search

GLORIA-project / scheduler-interface

GNU General Public License v3.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

Exposure time #10

Open lnicastro opened 10 years ago

lnicastro commented 10 years ago

I suggest that upon selection of a target by name, if it is (say) brither than V=12 , a suggested exposure time is presented. This based on an empirical look-up table of a typical telescope of the network. The user is warned that it is approximate and that the actual one will be calculated once the observation is allocated to a specific telescope. However the user "could" choose to change it, but a big warning is shown saying it is OK if the user has selected (in the advanced form) the telescope(s) for which that exposure is appropriate and, of course, he/she is aware of the telescope(s) characteristics. I still don't know if a simple interpolation of tabulated data is now performed or not. Anyway it would be difficult given the exposure times present in the current version of the table. And probably an empirical mathematical formula based on the telescopes characteristics would be more appropriate. Again I have no information about it being developed.

mserraricart commented 10 years ago

I think it is important to have both (working of course). Normally astronomers use exposure time directly but the possibility to select limit magnitud and noise is very useful because you do not know in advance what will be the assigned telescope. I completely agree with Luciano, if object (and magnitude) it is know the scheduler can suggest or even define a maximum exposure time. This should prevent CCD damages.

lnicastro commented 10 years ago

I did not say that the option to give S/N should be removed. Actually it is the only one to leave in the case of no object name given.

... and I just see that tonight M42 exposure time (on REM) increased from 15 to 50 s. I would ask to stop sending requests to REM.