From: Robert A. Knop Jr. (robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu)
Date: Mon May 06 2002 - 16:41:53 PDT
> Rob, the only argument I can see that goes the other way is that the
> Subaru deep fields would be completely fresh fields, allowing us to
> find more new z~0.85 SNe beyond the one that would already be found
> with CFHT (assuming that *sometime* in the next 5 nights CFHT gets a
> half-hour on each field). However, if the weather looks at all good
> at CTIO for the next three nights, I might still go with your basic
> plan (for the reasons that you give) and try to do the Subaru deep
> fields later.
I would guess that there is a good chance that *sometime* in the next
five nights CFHT will get those 25 minutes.
Two important questions: will the additional rolling search time beyond the
next five nights help lightcurves of deep supernovae? (how much rolling
time is there? the schedule makes it look like there are ~4 more nights
after May 10 for the rolling search). If we find more supernovae in
"fresh" fields, will we have time to follow time anyway?
Perhaps it is worth searching fresh (Subaru) fields. Perhaps we will do
that tomorrow night and Wednesday at CTIO. Unless there is a groundwell
of opinion that we're wasting time by doing the CFHT fields at CTIO
tonight, we'll stick with H1 and H4 (assuming good seeing) at CTIO.
-Rob
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon May 06 2002 - 16:42:09 PDT