Notes from telecon Sept. 12:

NEXT TELECON: SEPT. 25, 1100 CDT.

Present: Babler,  Benjamin, Churchwell, Clemens, Indebetouw, 
Kobulnicki, Marston, Mathis, Meade, Stolovy, Whitney, Wolff

I. Review of SSC meeting of Sept. 5 (Churchwell), with much
discussion of some of the issues:
The panel had misgivings about our observing strategy in the face of
 possible spacecraft uncertainties. EBC told them that we would
 deviate from the prelaunch strategy as little as possible, **as long
 as the photometry is sound.** The SSC staff did not believe that our
 photometry is sufficiently robust. They questioned whether only 2
 passes will provide useful data. What about calibration
 uncertainties? What are the effects of bad pixels? We must decide
 beforehand the criteria for changing our observing strategy, such as
 altering the size of the area surveyed (see item II below).

Marston: their main concern is loss of pixels, such as from muxbleed and
banding. Note that the SSC staff has had a lot of experience with
previous space missions (IRAS, etc.) with older technology. The IRAC
should have higher stability, but we must prove the reliability
and completeness of our products.

The SSC will want the AORs for our validation strategy, but not before
the Oct. 3 deadline. We will have 10 hours' observing for
validation. We probably should observe the same small area several
(10?) times, and see how the reliability changes if we used differing
numbers of passes for the survey.

We could take data simulation from Matt Ashby to estimate reliability
and completeness. Note that our reliability is improved by having 4
wavelength bands.

Clemens pointed out that there must be a SIRTF acceptance document
that sets a limit on the parameters such as numbers of bad pixels.
For instance, 20% of pixels being bad would likely not be acceptable
to NASA. We can't keep trying to hit a moving target of data quality.
We must determine and articulate our data acceptance criteria.

II. EBC: we must plan our initial test area(s) very carefully,
avoiding GTO regions. We must also choose the criteria for changing
the observing strategy. 
SUBCOMMITTEE for deciding these tough questions: Kobulnicki, Clemens,
Whitney, Indebetouw.

III. EBC: the review suggested better liaison with 2MASS, which is a
good idea from our viewpoint as well. John Carpenter would be an
excellent addition (unpaid) to the team, if he will join. There was
general enthusiasm.  Ed will contact him. Clemens: we should not
tie our completeness, reliability criteria to 2MASS, but use it as a
reference.

IV. EBC reported that M. Bicay might provide some funding for Martin
Cohen (on the MSX team now) if Cohen's LTSA proposal is not approved.
Cohen's model of the Galaxy would provide valuable calibration
information.

to Minutes index page