From: Rachel G. (gibbo@panisse.lbl.gov)
Date: Wed Feb 25 2004 - 12:11:39 PST
Hi Bill,
I wanted to confirm some dates for the first search.
At some point it was proposed that the Apr search interval
would be expanded from 2-4 Apr to 1-4 Apr. Just wanting to
confirm when we should expect to begin observing.
Second, is it by the next Tuesday or Wednesday that
we must submit the ToO observations?
On the issue of guide stars, I received the
following (below) info from Adam. Have you checked whether
the pointings with singles worked before with the same
singles? If the guide stars that you found for the visits
this time are not the same ones used last year, how
concerned should we be? Can you check on this for us?
Adam informs us that some of the original GOODS visits
failed.
Thanks,
Rachel
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 14:56:54 -0500 (EST)
From: adam riess <ariess@stsci.edu>
To: riess@stsci.edu, ragibbons@lbl.gov
Cc: robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu, saul@lbl.gov, ALSpadafora@lbl.gov
Subject: Re: question regarding upcoming search
Rachel,
This is important. We (GOODS team) have shot all of these
positions and orients already in Cycle 11. What this means
is that Bill can tell you which cases the guide stars worked or failed
from past experience. So, if you must use 1 guide star and you know
that that guide star was okay last time (e.g., not a binary) then
that is fine. But some GOODS pointings failed in the past because of guide
stars and it would be dumb to make the same mistake twice!
So please ask Bill to verify all of your guide star choices
from past data (thats what I asked him to do for the searches we programmed).
-Adam
>Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 11:01:48 -0800 (PST)
>From: "Rachel G." <gibbo@panisse.lbl.gov>
>To: riess@stsci.edu
>cc: Robert A Knop Jr <robert.a.knop@vanderbilt.edu>, Saul Perlmutter
<saul@lbl.gov>, Tony Spadafora <ALSpadafora@lbl.gov>
>Subject: question regarding upcoming search
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>
>
>Hi Adam,
>
> I wanted to make you aware that Bill Januszewski has
>had trouble finding more than 1 guide star for few of the
>search pointings. Were any of the original GOODS data taken
>with only single guide stars? Is this something to worry
>about or are you OK with it? I'm guessing some of the tiles
>had to be done with singles since we're observing in the
>same geometry (pointings and orients).
>
> Also, as we discussed once some time ago, for the
>odd numbered searches on GOODS in the "tilted" orientation,
>there were originally 16 pointings to cover the whole field,
>but we'll be doing only 15. One of the tiles on the edge
>has only very faint guide stars, so I've let Bill know we'd
>like to exclude that one.
>
> Let us know what you think of all this.
>
>Ciao,
>
>Rachel
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 25 2004 - 12:11:58 PST