[daip] [!15791]: AIPS - problems with 31DEC19 AIPS version

[Cristina Romero-Canizales]

problems with 31DEC19 AIPS version
----------------------------------

           Ticket ID: 15791
                 URL: https://help.nrao.edu/staff/index.php?/Tickets/Ticket/View/15791
                Name: Cristina Romero-Canizales
       Email address: cristina.rocc at gmail.com
             Creator: User
          Department: AIPS Data Reduction
       Staff (Owner): Eric Greisen
                Type: Issue
              Status: Open
            Priority: Default
                 SLA: NRAO E2E
      Template group: Default
             Created: 26 February 2020 09:16 AM
             Updated: 27 February 2020 07:50 AM
           Reply due: 02 March 2020 07:51 AM (4d 0h 0m)
      Resolution due: 22 November 2022 12:00 AM (998d 16h 9m)

Dear Eric,

As I mentioned in the ticket, I repeated the same steps I made in the data
reduction using 31DEC12, both in 31DEC17 and 31DEC19, and this last one I
did it in two different computers. Only in 31DEC19 I found the problems I
described in my ticket. I verified that the results from PRTAN and LISTR
OPTY 'SCAN' were exactly the same.

I made some more tests, following the advice in your first message. In
31DEC19 I loaded the data again with FILLM and used UVPLT with BPARM=0 for
the target NGC3393. The plot shows a maximum baseline of 600 kilo Lambda
(see attachment UVPLT_ORIG.png). I run UVPLT again after applying UVFIX,
since I wanted the coordinates in J2000. I attach the plot
(UVPLT_UVFIX.png) where you can see that the maximum baseline goes above
120 Mega Lambda. Doing exactly the same in 31DEC17, there is no change in
the scale: it goes from 600 kilo Lanbda to 600 kilo Lambda after UVFIX.

I checked the explain sections for UVFIX in both 31DEC17 and 31DEC19 and
they seem to be the same, so I assumed there is no change in the
parameters. I also didn't find any record for UVFIX in
http://www.aips.nrao.edu/index.shtml

The behaviour of UVFIX would explain the problem with IMAGR. About the
calibration, I still don't have an answer.

Could it be that 31DEC20 is not exactly identical to 31DEC19?

Best regards,
Cristina.




------------------------------------------------------
Staff CP:  https://help.nrao.edu/staff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listmgr.nrao.edu/pipermail/daip/attachments/20200227/20ca107b/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: UVPLT_ORIG.png
Type: image/png
Size: 50864 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listmgr.nrao.edu/pipermail/daip/attachments/20200227/20ca107b/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: UVPLT_UVFIX.png
Type: image/png
Size: 52647 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listmgr.nrao.edu/pipermail/daip/attachments/20200227/20ca107b/attachment-0003.png>