Date: Mon, 15 Feb 1999 17:36:09 -0900 To: Jim Conner From: Greta Reynolds Subject: Re: Notes from today's telecon Cc: harry@apl.washington.edu, dharding@sparc1k.images.alaska.edu, vkaupp@images.alaska.edu Jim- I'm concerned about the statement that only half of the US allocation is being used. I'm hoping there was some further explanation in the telecon aside from this blanket statement. If you go back and look at the volume we request versus the volume that is scheduled there is no indication of only 50%. Cycle Min Requested % of Allocation Min Sched by CSA % Success 37 1284 85 1258 98 38 1083 71 1027 95 39 1117 74 1056 95 40 1202 79 1064 89 41 1118 74 1117 100 42 1399 92 1302 93 43 1406 93 1328 94 44 1287 85 1253 97 45 1347 89 1338 99 46 1372 90 1369 100 47 1334 88 1324 99 The number of minutes requested comes from the ttdb with an algorithm to count overlap only once. The minutes scheduled comes from CSA, using an algorithm to sort the allocation and split any overlaps between Order Desks. Yes, there is a definite reduction in the amount of data we are requesting and there is a lot of logic to a background plan. What you science guys need to think about: - what are the goals of a background mission? - add data to the archive - temporal coverages - interferometric possibilities - what are the beam requirements? - geographic areas of interest? - what are the rules for conflict analysis? who has priority? It may be worth someone's time to talk to Ahmed Mahmood at CSA about their background mission and see what there is to be learned from some- one who has been working with this for the last several years. Once there are some concrete goals and guidelines in place we'll be happy to help.