[daip] Re: AIPS FRING

[Yuri Y. Kovalev]

Eric,

Thank you for the answer.
Let me ask additional questions / make some remarks.


1. Could you explain
why FRING is not reporting this in case if I set aparm(9)=0
and keep all the other parameters including SNR cutoff the same?
It does not make sense to me.
Possibly, I do not understand something.

2. Could you explain why in case of 
"many baselines to the REFANT are flagged and then there
is no way to reference the phases to that REFANT"
FRING is not using other ANTs from SEARCH?

3. In my view, this comment
fourie> FRING1: Sorry, the data has partitioned into multiple
fourie> FRING1:    disjointed subarrays. Flagging some good
fourie> FRING1:    solns. silly, aint it?
confuses a general AIPS user.
Could you change it to something more helpfull?


Thanks,
Yuri.

On Wednesday 06 July 2005 03:21 pm, Eric Greisen wrote:
> Yuri Y. Kovalev writes:
> 
>  > Task: FRING. I am doing global FRING.
>  > For SNR cutoff = 4 I get for some scans the following message:
>  > fourie> FRING1: Sorry, the data has partitioned into multiple
>  > fourie> FRING1:    disjointed subarrays. Flagging some good
>  > fourie> FRING1:    solns. silly, aint it?
>  > fourie> FRING1: No path from REFANT to ANT #  1, blanking solution
>  > fourie> FRING1: No path from REFANT to ANT #  3, blanking solution
>  > fourie> FRING1: No path from REFANT to ANT #  5, blanking solution
>  > fourie> FRING1: No path from REFANT to ANT #  7, blanking solution
>  > fourie> FRING1: No path from REFANT to ANT #  8, blanking solution
>  > fourie> FRING1: No path from REFANT to ANT # 10, blanking solution
>  > 
>  > It is strange and I do not understand very well, what does
>  > it mean for my data which do not have multiple subarrays.
>  > 
>  > If I use SNR cutoff = 3, I do not get such messages at all.
>  > 
> 
> It is this last remark that that suggests the source of the problem -
> if you set the SNR cutoff high, then many baselines to the REFANT are
> flagged and then there is no way to reference the phases to that
> REFANT,  You could try a different REFANT or accept using data of
> poorer SNR.
> 
> Eric Greisen
> 
>