From: Tony Spadafora (ALSpadafora@lbl.gov)
Date: Fri Dec 19 2003 - 10:43:54 PST
Search dates are still not set but here is what is now being considered.
-Tony
Begin forwarded message:
> From: adam riess <ariess@stsci.edu>
> Date: December 19, 2003 9:03:47 AM PST
> To: williamj@stsci.edu, RAGibbons@lbl.gov, ALSpadafora@lbl.gov
> Cc: robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu, saul@lbl.gov, ariess@stsci.edu,
> gibbo@panisse.lbl.gov
> Subject: options
> Reply-To: adam riess <ariess@stsci.edu>
>
> Bill,
>
> Okay, I see some room for improvement:
>
> Search 1: April 2-4, day 93-94 visibility > 60 min
>
> Search 2: May 21-23, day 142-144, visibility > 78 min
>
> Search 3: July 7-8, day 189-190, visibility > 59 min
>
> Search 4: August 25-26, day 238-239, visibility = 50.2 minutes
>
>
> Searches 1-3 should be totally fine now according to the tables.
>
> The problem child is search 4. (We just miss being able to work it
> on Aug 17, day 230).
>
> So, *if* you can find SAA impacted orbits to give
> us for August 25-26 (or we could go back as much as a week
> earlier) *and* you expand the 50 min visibility by the 8%
> you could do, then we hit the 54 minutes needed.
>
> So will this work?
>
> -Adam
>
> P.S. If we do this it would expand us into Cycle 13
> but its not our request since we could have done this with our
> option 1 in
> Cycle 12. So if we go this route, are you guys responsible
> for clearing it with Duccio and Rodger?
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 19 2003 - 10:44:11 PST