[daip] UVFIX

[Leonia Kogan]

----- Begin Included Message -----

>From ip at ast.leeds.ac.uk Wed Feb  4 09:42 MST 2004
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2004 16:41:23 +0000 (GMT)
From: Ian Pattison <ip at ast.leeds.ac.uk>
X-X-Sender: ip at linstar13.leeds.ac.uk
To: Leonia Kogan <lkogan at zia.aoc.nrao.edu>
Subject: Re: [daip] UVFIX
In-Reply-To: <200402031824.LAA24100 at bonito.aoc.nrao.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact postmaster at aoc.nrao.edu for more information
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-7.2, required 7,
	BAYES_01 -5.40, EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION -0.50, IN_REP_TO -0.37,
	QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT -0.38, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES 0.00,
	SIGNATURE_LONG_SPARSE -0.49, USER_AGENT_PINE 0.00)
X-Lines: 43
Status: RO

Leonia,

Instead, I have SPLIT the uv data into the 4 seperate pointing (by 
selecting TIMERANG), and then run UVFIX on each. I then DBCON'd these 4 
files.

I'm now wish to DBCON this with another file (A config). Looking at a 
bright source present in both data, the coordinates match to within 0.05 
arcsec. I hope this is sufficient, but wanted to check. Is there a 
guidline to how close the positions should match in seperate data?

	thanks


On Tue, 3 Feb 2004, Leonia Kogan wrote:

> Before sending me the fits file of your data sets, send me:
> 
> 1. List of inputs you used in DBCON
> 2. Output of LISTR with optype 'scan' of both DBCON input data and its output
> 3. Output of comand IMH for both DBCON input data and its output.
> 
> 
> 

-- 
******************************************
 Ian Pattison 

 Astrophysics Group 
 School of Physics & Astronomy
 University of Leeds
 LS2 9JT
 United Kingdom

 Tel: +44 (0)113 3433872
 email: ip at ast.leeds.ac.uk
 WWW: http://ast.leeds.ac.uk/~ip

******************************************





----- End Included Message -----