserve without correlating
> > > this run? or correlate what we have?
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Meri
>