Subject: RE: EIS propsal - Rybak et al.

From: "Len Culhane" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 14:52:26 +0100

Dear Jan,

My recent brief reply - which you may not have received, was due to email
difficulties last week at MSSL.

You will see from the present reply that I have received your message and
can now read it.

I will present your suggestion for joint Hinode/DOT observations at the next
meeting of Hinode SSCs on 19 June. If supported at that meeting, final
ratification will be needed at the Hinode monthly planning meeting on 27th
June.

If the observation can go ahead, we will validate your EIS studies and be in
touch with you if there are any difficulties.

It is important that you consider

1. Which of the instrument SSCs you would like to handle your proposal up to
close to observation time - namely will your involvement be mainly with the
EIS, SOT or XRT instruments

and

2. What are the precise beginning and end dates and times of your La Palma
DOT time - this is most important.

With apologise for delayed reply.

Regards

Len Culhane

-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Rybak [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: 11 June 2007 06:49
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Jan Rybak
Subject: EIS propsal - Rybak et al.

Dear Dr. Culhane,

this is a repetition of the email sent originally to your personal address
but I have got a negative answer on its existence. So for any case I sent
it again.

Jan Rybak

11/6/07
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

Dear Dr. Culhane,

many thanks for your previous answer helping me to prepare the EIS part of
our
Hinode proposal.

Finally our proposal is ready. I send to you all relevant EIS parts -
filled template, DEF file of the study, and proposal (PDF). For other SSCs 
(SOT - Dr. Berger, XRT - Dr. Golub), and for the CC J. Davis I will send
just 
PDF file of the proposal.

I hope the enclosed files will give you all relevant information you need 
to consider our application. In case of any question please contact me via
email
([email-masked]).

We ask for almost 2 weeks of the Hinode support during morning UT time when
seeing conditions for DOT at La Palma are the most favorable. We understand
that 
there are many other applications appearing so we probably will get much
less
that we ask for. Nevertheless we hope you and your colleagues will find our
proposal
interesting and we will get some Hinode support. It is especially crucial
for us after Aug 17 when SOHO keyhole start and therefore there is no change
to get CDS or MDI support.

With many thanks beforehand

Jan Rybak

TL, 31/5/07

PS: web page of our DOT campaign + SOHO JOP 189:
    http://www.astro.sk/~choc/open/07_dot/07_dot.html

**************************************************************************
* Jan Rybak                   tel.  : ++421 52 7879 156 (111 secretary)  *
* Astronomical Institute      fax   : ++421 52 4467 656                  *
* Slovak Academy of Sciences  email : [email-masked]                      *
* 05960 Tatranska Lomnica     WWW   : http://www.astro.sk/~choc          *
* Slovak Republic                                                        *
**************************************************************************

---

From: Khalid Al-Janabi <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 10:10:09 +0100

Dear Jan,

I will contact you with some comments about your study sometimes next week.

Regards,
Khalid

Len Culhane wrote:
> Dear Jan,
> 
> I note that a complete study with EIS requires a total of 8h 29m to run. I
> may have missed this but can you say specifically how often you wish to run
> this study and under what conditions in the period 18-31/08/07 when you
> request Hinode support. 
> 
> Since there are many campaign requests for operations with Hinode in August,
> the July SSC meeting on 17/18 July and the following monthly meeting about
> one week later will need to schedule these quite carefully and may not be
> able to accommodate all of the requests. So I was asked at the SSC meeting
> teleconference yesterday to clarify the nature and detailed timing of your
> campaign.
> 
> Also I understand that Khalid has contacted you about the details of your
> study. It would be good if you could respond to him soon since we will have
> periods in July and August when the simulator will be fully occupied with
> the testing of new code for upload to the instrument during August. Khalid
> will be in Japan for the upload which will mean that he will also be unable
> to do study validation work during a part of August. He will shortly
> circulate the schedule for this work.
> 
> It would be good therefore if we could simplify your study and seek a
> validated version in time for your campaign.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Len 
>

---

From: "Len Culhane" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 00:04:22 +0100

Dear Jan,

Regards

Len 

-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Rybak [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: 11 June 2007 06:49
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Jan Rybak
Subject: EIS propsal - Rybak et al.

Dear Dr. Culhane,

Jan Rybak

11/6/07

Dear Dr. Culhane,

Jan Rybak

TL, 31/5/07

---

From: Khalid Al-Janabi <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 18:47:19 +0100

Dear Jan,

Following are my thoughts about your study which are related to:

1) Operations
2) Structure

As far as point 1, I have consulted our chief observers (CO) in Japan, 
and I got the following reply in response to my question about running 
8h 29m study in connection with Hinode SYNOPTIC studies (sun disk 
pointing), and I quote:

David Brooks comment:

"Another point is that it lasts 8 hours. Currently there is *no*
possibility of running this study without it being interrupted by XRT
synoptic repointing to disk centre."

 From what I can gather from one of your emails to Len (copied to me) is 
that you are willing to reduce the study run-time, which is a *must* now.

Point 2 (study structure) is a little bit more complex:

Your proposal/study structure:
------------------------------

1. Context_calib_jr           ( 3 times) - 3x8m31s  (25.m in total)
2. Obs_sit_stare_jr           (12 times) - 12x28m3s (5.61h in total)
			      slit placed to the X-center of the previous raster	
3. Context_calib_jr           ( 3 times) - 3x8m31s  (25.m in total)

My suggestion:
--------------

Break down the study into two studies (two .def files):

1) Context_calib study. *One* raster study (RA:000031)
2) Obs_sit_stare study. *One* raster study (RA:000032)

These studies can be used by planners as follows:

1) Put Context_calib_jr on the time line

2) put Obs_sit_stare study on the time line and point to X
3) put Obs_sit_stare study on the time line and point to X center of 
previous raster.
.. Perform 3 as many times as time allows

4) Put Context_calib_jr on the time line (end of study context)

This gives the flexibility of shortening and lengthening the study run 
time as time permiting (controlled by the number of Obs_sit_stare study 
instances).

Question: Dose it matter how many Obs_sit_stare study runs per day (say 
8 today, 10 tomorrow, 9 the day after .. etc) or you would like to run 
the same number every day through out the campaign?

Before you do any thing yet, I would like you to think about my 
suggestion and come back to me. Changes (or not) should be performed 
once they are agreed.

Please do not hesitate in asking questions.

Regards,
Khalid