From: clidman@eso.org
Date: Fri May 10 2002 - 21:04:13 PDT
Hi Greg,
Thanks for the list. I've submitted the phase II material for FORS1, so,
in principle, they can start tonight. Should we consider the two supernovae
we tried to observe with the VLT a few days ago, i.e. C02-013 and C02-015?
From the list, I would suggest that, for tonight, we try
T02-015 - 2 hours with 300I+OG590
C02-027 - 1 hour with 300V+GG435
and then
C02-020 or C02-026 - 2 hours withh 300I+OG590 (has priortity 3 in SNtrak)
or
S02-058 - 1 hour with 300V+OG590
T02-047 - 1 hour with 300V+OG590
The S/N for T02-015 and C02-026 will be between 1 and 2.5 per pixel (2.5 Angstroms)
Cheers, Chris.
Greg Aldering wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Gerson, Saul, Alex, Val, Tony and I met at LBNL Thursday around 6 pm to
> examine where we stand on candidates. The idea was to start to look at
> what we might observe at Keck and what TNG to try to observe in the
> next three nights. The very quick summary is that we more or less
> agreed with Rob's earlier assessment, and have also looked at and
> assessed a number of new candidates in SDFe and SDFw.
>
> One note on this: the SDFw and SDFe candidates come from the regions
> formed by the intersection of the Subaru dithers. Rob is working on
> subtractions from the union of the Subaru dithers. Therefore, we expect
> more SDFe and SDFw candidates. Also, we will be getting SDF-proper
> candidates from Naoki and Mamoru.
>
> Here I give the candidate name, an overall assessment in layman's terms
> (look at SNTrak for a numerical translation), and where we think the
> candidate fits in terms of follow-up. Possible follow-up options were
> "HST", "rolling" (if CFHT will get lightcurves), and "ground" for
> targeted ground-based follow-up (WIYN, TNG, etc.). The ACTUAL followup
> will depend on what spectroscopy shows. For the SDFe/w candidates (all
> those with S02-xxx) I provide an approximate Kron-Cousins I-band
> magnitude estimate from Alex Conley.
>
>
> Name I-mag Plan Assessment
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> T02-015 24.0 HST cand very good - spectroscopy target
> C02-027 23.0 rolling good - spectroscopy target
> C02-020 23.9 HST cand good, but FROGS haven't confirmed
> C02-026 24.1 HST cand good - spectroscopy target
> C02-023 23.9 poor - wait for CFHT confirmation
> C02-025 24.4 poor - wait for CFHT confirmation
> C02-016 22.6 rolling spectrum taken
> C02-028 22.2 rolling poor - lightcurve rise not Ia-like
> C02-029 22.1 rolling poor - weird lightcurve
> Troudux ??.? rolling fair - worth a spectrum to see what it is
> S02-056 poor - do not pursue
> S02-057 24.5 HST cand very good - spectroscopy target
> S02-058 22.8 ground very good - spectroscopy target
> S02-059 poor - do not pursue
> S02-060 25.3 HST cand very good - spectroscopy target if great seeing
> S02-061 25.5 HST cand good - spectroscopy target if great seeing
> S02-061 poor - do not pursue
> S02-064 22.3 ground good - spectroscopy target (if time)
> S02-063 25.6 HST cand? good - probably too faint for spectroscopy
> S02-065 25.2 suspect - do not pursue
> S02-066 25.6 HST cand? fair - probably too faint for spectroscopy
> S02-067 not convincing - do not pursue
> S02-068 not convincing - do not pursue
> T02-037 R=22.3 ground very good - spectroscopy target
> T02-028 R=22.7 ground fair - spectroscopy target if time
> T02-029 R=21.3 ground probably OK - need conf. spectrum
> T02-030 R=23.2 ground we judged this as suspect -
> hard to assess since ref is so bad
> T02-047 R=22.9 ground ok - spectroscopy target
> T02-055 R=23.9 ugly - do not pursue
>
> Note to Rob, Pilar, and Javier: the objects where the plan says
> "ground" are ones we thought were worth considering for TNG follow-up.
>
> Note to Isobel and Chris: There are spectroscopy targets which could be
> started at Gemini and VLT. In particular, if the brighter ones in the
> SDFe/w or 14h+05d can be done prior to Keck this might help save time
> at Keck. The idea here being that Gemini and VLT are required to do
> imaging acquistions even for brighter targets, so doing the brighter
> targets at Gemini/VLT saves set-up time at Keck. Of course after the
> last run it is unclear whether the Keck time should be considered the
> most valuable!
>
> Thanks to Rob for the previous assessment which helped us in making
> these new assesments.
>
> - Greg
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri May 10 2002 - 08:57:20 PDT