[daip] Re: Smoothing in SPLIT ?

[Nissim Kanekar]

Hi Eric,

Thanks a lot for the changes and apologies for the delay in getting back; 
I've been away on vacation for the last week. I think putting the 
increment in the FQ table instead of the channel width is the right way to 
go, especially since the bandwidth, etc, of the data are computed by later 
tasks (e.g. IMAGR) from these values. In fact, this was how I noticed the 
problem; IMAGR produced an image with huge bandwidth smearing, despite 
using bandwidth synthesis, essentially because the visibilities were being
assigned to the wrong frequencies.

Thanks a lot !

Regards,
Nissim


On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Eric Greisen wrote:

> I have changed SPLIT to put the increment in the FQ table rather than
> the apparent channel width.  The user expects the increment there and,
> at least in your case with smoothing, the apparent width and actual
> width differ anyway.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Eric Greisen
>