[mmaimcal] Optimizing arrays for LMA

[Mark Holdaway]

On Tue, 2 Feb 1999, Harvey Liszt wrote:

> > Mark,
> > 
> > Given that the idea is currently being floated for a 20 km array,
> > I'm actually considering proposing that we rename the configurations
> > with A array being the most compact array.  People will hate it
> > at first, but to me it makes sense.
> > 
> > 	Tam
> 
> I get your drift, but I think it still doesn't work unless the "A" configuration
> is the most compact _possible_ configuration.  And doesn't BIMA adopt the VLA
> naming convention?  How about OVRO?  Standards do have their virtues.
> 
> regards, Harvey
> 

To avoid confusion in the reverse order, we could adopt a different
alphabet:

alpha,
beta, 
gamma,
delta array?

Of course, if we have a graduated system like the Europeans suggest,
it would be alpha1, alpha2,,,,,alpha10, beta1.

Or, since I now program in C++,

alpha0, alpha1...

	-Mark