Follow-up question for tonight's ISAAC observing plan...Re: no CISCO observations on Nov.14

From: Saul Perlmutter (saul@lbl.gov)
Date: Fri Nov 15 2002 - 14:50:40 PST

  • Next message: Mamoru Doi: "CISCO plan on Nov.15"

    Hello Chris,
        One quick addition to Mamoru's email: When we were discussing the
    CISCO & ISAAC plan, we were also thinking that the absolute highest
    priority was to complete the high-redshift SNe, -071 and -017, with all
    the other supernovae only getting IR observations if there really is
    enough CISCO & ISAAC time available. (We cannot use the high-redshift
    SNe unless we get the J-band data, while the lower-redshift SNe would be
    useful anyway.) So we don't want to take any risk of using up the ISAAC
    time on the lower-redshift supernovae if you don't think there would
    still be enough time to complete the high-redshift SNe in the worst-case
    scenario that CISCO doesn't manage to get either of them. (Also, we
    really want these two high-redshift supernovae observed near maximum, of
    course, and we were aiming to get the one that is being observed at the
    end of November with HST another time with ISAAC at the end of November
    to match.)

        I think your current plan doesn't yet run into this problem -- but
    I'm not quite sure, since I don't know how the fact that we are not the
    highest ISAAC priority of figures into this calculation. What do you
    think?

        --Saul

    Chris Lidman wrote:

    > Dear Mamuro,
    > I need to correct my previous e-mail. For SuF02-017, please read
    > SuF02-071.
    >
    > Cheers, Chris.
    >
    > Chris Lidman wrote:
    >
    > > Dear Mamuro,
    > > I will ask Paranal to observe
    > >
    > > SuF02-017 if the conditions are clear - 10 hour integration
    > >
    > > SuF02-001 if the conditions are not clear (ie thin cirrus) - 3 hour
    > > integration
    > >
    > > SuF02-019 if the conditions are not clear - 3 hour integration.
    > >
    > > There is a bit of this cirrus at the moment.
    > >
    > > Cheers, Chris.
    > >
    > > Mamoru Doi wrote:
    > >
    > > > Dear Chris,
    > > >
    > > > We had no useful observations with CISCO on Nov.14.
    > > > Again there was a trouble of the telescope (possibly
    > > > the IR secondary support) and we saw strong astigmatism.
    > > > We spent half night for Mirror analysis. The image quality
    > > > was acceptable in the middle of the night. But then we had
    > > > cloudy/hazy sky.
    > > >
    > > > We will change the secondary from IR to optical, which is
    > > > more reliable with little disadvantages for CISCO J-band
    > > > observations.
    > > >
    > > > -Mamoru and Kentaro
    > > >
    > > > Mamoru Doi
    > > > Institute of Astronomy
    > > > School of Science
    > > > University of Tokyo
    > > > voice +81-422-34-5084
    > > > fax. +81-422-34-5041
    > > > doi@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Nov 15 2002 - 14:50:00 PST