On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, VLBI Observers (Aspen only) wrote: > Hi Anna, > > It appears you are requesting two correlation passes > for each bandwidth of bs161, is that correct? We can > do this, in fact with mixed bandwidths it is necessary > to generate seperate correlation scripts. But we would > like for you to group the wide and narrow modes together, > so that they're not switching so often. Please could you > group them in periods of an hour or longer? > > George, do you have any advice for this? > > best regards, > > Lisa Foley --------------- Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 11:13:12 -0600 (MDT) From: George Moellenbrock To: "VLBI Observers (Aspen only)" Cc: Anna Bartkiewicz , Marian Szymczak Subject: Re: bs161 - VLBA scheduling Hi Lisa- I didn't realize this would require two passes. The scientific needs of this observation are such that it is fairly important to track the relative calibration between the different bandwidths on the timescales given in the schedule. How difficult is this observation to correlate as is? I guess each bandwidth change is a new correlator job, and the bandwidths will be correlated in separate passes? Is this just a throughput issue, or is there a more fundamental problem? Thanks, George ------------------ Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 19:14:36 +0000 (GMT) From: "VLBI Observers (Aspen only)" To: George Moellenbrock Cc: Anna Bartkiewicz , Marian Szymczak Subject: Re: bs161 - VLBA scheduling On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, George Moellenbrock wrote: > I didn't realize this would require two passes. It doesn't "require" two passes, but it looked like that was being requested in the correlator notes: Correlator Notes: Correlation: narrow band 0.0625 MHz - 128 channels Correlation: wide band 4 MHz - 16 channels Please, correlate RR, LL, RL and LR. > The scientific needs of this observation are such that it is fairly > important to track the relative calibration between the different > bandwidths on the timescales given in the schedule. How difficult > is this observation to correlate as is? I guess each bandwidth > change is a new correlator job, and the bandwidths will be > correlated in separate passes? Is this just a throughput issue, > or is there a more fundamental problem? We can correlate this as-is, but as you mentioned, it will require a seperate job script each time the bandwidth changes. It is a fairly time-consuming process, that's why I was hoping we could cluster them together. But, in this business, science rules. If that's what is neceessary to accomplish the scientific objectives, then we'll make it happen. Send chocolate! (just kidding... the last thing i need is more chocolate :) cheers, Lisa --------------------- Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2005 10:06:47 +0200 (MET DST) From: Anna Bartkiewicz To: vlbiobs@aoc.nrao.edu Cc: Marian Szymczak , gmoellen@aoc.nrao.edu Subject: bs161 - VLBA scheduling Dear All, I am attaching the key file for the two epoch project BS161: "Polarised OH outburst in a proto-planetary nebulae"" observations at 1612 MHz with 0.0625 MHz band on a target and with 4 MHz on calibrator, full polarization, 4 BBC's centred at the LSR velocities: 50.0, 50.0, 73.0, 73.0 km/s, respectively (to observe the two peaked emission). OH17.7-2.0 - a target, OH maser J1733-1304 - a phase-reference source, d-terms 3C286 - a position angle calibrator 3C345 - a fringe finder from VLBA list, 3.5 Jy at 1.6 GHz J2253+1608 - second fringe finder from VLBA list, 6.6 Jy at 1.6 GHz, d-terms One of fringe finders will be used as a bandpass calibrator. The '_N' and '_W' letters names sources observed in the narrow or wide bands, respectively.