In this section we will discuss the status of each instrument and any limitation to configurations that occurred during the period.
Here is a histogram from the last period.
For comparison here is the image quality for the period last year.
We expect to have a similar overhead to last period. The following overhead statistics include slew, setup, readout and refocus between exposures (if there are multiple exposures per visit). In the summary page for each program the average setup time is calculated. The table below gives the average setup time for each instrument PER VISIT and the average and maximum PROPOSED science exposures and visit lengths.
| Instrument | Avg Overhead (min) | Median Overhead (min) | Avg Exposure (sec) | Median Exposure (sec) | Max Exposure (sec) | Avg Visit (sec) | Median Visit (sec) | Max Visit (sec) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LRS | 15.9 (from last period) | 15.0 (from last period) | 379.7 | 600 | 2700 | 1036.2 | 600 | 4800 |
| HRS | 14.3 (from last period) | 10.9 (from last period) | 613.9 | 1200 | 3000 | 1017.5 | 1200 | 5720 |
The overhead statistics can be shortened by multiple setups (each one counted as a separate visit) while on the same target as is the case for planet search programs. The overhead statistics can be lengthened by having multiple tracks that add up to a single htopx visit as can happen for very long tracks where each attempt might only yield a half visit.
A way to improve the overhead accumulated for programs with long exposure times is to add double the above overhead to the requested visit length and make sure that time is shorter than the actual track length. This avoids the RA having to split requested visits between several different tracks.
The following links give the summary for each institution and its programs.
The resulting table will give (for each program) the total number of targets
in the queue and the number completed, the CCD shutter open
hours, average overhead for that program, and the TAC allocated time.
This usually will be the best
metric for judging completeness but there are times when a PI will tell
us that a target is "done" before the total number of visits is complete.
This is how each institution has allocated its time by priority.
Observing Programs Status
Program comments:
UT03-3-001: (Barnes) priority 0 Synoptic EE50<2.0 dark HRS Photometric
UT03-3-002: (Cochran) priority 1-4 HRS synoptic
UT03-3-006: (Endl) priority 1-4 HRS synoptic
UT03-3-007: (Hill) priority 1-2 LRS g3 TOOT survey
UT03-3-008: (Endl) priority 0 HRS synoptic
UT03-3-009: (Robinson) priority 1 HRS synoptic
UT03-3-010: (Gebhardt) priority 1 HRS
UT03-3-011: (Gebhardt) priority 1-3 LRS g2
UT03-3-012: (Cochran) priority 0 HRS ToO
UT03-3-013: (Hynes) HRS/LRS ToO
UT03-3-014: (Prieto) HRS twilight program
UT03-3-015: (Kilic) priority 3 LRS g2
UT03-3-016: (Kormendy) priority 2,4 LRS g3
UT03-3-020: (Wheeler) priority 0-2 LRS g1 ToO
Program comments:
PSU03-3-001: (Eracleous) priority 0 ToO
PSU03-3-003: (Brandt) priority 1 LRS g2
PSU03-3-029: (Eracleous) priority 2 LRS g3
PSU03-3-030: (Eracleous) priority 1-3 LRS g1/g3
PSU03-3-031: (Brandt) priority 1 LRS g3
PSU03-3-032: (Stark) priority 2 LRS g1
PSU03-3-033: (Stark) priority 1 MRS
PSU03-3-034: (Ge) priority 2,4 HRS
PSU03-3-035: (Palma) priority 1 LRS
PSU03-3-036: (Schneider) priority 1 LRS g1
PSU03-3-038: (Debes) priority 2-3 HRS
PSU03-3-039: (Ge) priority 4 HRS
PSU03-3-040: (Ge) priority 2-3 HRS
PSU03-3-041: (Chakraborty) priority 1 HRS
PSU03-3-042: (Schneider) ToO, no phase II materials
Program comments:
STA03-3-001: (Romani/Michelson) priority 1,2,4 LRS g1
Program comments:
MUN03-3-001: (Saglia) HRS, priority 1 synoptic
Program comments:
There are no Göttingen programs in the queue at this time
Institution Status
| Time Allocation by Institution (hours) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Institution | Priority 0 | Priority 1 | Priority 2 | Priority 3 | Priority 4 |
| PSU | 6.000 (9%) | 14.520 (22%) | 20.570 (31%) | 16.460 (25%) | 8.800 (13%) |
| UT | 11.500 (6%) | 38.000 (21%) | 49.000 (27%) | 36.500 (20%) | 45.000 (25%) |
| Stanford | 0.000 | 4.000 (33%) | 4.000 (33%) | 2.000 (17%) | 2.000(17%) |
| Munich | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Goetting | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| NOAO | 0.000 | 41.370 (54%) | 29.510 (39%) | 6.000(8%) | 0.000 |
| SALT | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| DDT | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| UT03-3 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Rank | Program | Constraints |
| 1 | UT03-3-001 | HRS, Synoptic, EE50 < 2.0, Vsky > 20.3 |
| 2 | UT03-3-007 | LRS G3, EE50 < 2.3, Vsky > 20.0 |
| PSU03-3 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Rank | Program | Constraints |
| 1 | PSU03-3-003 | LRS G2, EE50 < 5, Vsky > 20.2 |
| 2 | PSU03-3-036 | LRS G1, EE50 < 2.0, Vsky > 20.5 |
| 3 | PSU03-3-031 | LRS G3, coordinated observation, EE50 < 2.5, Vsky > 20.0 |
| STA03-3 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Rank | Program | Constraints |
| 1 | STA03-3-001 J0205+1444, J2049+1003 | LRS G1, EE50 < 1.5, Vsky > 20.0 |
| MUN03-3 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Rank | Program | Constraints |
| 1 | MUN03-3-001 WESP213 | HRS, Synoptic, EE50 < 2.0, Vsky > 20.5 |
| G03-3 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Rank | Program | Constraints |
| 1 | No programs | None |
The following histogram shows some of the extrema in observing conditions: good seeing dark time, bright time and bad seeing dark time. There will be a problem later in the trimester with a lack of bright time targets.
