[evlatests] more on EVLAS and VLA subarrays

[Ken Sowinski]

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Gustaaf van Moorsel wrote:

> Ken suggested I also test a case where the number of channels
> is different.  So I repeated the above test, with the differ-
> ence that the VLA subarray now observed with BW code 4, or 128
> channels.  The EVLA subarray remained unchanged, at BW code 5
> and 256 channels.
>
> The result of this second test is that whereas the second sub-
> array (VLA) bandpasses look fine again, the subarray 1 (EVLA)
> bandpasses are complete rubbish.
>
> I will add this information to our EVLA web pages shortly.

I have been able to verfiy that this fails and now know why.
The fix is simple and will be made and tested at the next bit
of test time that can be disentangled from EVLA testing.