[mmaimcal] Re: [Almasci] Two antennas

[Bryan Butler]

despite whatever the intent is, if it's not currently budgeted, then it's an 
adjustment of scope, with budget implications.  if debra (or brian or gianni) 
say it's not currently budgeted, then whatever the intent, interpretation, 
etc... of what is written, that's the end of the story, right?  unless you want 
to make a change request...

	-bryan


On 11/7/05 10:14, John Richer wrote:
> Hi Debra,
> 
> Yes, the requirements you quote are the ones I was looking at.  I agree
> that the intent is somewhat ambiguous as written.  I'm sure someone here
> can elaborate.  I did look for the AIPS++ audit that ALMA did to see if
> ths shed any light, but I couldn't locate it. 
> 
> However I think the intention here is surely to allow different primary
> beam responses, given that we are trying to push these dishes up to very
> high frequencies where the beam efficiency gets rather modest, and where
> beams will necessarily vary from dish to dish no matter which vendor it
> came from.
> 
>   OL 5.3-R2 Careful (polarized) primary beam correction and pointing 
>   correction is critical for high fidelity mosaic imaging and must be 
>   incorporated into the mosaicing algorithms.  Priority 1.
> 
>      OL-5.3-R2.2 A set of ALMA standard beam images will be made
>      available by the project and distributed with the Package, with
>      updates available for download when appropriate. Priority: 1
> 
>      OL-5.3-R2.3 The user shall be able to specify the primary beam in a
>      number of forms, both analytic and tabular, in addition to the ALMA
>      provided primary beam. Priority: 2
> 
> John
> 
>